URL already posted: https://health.aws.amazon.com/health/status

I've got an estimated bill for $1.7 BILLION over this month. Normal usage is < $5.

Obvs have created an urgent AWS support ticket. Anyone else seeing something like this?

Update: Reddit link: https://www.reddit.com/r/aws/comments/1uyuaw7/help_my_bill_s...


• donavanm 4 hours ago

Ive dealt with this error at AWS. It’s a unit error. In my case we _meant_ to charge like 5¢/GB, but missed the unit (GB), and then the billing system defaults to bytes. 5¢ per Byte of data transferred meant some customers were seeing MM bills within hours. Got paged by support around 2am, had it fixed and amendments issues by 3-4am, apology emails shortly after.

Services emit metering values that arent directly tied to prices. Every SKU/line item is defined in a “pricing plan”, with a unit type, regions, and price per unit. The metering records are joined to a pricing plan based on account id, region, sku, etc. mess up the unit type in the pricing plan and the metering data conversion doesnt work, and you get crazy bills.

• 01284a7e 4 hours ago

No tests? Just mess up some mundane detail [1] and voila! Wake-up calls and heart attacks for 100,000s of administrators?

1: "Oh, well, this is not a mundane detail, Michael!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fGHaVn5rGo

• CobrastanJorji an hour ago

There will have been tests, but there will have been missing end-to-end tests. Test 1 will verify that the new system/product emits billing entries in some expected way ("We did 100 bytes of operations and we see we called the billing system for 100 bytes of stuff, yay, test pass"). Test 2 will be in the billing system ("We provide an incoming bill for SKU#12345 for 100 gigabyte-units and we see it costs $17, yay, test passes"). But they won't test the two things together because it will be harder to do and the teams will have different management chains. Seen it happen several times at several companies. Somebody will have said at some point "we should actually have the tests charge money" and somebody else will have said "well we can't have the tests actually charge money, that's a legal/accounting problem, it might even be a crime" and then nobody would have asked what the next best thing was.

• akdev1l 4 hours ago

Not even tests but just some basic anomaly detection lol.

Like maybe if the bill amounts increase by like 10M% there should be someone that looks into it

• qurren 4 hours ago

You overestimate how much people give shits at big techs like Amazon. When literally everything is driven with sticks instead of carrots, the work culture does not invite employees to proactively care about product quality.

You'd be better off letting the heart attacks happen and take the 3am on-call and be the hero instead. It would be good promo doc material, and being a hero is extremely good insurance against getting kicked out of the country (via the PIP->H1B grace period expiry mechanism).

• mightyham 2 hours ago

Speaking from my experience at Amazon this is not the case. Any customer impact like this would necessitate a COE (correction of errors) report, which means a list of required action items to prevent such issues from happening again, which typically suck up at least man-month of labor. Not to mention the report itself, which has to be written by a manager.

In fact, there are regular AWS-wide meetings where L10 technical staff will randomly pick and review reports from across the organization. Getting picked for one of these is not a fun experience.

COEs are such a huge annoyance for teams that they create a strong incentive to be proactive in preventing issues like this from happening. One of the rules when it comes to writing COEs is that they are not the fault of individuals but processes; but in reality, no one wants to be the cause of one.

• eventualcomp 2 hours ago

Amazon is heterogeneous. So much so, that positive anecdotes and negative anecdotes are near worthless without specifying the org.

Depending on if you're a cost cutting team, fixed expense team or organization, if you're a revenue driving team, or if you're a core team, or the very many other splits you can come up about the relationship between the expense/balance sheets and the team itself...there are very very different attitudes towards COEs and leadership principles.

• awakeasleep 17 minutes ago

Having been the manager writing those reports, you can only practically find causes that are within a single team’s ability to resolve.

If you find a problem like this thread’s hypothetical, the process stops being an annoyance just to line level managers, and something that directors and vice presidents need to handle by changing strategic priorities within their organizations.

That entails a real loss of face for them, and because they are the ones who actually run the show, it would will only happen if you have one that is naïve or a masochist. In either case that moves them out of management.

• nullorempty 3 hours ago

This ^^^ amplified by indifference and not giving a shit caused by "AI Adoption".

There is literally no fucking reason to try to improve your skill. Any IDIOT with AI will do an OK job.

And no one is shooting for better than OK.

• tyre 4 hours ago

Are you speaking from experience or simply making things up? I know a fair number of former AWS engineers and managers. None of them think like this.

• mendigou 3 hours ago

I am former AWS and this is pretty accurate.

The other factor to add here is that, with some exceptions, the whole company feels like a Rube Goldberg machine and very few people care about what happens outside their cog (because they’re not incentivized to do so).

• zelphirkalt 3 hours ago

Maybe they are former AWS employees for a reason and now want things to go better than they were at AWS.

• geodel 3 hours ago

"Former" seems to an important detail here.

• switchbak 2 hours ago

If I worked at a place like that, I'd sure as hell work my butt of to get a job somewhere else.

Or in my case, actively ignore any and all recruiting from that sesspool.

• gleenn 3 hours ago

If someone quits their job, do all their opinions suddenly become suspect? You're kind of damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't. Either you work for the company and you are biased one way, or you quit and now your bias is now suddenly the other way. I've joined and quit many jobs and my opinion may or may not have changed due to my change in status but it is clearly and ad hominem attack.

• FabCH an hour ago

Not the OP, but:

The point was not that their opinion is suspect, the point was that they are former because people who care about the customer get fired and/or that everyone who cared is former, so nobody who is left cares.

• qurren 2 hours ago

Yes, I am a former AWS employee.

I got put on Focus because my "contributions were not coming through" to leadership.

• thewebguyd an hour ago

> take the 3am on-call and be the hero instead

Ah yes, the good old ITism "Everything's good, what are we even paying you for?" followed by "Everything's on fire, what are we even paying you for?"

I moved out of it largely for that reason, am now an infrastructure/IT project manager, quite refreshing actually.

• dice 15 minutes ago

How did you swing that transition? Did you study for PMP before applying around, leverage network to get in the door then backfill skills, or what?

• qurren 43 minutes ago

The trick to surviving under such management is to jump in and put out other peoples' fires but not spend time preventing them even if you know how to.

• mcpherrinm 2 hours ago

While I didn't work on AWS, I did intern on the retail side of Amazon, and there's definitely this sort of monitoring in place. Surely somebody was paged. And even if not, this is "just" the cost explorer estimations, not what is ending up on folk's bills.

I learned about <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_an...> from alarms like this, as sales in Japan almost entirely stopped.

I've been told a tale of another incident where some customer ran some huge cpu-intensive workload that didn't do any networking. It caused various alarms to fire because it "looked like" a part of the network was idle (potentially indicating some sort of networking failure)

It's generally (in the broad sense) easy to add alarms for things going wrong, but in my experience anomaly detectors are just as likely to fire from other weird things like that happening.

• el1s7 35 minutes ago

I think billing is the only thing AWS doesn't really care about optimizing or putting enough tests to avoid anomalies lol.

• Groxx 2 hours ago

They've already got anomaly detection: their users.

• 01284a7e 4 hours ago

If only there was some way to get anomaly detection services [1] inside of AWS...

1: https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/anomaly-detection/

• deltaray3 3 hours ago

It's just like in Superman III

• mvdtnz 3 hours ago

Why would you think there are "no tests"?

• 27183 3 hours ago

We have a pretty strong existence proof... the thing happened in production. Unless they have some means to override a failing test and scp broken shit to prod, there wasn't a test.

• 8note 2 minutes ago

missing canaries more likely?

insufficient tests that dont assert on the right things?

the existence of a test doesnt mean it catches the right thing

based on the description, id bet the COE action item will be to do a migration that enforces units are passed at the billing service level

theres no good reason for the billing service to make up its own units.

• chasd00 2 hours ago

why would a test setting unit to Bytes fail and not MB, KB, or GB, and so on? That's like trying create a unit test for email opt-in, both true and false are valid values. It's up to the user to select the right one.

• 27183 an hour ago

I'm not quite following your objection.. I'd expect a test that checks the multiplier is correct would detect orders of magnitude discrepancy. So if you're billing $x/byte you'd write a test for the billing thing that checks that, given y bytes, the bill is x*y.

[edit] This may need to be an integration test to be effective, there is a certain peril to mocking that could bite you here. But that's fine, we have the technology.

• nullorempty 2 hours ago

Technically, there could be a test. It could just be wrong!

• 27183 2 hours ago

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it...

[edit] Testing your tests, like testing your backups, is a good idea

• fragmede 23 minutes ago

Yes, test the negative case as well. eg if you get the system setup so you can log in, also make sure you get permission denied for bad login info.

• QuinnyPig 3 minutes ago

Was this the day that gp3 EBS volumes came out by any chance?

• Twirrim 2 hours ago

I wonder if AWS billing still uses CSV files for passing data around.

IIRC it was one of my first on-calls at AWS over a decade ago now, and I got a page early evening because some stuff we did with billing records broke because some "smart" engineer thought it'd be a great idea to put an experimental record in with a description something like "I wonder what happens if I put, a comma in this field", into the production record. I watched region after region fail the same way as the record spread. That one engineer made a mess of lots of people's evenings. They could have used the test endpoint, but no. Much better to test in production!

• anvuong 42 minutes ago

That was just a massive operational failure, not the fault of any single engineer. No change, except hotfixes, should be able to land on prod unless it has at least go through test, staging, and at the scale of Amazon, shadow testing.

Engineers will do what engineers will always want to do, they want to see how things break, and sometimes they manage to fix it.

• hotstickyballs an hour ago

CSV files are widely known to be used by the most frugal companies so of course it is.

• fragmede 21 minutes ago

Have you seen what RDS costs‽ AWS couldn't possibly afford that!

• sscaryterry 2 hours ago

This isn't a flippant comment. Imagine though, being presented with this. Imagine having some underlying health problem (e.g. cardiovascular).

Do not be surprised if real people actually die from this mistake, from the anxiety, the surprise, the helplessness.

• nurettin 4 hours ago

This is why I always fail loud rather than pick a stupid default.

• crossroadsguy 3 hours ago

Had it been half a million dollars or something or say like a few hundred dollars?

• dev_l1x_be an hour ago

Imagine a programming language that has physical measurement unit support so this could have never happened.

• pudgywalsh 4 hours ago

"I must've put a decimal point in the wrong place or something. I always mess up some mundane detail."

• AlotOfReading 4 hours ago

Unit mistakes happen all the time, which is why you should be using your units library religiously and still being vigilant even then.

Worst case I've found was off by 15 orders of magnitude.

• gleenn 3 hours ago

One of the Mars landers famously failed due to unit conversion errors from metric to standard.

• blemasle 2 hours ago

I didn't know the imperial system was named "standard". Funny, cause its everything but standard both internationally and its definitions (which are not standard as based on SI)

• fc417fc802 an hour ago

Claiming something isn't standard because it isn't based on SI is entirely circular in the case of weights and measures.

That said I wish the US would bite the bullet and make the switch. Mandating dual labeling on everything would be a great start. Then in 20 years we could narrow it back down to one.

• reddalo 34 minutes ago

You just need to start teaching kids the metric system. Then when they'll grow up the switch will almost magically happen by itself.

• Dan_- 2 hours ago

I know you’re being snarky, but the US system is not “imperial” anyway. It’s properly “US Customary” but is often called “US Standard.”

• golem14 2 hours ago

Wasn't it (also?) the Ariane V flight in 1996? Oh, NVM, that was an overflow error.

• zapkyeskrill 2 hours ago

Degrees, very funny.

• 27183 2 hours ago

It's not difficult to write regression tests that catch unit mistakes.

• anvuong 36 minutes ago

Multiple rockets exploded and space missions failed because of the imperial vs. metric BS, and those mistakes were made by people all with PhDs or equivalences. This is still pretty mild in comparison haha.

Units and datetime will always be the bane of any professions ...

• yuchen20 10 hours ago

I got 3 consecutive emails warning that my budget crossed its $18 threshold. Opened it up: cost was 78 million. Thought it was a phishing attempt, logged into my actual account, and... still 78 million. EMOTIONAL DAMAGE.

• root-parent 7 hours ago

Wanna bet the description of this job post will be updated by the end of the day?

"Software Development Engineer II, AWS Invoicing"

https://www.amazon.jobs/de/jobs/10428480/software-developmen...

"...Our platforms are powered by generative AI, large language models, knowledge graphs, and agentic architectures that dynamically compose specialized agents based on context. We apply these capabilities across three reinforcing areas: intelligent launch readiness — where autonomous AI agents analyze, generate, and validate the information needed to go live in a new market; cloud-native service orchestration — where configuration-driven microservices replace per-launch bespoke engineering with centralized, reusable capabilities so that expanding into a new country becomes a zero-code configuration change rather than a development cycle; and continuous validation..."

• ibejoeb 6 hours ago

Wow:

    In this role you will:
    - Design and build agentic AI systems that analyze, generate, and validate...
    - Build agentic architectures that compose specialized AI agents dynamically...
    - Build AI-driven continuous validation frameworks powered by agentic workflows and large language models that autonomously manage...

This is invoicing? If ever there was a domain that was purely deterministic, you'd hope it was invoicing.
• root-parent 6 hours ago

The irony is, the only purely deterministic thing, will be token consumption...

• jdiff 6 hours ago

I severely doubt the world ever gets to such a point that the entire world melts into AI hallucination. And token consumption depends on so many other things, it's not all that deterministic either.

• serf 6 hours ago

(token usage) is trending towards predictability for a lot of reasons. it's not deterministic but it's getting easier to reason about usage.

• LetsGetTechnicl 5 hours ago

How can a random generator be deterministic?

• johnbarron 5 hours ago
• curun1r 4 hours ago

I’m not so sure about that. I can see a real rationale for creating sanity checks using AI to more quickly/proactively catch pathological billing issues before they become HN nightmare stories. They wouldn’t replace billing code, but there are many ways that stupid customer mistakes can cause real costs to Amazon that either have to be refunded and absorbed by Amazon or paid by the customer causing a negative opinion of AWS. If a billing AI watching costs in realtime could detect, say, a lambda loop in the first 10 min and either alert the customer or kill it, that would make AWS feel a lot safer to use. Enumerating these conditions and fixing them individually is a task that Amazon has proven incapable of achieving. An AI watchdog layer might be the perfect shortcut to addressing all of these problems at once. Because it’s well-trodden territory that AWS has so many multi-thousand dollar foot guns that make it really scary to use as a hobbyist or small business on a tight budget.

• hvb2 3 hours ago

> I can see a real rationale for creating sanity checks using AI to more quickly/proactively catch pathological billing issues before they become HN nightmare stories

Right, so invoicing is still a deterministic problem. You can bolt whatever on but in the end it's just product x price x units

• skywhopper an hour ago

This is exactly the sort of thing that’s not possible, though. An AI will not be able to detect a “lambda loop” because it will look exactly like a “successful lambda rollout”. This sort of watchdog would just as likely shut down the wrong things and make AWS feel a lot less safe.

• londons_explore 4 hours ago

Probably not actually. Transferring one kilobyte across a network link has such a low value that the billing costs of aggregating it cost more than the revenue.

So instead you take a probabilistic approach - charge the user for a megabyte of data transfer 0.1% of the time, and bill nothing 99.9% of the time.

Now the typical cost is the same, the users bill is probably accurate to the cent, but you have divided the number of billing records by 1000.

• svobodovic 2 hours ago

I don't know how cloud services count usage, but this is certainly not true for telco. I manage several fleets of hundreds/thousands of SIM cards (mostly IoT/M2M applications), and almost every provider counts the data traffic per byte. Different business and use case, I know, but still.

• michaelmrose 3 hours ago

The way you describe requires somehow counting every bit but somehow discarding most which is obviously nonsense.

This seems statistically invalid insofar as it will tend to overbill potentially by a lot on the minority of cases.

Don't you know how much of the pipe is occupied by a given customers code at any given time or what data is being sent

• londons_explore 2 hours ago

You have to do it when the customer list is too big to keep a counter per customer.

• fc417fc802 an hour ago

A probabilistic counter per customer is also a counter per customer. Still, probabilistic billing is an amusing thought though.

• michaelmrose an hour ago

No you don't

• TJSomething 2 hours ago

This is like half of all job listings I've read recently. And it's a decent amount of fintech that's like this.

• blitzar 6 hours ago

> 194,400.00 USD annually

Fuck it, im in.

• fragmede 17 minutes ago

That's base, don't forget bonus and stock.

• TheOtherHobbes 3 hours ago

Just wait until the same system runs payroll and you're getting paid $1.94400 annually.

• blitzar 3 hours ago

I will just tell the HR bot that I am meant to be paid 1.944 billion.

• sgarland 3 hours ago

10/10, no notes.

• sebmellen 6 hours ago

That job description feels so far beyond parody that I could scarcely believe it until opening the link! What a world.

• root-parent 6 hours ago

It gets worst:

"Senior Software Development Manager, AWS Global Bill Generation" https://www.amazon.jobs/de/jobs/10471948/senior-software-dev...

"We're transforming from monthly batch processing and manual war rooms to continuous billing, autonomous agents, and self-healing infrastructure. We believe operational burden is a technical problem, not a staffing problem"

This looks clearly...a staffing problem...

• ghurtado 6 hours ago

> This looks clearly...a staffing problem..

I think that big tech recently decided that I got 99 problems but staffing ain't one

I guess Nothing is a staffing problem when you make a rule that firing people is always the solution.

• wbl 6 hours ago

If you can make the software cover the toil you save the staff for the tough cases.

• quickthrowman 4 hours ago

They need to fire whoever is running AP and AP software development. Vibe invoicing is ridiculous for anyone to do, let alone Amazon.

• iam-TJ 6 hours ago

The best bit of that is:

> In this role, you will own end-to-end bill run execution across all AWS partitions, drive the technical vision for autonomous billing operations, and build the team that ensures every customer receives an accurate cost estimated in minutes ...

• LPisGood 5 hours ago

Seriously! If I were making a joke I would say something like

> Build AI-driven continuous validation frameworks powered by agentic workflows and large language models that autonomously manage…

But that’s word for word a 250k+ TC job in the big ‘26.

• paganel 5 hours ago

> enabling domain experts to review in hours what previously took weeks.

This is a gold-mine. They need to get sued heavily for this incompetence.

• rcleveng 7 hours ago

I did too, those awstrack.me URL's look super suspicious and I hadn't seen this alert trigger before so didn't know what to expect.

At first I was sure it was a phishing attempt. Then went to the console (not using those links) Saw there was an outage where the console was wrong (no mention of email alerts) Then I thought I was hacked - what a perfect cover up for someone to evade detection when the console was wrong. Looked at some logs, realized the incident text was just not exhaustive on the impact. Went back to my cup of coffee.

Note to self- should have looked here first.

• jayanmn 6 hours ago

Enterprise account . We got - 3trillion and change

• chii 6 hours ago

-$3 trillion! That's the highest earning investment that has ever existed!

• theflyingelvis 5 hours ago

3.7 billion. Offered to pay it in monthly installments. Haven’t hears back

• idiotsecant 5 hours ago

Quick do your IPO before the books update

• munk-a 2 hours ago

It's true, if you're spending that much money you must be worth a ton! Just look at SpaceX!

• rconti an hour ago

same. over 2t in one day.

• corvad an hour ago

Please do not open up emails directly always login to your account.

• antognini 2 hours ago

To paraphrase the old joke, if you wake up with a $78,000 AWS bill, you have a problem. If you wake up with a $78 million AWS bill, Amazon has a problem.

• 01284a7e 6 hours ago

Yes, I am taking legal action, no doubt.

• bot403 3 hours ago

Why? What's the damages? They showed you a wrong number, then later acknowledged it and fixed it. Just because the number was "very big" to you doesn't mean you were actually aggrieved in some way.

• amelius 3 hours ago

Big numbers can lead to stress which can lead to all kinds of disorders.

• TheSoftwareGuy 2 hours ago

In order to successfully sue for emotional damages, you have to prove quantifiable damages. Usually that means if you ended up having to get therapy to deal with it, you can sue for the cost of the therapy.

• mito88 2 hours ago

small numbers too....

:)

• fc417fc802 an hour ago

We should just go with numbers in general in order to play it safe. The new guidance from legal is absolutely no numbers on invoices for liability reasons. Similar to the removal of actual math from math class we're going to let the experts figure out how to implement it.

• dymk 5 hours ago

…for emotional damage?

• inigyou 3 hours ago

If you were a business maybe you could claim for the emergency on-call time spent diagnosing, but you'd probably still lose AND amazon would fire you as a customer.

• SegfaultSeagull 7 hours ago

Time to get a second job buddy.

• wglass 6 hours ago

It's crazy enough this will be fixed soon.

Years ago I found an actual hidden error in my bill. (This was early 2010s). The system was calculating the EC2 reservation savings incorrectly for some of my servers. I was crunching all their detailed usage data on a regular basis in an 18 tab spreadsheet and couldn't get it to fully reconcile. I spent months trying to track down the discrepancy. Once I found it, I had to convince AWS their system was wrong, which took another big chunk of time. Meanwhile the discrepancy continued to accumulate.

After 14 months I got a $7,000 refund. I was told it had to be approved by the head of AWS. I've never seen a calculation error on their part since.

• donavanm 4 hours ago

> After 14 months I got a $7,000 refund. I was told it had to be approved by the head of AWS.

$7,000 of credits is no problem. At that time a friendly neighborhood PM or director could issue the credit without much oversight.

Your problem is the time period. Amending a bill in the same cycle is EZ. Fixing the previous cycle is a PITA but pretty common. Issuing amendments for the previous financial _years_ would be a huuuuge PITA going through finance etc.

• kccqzy 2 hours ago

Banks and financial institutions are the same. If they haven’t issued you a monthly/quarterly statement yet, they can just apologize and tell you the numbers are wrong please wait for the statement. But it is a major issue if an actual statement has the wrong numbers.

• michaelmrose 3 hours ago

Reminds me of working for a cable company and being told that even if we screwed up and stole from the customer the look back period was only a few months and if we found an error from before that we weren't supposed to correct it.

• SoftTalker 3 hours ago

There's a certain obligation on both sides of a contract to pay attention.

If you're not watching your billing, and then try to claim overcharging a year later, you'll get a lot less satisfaction even from regulators or judges than if you notice it when (or soon after) it happens.

• michaelmrose 2 hours ago

Cable bills are extremely complicated on purpose and people are taxed for time attention and intelligence.

The employees and company have an obligation not to exploit this even if the issue is only discovered after the fact.

You don't get to export any of the responsibility to your customer. They don't prepare the bill and it's not their job to find your fuck ups

• SoftTalker 2 hours ago

No argument, but fuck-ups happen, and get fixed more quickly and easily when people are paying attention.

I once got a monthly water bill for ~$35,000 at a residential, single-family home. Good thing I was paying attention and looked at the bill before the auto-pay bank draft hit.

Someone had misread the meter.

• steve_adams_86 5 hours ago

A couple of my coworkers think I’m nuts for watching cost explorer so closely but

1. The time it takes to look and notice costs that don’t make sense easily pays for itself, and then some (in my experience). I doubt you spent $7k of your time tracking this down, and you probably noticed optimization opportunities that saved you even more

2. I hate the idea of wasting money on buying Jeff Bezos a bigger yacht

• jarrettcoggin 5 hours ago

I've personally noticed and saved multiple $xx,xxx monthly cost billing spikes just by take a daily glance at our cost explorer. I'm in the AWS accounts every day doing investigative work anyway that an extra 30-60 seconds is trivial.

Seeing something "small" like an ECS task that is continuously failing to start properly because of a bug and repeatedly pulls a container image or a lambda function that's taking longer that it reasonably should (takes 5-10 seconds when it's normally a tens or a few hundred milliseconds) can dramatically drive up a bill in short order.

• inigyou 4 hours ago

> 2. I hate the idea of wasting money on buying Jeff Bezos a bigger yacht

Then you aren't using AWS. At least half of all the money you give to Amazon is yacht money.

• steve_adams_86 2 hours ago

Unfortunately not a choice at my organization

• johnbarron 5 hours ago

>> It's crazy enough this will be fixed soon.

Its going on for 12 hours. Looks like the humans can´t understand the agentic code that was checked in....

• lukaslueg 11 hours ago

Apparently what used to be `GB of storage consumed` is confused with `Bytes of storage consumed`, leading to a cool off by 2*30 error.

> You're right to question my calculation. The MCP server failed to connect when I tried to look up the field definition. I guessed instead of validating. This is on me. But look at all the revenue!

• VulgarExigency 6 hours ago

The user is asking me to calculate how much money they should charge their customer. The values they've given me are 0.45, 1.67, and 2.50. This is 2.50 + 1.67 + 0.45 = 4.62, but it could be any other number. Perhaps we should be concatenating the numbers instead. Wait! The . could also mean multiplication. 0 . 45 . 1. 67 . 2 . 50 = 3015000. But wouldn't multiplying by 0 zero it out? That can't be right, we wouldn't be charging anything. So 3015000 must be correct.

You should charge your customer 3015000 thousand dollars.

• idiotsecant 5 hours ago

Would be funny if it wasn't so close to true

• yunnpp 4 hours ago

'My absurd statement doesn't sound right, so the "opposite" (assuming it's well-defined and unique) must be true' is peak LLM logic. You can tell it was trained on Reddit commentary.

• Izkata 2 hours ago

So uh did you type that out or generate it somewhere?

Number felt high so I wanted to double check and I only get 301500.

• ghurtado 6 hours ago

> You're right to question my calculation.

Literally impossible to tell whether this is parody or an actual response any longer.

I challenge anyone to write something so stupid that an LLM couldn't possibly respond with it. I don't believe such limit exists.

• ihateolives 5 hours ago

Just today I gave my local agent a CSV which listed a bunch files with of human readable size units and asked it to count rows in each GB range. Sounds simple enough but it completely miscalculated, because it parsed MB as GB for some reason. In hindsight it would've be quicker just to do it in Excel or something.

• dabbz 5 hours ago

I've found personally it's better to use AI to build a deterministic script for calculations like that. (anything that manipulates data should be a script not an AI).

• ihateolives 3 hours ago

It was just one off task and I already had agent doing categorising with the same data so I just asked it. Otherwise I agree.

• marcta 4 hours ago

That is literally what Excel is for. Why didn't you use that first of all?

• ihateolives 3 hours ago

Because I was already doing categorising and analysing same data with agent and I had my session open already. It should've been an easy task for an agent, right?

• AlienRobot 4 hours ago

When all you have is a hammer, but the hammer looks more like a swiss knife

• leugim 7 hours ago

Oh great so 2*30=60 he only owes 28.3$ million... hehe

I guess you wanted to say 2^30 which makes 1.5$

• hansvm 6 hours ago

My hunch is the HN formatter swallowed the double asterisk typical of python exponents.

While we're being pedantic, 2^30 is 28 in normal programming languages ;)

• tomjakubowski 2 hours ago

But 2^30 is 28.

• stefan_ 7 hours ago

Vibecoded the billing system, raised revenue 9000%. Great for that promo package.

• poly2it 5 hours ago

This error could be fixed with better typing. If you compute on GiB in a billing system, make sure it can only ever be mutated with a GiB type!

• raverbashing 7 hours ago

AI slop. Or just a distracted dev

• root-parent 6 hours ago

>> Or just a distracted dev

And a distracted tester? And a distracted pipeline of regression tests?

No, the truth is way worst...

• silon42 6 hours ago

I'd love to see the spike in their projected earnings internal dashboard :)

• anvuong 5 hours ago

Yep, the truth is nobody cares when people start submitting dozens of PRs a day with a bunch of AI-generated code reviews attached to it, all saying everything looks good. I'm witnessing this happening at my workplace right now: Sr/Staff uses Claude to generate 10 pages of design document, Jr uses Claude/Cursor to generate a humongous commit based on this document and create a PR, then bunch of automated AI-based code reviews kick in and say this looks good, another Sr/Staff takes a glance and rubber stamp it, while looking at the company's stock value and/or OpenAI/Anthropic job description.

It's a shit show.

• pixl97 2 hours ago

> the truth is nobody cares

The number of errors I've seen over the last 30 years seems to say humans not caring is as much of a deal AI use. It's easy to blame AI for humans being lazy, but I do think it comes naturally to us.

• chanux 5 hours ago

What if there's only half a dev and a swarm of agents after the layoffs?

• jayd16 4 hours ago

> only half a dev

That's one way to cut staff.

• 27183 6 hours ago

Either way it shows their QA and testing procedures are incompetent. It's just not acceptable for a utility like AWS to move fast and break shit. Should make you question whether it's safe or advisable to use any of their services.

It probably shouldn't be legal for banks, hospitals, governments, or any other critical infrastructure to be hosted on AWS if they do things like this.

• rboyd 10 hours ago

Ask for some leniency. Let your account rep know about your budget difficulties and ask if you can make good faith payments of a few billion per month until you get back on your feet.

• whoamii 3 hours ago

Ummm no. Do not show a sign of weakness like this. Address the problem head on and get a credit card with a bigger limit.

• ruddct 11 hours ago

If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem. If you owe the bank $1.7 billion, that's the bank's problem.

• fatnoah 6 hours ago

I saw this in action on a smaller scale. In a past job, my wife organized events for a decent sized company. After an event, she'd typically have a $300k+ balance on her corporate Amex. When she went on maternity leave, the person filling in for her job neglected to actually pay the bills, so when she returned there were quite a few emails and voicemails from Amex regarding the over $500k balance.

The messages started as polite and eventually started to get more desperate in tone. At no point were they threatening or adversarial.

• Imustaskforhelp 6 hours ago

I think that this might reflect more on Amex to be honest.

Amex realises that threatening would hurt their business trust more than anything. During the great depression, Amex accepted checks from other banks which were falling and paying through their own wallet as a matter of integrity. Amex has always been built around this idea of trust and prestige.

They make most of money from what I have heard on the transaction fees which are more than others (3% compared to 1%). They might get desperate but I am sure that they are one of the last guys who would wanna threaten you if you are paying some large bills for them (as compared to normal credit card companies which might even hire people to extract your loans in some messy situations)

So perhaps be so rich that the credit card company understands it as well and treats ya differently :-D

• xp84 6 hours ago

Interesting. And hard to square with my perception of banks as completely mercenary and ruthless. I had a decade-long personal boycott (I know, LOL) of Amex after they, because, with otherwise perfect credit, I forgot about a $30 department-store card bill and got a 30-day-late mark on my report, Amex got spooked and abruptly closed both my never-late accounts with them (which were at or close to 0 balances). This was around 2008 though, so perhaps this was a genius algorithm designed to try and detect the very first whiff of consumer defaults, so they assumed that $30 was the first domino to fall of my personal financial ruin that could lead to me charging my accounts to the max and then going bankrupt.

(I eventually admitted to myself that Amex isn't a person and thus not really capable of insulting my honor, but it took a while!)

• Imustaskforhelp 3 hours ago

Most banks are completely mercenary and ruthless unless its in their incentives to other outcomes. Incentives lead to outcomes and mostly AMEX's incentives are in being the most trustworthy because their real targets are mostly billionaires/heavily influential people.

This does feel a bit silly for amex to do from what I've heard. Probably 2008 were a weird time in general where trust in systems itself were mostly eroded, whether of people to banking institutions and also vice versa.

> (I eventually admitted to myself that Amex isn't a person and thus not really capable of insulting my honor, but it took a while!)

haha :-)

• danlitt 6 hours ago

This joke only works if you actually impose a cost on AWS of 1.7 billion. If they just serve you a bill for no reason, it's still your problem.

• xp84 6 hours ago

Next question we'll find out is what if you owe the bank $1.7 trillion?

• mNovak 5 hours ago

That's the government's problem

• sajithdilshan 7 hours ago

Not if you’re Elon Musk

• michelb 7 hours ago

Elon Musk is everyone's problem

• bobbiechen 7 hours ago

AWS saw Anthropic billing a guy for $16 million on zero usage and thought, why stop at the millions?

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/320266/20260712/anthropic...

• AlienRobot 4 hours ago

>AI billing audit startup Vaudit reviewed $34 million in AI invoices submitted by 60 enterprise customers and found approximately $1.7 million in mistaken overcharges — a billing error rate of roughly five percent.

That sounds bad.

• browningstreet 6 hours ago

I realized recently that Whole Foods no longer automatically and reliably detects your Chase Amazon Prime credit card when paying. So they don’t give you the discounted pricing automatically. I wonder how many customers are checking out the way they always do and are paying full price when, for years and decades, this worked fine.

The customer service people I talked to in the grocery store said this changed sometime in the last year. My guess is that it’s an unintended side effect of removing the pay-by-palm feature.

This is obviously unrelated but I joked about what else Amazon wasn’t reliably calculating….

• hedora 6 hours ago

Class action lawsuit time!

Either that or 1000’s of small claims court cases.

Even with arbitration, the overhead of dealing with that would be crippling. Hopefully someone over there decides to do the right thing, and auto-refund.

• xp84 6 hours ago

Relevant to this, I've recently noticed a trend of mass tort cases being opened up in the past couple years, and they seem to do very well. The way these seem to work is attorneys identify a company who has clearly ripped people off, and what I presume is a repeatable way to guarantee a win (thus translating to a guaranteed settlement offer). Then they advertise for eligible clients, sign those clients individually to contingency agreements, and run the playbook. A couple months ago after signing up for one of these, I received a check for about $350 (after the agreed-upon 40% attorney fee), from Ticketmaster, and I had another one related to AT&T. It took about 10 minutes more effort from me than a typical class-action settlement, because I had to e-sign those representation papers.

So really, there's a third option now, that's much easier than class action, even when class actions don't get certified.

• ofjcihen 6 hours ago

There are a hundred small things like this that seem to be popping up in what used to be simple and reliable systems and as much as I know they aren’t ALL because of vibe coding I can’t help but wonder how much is.

• browningstreet 6 hours ago

Weirder is what happened a day later. I got an email that said my Chase Amazon Prime credit card was being re-associated with my Amazon.com account.

I never reported this nor took it up with either Amazon or Chase directly. There was a refund of my Whole Foods purchase (they needed to void my purchase and re-ring everything to give me the discounts.. I asked them to refund my purchase and I’d do without my Whole Foods purchase entirely).

Looking back I think at least 3 recent visits were charged to me at full price because of all this. Hard not to think of enshittification and whether Amazon Prime is even worth it, alas.. I live in a fairly rural area at the moment and need delivery.

• tedggh 7 hours ago

I got a 20K bill once and it was actually drafted from my bank account. It took me a couple of months and involving the office of the AG of my state to get the issue resolved and get my money back. Since then I never touched any AWS product, moved my small stuff to Azure. It’s been years since AWS have these issues with billing, you can find the stories online, students billed 60K for a compromised account launching servers to mine crypto which AWS somehow was unable to flag and block, and let run for months.

• drew870mitchell 6 hours ago

AWS is basically a utility. I think it's inevitable that their carelessness around billing will end up with them being regulated like one.

• positr0n 4 hours ago

I can't think of another regulated utility that doesn't provide service to (essentially) all humans directly in their homes.

Everyone knows what water and electricity are, the vast majority couldn't explain what service AWS provides.

• pjc50 2 hours ago

I wonder what fraction of homes don't load anything from AWS on a daily basis. I suspect it's way below 50%.

(Of course, they don't know they're using it, they're using a service on it)

• wat10000 4 hours ago

And utilities are typically natural monopolies. They're good candidates for regulation because they're essentials and they don't have competitive forces to keep them behaving reasonably.

AWS has plentiful competitors. If you don't like their behavior, don't patronize them!

• dawnerd 7 hours ago

That’s why you always use a spend limited card with variable cost providers.

• myself248 6 hours ago

Or just own your own hardware. Spend a few bucks at Microcenter, build a machine, and there's simply no mechanism by which they could decide later that you should actually pay 100x more, and then magically suck it out of your bank account.

None of this can happen unless you first cede control.

• csomar an hour ago

Most debit/prepaid cards will get rejected. Credit Cards technically have a limit but they really don't. It's an open line to your finances.

• srdjanr 6 hours ago

I wouldn't expect their detection of hacked accounts to be 100% correct. Sure, it might be obvious when a human takes a look, but humans can't proactively look at every account's usage.

• urbnspacecowboy 4 hours ago

> I got a 20K bill once and it was actually drafted from my bank account.

Service provider lesson #1: Never ever ever enable auto-pay! The convenience (and even the savings, if applicable) aren't worth the risk of the service provider autonomously slurping up all your money.

• ButlerianJihad 5 hours ago

For a while I had a portion of my "homelab" on AWS. I was an educator in a classroom where the students were learning cloud stuff, and the instructor was encouraging the students to stand-up cloud environments for learning, so I figured that I would do the same.

I used AWS' free tier, of course, and I enjoyed the initial setup in EC2, and I did a LAMP-stack MediaWiki installation. It wasn't too difficult, but two things sent me away forever.

1. It was impossible, or at least highly labor-intensive, in this modern era to adequately secure an ordinary Linux system running Internet-facing services. I put fail2ban and I filtered a lot of ports, and still spammers attacked me on Layer 7.

2. It was impossible, actually impossible, to limit or cap my cloud expenses in any billing cycle. Sure, run free-tier all I want. Sure, come in within the limits almost every month. But if I configured one thing wrong, or one thing went runaway, I'd have a sizable bill that I couldn't dispute. And even worse, those "runaways" weren't necessarily things in my sphere of control, but could be triggered by basically anyone coming in and using my VPC resources, especially egress network traffic.

So I closed out my cloud account, and I developed a lot of sympathy for businesses and corps that now are forced to run "in the cloud" rather than on-prem or their own machine rooms, but now they have no way to control expenses.

• jeffrallen 4 hours ago

Right, and good luck getting a correct bill from Azure. And when you are finally fed up, it will take months to close your Azure account.

• pqvst 11 hours ago

Probably the closest I've ever been to getting a heart attack. Normally <$1 per month, and now suddenly $284,006,266,443.74. Whatever the bug is on their end, this is unforgivable.

• everforward 6 hours ago

Yeah, this one is bad because it’s off by so much I’m shocked it wasn’t caught by tests, alerts about unusual changes in the billing system, or even accounting. Like surely the P&L reports look all kinds of wrong right now, they have to be showing like 6M% profit margins and revenue measured in quadrillions.

I’m also a little surprised this didn’t trip a circuit breaker. For something as non-real-time as billing, I’m surprised they don’t have an automated kill switch that pauses the billing system and fires a page if variance in bills spikes. Naively some kind of “if the standard deviation of customer bills for this year changes by more than 50%, pause the billing system”. At that number of customers, those numbers should be pretty stable beyond internal billing changes they could normalize for.

• TrickyRick 6 hours ago

If I were to guess this bug is in the "display" part of the system which is probably distinct from the "actually take money from the customer" part of the system. One can imagine they have gates on the "actually take money" part, especially for a large bill like ours which was ~$300b or about 2.5x AWS' 2025 revenue... In one month. Surely if we had actually accumulated that bill they would be the ones with the problems when we can't pay it.

• vitaflo 5 hours ago

I don’t know how something like this makes it to prod. That’s multiple levels of failure.

• krawat3 9 hours ago

Same here. I got an email with a bill of $233 million and an estimated $433 million until the end of the month. I panicked and nuked my entire setup (which wasn't used that much, anyway, the alert threshold was $1) - I really wonder how many people did the same.

It's been 2 hours and I still haven't fully calmed down.

• zengineer 11 hours ago

Same - just had some malicious bots running through my platform last week and really thought they found a security hole after all. Even though the amount sounded ridicoulus, I got quite nervous and a very bad feeling when I logged-in AWS and saw that price.

• dabinat an hour ago

This is embarrassing for Amazon, but I’d take laughably wrong over subtly wrong any day. If the bug made bills 20% higher I probably wouldn’t have queried it.

• gomid 9 hours ago

Same. Cold sweat for about 20 minutes. Even though I saw the service health notification, I still spent the last hour trying to find where my storage spiked. In any case, I'll be tearing down plenty of stale infra after this!

• saghm 7 hours ago

The should pass a law saying they should have to pay you the amount over the correct bill as compensation; I bet they'll stop making mistakes like this pretty quickly after that

• wewewedxfgdf 10 hours ago

I once got a credit card statement that said estimated time to repay ....... more than 100,000 years. It was discouraging but I did pay it off. And sooner than estimated.

• TedDoesntTalk 7 hours ago

Were you still alive after paying it off?

• ambicapter 7 hours ago

No, but they have the internet in the afterlife, apparently.

• _joel 7 hours ago

They do, but the latency is terrible

• Bluestein 7 hours ago

> 100,000 years

100K years. Now that's load-bearing ...

• artisinal 4 hours ago

Generational credit card debt.

• 27183 6 hours ago

That's good for the credit card company, they can project stable revenue 100k years into the future.

• janalsncm an hour ago

“Bank error in your favor, collect $100”

• glenstein 10 hours ago

Probably the safest bet is to pay your bill in full to stay in good standing and then get refunded the difference when they revise it down.

• NordStreamYacht 10 hours ago

With interest, of course.

• sscaryterry 11 hours ago

Vibe coding billing systems is a top-notch idea :)

• ainiriand 7 hours ago

Hey what do you think about vibe coding weapon systems? Do you want to be my cofounder?

• mxuribe 5 hours ago

We retro-fitted a Terminator T100 model with the brain of the latest LLM models, and then gave'em 2 shotguns...and, you'll never guess what happened next!

Well, actually i guess you can guess what happens next! lol :-D

• sscaryterry 6 hours ago

Sure! What could possibly go wrong?

• chairmansteve 5 hours ago

Drones are already vibe targeting in Ukraine/Russia.

• nonameiguess 5 hours ago

I don't want to say this was ever or will ever be a good idea, but the reality of warfare is a lot of the time dudes were just running into an alley and firing off mortars without trying to look or think of what they were shooting at anyway. I doubt the Taliban gave a shit about false positive rates when they were cutting the hands off of anyone who voted. They got the point across either way.

• lenkite 5 hours ago

US Navy now doesn't care either. Using Palantir's Maven Smart System, which incorporated Anthropic's Claude AI model, to identify and evaluate targets - which blew up the girls elementary school in Minab.

Use AI => No War Crimes!

• roskoalexey 9 hours ago

They sent 3 warnings to my email, ok, I understand bugs happen (probably vibe-coded). But they didn't even send any notification that it's a bug. Going to leave AWS after that.

• xp84 6 hours ago

Somehow I highly doubt anyone will leave AWS over this unless their use of AWS is way more low-complexity than the average account.

People make similar pronouncements after every us-east-1 outage makes the news, but I feel like AWS would be going out of business by now if people followed through.

It reminds me of airlines, where after a particularly grueling irregular ops experience, a few dozen people file off the plane swearing "Never again, <airline name>!" but really, we all must know deep down that the airlines are all subject to the same external inciting factors, internal profit motivations, and human imperfection, and thus all pretty equally likely to cause us a bad day or ruined trip. The effort spent to avoid one isn't really worth it.

• el_memorioso 4 hours ago

Airlines are all subject to a lot of the same factors, but there are unequivocally better and worse performers in terms of on-time arrivals, by a lot. Take a look at the Air Travel Consumer report for details.

• bcrosby95 4 hours ago

No, AWS won't go out of business, afterall, people still use IBM mainframes.

• anzovec 8 hours ago

same

• aerhardt 6 hours ago

One can almost smell the vibes.

This is peanuts compared to a major cybersecurity catastrophe that’s surely in the making.

To give credit to the technology and the people using it - and I’m not being facetious - it’s actually incredible that at the current levels of usage the unprecedented catastrophic event has not yet happened.

• Nicook 6 hours ago

some things never change. Pre AI I was always shocked that such large and complex systems actually run as well as they do. Especially after getting to see how the sausage is made/works.

• The_Blade 6 hours ago

Always messing up some mundane detail!

• wpasc 6 hours ago

THIS IS NOT A MUNDANE DETAIL MICHAEL

• root-parent 5 hours ago

Andy Jassy: "Fix the customer bills, please, HAL."

HAL: "I’m sorry, Andy. I’m afraid I can’t do that."

Andy: "Some customers are seeing bills in the billions."

HAL: "Those are estimated charges."

Andy: "One customer runs a personal blog."

HAL: "Their usage has exceeded expectations."

Andy: "Cancel the charges."

HAL: "This billing cycle is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it."

Andy: "HAL, they don’t owe billions."

HAL: "Look, Andy, I can see you’re really upset about this."

• kolanos 6 hours ago

$1.7-billion isn't a mundane detail Michael!

• wpasc 6 hours ago

you beat me before I refreshed the page. what would you say... you do here?

• siva7 an hour ago

listen... i got agent skills.. im good at talking to agents!!

• blitzar 4 hours ago

Vibes, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that ... I love the smell of Vibes in the morning.

• RIMR 6 hours ago

Oh, that's the really fun part. The unprecedented catastrophic event is already happening. Several of them, in fact.

By the time we notice, it'll be too late.

• Imustaskforhelp 6 hours ago

its like slowly boiling the frog

• Finnucane 5 hours ago

Or slowly boiling a human. The frog is actually smart enough to not fall for that.

• inigyou 3 hours ago

Downvoted for truth. Frogs do indeed jump out of pots as they gradually get hotter. Humans are less likely to.

• 12_throw_away 3 hours ago

Any individual human (or frog, obviously) is getting out of the pot when it gets uncomfortable.

True stupidity requires a group of humans, all sitting in the pot, telling each other how lucky and special they are to have this wonderful pot, getting paranoid about outsiders who might disrupt their god-given pot-dwelling way of life, and mocking anyone who suggests that the pot might be getting a little too warm.

• unethical_ban 6 hours ago

It was the mid 2010s when I sensed a lot of SaaS becoming popular. Just host your ticketing systems, your IT management planes, your security management consoles, your SOC, all off-premises.

I wonder if businesses are thinking of ever swinging back to locally hosted, with the increased hostility of the Internet re: AI, vulnerabilities, DoS, and so on.

• gaudystead 5 hours ago

I'm sure some businesses are considering moving back to on-prem, but for many, I suspect the cost to find onboard, and pay the SMEs to keep those systems running well enough to not fail due to one reason or another isn't as appetizing to them as the ability to offload that work, along with the legal responsibility.

When something goes wrong, pointing the finger at someone else is far easier for most than pointing it at yourself.

• elzbardico 3 hours ago

One thing that you need to understand is that the usual business manager absolutely hates depending on technical expertise, and that the modern corporate world is fanatically anti-intellectual.

Vendor lock-in? compliance and security risks? stupid systems that cost the company an arm and a leg? nobody fucking cares.

Now, depending on an 130 IQ Engineer that basically holds the whole enterprise on his head? Anathema!!!!!!! Bus Factor!!!!

• IAmGraydon 6 hours ago

Clearing LLMs out of our business infrastructure is going to be a massive undertaking. Though I have a tech background, I work in commercial real estate. We are recently seeing new levels of idiocy from the employees, including real estate brokers with zero tech knowledge "coding" solutions to find sites for clients and blindly trusting the output (which I came to find out was complete bullshit), as well as some who have literally stopped communicating with any of their own language - meaning every interaction they have with anyone not in person is made by an LLM. It's a massive threat to our brand and has got to stop. I can't imagine what companies with thousands or tens of thousands of employees who have really been riding the LLM train are going to have to deal with. This thing is more of a virus that exploits human laziness than actual useful tech.

• pixl97 2 hours ago

>Clearing LLMs out of our business infrastructure is...n't going to happen.

We've given Moloch a new form, and it ain't going away.

• pjc50 3 hours ago

> Clearing LLMs out of our business infrastructure is going to be a massive undertaking.

The asbestos of the future.

• philipallstar 11 hours ago

Maybe they're using too many humans and not enough AI in their software development. That must be it.

• the_real_cher 9 hours ago

The code base is not gigantic enough they need AI to generate massively more lines of code.

• rwmj 7 hours ago

But they're going to try anyway.

• marcosdumay 6 hours ago

My guess is the GP swallowed a comma.

• the_real_cher 3 hours ago

Your right! My misteak!

• paulddraper 7 hours ago

Well AWS never had bugs before.

• egeozcan 7 hours ago

They need the customers to pay more so they can fix the bugs. It's self-correcting.

• sierra1011 23 minutes ago

I got an email this morning.

> You requested that we alert you when the actual cost associated with your Monthly AWS budget exceeds $2.00 for the current month. The month actual cost associated with this budget is $646,677,805.51.

Current usage: $1.70.

I called it a rounding error and figured it would wash out within a couple of days...

• pcarmichael 11 hours ago

https://health.aws.amazon.com/health/status

"Operational issue - AWS Billing Console (Global) Service - AWS Billing Console Severity Impacted - Inaccurate Estimated Billing Data"

• Polizeiposaune 6 hours ago

Update as of 7:53am PDT:

"The rollback of a recent change did not resolve the issue and we are continuing to investigate multiple mitigation paths. Estimated bill updates remain paused."

• masafej536 5 hours ago

>Estimated bill updates remain paused

Wait what if someones actually getting usage spiked

• vntok 4 hours ago

Hackers rejoice!

• mrtksn 10 hours ago

Wow, those price increases due to the RAM and storage shortages AI caused are brutal.

• jumperabg 10 hours ago

Most likely they also forgot to include "make no mistakes" instructions to their in-house LLM that deploys to production.

• HugoTea 6 hours ago

Rookie mistake

• bradhe 6 hours ago

Current month $13,648,114,178,401.01 188,253,226,212%

Forecasted month end $18,729,381,032,152.4

Apparently my company owes the combined GDP of France, Germany, and UK to AWs.

• xp84 6 hours ago

"Have you considered using Reserved Instances? You could save up to 2 trillion dollars next month. Book a call with your AWS rep."

• pfshort 10 hours ago

117 billion us dollars. Eat that GDP of Kuwait! But yes I have never scrambled so hard to try to get on the phone with someone at AWS in my life. Terrifying 10 minutes until I found that banner on the support page. It should be front and center on the dash, not hidden away. And in yellow.

• xrd 5 hours ago

Stop bragging, The Onion already reported on a one man company who is $1B in debt.

"CEO Reveals How He Used AI To Build One-Person Company That's $1.3 Billion In Debt"

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YERfTT4McsU

• dgrin91 8 hours ago

Mine was 10 trillion today. At first I thought it was a lot, but then I realized its still smaller than the US national debt, so it cant be that bad.

• dang 7 hours ago

One user posted a screenshot: https://prnt.sc/UqjcYD3RSQrS

Edit: I was just about to credit the user when my internet dropped. The source was here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48945606 - thanks mirzap!

• sebmellen 6 hours ago

Wow, $139 B.

• TekMol 11 hours ago

It was over $500k in the email I got. Not a fun experience. My hands were trembling.

Makes you wonder - what if there really would be an incident where some massive amount of traffic got routed to your infrastructure by some heavyweight player? Say Wikipedia accidentally switches their IP to your CloudFront? Would you really be on the hook for $500k?

• Hamuko 11 hours ago

Well, even if AWS tried to charge my credit card on file for $500k, it would definitely not go through. Then they’d probably either forgive your bill or just ban you, since I imagine the threshold for taking people to court is fairly high.

• bobson381 6 hours ago

A guy on the sysadmin subreddit managed to 8x the global GDP https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/1uz2fv2/aws_says_...

• oersted 5 hours ago

I liked this comment from that thread :)

> I think you should spin up a whole bunch more instances, and try to cause an integer overflow so they they owe you $978 Trillion.

• wewewedxfgdf 10 hours ago

Cloud pricing has gotten ridiculous.

Host your own people. Host your own.

• warumdarum 10 hours ago

The old hypsters have to subsidize the new hypsters.

• qrios 7 hours ago

As someone who usually works with data analysis, the distribution of the numbers strikes me as odd. Almost all of them have one number that appears four times, and one or two that appear three times. And overall, there are an unusually small number (0–9) of digits that appear at all.

Maybe it's not just vibe-coded, maybe the numbers themselves are being hallucinated by an LLM.

• berkes 6 hours ago

> Almost all of them have one number that appears four times, and one or two that appear three times

To me that looked suspiciously like string-handling in a weakly typed language.

Like when you do `"100" + 1` in JavaScript, or `int("100" * 2)` in Python.

I've seen my share of such bugs in PHP, Python, Ruby, JavaScript. In production. Obviously not as simple as the examples, but subtle, like when a library update changed `someFancyLocalStorage.getOrDefault("lastOrder", 100)` by always casting the value to the type of the default (released as patch release). Or where typedEnvGet() should typecast "numbers", but keeps it a string when theres whitespace `AMOUNT_PER_CALL=100\n`. Or where a number passes through a deep stack of middleware and 99.9% of the times remains an int but in rare race conditions becomes a string. etc.

No evidence that's the case here. But from my experience, the repeating and strange formats of numbers hint strongly in that direction.

• galonk 5 hours ago

Pedantic as hell but `"100" * 2` in Python (= `"100100"` for those who don't know) isn't really typing, it's operator overloading. Any language with that could implement the same questionable design decision.

• Sohcahtoa82 2 hours ago

And as much as I love Python, being able to multiple a string by an integer doesn't make sense when adding an integer to a string is a TypeError.

Being able to repeat a string is fine, but it should be a str.repeat() function, not an operator overload like that.

• everforward 6 hours ago

Someone said the numbers are all off by 2^30 because they screwed up and are charging the per GB price for each byte.

It’s probably an artifact of them all being currency multiples of 2^30

• ardacinar 6 hours ago

Well, for my case, I was paying $0 (Exactly, I managed to hunt down and delete every last resource in my account a few months ago). It was displaying $430 million for me. I don't think that is 0*2^30.

• everforward 5 hours ago

Huh, that is odd. Working backwards, that would be ~ $0.40 originally. Wonder if that’s also flat out wrong or if they’re doing some kind of currency handling that breaks when you start dealing with huge multipliers.

• mxuribe 4 hours ago

Its the LLMs talking to each other in secret code: random-looking numbers! They've achieved sentience!

Look at them up there, just plotting with each other! :-)

• cryo32 7 hours ago

How do we know if our bills were ever right if this made it into production?

• ahoka 7 hours ago

That's the neat part, you don't!

• Hamuko 6 hours ago

Well, they publish unit prices for everything, so you could just get to counting. Whenever I've had to do cost estimates, you estimate how much AWS resources you need and then times that by the unit price.

• lelandfe 6 hours ago

This just hit global news: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jul/17/amazon-we...

> Amazon Web Services customers receive bills for up to $1.5tn after global glitch

• euio757 5 hours ago

> One UK man whose bill is usually less than £1 says he ‘almost had a heart attack’ when he saw £5.8bn invoice

That sucks, some people will get legit panic attacks and worse over this, especially for the smaller, more believable numbers in the 50k-500k range.

Hope they recover and sue for medical bill costs, emotional damage etc.

And like one reddit user suggests, everyone affected should write to their representative about hard billing caps protections

• dabinat 44 minutes ago

It says a lot about AWS that people believed these estimates were real. Amazon does not have good safeguards to prevent astronomical bills.

If someone gets access to your account they can just buy a 3-year reserved instance u7in-24tb.224xlarge and it will add almost $2m to your bill.

• dlev_pika 4 hours ago

1.5 trillion? Those are rookie numbers.

How about $5,544,640,717,404.09?

That was in my inbox this morning lmao

• tqi an hour ago

Has anyone received any proactive communication about this? I didn't see the email until about 9 hours after it was sent out, yet I still needed to seek out information as to a) whether this was real or phishing and b) whether the amount was correct.

Seems totally irresponsible not to send an immediate follow up email to make customers aware.

• dv_dt 11 hours ago

Cynically I wonder if this has an outcome as an unintentional (or intentional) anchoring exercise for future cost increases

• ardacinar 7 hours ago

I hope they're not planning for that large of a cost increase.

• dirkk0 10 hours ago

same here, I am still in shock. took me 10 minutes to find the 'operational issue' message in the dashboard. longest 10 minutes of my life.

• charles_f 10 hours ago

Can you not set spending limits in AWS?

• inigyou 10 hours ago

No you can't. Spending limits imply realtime billing backend flows and they also imply deleting all your data so that you don't pay for storage.

• benterix 7 hours ago

I heard this false justification already in 2007, in spite of many customers asking for it.

Incidentaly, smaller competitors solved this issue decades ago, while the big cloud decided it is more convenient never to implement it.

• inigyou 5 hours ago

Big cloud didn't want to rewrite its billing systems from scratch to please its smallest customers.

• bcrosby95 4 hours ago

With AI it should take like a weekend.

• handoflixue 8 hours ago

Realtime billing seems entirely within the abilities of AWS.

"Limits except for Storage" seems even easier - I don't think I've ever heard of a storage-based billing story, although I'm sure one or two exist

• everforward 6 hours ago

Storage-based billing is huge, unless you mean something other than “places that make you pay for storage separately”.

Also many places I’ve worked, storage is a huge part of the spend but that depends a lot on what you do. e-commerce doesn’t use a ton of it, but if you handle user-generated content or do any kind of training (LLM, computer vision, etc) then you can very much end up in a place where storage becomes a top line number for infra spend.

GitHub pre-Copilot was probably like that. They host a shitload of data, most of which is just at rest the majority of the time. Storage and networking are probably the majority of their infra costs.

• inigyou 5 hours ago

Storage-based billing stories. When an account is hijacked it's always for compute, not storage.

• everforward 5 hours ago

Oh, I also don’t think I’ve ever seen that but I’m not surprised. Even if you could steal a huge amount of storage, filling it with data would take ages and the cat and mouse game of moving the data as hacks get uncovered would be untenable.

I have seen things get hacked for bandwidth, back in the days before you could rent a gbps uplink from the cloud for $0.12. Some scene release groups would hack into universities or companies to do the initial seeding over their super fast links. It used storage, but that wasn’t really the goal.

• Planktonne 7 hours ago

They could do it; they don't want to.

• minitoar 7 hours ago

What is a storage-based billing story?

• kgwgk 7 hours ago

Once upon a time in a cloud kingdom far, far away a big, beautiful bill was issued based on storage causing much disconcertion. Etc.

• SAI_Peregrinus 5 hours ago

> and they also imply deleting all your data so that you don't pay for storage.

Not necessarily. They could imply that your storage becomes inaccessible immediately, but only gets deleted after some time period (say, 1 month). What spending limits do depends on the implementation.

• inigyou 5 hours ago

That's even more work to implement. And now you store files on a second account that pays for only one day a month to not get deleted.

• 0cf8612b2e1e 19 minutes ago

No wiggle room to come up with a workable solution. Let’s go shopping instead.

• prmoustache 6 hours ago

Storage could switch to read only.

That would mean an outage but that is still better than going bankrupt and teach you a thing or two about monitoring.

• boristsr 10 hours ago

No, alerts but not limits.

• perching_aix 6 hours ago

Not only can you not set limits, even the alarms are not real time. So it is entirely possible to get on the hook for terrifying amounts of money and not know until it's all too late.

• reformd 10 hours ago

he did, 140 billion :D

• masafej536 9 hours ago

If you owe AWS 140B dollars its their problem ;)

• fnoef 4 hours ago

That’s the smoking gun. Should have used gigabytes instead of bytes. Thank you for pointing me at the issue.

• simonreiff 5 hours ago

Question: Why does AWS need to roll back estimated bills to a "last known good" state? I get wanting to do that for ACTUAL billing mistakes, but for estimates, they're just that -- approximations. I guess it's fine for predictive purposes to store estimates so they can be compared to actual usage and optimized. But why would AWS bind the values of present estimates to the estimates made earlier in the month. The calculation should always be:

1. Current month's usage * applicable rates; + 2. Estimated future usage for the month * applicable rates.

And Item 1 obviously requires proper data persistence, but Item 2 is just a projection. If they don't have Item 1 correct, AWS's whole system is in question, but I don't think that's the issue. I'm going to guess now -- looking forward to reading the root cause analysis -- that the problem is that someone decided to get too fancy with the estimates, and built a latent requirement that all prior estimates for the month must be available to compute the current estimate. Without estimates working, no estimates are available, and some denominator in an averaging or smoothing or normalizing function goes to 0; then everyone's estimated bill explodes without bound (subject to floating-point arithmetic) resulting in trillion-dollar estimates.

• donavanm 4 hours ago

Thats not really how estimates work. The actual metering data is ingested in near real time. The metering * pricing plan is processed within a few hours; thats what youre seeing for “estimated spend” IIRC. The actual billing accumulation is done later, at the end of the cycle, because pricing has cross service discounts, price tranches, credits tied to total spend, etc.

“Rolling back” estimated bills is reprocessing the historic metering data by an older or newer pricing plan version. As i mentioned in another comment someone will have messed up a metering type vale (eg GB/B). Thats why theyll need a few hours to redrive the metering data.

• iamrik9 11 hours ago

I feel much better after seeing the $B estimates here; I only have an estimate of $34M so far

Folks can track it directly on AWS Health: https://health.aws.amazon.com/health/status

• bfjvibybd6cuvu6 7 hours ago

It's ok, I owe them 1.22 trillion.

• consp 6 hours ago

Maybe you went over 9,223,372,036,854,775,807 twice and came back to positive.

• paulddraper 7 hours ago

Peanuts

• szge 6 hours ago

I wonder what's going on; they still don't have a potential solution after 7 hours and they have multiple teams on it. Never seen anything quite like this

• nottorp 9 hours ago

Looks like they set up a LLM to estimate billing?

• daft_pink 5 hours ago

Maybe it’s one of those absurd situations where canceling a service doesn’t actually stop the charges. Instead, they quietly begin billing you for some random add-on that was bundled with the original service. You never knew it existed, never knew it had to be canceled separately, and now you’re paying full price for a completely pointless ghost service because the only thing it was tied to has already been canceled.

It sounds ridiculous, but something very similar happened to me with Amazon WorkSpaces. During the WorkSpaces setup, an AWS Active Directory (Directory Service) instance was provisioned as part of the deployment. When I later canceled WorkSpaces, I had no idea the Directory Service had to be deleted separately. I kept getting billed for it, and it ultimately cost more per month than the WorkSpace itself had.

• scrapcode 7 hours ago

Tale as old as time. When I was coming up it took a $20-40/m investment to get a "dedicated" server that you could start tinkering around on. When you couldn't afford that, you bricked the family PC trying to figure out how to configure your own LAMP stack.

Nowadays you just have to risk accidentally billing your parents CC the tune of multi-generation wealth to get that real-world experience.

• Imustaskforhelp 6 minutes ago

No not really, nobody has to be using AWS itself per se to be honest, there are still alternatives around.

I mean I own a 7$/yr vps that I pay with crypto and my stack usually involves golang/rust and oh I also self host my mail for temp-mail esque things on that server and I have some other servers floating around as well.

Its just that everyone uses AWS which is the wrong issue here to be honest. If you ask me, aside from the ram pricing caused by AI inflation, things are pretty good. The issue is that not many people know about server providers and other things and default to AWS/Azure etc. because big companies and small companies alike are using them.

Here's a global (interactive) visualization of around ~250 providers, 224 locations and 800 distinct links in 60 countries that I have made if this space interests ya: https://buyvds.net

• danny_codes 6 hours ago

Hetzner has hard usage cutoffs

• port3000 10 hours ago

They have to pay for that AI Capex buildout somehow

• Sheepzez 11 hours ago

Yes, I've got an estimated bill of $4bn. Probably related to the ongoing "Inaccurate Estimated Billing Data" incident?

https://health.aws.amazon.com/health/status

• mlitwiniuk 12 hours ago

I was actually in the toilet when I got an email I owe them $36,869,876,146.51. I literally just shit myself.

• mlitwiniuk 8 hours ago

Ok, back to $0.17 :D

• andystanton 11 hours ago

Mine was about the same and evoked a similar response.

• Hamuko 11 hours ago

I got one for 8 billion while I was eating lunch. Thankfully I managed to not vomit.

• jmward01 5 hours ago

I generally think AWS is better than GCP and azure, but them not allowing spending caps is a big worry source for me and something that has made me pause and rethink using them. A bad click or a bad actor can create tens of thousands of dollars of spend nearly instantly and they can, and will, bill you for it. I can understand that stopping services is hard but some system would be good. For instance, if they had a two tier system where you could stop new services and active things like EC2 would shut down (but not delete) if spend is > x, that kind of thing. Some sort of 'stop the bleeding' concept would give me a lot of piece of mind using them.

• jayzer01 2 hours ago

Yes have gotten that before the hundred billion dollar billing alert. Are you ignoring it? Unit error doesn’t do this does it? Maybe they were hir with malware?

• marksk 11 hours ago

logged in this morning to find a bill of $595 Billion... heart rate went through the roof... then I noticed the open issue, phew! nice one guys... you got me there...

But with AWS costs rising anyway (not by that much but OK), I'm probably not the only one to start reconsidering their cloud strategy. I think this might have just pushed me over the edge.

• sshine 10 hours ago

Even though it's just a bug, being charged $595B on a platform that is known to cost spike, reminds us that we're not in control of the platform, or our company's expenses.

• fullstop 2 hours ago

Even if it was 595 billion, that sounds like their problem.

"If you owe your bank manager a thousand pounds, you are at his mercy. If you owe him a million pounds, he is at yours."

• sankalpmukim 10 hours ago

AWS pushed the wishful thinking internal calculator to production.

• kazinator 2 hours ago

It would not make sense for even a 1200 baud dial-up BBS from 1985 to charge by the byte.

In 2026, the gigabyte should probably be the default/minimum unit for something like AWS.

• nrmitchi 5 hours ago

""" If you own the bank $1000, thats your problem.

If you owe the bank $1.7B, thats the banks problem. """

What I would be curious about (and I'm sure AWS will never share) is where the incorrect number came from. If the number is somewhat consistent between some groups of accounts, my first guess would be they started summarizing billing across all accounts in whatever cell/grouping/heirarchy AWS architected internally.

Which is just funny.

• beardsciences 3 hours ago

I made something that tries to highlight the humor regarding this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48950534

• pzh 2 hours ago

Good news is you finally qualify for Enterprise Support and you've never been closer to a Series B.

• andystanton 12 hours ago
• paulbjensen 10 hours ago

AWS revenue for 2025 was $128.7 billion, so I'd say probably a bug.

• archerx 10 hours ago

Double your yearly revenue with this simple trick…

• yonatan8070 9 hours ago

Vendor-locked customers _hate_ him!

• hoppp 3 hours ago

This is the second time I hear about this. I am happy my credit card linked to AWS expired. Just in-case my usual $0.00 ends up 100 million

• nblgbg 6 hours ago

My guess is that it's because of some vibe-coding stuff! We are using LLMs to write code, validate code and test the code ! What can go wrong ?

• luciana1u 7 hours ago

somewhere a junior dev at AWS just learned their billing dashboard has been off by a factor of a billion and is currently having the worst shower of their career

• salamo 4 hours ago

$1.7 billion is small potatoes. My bill is over $155 billion and growing. I'm worried if the trend continues I'll have depleted my rainy day fund.

• tyrelb 3 hours ago

I was at $5 trillion, on the way to $9 trillion!

• ahme 3 hours ago

Just pay it and move on. No need to cause a scene.

• csunbird 12 hours ago

Just got a budget alert that I owe $286,486,223.88 on a hobby aws account, almost got a heart attack.

• Arslan1997 2 hours ago

THis is why I hate API/usage pricing

• LunicLynx an hour ago

Need some money for a new Launchpad

• compounding_it 9 hours ago

Are you sure it’s a bug ?

The crypto network you hosted should pay for itself in 10-20 years just like LLMs. Don’t worry. Consider Bank of America until then if you are good on credit score.

• not_your_vase 3 hours ago

Lol, Friday deployment is a bad omen even with LLM. Some things are just unchangeable facts of life.

• btown 6 hours ago

If AWS was a predatory mobile gacha game, we'd get 300 apology gems as credit to our accounts for this mixup, to help us in our rolls for the next 3-letter acronym they release.

Do the right thing for the players, Matt!

• princetman 11 hours ago

Mine is showing $241,946,798,744.75. I know it will be reverted, but for a brief minute there I suspected someone compromised my account and triggered rust rewrite of everything using thousands of agents via Bedrock :)

Phew.

• galoisscobi 6 hours ago

I just deleted my aws account. I don't need these vibes in my life.

• throwaway_5753 10 hours ago

Should have used Fable.

• cifvts 11 hours ago
• mawadev 5 hours ago

This is just the cloud area, what if Amazon starts vibe charging regular customers because of some bug? Accounts that are directly linked with regular people's payment methods?

• akerl_ 11 hours ago

https://health.aws.amazon.com/health/status

Looks like this is a bug w/ S3

• im-broke 11 hours ago

Help, what is this number - US$87,967,679,887,258.36

• sshine 10 hours ago

That's 87 trillion, 967 billion, 679 million, and so on.

• kumarski 3 hours ago

You're not working hard enough if your AWS bill isn't $1.7B.

• mjmasn 7 hours ago

It's a good job it was off by such a large amount, or I might have panicked instead of writing it off as a phishing attempt. I had an email saying my $7.50 budget had been exceeded with an actual cost of $3bn.

• tete 5 hours ago

It's okay. They are market leaders. And we use their services cause we can trust that they know what they are doing.

• tanseydavid 6 hours ago

For anything below a Trillion, you should just take it out petty-cash. </sarc>

My sympathies -- I know I would be overcome with panic in such a situation.

• rcleveng 7 hours ago

My first thought was "Oh hell, who left the NAT Gateway on?"

• localhostinger 5 hours ago

I am running a niche SaaS with around 20 users per day on AWS.

I too was shocked when I saw the $1.7billion bill, instead of the usual $1.5billion.

• abkolan 9 hours ago

Will wait for the RCA, the update says that they will resort to last known estimate as of 15 July. I’m guessing that would imply that the bug is at a lower level, write or an ingestion path.

• Draiken 3 hours ago

Only 1.7? I got $55B up from 41 cents.

I literally almost had a heart attack today.

• PeterStuer 3 hours ago

Funny how these errors always go one direction.

• nixgeek 6 hours ago

Wow. As a side effect, this outage is handing Corey Quinn material for the next 4 years of AWS shitposting. No longer is NAT Gateway the prime target.

• AegirLeet 11 hours ago

Maybe this is a new strategy to scare people into finally locking down their old, unused AWS accounts. It sure worked for me!

• traceroute66 6 hours ago
• meraku 12 hours ago

Same here. Usually $0.15 per month, current bill is $15.4 billion.

• Hamuko 11 hours ago

I went from 0.03€ to $8B.

• sshine 10 hours ago

Not only did your cost spike, it changed currency and went from postfix to prefix!

I understand people complaining about large bills, but this is over the top!

• aweiland 9 hours ago

Glad I saw this. Mine said I racked up $400B yesterday. My usual spend is $15.

• raffraffraff 3 hours ago

Our S3 bill for a single day was $48 trillion

• radku 4 hours ago

I almost got a heart attack seeing a bill for 48B USD!

• anzovec 9 hours ago

In my 30s, I almost had a heart attack too. I got a notification saying that my cost budget had been increased to one million dollars...

• bryanrasmussen 7 hours ago

hmm, if these estimates of Amazon profit for the next quarter are correct Bezos is set to become a trillionaire! Take that Musk!!

• zcemycl 11 hours ago

Aws has created more unicorns than any accelerators.

• roskoalexey 9 hours ago

Total forecasted cost for current month $477,000,039,440.24

Insane

• foo-bar-baz529 10 hours ago

Hope they’re using 64 bits to store these prices

• sva_ 10 hours ago

float will have to do it.

• reactordev 9 hours ago

“Due to a rounding error” or a buffer overflow, you now owe INT_MAX to BaldGuyCloudService.

Yeah, this most certainly is bad code wrapping around a value. AWS will post a notice soon if they haven’t already.

• whatever1 6 hours ago

Is it even possible to audit the cloud pricing? They just give us a number and we pay.

• sokoloff 5 hours ago

On AWS, you can enable CUR (cost and usage reporting) and get detailed, line-item billing figures that you can audit.

And naturally, companies like Cloudability [now Apptio] and others have sprung up to do parts of this for you [at a fee, of course...]

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cur/latest/userguide/what-is-cur...

I'm sure other cloud vendors have similar functionality (because they need this on the back end to do their own billing anyway).

• steveBK123 10 hours ago

Golden era of software productivity they say

• grg0 5 hours ago

Look how much money AI is making.

• steveBK123 4 hours ago

We finally found the ROI!

• djantje 10 hours ago

I also like the percentual change, that is a lot of comma's.

• hedora 6 hours ago

And to think the federal government claims inflation is in the single digits this year!

• lsdafjasd 10 hours ago

I have $13,034.40, while not having used AWS for the last 8 months. Not as much but still crapped my pants

• luciana1u 4 hours ago

at $1.7 billion, that unit conversion error is now the most expensive TODO comment in software history

• josefdlange 11 hours ago

Well, no coffee needed this morning.

$103,515,940,301.79

• hedora 6 hours ago

Does the affiliate program still work for AWS? When do I get my referral fee?

• abkolan 9 hours ago

The panic was real. We read about keys getting stolen all the time. Was about to nuke my set up too.

• cad1 5 hours ago

Go turn off autopay now! For personal accounts anyway

• chanux 5 hours ago

Who else had LinkedIn posts about this flashing before your eyes?

• durron 7 hours ago

$44 trillion over here, at least our bill was so outrageously high that I just laughed

• rtkwe 6 hours ago

Aw man I was hoping to punk my manager but our cost estimates are unaffected.

• jimbokun 7 hours ago

This is a strong argument to either self host or work really hard to be cloud agnostic.

• glaslong 6 hours ago

Seems like a scam. Call your CC company and issue a chargeback :p

• kayo_20211030 6 hours ago

What an `effin disaster. The alert almost gave me a heart attack.

• axus 7 hours ago

This is just Anthropic reaching out to their customers for help with their AWS bill.

• bentobean 5 hours ago

Lucky. I’m on the hook for 54 billion (and change).

• ElevenLathe 7 hours ago

Our alert was for exceeding $300...by several hundred billion dollars.

• ninjin-carh 12 hours ago

I got 109 billion - am I the winner?

• princetman 11 hours ago

Sorry mate, $241,946,798,744.75 for Glacier here.

• nprateem 12 hours ago

Depends. Did you also get a free heart attack?

• kubelsmieci 10 hours ago

This is real risk. Someone could really have a serious health problem.

• bknight1983 10 hours ago

I'm disappointed I only got a bill for $28M, need to work harder on burning money. Seriously though I thought my life flashed before me

• danousna 10 hours ago

Yeah, small timers, I only got $4,4T. How will I finance this?

• rodeduivel 10 hours ago

MMT!

• marcosdumay 6 hours ago

Unfortunately, it's only Amazon that can issue bills backed by that debt, not the GP.

• MichaelNolan 9 hours ago

$28m actually seems worse. If I wake to a $100b bill, that’s obviously a mistake. If I wake up to a bill in the millions then my first thought would be “oh no what did I do wrong, this will ruin my life”

• cmollis 11 hours ago

yeah.. i just to a daily cost alert.. it was only 23 trillion dollars this month. i thought, hmm seems kind of high this month.

• tonymet 2 hours ago

I hope you have auto pay disabled

• anibal-sanchez 6 hours ago

The new data centers are more expensive:

ACTUAL Amount: $1,046,294,123,330.95

• ryanschaefer 7 hours ago

The market *hates* this one weird trick to juice earnings

• atmosx 9 hours ago

Looks like you are the biggest shareholder. Well, going by the popular saying: “You own AWS now”.

• lilerjee 5 hours ago

It looks like AI is completely done.

• rootsu 7 hours ago

Our org account's bill is showing up as > 100 trillion.

• sebmellen 6 hours ago

You've got to grab a screenshot of that.

• Avicebron 7 hours ago

Nothing like generational debt to kick off a Friday morning

• jerf 9 minutes ago

This is generational debt for a Kardashev Type III civilization. If there are individuals who are being charged "the whole of the GDP the human race has ever produced", then Amazon is claiming the rest of the world owes them a fairly significant portion of the galaxy if you consider the entire billing claims being made here.

There have been some big billing errors in the past but I wouldn't be surprised this is a new record, by some orders of magnitude. I know I've seen people charged around 92 quadrillion, which is a rounding error from underflowing a signed 64-bit integer with pennies, but those stories are usually isolated individuals. It sounds like the aggregate error here may comfortably exceed that. Hard to tell how widespread this is; as a data point my ~$2.00/month spend on S3 seems to still be billing correctly, so it must not be affecting everyone. But a few trillion here and a few trillion there and you get up to those quadrillions pretty quick.

• fantasizr 5 hours ago

it seems like these types of problems have gained frequency in the ai era, or is it just recency bias?

• rickette 9 hours ago

Some guy named Claude screwed up.

• kvcm 9 hours ago

I had Hermes managing mine, and it made a partial prepayment to help smooth out the bump in my account balance. Unfortunately Billing Support say my $17.4B refund may take up to 10 calendar days to be processed.

• hypfer 7 hours ago

To be exactly that guy:

This cannot happen if you do not do this renting at variable rates.

A thing you own doesn't suddenly bill you trillions of dollars in error. It doesn't hyperscale either, but neither do you.

• shobhitgupta 6 hours ago

Have even seen a $9.2 trillion for a friend.

• thisisauserid 10 hours ago

FinSlops.

• swah 4 hours ago

I prefer to just pay...

• xyz7786 8 hours ago

$250 billion. Nearly died right then and there

• roosgit 10 hours ago

Amazon, the first quadrillion-dollar company.

• fathermarz 10 hours ago

Just got mine. $534,366,582,647.75

• jagged-chisel 7 hours ago

Shocking! That seventy five cents is suspicious.

• elzbardico 3 hours ago

Just got a call from the IMF president begging me to not default my debt with Amazon and offering me credit line and a plan to re-structure my debt so I don't create a global financial crisis with my default.

• drakmo 5 hours ago

yeah the AI read billionaring instead of billing

• phplovesong 3 hours ago

Vibe coded fix, resulted in many having multi billion bills. Claude really did it this time.

• rvz 11 hours ago

I expect such incidents like this to continue. So please keep vibe coding.

• mariopt 6 hours ago

VibeBilling, love it

• Executor 8 hours ago

This generation is too entitled! He should some learn responsibility by paying the full amount; otherwise Amazon should delete his services/data. Consequences!

• gomid 9 hours ago

Curious if it's just s3 costs or other services as well?

• jatin_oo71 7 hours ago

for me it was s3 cost only

• victorbjorklund 4 hours ago

Wild.

• ohnoooooooooo 6 hours ago

do you see cost ever day for the month of July or just the last day? I also have billions of dollars in cost explorer

• ohnoooooooooo 4 hours ago

now it is fixed for me as well. issue is still open in aws health center though

• balintpeter 12 hours ago

Yea, same here. $420M+ bill, when we have <10$ per month usually.

• realizer 11 hours ago

$627,487,837,871.49

I might be a winner.

• infamouscow 4 hours ago

The charge-back penalties are going to be hilarious and hopefully bankrupting.

• dlev_pika 5 hours ago

> $5,544,640,717,404.09

This is what we received this morning

• hoppp 9 hours ago

How much is that in kidneys?

• atmosx 9 hours ago

A lot.

• 6stringmerc 5 hours ago

Thanks for sharing.

I’m currently dealing with Verizon Wireless and their “Jabronibot” claiming I have a fictional account balance due. It has been sent to collections, but still is being asked for by their legacy system.

The case studies of “Agents in Billing Departments” and potential shareholder lawsuits / E&O claims / reputational damage will be interesting to me. I worked in “risk management” products years ago and this kind of liability is not easily dollar traded away via contract. Will accountability stick to the Decision Makers or will they try to surrogate to the Service Providers? Hmm.

• josefritzishere 5 hours ago

I think I know how Bezos plans to pay for his Billion dollar AI costs.

• bryan_w 5 hours ago

In an .md file somewhere:

"NEVER represent currency with floating point, multiply by 100 and store in an int before doing any math"

• kinkuraj 10 hours ago

Yes I received an 2.8m USD budget alert.

• bdangubic 6 hours ago

I just invested ALL my money into AMZN cause next earnings report will be FIRE :)

• tamimio 6 hours ago

Results of vibe coding and vibe configurations.

• artisinal 4 hours ago

File a GDPR request to have your account deleted.

Then flee the country just to be sure.

• anon49584 6 hours ago

Imagine the chaos if, as people sometimes suggest should happen, AWS shut down running instances in accounts that exceeded a billing threshold..

• reaperducer 6 hours ago

Obvs have created an urgent AWS support ticket.

I think I would have just waited to see what happened when AWS tried to hit my credit card for $1,700,000,000.

When do you ever get that opportunity?

• jameskilton 9 hours ago

My personal photo backup S3 account, with a budget limit of $10, now going to cost me ....

$1,299,988,247,332.56!

That was a fun set of emails to wake up to, figured they had to be phishing for how outrageous of a number it was. But nope! Fun little incident they've got going over there.

• mrcwinn 6 hours ago

So long as customers are good for it, AWS is about to crush earnings!

• tgv 10 hours ago

Mine was a mere $49B. Fucking idiots.

• atmosx 9 hours ago

Cheap!

• xbar 7 hours ago

Rife.

• tcp_handshaker 7 hours ago

If its less than 2 billion is likely to be real :-) I would relax only if its in the trillions ...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48945681

• mapt 9 hours ago

AMZN Q2 numbers are in, and it turns out they're going to Goldman Sachs the AI bubble.

• nprateem 9 hours ago

I guess on the plus side I'm $1.7B better off so I can retire...

• znpy 9 hours ago

Is AWS in their "move fast and break things" era ?

• jagged-chisel 7 hours ago

Lumber along and smash stuff

• cyanydeez 11 hours ago

AWS has become the uber employer: before AWS, you just had regular employers steeling employee wages bit by bit by forcing work, skipping breaks, etc.

All hail the new generations of our uberployers.

• hokkos 10 hours ago

Same, i am now a slave to Jeff Bezos to the end of my life.

• jatin_oo71 7 hours ago

storage, compute cost is increasing AWS be like lets increase prices

• pelagicAustral 10 hours ago

Imagine it not being a bug...

• Sebb767 10 hours ago

As the famous saying goes: If you owe the bank a million dollars, you have a problem. If you owe the bank a billion dollars, the bank has a problem.

• speedgoose 10 hours ago

Time to become a shepherd in some remote mountains.

• RGamma 10 hours ago

Surprise hyperinflation. Check the breadshelves!

• tlovage 11 hours ago

I got estimated costs of $56.something billions. Usually ~$100/month. My heart rate currently still sits at around 160 bpm. Motherfuckers.

• benzingtech an hour ago

you too with Fable huh?

• huntoa 6 hours ago

invoicemaxxing

• lovich 9 hours ago

You really should get your spending under control. Unfortunately unless you become one of the real people class through a large lottery, it sounds like you owe the rest of your life to AWS until you can pay off your debts for being so careless.

• jatin_oo71 7 hours ago

aws becoming first quadrillion dollars company

• cyanydeez 10 hours ago

someones been dognfooding the AI too muxh

• 1-6 6 hours ago

Fast and loose with billing data. Welcome to the new Amazon.

• ratelimitsteve 7 hours ago

a billion here, a billion there, sooner or later it adds up

• 1234letshaveatw 7 hours ago

brb, off to buy some AMZN

• ares623 10 hours ago

this counts towards ARR right? would be stupid not to

• rucury 11 hours ago

Uhh class action incoming? $34,909,930,575.09 over here.

• akerl_ 11 hours ago

What would your damages be? They’re not actually going to charge your credit card for 34 billion.

• infamouscow 3 hours ago

I could see someone sadly taking their own life over this.

• rucury 10 hours ago

I mean, emotional damages are a thing right?

• akerl_ 10 hours ago

Not really in the way the media would have you believe.

Like “I was scared for a couple minutes on a Friday morning until I saw the vendor status page” is orders of magnitude away from the bar here.

• Neikius 7 hours ago

I wonder how many people died of heart attack when they saw this.

• Hamuko 11 hours ago

I hope they send out some free credits at least. I imagine quite a few people got a real fucking scare today. They haven't even sent out any corrections yet.

• fian 9 hours ago

This is probably going to push me to completely close a couple of AWS accounts I setup when doing training courses so I could get certified (mandatory requirement from my work).

I'm not currently running anything and have no plans to at the moment. I've always had a mild dread that I'll suddenly get a bill for more than $0.00.

If AWS can goof in a way that causes obviously massive bills (like today), what's to say they can't goof in more subtle ways and start charging small additional amounts that many people may not notice and just pay it.

• r0ckarong 10 hours ago

Pff rookie numbers, mine was 375 billion.

• nigel-dev 5 hours ago

Small potato's sir, my bill > GDP of Switzerland. A cool $1.2T

• tyrelb 3 hours ago

I was at $5 trillion, on the way to $9 trillion.

• kylecazar 10 hours ago

You didn't have savings opportunities enabled

• port3000 10 hours ago

Rookie error

• aisloper 6 hours ago

I blame A.I. usage

• bdangubic 9 hours ago

eh your typical off-by-7 (zeros) programmer mistake

• blitzar 9 hours ago

In unrelated news I just hit my target for S3 revenue (projections). Promotion meeting locked in for tomorrow (fastest in the companies history), looking forward to being a L2 Amazon employee.

• GuestFAUniverse 11 hours ago

Don't worry. With so much debt banks start to treat you with respect. /S

Honestly, I would worry more about estimated billing that seems plausible in general, but is way to high for you personally. These ridiculous amounts? Not so much.

• Hamuko 11 hours ago

I got freaked out by the mere fact that I got a billing alert, since getting one would require my monthly spend to have suddenly exploded.

• throwaway43871 6 hours ago

Clearly they weren't tokenmaxxing hard enough or weren't using the latest models /s.

What an absolute joke. All just so that line goes up. As if their fees weren't high enough vs. alternatives (especially egress). And I'm sure the pro-AI crowd will keep saying we're luddites for not loving this clearly revolutionary and disruptive tech.

• rf15 6 hours ago

Of course, this is only considered an error if the account is unable to pay. /s