No, I don’t need to know the use case. There are a vanishingly small number of use cases that cannot be performed 25,000 times per second on hardware from 25 years ago. If you indeed work on one of those few cases, you wouldn’t simultaneously call Terraform and public utility cloud simple architecture for any use case relevant to Hacker News discussion; that’s just plainly false beyond a certain level of computing depth, i.e., after you’ve written a process scheduler in an operating system or a supercomputer. (Note that I’m not calling you inexperienced. I’m talking about exposure to diverse types of computing, or, more realistically, the papers those communities develop.)

Those two ideas, that 25k is hard and Terraform is easy, are incongruous positions to hold from my perspective and basically prove the point I made. I understand if that’s not as obvious to you. The Web and cloud trap people into believing the world you’re living in is computing, and that the computers you’re working with go a certain speed on the road. There’s a lot of infrastructure in between you and computing in the model you’re working in, and it’s not apparent to you as unnecessary to compute. Computers are capable of far, far, far more than the entire industry thinks. That’s why those Hadoop takedown demos made me smile back in the day, and why I can’t wait to demo against $10 million of Kubernetes eating companies of the future alive.

Or yeah, blow my mind with your workload that can’t be tackled in a few shakes of a PlayStation’s tail with strong vector units nearby (the reason I specifically mentioned a PlayStation).