I'd classify it as "overhead" to AWS rather than any single account. Individual accounts don't get billed for unauthorized access attempts, at least not directly. AWS totals up the cost of handling those unauthorized requests and factors it into the costs of their services. Then those costs get spread across all accounts, so for each account it amounts to a fixed percentage of their bill that goes to paying for "overhead".

Or permit us to isolate the service endpoints behind a firewall or vnet, like I'd do going the traditional route, so the Internet at large couldn't hit them with unauthorized requests.

Amazon might be on to something! I am thinking of charging my customers for every HTTP request my servers handle. Then, I'll set up bots to make HTTP requests to their web sites. Then, infinite profits!

I never quite understood why they didn't clone the original doctor image and spin up a few dozen more of them. There were several stories that touched on this, but not to my satisfaction. Even if the clones had to start from scratch, they'd be perfectly reasonable nurses and assistants, and if they left them running they should eventually wind up as complex as the Dr. I think there were even a few holodeck sims that ended up gaining sentience, so they left them running (or because they did?).

What competition though? The Ambulance will take you to the closest hospital and they bill you whatever they care to bill you. If you need "Panacesq", there is one and only one manufacturer and you better pay what they want if you want to live. Where's the competition?

You want an all inclusive price for something? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah,no.

If privatization is so great, why does healthcare in America cost more than double that of any other developed nation but we're in 26th place for outcomes?

Honestly I'm not sure if the proponents of privatization remind me more of Linus in the pumpkin patch waiting for the Great Pumpkin or Charlie Brown being sure Lucy won't pull the football away this time.

Many forms of socialized medicine leave others completely free to set up a private practice if they believe they can do better. All of them buy supplies and medication from companies, only manufacturing for themselves (really contract the manufacturing) as a last resort. The same companies that ass rape Americans in need of medication willingly sell at much better prices to various countries' socialized medical systems. They may not prefer that, but wave a dollar and they'll jump through the hoop just fine.

According to Star Trek, AI doctors are fine as long as you don't beam into remote areas or convince doc they are an opera star.

Buy 3 livers and get one free!

You just haven't tried a Huawei spleen yet. Their CRISPR tech is cookin'

...for many things you don't know if it will fly until you try. Their shoppers tend to be older, so health services made sense on paper.

I think it's more that Nadella knows if he goes against Gates' wishes and his own plan fails, he's in the hot-seat, as Gates is bigger than life.

You trot out this stat as if the opposite were true for women (that 994 of 1000 get married). Unless those 6 men are marrying multiple wives, the stat can be equally applied to women: "women avoiding men to the extent that only 6 out of 1000 get married".

How did you make the leap from "6 out of 1000 people get married" to "because men are the deciding factor and they're the ones choosing not to get married, but it's not their fault - women caused them to act like this"???

... and then you jump right into your androcentrism.

Maybe you can start by not making wild leaps of assumption (ex. "While you appear to believe that women are always the victim, never at fault...")
Next, maybe address any of the points I provided in any way. As is, it seems you're content to rant about your own narrative while ignoring the conversation.

... here in the comments on a week old post on a public forum? Sure, that's not disingenuous at all. But sure! I'll address your questions/statements.

* "Why in your estimation has the fertility rate fallen as indicated by these article - or do you deny it?"
"Why" isn't a confirm or deny. Stats show it has fallen. The post I replied to (IE: "Don't forget to add feminism. A lot of men don't want to deal with abusive women") attempted to attribute it to abusive feminists impact on men causing men to avoid having children. Would you like to defend that stance? I think it's absolute bullshit, and laid out a few of the glaringly obvious reasons.

* "Why has the marriage rate fallen to 6 out of 1000 people today?"
What does this have to do with this topic? Do you have some evidence that connects this correlation? And why do you think I need to provide some theory on why it is occurring?

* "There is a widespread complaint by women that men no longer approach them. Is she wrong? Tell us why she is wrong."
That article shows a few anecdotes from men and women that I've heard my entire life from various people. I can say that my opinion of those handful of statements sounded, in general, like weak men who lacked confidence. They have no one to blame but themselves for not trying. Some examples:

** This guy sounds like he simply gave up. "I don’t approach women anymore because it’s too tedious with little chance of payoff. It’s either they ignore you, reject you, shame you, or, worse, accuse you of molestation."

** This guy is too scared to act. "It’s mainly the negative consequences that’s stopping me. It’s scary when you hear stories about guys and fake accusations on campus."

* "Women recording themselves at gyms to accuse men of creeping" ... "Men are largely stopping going to them" ... "Men no longer attend singles events"
The anecdotes of women recording men creeping with the purpose of exposing them... that's not actually widespread (feel free to provide any actual stats on this), and who cares? For one, don't be a creep and you're fine. Two, so what if they post it? Do you care that other people see what you do in public and what they think of it? If it's bad enough that you're scared to act as you normally do, maybe you're a creeper?
Curious, if there are stats on men no longer going to the gym or singles events, I wonder if those line up much with the pandemic. Things change; Change with the times.

* "is a woman calling a man a creep ... abusive?"
No
* Who is responsible?
For what problem? The impact of social media on modern society? Or should I assume you consider the exposure of creepy public behaviors to be abusive, problematic, and attributable to one party? (IMHO, it's a feature, not a bug).

So, what's your opinion of feminism? Do you think it leads to a significant increase in abusive behavior in women? Are you noticeably impacted by abusive feminists in your day to day life? Have you avoided women, relationships, and/or sex because of your direct experiences with one or more abusive feminists? How do you personally define "feminist"? Are you aware of any studies that support the theory that the rise of feminism is a thing, and that it has lead to an increase in abusive women, and that men in general have noticed that to the point that they are actively avoiding women/sex/procreation directly because of it? Or maybe you have some personal anecdotes about that (ex. friends/family)?

Why would I do that? Corporate America is Gollum. They will chase their preciousss dollars directly into the volcano every time.

That was a Gilligan's Island episode: a Mars probe inadvertently landed on the island, but NASA thought it reached Mars. Soon after being activated, the camera lens popped out and broke, preventing the castaways from sending an SOS.

The Professor baked a special glue to fix the lens, but Gilligan forgot to turn off the fire on the glue pot. Right when they got the lens to work, the pot exploded and blew glue & Gilligan's feather collection all over the crew and signs. NASA thought they were looking at "Martian bird people".

Corny but funny; a bunch of plot elements came together at once in one big explosion, like reverse entropy. The probe did look like a taller version of the Viking landers despite being a decade earlier. (I simplified the story a bit for TLDR.)

Those people are free to never stray beyond it's walls.

But note, even if literally nobody chooses to go outside the garden, the simple fact that they are free to makes sure Apple is careful to maintain the garden well.

Correction, it's supposed to be "glaring", but blaring works also, as the gaps are so obvious you can practically hear the suckage.

As a practical suggestion, the main screens for their software should have a completely different UI for mouse/desktop versus mobile. For infrequently-used screens, mobile is the lowest common denominator and works good enough, but the high volume screens should be tuned for each if you care about your customers.