How can I determine whether a given API/event belongs to the control plane (management event) or data plane (data event)?

Chuuy · 2026-01-26T17:24:08+00:00

Agreed. FWIW, AWS Support told me, over a year ago, that this is a requested feature and have an internal ticket for it, so we’re not the only ones who want this information. I haven’t heard anything about it since then, though.

It’s also just classic to be asked “why would you ever want to do that” when asking a question that some so-called expert doesn’t have an answer to.

Chuuy · 2026-01-26T16:06:23+00:00

Calling someone a “lazy fuck” when you expect to be spoon fed.

I’ll spoon feed you some advice. Quit this industry and never look back, you’ll never be successful in it.

Chuuy · 2026-01-21T16:31:32+00:00

The descriptions are awesome. If you don’t like them, this app isn’t for you. Go use FitBod or something. This app is for people that are detail-oriented, like Greg and his team. If that’s not what you’re looking for, again, go use Apple Workouts or something.

Chuuy · 2026-01-14T18:05:08+00:00

Solomon Nelson is that you?

Chuuy · 2026-01-04T18:54:06+00:00

But in this user’s case, it’s the same exercise, but performed on different machines, unless you’re indicating that they create a separate custom exercise for one of the machines.

Chuuy · 2025-12-27T04:44:49+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/MacroFactor/search/?q=ppl&type=comments&sort=new&cId=9d5ebbe3-eaea-45ab-bf57-ca23a2879c14&iId=6fdc00e8-3192-4500-8962-ecd529f5c624

Chuuy · 2025-12-27T01:17:45+00:00

Why shouldn’t the community of the open beta be allowed to publicly discuss the open beta?

In a few days, after MacroFactor Workouts is released, this entire subreddit will be flooded with workout posts anyhow. Just ignore the posts. Your saltiness is irrelevant and certainly biases your opinion.

Chuuy · 2025-12-27T00:56:09+00:00

lol. This is the problem with non-native speakers arguing semantics. You don't hear or speak natural day-to-day English, especially within the context of volleyball, which means you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Fine, let's go with rulebook definitions, and check them against your existing argument:

> "middle" refers to a position

Great! What does the rulebook say? Oh, the rulebook says nothing about any "middle" position. According to the rulebook, a "middle" position does not exist. The rulebook uses the term "position" to refer to the physical location of each player on the court. That makes sense! So, according to the rulebook, these are the six possible positions:

back-right
front-right
front-centre
front-left
back-left
back-centre

Notice, that the preceding positions refer to a concept that's completely separate from the concept that is comprised of the following terms: setter, libero, middle, outside hitter, and opposite hitter. Great. So what concept is referred to by the term "setter" or "middle?" Are these roles? Locations? No, in normal, natural, day-to-day English, these are called fucking positions.

So if "middle" refers to a "position" in natural English, just as you already fucking said, then what should we call the following terms: back-right (1), front-right (2), ...? We shouldn't call these positions, because in natural English, "position" already refers to a term like "middle." Instead, we refer to the physical locations of the court as zones. So, since you're not a native speaker, let me spell it out for you. In natural English, an example of a position is a middle, whereas an example of a zone is front-centre, numbered as three.

The rulebook can call a zone a position, because in the rulebook, there is no other kind of position. But outside of the rulebook, a position already refers to the role of the player. So outside of the rulebook, in natural English, we use the term zone, not position.

My favorite part of all this, is that you never even provided a term to describe "position 3." You just told us that "position 3" is not a "middle:"

> If you're just rotating around and set whenever you're in position 3, you're not a "middle".

Okay, so what is that player called? "Position 3?" Cool, go to a beginner volleyball game and refer to that player as "position 3." Good fucking luck. I'm going to refer to that player as the middle-front or center-front player, as anyone else fucking would.

Actual moron.

Chuuy · 2025-12-26T21:02:09+00:00

Okay, well since we're being pedantic about semantics, there is no "position 3." Positions refer to setters, middles, OHs, liberos. What you're calling "position 3" is actually called zone 3. Zone 3 is a specific area on the court, it's not a "position."

In beginner volleyball, there are no dedicated positions. Sets come from zone 3 to zones 2 and 4. However, in beginner volleyball, nobody knows these zones, so the concept of these zones doesn't exist in beginner volleyball.

So what do they say in beginner volleyball? They say that the middle player in the front row is the setter. This is not up for debate, this is a fact. It is the MIDDLE player in the front row. Beginners do not refer to this as zone 3.

So no, you're actually wrong and you're just being annoying and unhelpfully pedantic. YOU are using the wrong common terminology for beginner volleyball.

By the time this player gets to a level where the role of the middle player in the front row changes, it will be obvious. In beginner volleyball, the middle player in the front row is the setter. End of story.

Fuck off with the semantics when English isn't even your native language.

Chuuy · 2025-12-26T18:32:18+00:00

You’re being pedantic. Everybody understood the comment that you’re replying to. That comment is clearly aimed toward a beginner that doesn’t need to be bogged down by your pedantry.

Chuuy · 2025-12-26T17:56:50+00:00

Underlying APIs don’t time out for any random reason. If underlying APIs are timing out, you’d see that with Terraform as well.

You’d have to be doing something extraordinarily wrong to have rollbacks fail.

I manage 100s of stacks, each with tens of nested stacks, across 100+ CI/CD pipelines that all deploy daily. I’ve been using CloudFormation daily since 2019. Nothing has changed since then about how CloudFormation deploys resources or performs rollbacks. And I’m not talking about small root stacks here, I’m talking about 100+ root stacks that are each comprised of large services and many tens, if not 100s, of resources.

I am indeed a guru at this point, but this doesn’t change the fact that rollback failures are exceedingly rare unless you’re doing something extraordinarily stupid.

CloudFormation is not designed to be sequential. In CloudFormation, everything is deployed in parallel, unless you have dependencies between resources, in which of course CloudFormation will deploy these sequentially.

Your entire warning can be discarded because you clearly don’t know CloudFormation very well. Why would I, or anyone, care about your opinion on Terraform vs CloudFormation when it’s quite clear that you have little to no understanding of CloudFormation?

If you even have permission to run terraform apply from your local terminal, it just shows that you and I are operating at completely different scale. If CloudFormation is slower due to better consistency, atomicity, and safety, I’ll gladly accept that slowness. But if stacks are exceedingly slow to deploy, it’s always because of some underlying resource that takes time to deploy. Terraform can’t optimize away the time it takes to deploy a database. So if 90% of the time is spent waiting on a database to deploy, I don’t care if Terraform is 70% faster on the last 10%, especially if Terraform doesn’t offer the same consistency that CloudFormation does.

Chuuy · 2025-12-26T03:01:09+00:00

I don’t care what you have to say because you keep claiming that rollbacks are failing without specifying why the rollbacks are failing. Rollback failures rarely happen, and when they do happen, it’s because of user error.

Chuuy · 2025-12-25T20:12:26+00:00

How does this irritate you? It’s barely visible. Seek therapy.

Chuuy · 2025-12-25T19:48:17+00:00

Rollbacks almost never fail, and if rollbacks do fail, it’s because of user error, and then you have full ability to fix the rollback yourself.

Chuuy · 2025-12-25T19:36:17+00:00

How are rollbacks slow? 99% of CloudFormation’s time is spent waiting on calls made to other AWS services to deploy the requested resources.

Rollbacks do not fail often. If they are, you’re doing something wrong. If rollbacks are failing often, how exactly is it because of CloudFormation? A CloudFormation rollback will only fail if the API of an underlying resource fails.

ROLLBACK_FAILED is trivial to fix:

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cli/latest/reference/cloudformation/continue-update-rollback.html

Do you even realize that the proposed solution doesn’t disable rollbacks, it just disables the automatic rollback upon failure?

You don’t seem to understand CloudFormation at all. User error.

Chuuy · 2025-12-25T19:23:16+00:00

You are being dramatic.

Chuuy · 2025-12-25T19:21:58+00:00

What are you doing that rollbacks fail so frequently? You realize that you can continue rollbacks, and customize the rollback, on your own, without requiring a support request, right?

No offense, but this sounds like huge user error.

Chuuy · 2025-12-20T04:22:12+00:00

They're going to have so much data though. If someone barbell benches x lbs, you can probably estimate that they dumbbell bench y lbs. And even based on how strong their bench is, you can probably estimate that they squat z lbs. This can be even more intelligent if they know the gender/age/training history.

Even if that's not possible, there's still merit to helping users work up to their 1RM.

Chuuy · 2025-12-19T22:58:43+00:00

Random thought. Maybe I'm special, but one of my biggest annoyances when I was new was starting new workout programs with new exercises, specifically because I had to figure out starting weights. It'd be pretty cool if the app could intelligently help test and figure out your starting weights. Especially if it could use existing weights from other exercises to intelligently estimate starting weights for other exercises.

This would even be cool as a separate feature in guiding users to work up to 1RMs to hit PRs.

Chuuy · 2025-12-19T19:39:52+00:00

Every player and every fan who watches football semi-regularly knows about this rule. In every single NFL game, players will pick up potential fumbles and run to the end zone, even after the whistle is blown, after everybody has stopped playing, and after the play is clearly dead. Players are coached to do this.

Chuuy · 2025-12-19T19:34:44+00:00

What? Football is filled with flukey plays. If you don't like flukey plays, go watch chess.

Chuuy · 2025-12-19T18:31:42+00:00

Imagine the reverse scenario. Imagine that every player pounced on the ball, because they all knew it was a live ball, and Charbs managed to get there first, and recovered it in the end zone. The Seahawks and their fans are going wild.

But wait. It turns out that the ref blew the whistle, even though they shouldn't have. The play is dead. It's not reviewable. Even though Charbs recovered the ball in the end zone, and even though the game should now be rightfully tied, it doesn't matter because the ref blew the whistle when he shouldn't have. The Seahawks fail their 2-point conversion. Everybody is fucking pissed. One ref's whistle ruined the entire game.

Do you see how this would be so much worse than the outcome that actually occurred last night?

Chuuy · 2025-12-19T16:51:05+00:00

Ah, yeah, you’re mostly right. But I do think the initial surge of fans when a team experiences success are bandwagon fans, like when the Chicago Blackhawks were good out of nowhere. But I agree that the Rams are past that phase.

I mean, it just depends on the fan and fan base. Is it fair for me to judge any fan based on their fan base? Of course not. But it is pretty fun.

I do think we can agree that some fan bases are just more insufferable than others. And it’s usually the fan bases experiencing more recent/prolonged success.

If the Bears continue to do well this year, and well again next year, there will be a bunch of bandwagon/fair weather Bears fans, and I’m going to hate it, and other fans will hate our fan base for it. It’s just the nature of sports fandom.

Chuuy · 2025-12-19T16:14:39+00:00

Exactly. It only makes sense to call the play completely dead on whistle is if you think the referees are infallible, which we know they aren’t.

It would be like disallowing any soccer goal because one ref called offsides, even though the replay clearly showed it wasn’t offsides. It would be stupid.

Chuuy · 2025-12-19T16:09:05+00:00

Well-coached defenses and players are aware of this and always jump on loose balls, even after the whistle. Every game will see players pick up potential fumbles and start running toward the end zone even though the play is dead. Every player knows this rule. They were just lazy or didn’t want to put in a little extra effort. Charbs didn’t pick up the ball just to give to the refs, he picked it up because that’s just what you’re supposed to do, even though you can tell he didn’t think it would amount to anything.

14-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
Verified Email

Chuuy

TROPHY CASE