u/dyeusyt

Lately I’ve seen too many posts on X; mediocre projects with tons of GitHub stars getting into YC.

Not saying this applies to all the good ones out there, but is this becoming a new way to judge entries? And how do they even spot bot farms in this? Since Fake GitHub stars are a rising thing these days.

So I’m at GEU, and there’s basically no professor or active alumnus here who even has an arXiv account. Therefore I’m asking in this sub if there are any CS folks around who could help.

I need someone to endorse me so I can preprint my paper there; thanks!

So I ain't that much of a big researcher to begin with, am just a final year CS undergrad; while writing my major project thesis this time I was firstly introduced to all of this conference, publishing and all; though I was reading papers on arXiv since like 3–4 years ago already and always thought like it's so great... I could easily get so much info from this (nowadays mostly benchmark maxxing though)

But then, when I started to actually look into the tech scene of this academic publishing part; where we've got publishing into journals costing me more than my current gaming laptop, and publishing in those IEEE ones felt as if I was someone low life. For comparison, I finetuned an LLM, and then on top of it built a PoC on agentic harness of SLMs etc; but in the same conference there are gonna be kids putting up "smart park" or the same "image recognition" by just throwing a fraction of money. So for me the dopamine of creating something great instantly went off; like for a period I thought, I'll just be making the GitHub repo, open-sourcing it, share it with the community and continue it as a side project so that I actually feel that it's useful and not some gimmick I made to put up on my resume.

So like I do want to ask the older folks in this sub?? Is this really what you people actually like to do, if yes then how? if no then why is this still prevalent?? Like I was just chatting with the LLM above, and the communistic idea of academia sounded much more of an improver for the general human population than the current obscenity we've got.

But at the end it's just my opinions and first impressions of why this feels so fk'd up; looking to hear other people's opinions so maybe I get a sense of things maybe...

Hey r/aws,

I'm running into a frustrating issue with my ECS setup and would appreciate some guidance.

Current Setup:

• ECS cluster using EC2 Spot instances
• Attempting to mount AWS S3 Files (the new S3-as-filesystem feature)
• S3 Files are not mounting with EC2 Spot instances at all

The Problem:

After doing some research, I discovered that S3 Files volumes are NOT supported on the ECS EC2 launch type - they only work with Fargate and ECS Managed Instances. This explains why my mounts keep failing.

What I'm Trying to Achieve:

• Persistent S3 Files mounts that survive spot instance interruptions
• Auto-reconnection when new spot instances spin up
• Ideally configured via launch template for automation

My Questions:

1. Should I switch to ECS Managed Instances? Would this solve my S3 Files mounting issues while still giving me cost optimization similar to Spot?

2. Alternative: Direct EC2 mounting? If I stick with EC2 Spot launch type, can I mount S3 Files directly on the EC2 instances (bypassing ECS task definitions) and have containers access them via bind mounts?

3. Launch Template Configuration: For either approach, what's the best way to configure the launch template to:

- Auto-install amazon-efs-utils on instance startup

- Mount the S3 filesystem automatically

- Add to /etc/fstab for persistence across reboots

- Handle the mount before ECS tasks start

4. IAM Permissions: What specific permissions need to be in the instance role vs task role for S3 Files access?

Has anyone successfully set up S3 Files with an ECS cluster in a way that handles spot interruptions gracefully? Any launch template examples or user-data scripts would be incredibly helpful!

Thanks in advance!