4 ms·

I hate the term serverless. It involves a server. AWS Lambda is a service bound to a port therefore a server. It runs user defined functions, true. But it is a

I hate the term serverless. It involves a server. AWS Lambda is a service bound to a port therefore a server. It runs user defined functions, true. But it is a server.

PetahNZ 10y ago
Isn't it more of a cluster rather than a server
- partycoder 10y ago
  A cluster of? servers. Again, server. server, server, server. Repeat with me: server.
  - HammadB 10y ago
    It's just semantics, point is, you don't have to worry about spinning up servers, provisioning them, or maintaining them; just write code.
    - partycoder 10y ago
      Write code to run on? a server.
      - blowski 10y ago
        Call it whatever you want, but I like to use the language of those who hold the purse-strings. If they call it "serverless", then I call it "serverless". If delivering a lecture about why it's not really serverless improves your product, then go ahead and deliver that lecture, but I doubt it will.
        partycoder 10y ago
        Involves a server listening on a port, running on infrastructure that you indirectly pay. Not in the air, on a server. It is a very misleading term. Especially for non-tech savvy. Sounds like a scam. It's like calling being passenger on a car "wheel-less transport", because I as passenger don't have wheels.
        blowski 10y ago
        A driverless car has a driver, it's just not a human driver. A serverless architecture has servers, but you never see or need to think about them. Don't get hung up on the name. Bananas are not a fruit, but it's fine to put them in a fruit salad.
        inopinatus 10y ago
        It's more like driverless cars. Something clearly is driving the car, but it isn't you. Moreover the fact it's even a car is now an implementation detail. It could just as well be a motorised shipping container that slots into a hyperloop when it reaches the station. The assumption that the AWS Lambda infrastructure is server hardware is just that - it may not be true now, and you could build a function-as-a-service platform out of a massive array of Raspberry Pis and it'd still have solid at-least-once invocation semantics. And I'm repeating this, but you're flat wrong about the listening server-on-a-port. AWS Lambda functions are bound to queues and receive events. The closest you'll get to having a socket-on-a-port is that the provisioning API has a REST endpoint. So if it isn't necessarily server hardware, and there's no server endpoint to connect to, that "hate" you started this thread with looks rather misplaced.
inopinatus 10y ago
It isn't bound to a port. AWS λ functions are event-driven. They're bound to queues.
Freak_NL 10y ago
It would help if people referred to this technological concept as Function as a Service. That is a lot less ambiguous and buzzwordish than 'serverless'.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
collyw 10y ago
"serverless" is the pricing model as far as i can tell
moduspwnens14 10y ago
Me, too. And "driverless cars," also. There is a driver! It's just in software! The car's still got something driving it. It's just not a person! People tell me, "Dude, that's pedantic. Clearly what people mean when they say 'driverless cars' isn't that there's literally nothing driving it. They mean that having people driving cars has a lot of downsides and having the benefits of cars available without having an in-person driver opens up a lot of opportunities and frees us from personally having to drive ourselves." I hate it when they tell me that.
- partycoder 10y ago
  Autonomous car could be a better term.
  - moduspwnens14 10y ago
    You're right. There is a clear and accurate alternative in this case. What about for a serverless architecture?

I hate the term serverless. It involves a server. AWS Lambda is a service bound to a port therefore a server. It runs user defined functions, true. But it is a server.

PetahNZ 10y ago

Isn't it more of a cluster rather than a server

partycoder 10y ago
A cluster of? servers. Again, server. server, server, server. Repeat with me: server.
- HammadB 10y ago
  It's just semantics, point is, you don't have to worry about spinning up servers, provisioning them, or maintaining them; just write code.
  - partycoder 10y ago
    Write code to run on? a server.
    - blowski 10y ago
      Call it whatever you want, but I like to use the language of those who hold the purse-strings. If they call it "serverless", then I call it "serverless". If delivering a lecture about why it's not really serverless improves your product, then go ahead and deliver that lecture, but I doubt it will.
      - partycoder 10y ago
        Involves a server listening on a port, running on infrastructure that you indirectly pay. Not in the air, on a server. It is a very misleading term. Especially for non-tech savvy. Sounds like a scam. It's like calling being passenger on a car "wheel-less transport", because I as passenger don't have wheels.
        blowski 10y ago
        A driverless car has a driver, it's just not a human driver. A serverless architecture has servers, but you never see or need to think about them. Don't get hung up on the name. Bananas are not a fruit, but it's fine to put them in a fruit salad.
        inopinatus 10y ago
        It's more like driverless cars. Something clearly is driving the car, but it isn't you. Moreover the fact it's even a car is now an implementation detail. It could just as well be a motorised shipping container that slots into a hyperloop when it reaches the station. The assumption that the AWS Lambda infrastructure is server hardware is just that - it may not be true now, and you could build a function-as-a-service platform out of a massive array of Raspberry Pis and it'd still have solid at-least-once invocation semantics. And I'm repeating this, but you're flat wrong about the listening server-on-a-port. AWS Lambda functions are bound to queues and receive events. The closest you'll get to having a socket-on-a-port is that the provisioning API has a REST endpoint. So if it isn't necessarily server hardware, and there's no server endpoint to connect to, that "hate" you started this thread with looks rather misplaced.

inopinatus 10y ago

It isn't bound to a port. AWS λ functions are event-driven. They're bound to queues.

Freak_NL 10y ago

It would help if people referred to this technological concept as Function as a Service. That is a lot less ambiguous and buzzwordish than 'serverless'.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

collyw 10y ago

"serverless" is the pricing model as far as i can tell

moduspwnens14 10y ago

Me, too. And "driverless cars," also. There is a driver! It's just in software! The car's still got something driving it. It's just not a person! People tell me, "Dude, that's pedantic. Clearly what people mean when they say 'driverless cars' isn't that there's literally nothing driving it. They mean that having people driving cars has a lot of downsides and having the benefits of cars available without having an in-person driver opens up a lot of opportunities and frees us from personally having to drive ourselves." I hate it when they tell me that.

partycoder 10y ago
Autonomous car could be a better term.
- moduspwnens14 10y ago
  You're right. There is a clear and accurate alternative in this case. What about for a serverless architecture?