5 ms·

They call this 'serverless' and yet it's all about running thing on ... Servers. I think it's safe to say that if any individual or company uses the word 'serv

by jbb67 9y ago

They call this 'serverless' and yet it's all about running thing on ... Servers. I think it's safe to say that if any individual or company uses the word 'serverless' they are either stupid or have been taken over by marketing and can safely be ignored and ridiculed

plq 9y ago
I've developed some resistence against marketing people talking nonsense over the years but this serverless thing is ... some next level bullshit. Just because I'm not maintaining my car's engine doesn't mean my car's engineless! Just call it "managed cloud" or something -- calling it "serverless" is nothing short of a blatant lie!..
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  It's more like you're renting a car rather than owning a car - you'd be well within your rights to call yourself "carless" then, no?
  - plq 9y ago
    This is where the good old car analogy falls apart doesn't it :) I have this software package that I happen to own (the car) whose engine (the backend code) is claimed to be nonexistent, which annoys me slightly more than just "slightly" which motivates me enough to exchange micro-rants on forums with complete strangers.
  - ben-schaaf 9y ago
    You wouldn't call someone renting a house homeless, or houseless. I wouldn't call someone with a rented car carless. And I certainly wouldn't call a service running on servers with an abstraction layer inbetween serverless :)
    - zimpenfish 9y ago
      > You wouldn't call someone renting a house homeless, or houseless. I'd say "houseless" was an acceptable description. "homeless", ok, that definitely doesn't work for a renter.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > > You wouldn't call someone renting a house homeless, or houseless. > I'd say "houseless" was an acceptable description. “Houseless” would be a very strange description of someone with a legal possessory interest in a house.
        zimpenfish 9y ago
        > a legal possessory interest in a house. I'm not sure renting gives you any "possessory interest" in the house, does it? Can you cite some sources for that?
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        > I'm not sure renting gives you any "possessory interest" in the house, does it? Yes. > Can you cite some sources for that? https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/possessory_estate https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/possessory_estate
        zimpenfish 9y ago
        Cornell on US law doesn't really help me in the UK (not that you were to know that) but there might well be something similar here. Ta.
    - sramam 9y ago
      I think a better parallel would be to compare a home-owner with someone who lives completely in air-bnb. I'd have a much easier time calling them houseless. There two factors that affect it: 1. The unit of time that the rental is active for. 2. Who controls the idle time of the resource. Personally, when describing Lambda to people new to the concept, I eschew this "serverless" confusion completely by describing it as renting a server in 100ms increments for fractions of a penny. Works well for me!
- collyw 9y ago
  Its the pricing model that is serverless. That's about the only truth in the name.
monsieurbanana 9y ago
Where does all that anger come from? Serverless may not be the best choice for a name, but it's the de facto name now. Most people I personally know that have used this word, me included, know that there's a server behind and aren't idiots. I can't just put "managed cloud" on my CV if I want to get a job or if I want to be easily understood. Does that mean I am stupid and I should be ignored and ridiculed?

by jbb67 9y ago

plq 9y ago

I've developed some resistence against marketing people talking nonsense over the years but this serverless thing is ... some next level bullshit. Just because I'm not maintaining my car's engine doesn't mean my car's engineless! Just call it "managed cloud" or something -- calling it "serverless" is nothing short of a blatant lie!..

zimpenfish 9y ago
It's more like you're renting a car rather than owning a car - you'd be well within your rights to call yourself "carless" then, no?
- plq 9y ago
  This is where the good old car analogy falls apart doesn't it :) I have this software package that I happen to own (the car) whose engine (the backend code) is claimed to be nonexistent, which annoys me slightly more than just "slightly" which motivates me enough to exchange micro-rants on forums with complete strangers.
- ben-schaaf 9y ago
  You wouldn't call someone renting a house homeless, or houseless. I wouldn't call someone with a rented car carless. And I certainly wouldn't call a service running on servers with an abstraction layer inbetween serverless :)
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    > You wouldn't call someone renting a house homeless, or houseless. I'd say "houseless" was an acceptable description. "homeless", ok, that definitely doesn't work for a renter.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > > You wouldn't call someone renting a house homeless, or houseless. > I'd say "houseless" was an acceptable description. “Houseless” would be a very strange description of someone with a legal possessory interest in a house.
      - zimpenfish 9y ago
        > a legal possessory interest in a house. I'm not sure renting gives you any "possessory interest" in the house, does it? Can you cite some sources for that?
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        > I'm not sure renting gives you any "possessory interest" in the house, does it? Yes. > Can you cite some sources for that? https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/possessory_estate https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/possessory_estate
        zimpenfish 9y ago
        Cornell on US law doesn't really help me in the UK (not that you were to know that) but there might well be something similar here. Ta.
  - sramam 9y ago
    I think a better parallel would be to compare a home-owner with someone who lives completely in air-bnb. I'd have a much easier time calling them houseless. There two factors that affect it: 1. The unit of time that the rental is active for. 2. Who controls the idle time of the resource. Personally, when describing Lambda to people new to the concept, I eschew this "serverless" confusion completely by describing it as renting a server in 100ms increments for fractions of a penny. Works well for me!
collyw 9y ago
Its the pricing model that is serverless. That's about the only truth in the name.

monsieurbanana 9y ago

Where does all that anger come from? Serverless may not be the best choice for a name, but it's the de facto name now. Most people I personally know that have used this word, me included, know that there's a server behind and aren't idiots. I can't just put "managed cloud" on my CV if I want to get a job or if I want to be easily understood. Does that mean I am stupid and I should be ignored and ridiculed?