5 ms·

I've developed some resistence against marketing people talking nonsense over the years but this serverless thing is ... some next level bullshit. Just because

by 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.

by plq 9y ago

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.