7 ms·

It's not severless. Jerks.

• crabasa 14y ago
  It is serverless in the sense that you don't need to have or maintain a server. I think this is consistent with how most people use the term.
  • jmillikin 14y ago
    I don't maintain HN, but that doesn't mean HN is serverless.
    • crabasa 14y ago
      Here are some other stories that use the term serverless: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=Serverless&start=0 http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=Ser... I feel like it's a term that has a generally well-understood meaning. What other term would you prefer?
      • xymostech 14y ago
        I think it depends on the context. In this case, I think that "serverless" would mean "doesn't depend on an external server, only the two clients", because that's the only really important distinction you could make about servers.
      • kelnos 14y ago
        I would prefer "hosted" or something like that. Maybe I just don't know of the well-understood meaning, but when I read "serverless" here, I was excited, thinking that they truly built something peer-to-peer.
        • mayop100 14y ago
          [Firebase founder here] We weren't trying to be disingenuous with the title. Keep in mind that basically any web technology, including P2P ones, do actually use servers. If you're using a domain name, for example, you're probably going to use a DNS server. If you're using Google Analytics or any other addon in a web page, you'll be using their servers. If you're on a 3G connection your data is probably being proxied by a server somewhere. Even BitTorrent has trackers. The list goes on... Our point is that you don't need to run a server. You can treat Firebase like you treat DNS -- a service that is there for you to use but that you don't need to operate.
          • ericmsimons 14y ago
            So wait, is Firebase 100% free? If it is, I kind of see the argument you're trying to make. If not, the user is PAYING for a server (or part of one) to host a critical part of what makes their video app work. The big problem is that moving most of your app logic to the front end does NOT necessarily make it serverless. In the case for this WebRTC project, it relies less on the server than the Google demo, but you still have a server. This is why many folks (including myself) are thinking that the title is a bit disingenuous.
          • mayop100 14y ago
            We'll have a free plan, but in general, no it's not free. Neither is DNS though (it's free for the end user of course, but not the developer, just like Firebase).
            • ericmsimons 14y ago
              Cloudflare would never say (and never has said) "meet serverless DNS", because I'm still paying for a DNS server somewhere over at Cloudflare. Sure, it's a different server, but we are still paying (basically the same amount, if not more) for a server. The title of this post should be "meet a more client heavy version of WebRTC", because that's what it is.
              • mayop100 14y ago
                I challenge you to find a way to use fewer servers... WebRTC depends on them for signaling. We're just providing a tool to make that easier. See: http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/webrtc/basics/ http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/webrtc/basics/ "In the real world, WebRTC needs servers..."
                • ericmsimons 14y ago
                  Exactly - the title should be "here's an easier way to do WebRTC with less backend code, less servers, and more frontend code", not "meet serverless WebRTC". Can you appreciate the difference between these two statements?
      • svachalek 14y ago
        What the heck -- how have we redefined "serverless" to mean anything but "without servers"? I second the use of "hosted" or "hosted free as in beer" or pretty much any marketing term we want to apply to this as long as it doesn't use words that mean the opposite of reality.
        • anant 14y ago
          Peer-to-peer systems still use DNS "servers". Pure P2P WebRTC systems still need STUN "servers". In fact, one of the peers in a P2P system could also be considered a server. "Serverless" as you define it would describe nothing in existence today. I think the way most people perceive the term is simply to mean reliance on servers that you don't have to build and run.
  • themgt 14y ago
    you don't need to maintain servers at many modern cloud/PaaS providers. It looks like Firebase forked a generic node.js app (https://github.com/anantn/gupshup https://github.com/anantn/gupshup) that could run on any node.js-compatible platform, and modified it into a Firebase-only app. "serverless" is not the right adjective for that change, really.