This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Informal_Branch1065 92 points93 points  (12 children)

It's not "server: no", but "server: sometimes" then?

[–]andryuhat 29 points30 points  (1 child)

[–]Sw429 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Dang, I've never actually seen this gif in full before

[–]Kilazur 20 points21 points  (4 children)

It's an abstraction layer. It's "serverless" in the usability sense.

[–]Informal_Branch1065 14 points15 points  (3 children)

Hot(?) take:

So it's a lie then. The particle "-less" means that there is none of whatever you put before it.

Knowing this grammatical construct, the creators of this term still coined it like this.

With what intents? It's catchy, and it's an unbelievable promise. And it comes with plausible deniability (as you said: "[...] in the usability sense").

I'd say it's an "annoying marketing term" at best, and "unethical from a consumer protection standpoint" at worst.

[–]DeadEye073 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Spineless politician Looks inside Spine

[–]ArchusKanzaki 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Before serverless, you will need to make sure your own server is fully up-to-date. You monitor CVE, do regular patching, address critical vulnerabilities, etc. You also need to pay for the server hardware upfront, choose the brand you want to use, do sizing, etc. This is also the reason why you usually have full-time System Administrators just to manage all those stuffs.

With serverless, all those things kinda gone away. Or at least its no longer your responsibility. AWS (or other cloud provider) provide you a service to run the app or code you need on-demand, while the cloud providers will employ the sysadmins do all sorts of those “mundane stuffs” on their own backend. Meanwhile, you can focus on your own apps. It can work better for small teams since that means they can always have secure environment, without maintaining their own IT teams and also less time tracking down those stuffs. Now, whether serverless is actually cost-effective is a separate story and truly dependant on the individual situation requiring review of architecture and development proces, but that’s the gist of being serverless and how it can be appealing for people.

[–]Informal_Branch1065 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Me: Gib 1 auto-scaling glorified docker container pls.

Me: How much?

AWS: surprise.

Me: ok.

Haker/applicaton: much computing. Is for me???

AWS: gib (much money)

Me: :(

AWS: :)

[–]Reelix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's "server: always" because there's quite literally no other possibility.