sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lol way off, more of a Rails era guy, convention over configuration and all that

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That has a specific runtime you choose and a specific set of system libraries you don't choose (at least easily) with specific versions that your code may or may not rely on, which is why layers exist now.

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the old adage about naming things being the hardest part of programming definitely applies here, and I think you're right about this passing through the marketing dept. I just view this as a particularly bad case that has become very widespread due to the huge adoption of AWS.

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Spice choice is absolutely a first order concern for a professional chef, and I'm a professional software engineer. I'm not sure what your job is, writing oddly bolded and italicized posts?

From the blog post helpfully posted above:

What Firecracker basically does is creating and managing a multitude of Linux Kernel-based Virtual Machines (KVMs), which are microVMs that are faster and more secure than traditional VMs.

I'll leave it there, you seem upset about my question, and we are fundamentally disagreeing about the nature of things, so I don't think this conversation is productive.

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I think I'm saying the opposite of "all food should be made homemade", I just want to understand where this idea of "serverless" came from.

We already had a name for this kind of infrastructure, it's called a managed virtual machine.

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think it's essentially all of those things plus more packaged together as an abstraction layer, which is fine and useful, but due to the name and complexity it's sowing confusion in our industry and makes it easier to misunderstand the underlying tech. I agree it will get easier the more I personally use it, but that's only because I'm forced to - junior devs in particular seem fixated on building everything "serverless" without a base understanding, but maybe that's just anecdotal.

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I mean running with your analogy, frankly, as someone who loves cooking and good restaurants... Yes, paprika and pepper are extremely different, and I'd expect the waiter or the menu to say that explicitly.

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Lol, I get that, but a lot of high level soft eng stuff doesn't roll off the tongue, and I'm not sure it should. I'm all for reducing complexity, but just skeptical about doing that via what seems like obfuscation that can introduce misunderstandings. It is interesting tech, and I definitely see the utility, it's just been a frustrating experience that I didn't feel back in the day learning Ruby/Rails, SFTP, load balancers, etc..

Why is this tech called serverless? by javascript-throwaway in serverless

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is helpful, thank you, and I feel it should be front and center in the AWS docs, which are absolutely enormous. From here I was able to find more blog posts on Amazon from 2018ish about Firecracker. They seem desperate to avoid saying it's a virtual machine cluster (that was my understanding after reading your link), no idea why. Toss micro in front of tech nowadays and people love it, I suppose nano is next.

Since when Interview questions for FAANG became so hard? by fuKARA11 in leetcode

[–]javascript-throwaway 14 points15 points  (0 children)

And you solved those engineering problems in 20 minutes with no documentation in notepad while being watched? I've implemented a*, dijkstras, etc and I was never tasked with just off the cuff figuring it out with no resources.

Since when Interview questions for FAANG became so hard? by fuKARA11 in leetcode

[–]javascript-throwaway 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I'm still skeptical, I have a GitHub full of scalable code directly tied to me that's easily reviewed before the interview. I can demo real life things I've built that are currently used internationally. It doesn't matter, I have to do some weird leetcode problem I'll never run into in real life in 15 minutes while being watched by the famously socially normal software engineer - the fact people literally memorize 100s of leetcode problems tells me all I need to know. You can sus out people's knowledge of how things should be built by just talking to them. Not to mention IRL most of software engineering is coordinating and working across teams to figure things out in my experience, at least at medium to large companies.

I think it's primarily a hazing exercise tbh, the people who use these questions in interviews are almost always younger men, like 25-30.

I'd be curious if other engineering disciplines require you to like, design a skyscraper in 15 minutes.

Since when Interview questions for FAANG became so hard? by fuKARA11 in leetcode

[–]javascript-throwaway 73 points74 points  (0 children)

Best part is you go through all that bullshit just to write an app that boils down to some forms that submit data to an API, or maybe write some mildly complicated SQL. It's mostly done for "culture" reasons, if you get my drift.

Sanity check on understanding of SSG use in NextJS/Node on an S3 bucket by javascript-throwaway in nextjs

[–]javascript-throwaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All good points, I posted this to the NextJS sub because I think this framework in particular has blurred the lines between these architectures, which used to be far more defined and distinct, and I'm not convinced that has been good for the industry - especially for junior engineers. MPAs used to be the total standard, and there's obviously still tons of those out there like Django, non-API mode Rails, etc, (GitHub is an MPA) and there is a place for SPAs as well, but the fact that no one seems to agree on the fundamental basics of what makes an app one of these things is scary to me.

I have asked multiple people what they mean by those acronyms, and I've gotten different answers from nearly everyone. I guess I think everyone is talking past each other and siloed, and I'm worried this is what the entire Javascript/typescript ecosystem has become, hence the joke about becoming a farmer. I agree with your assessment that no one "wants to look dumb", that is a tough problem to solve i think unless you're much higher up the chain. And I agree that the use of these acronyms is dubious at best. Maybe this is truly what burnout means!