|
|
|
|
|
|
by scott_g
3491 days ago
|
|
|
It's not 'serverless'. You are allowing another company to run your entire infrastructure. They run the servers. It seems like this is just another way of saying it's in the 'cloud'. We seem to have this obsession with creating businesses that give complete control over to large companies like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Twitter. |
|
|
I've had a website temporarily taken down due to an invalid complaint from Amazon, and it wasn't my hosting that was the problem, it was Dyn, who gave zero notice. The same company that's now owned by Oracle.
Seems pointless to worry about ceding control of your infrastructure hosting -- especially when you can craft it to be easily replicable on another service -- when there are plenty of other means to wipe out your online presence with little recourse.