[jevgeni]

Completely agree. What also irks me is the corpspeak sleigh of hand, where the problem of maintaining your infrastructure is “solved” by using AWS Lambda. It’s not solved, you’re just paying some AWS contractors to do it for you and you assume it’ll be alright.

[remus]

> It’s not solved, you’re just paying some AWS contractors to do it for you and you assume it’ll be alright.

In as much as maintaining infrastructure can ever be 'solved', doesn't paying someone else who does a good job of it to provide you with the infra count as solving the problem? Otherwise you'd be down the mines picking ore out of the ground so you can build your chips right, rather than relying on intel/AMD to do it for you and assuming it'll be alright.

[jevgeni]

The problem arises when the infra providers’ setup stops being aligned with yours. Which, given a small organization and a long enough period of time, is guaranteed to happen.

The question is then: is it just cheaper in the long run to deal with the hassle of your own infra (we are still talking about the cloud, btw, the thing that supposedly already solved it) or would it be ok to follow the practices and changes in the providers offering?