I can see the value of serverless in general (not this hack necessarily) in small startups that don't have sysadmins on payroll but still want to rapidly deploy products with confidence that it will just work - all without worrying about infrastructure, scaling, etc.
What I'm curious is if (1) serverless is cheaper than hiring competent sysadmins who can maintain the infrastructure instead and (2) are these savings worth being locked into a chaotic architecture and boring proprietary tooling that is forced on you for the profit of the Google, Microsoft, and Amazon monopolies?
I've recently entered the job market and personally find no joy in working in serverless environments because of the latter.
I wouldn't be surprised if the term originated as a marketing tactic (e.g., AWS) to seed in people's heads the idea of not having to care about servers
Why did you decide this?