With wireless networking and even phones, the wires have actually been eliminated, replaced wholesale by something else, radio. A better analogy would be something like the powerline ethernet systems, but nobody is calling them something controversial like "wireless" or "cableless".
Put another way, I've seen cloud computing (of which "serverless" is, arguably, merely an evolution into increasing levels of abstraction) called "somebody else's servers". The equivalent with the Wifi analogy would be "somebody else's wires", and, usually, what wires there are, for the backhaul [1], aren't even somebody else's.
EDIT:
Ultimately, my point is this:
The analogy is weak becasue WiFi is not an abstraction layer on top of wired networking that merely hides the existence of (and, ideally, some of the downsides of dealing with) the wires, instead being a different technology with different upsides and downsides. Serverless is such an abstraction layer.
[1] Which brings up a nitpick: Wifi can remain even wireless in its entirety, with various mesh networking techniques.
> You think WiFi connects your laptop directly to the server in the datacentre? Interesting.
The way you've selectively quoted one sentence out of what is a very short post anyway just so you can imply that I'm oblivious to other infrastructure - even when my very next sentence describes other infrastructure - is in very poor taste.
Plus you're still failed to prove point. Yes ethernet over cat5e/6 cables and fibre exist, but they're not WiFi. Neither is 4G, Bluetooth, nor FM radio despite actually being wireless (unlike cat6 / fibre).
What you're arguing is beyond nonsensical; it's like saying "I drive to the railway station every morning therefore the train I then catch is also classified as a car."
The daft thing is if you'd talked about the wireless radio's antenna then you might have had a genuine point. Yet you went the "network cables are WiFi as well" argument instead. Go figure.
I believe my analogy to be a sound one, in that all wireless does is insulate the end user from mile upon mile of wiring, just as serverless insulated the user from racks upon racks of servers, and that you were - and are - being needlessly pedantic.
Isn't the point of HN that you can have a discussion when you disagree with someone?
I called it a spat because you both got personal. It's nice that you both enjoyed it, but it's still against the rules here. It sets a bad example for others, who unfortunately aren't so convivial.
It’s the name. It infuriates people because obviously there still really are servers. But I think of it like WiFi - there still are wires, you just don’t see them.