There might be a useful rebuttal buried in your reply, but it's going to be killed by downvotes because you obscured it with ageism and arrogant dismissal.

I’ll admit I was three sheets to the wind when I originally commented on this. Definitely could have left the ignorant low blows out.

That being said, I think what gets me most about this is it seems to overlook the fact that serverless exists to remove the effort and time and cost spent on maintaining servers and aims to allow developers to focus purely on providing value. There’s no doubt you pay more to have it managed by someone else, but at the same time costs are optimized as best as possible by only charging on a per use basis rather than having servers running all or most of the time to host services.

Massive monoliths are very difficult to maintain and often lack resiliency based on the often coupled nature of them. Microservices aim to solve this and also provide more ownership for teams. They also allow for flexibility in hosting as well.

If you don't remember the 70s and mainframes, you're not in a position to evaluate comparisons yourself.