We've all got these peeves; the one that gets me is 'isomorphic'. But language evolves one annoying incorrectness at a time, and it's tedious and off-topic to vent about this every single time it comes up. (I'm not saying that to you personally but in response to all these subthreads.)

Sure, but it's fundamentally wrong. The only upside is that it's catchy.

It's tiresome to point it out from time to time but if I go to a bar and each time I say Jeronimo and each time I get slapped and explained that they don't like it that there, after a while I'll stop and just ask for a beer like normal people do :)

I doubt that that model applies here.

What we need is to find a term to replace that atrocity. We agree that this is not "server less" but what is it? Its more like abstract servers.

Indeed there may not be. You do not require server-grade hardware to build a function-as-a-service platform. Moreover you do not need a client-server endpoint. If you do have either of those things, it's an implementation detail. Case in point, AWS Lambda was launched without one of them.

If you have a better suggestion for a catchy name for function-as-a-service, the world of tech marketing awaits you.