I'd like to see your readme expanded with some figures:
* Processing speed - that is, how long does it take to do that word count example on a nontrivial dataset? Something that takes hours on a local machine, vs minutes in map/reduce. Comparing local to this to e.g. Hadoop or Google BigQuery or whatever viable alternative there is.
* Cost. I think that's probably the biggest factor here. I don't get the impression that Lambda was intended for big data or highly resource / i/o / processing intensive operations, but, I'd love to be proven wrong.
* Actually, mostly just cost vs performance.
I mean it's a neat idea but if the serverless benefit is outweighed by difficulty in setting up, cost, performance, etc compared to dedicated big data solutions it's going to stay a proof of concept.