That's okay though, because that's not why the big clouds are valuable. I'm going to refer specifically to AWS, but I also include Azure, GCP, etc. AWS is not cheap. If you only need a single host, or a small fixed group of hosts, AWS is an expensive option with little to justify the added cost. What you're paying for with AWS isn't just the resources you use, but the resources AWS keeps available for use at a moment's notice. If you don't have that need to scale your resources up and down, the costs of using AWS become harder to justify.
If the goal is to do it on the cheap, a $5/mo vps is going to do better than the AWS free tier. If you need more power, the price gap between a bare metal private server and an equivalent AWS instance just gets bigger as the server gets more powerful.
AWS, Azure, GCP is premium.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eo8nz_niiM
Here's a GCP/Google DC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd33UVZhnAA
Not to speak of network/power redundancy, managed hardware (like not having to prove to your ISP that their memory or disk is broken!), lots of services besides just metal...
HN is actually really in love with putting things on Hetzner, OVH and co. It works and it's cheap. But it wouldn't be a good experience when things break, and you better have really good backups and plans to fail over to another box when something bad[1] happens.
[1]: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/ovh-fire-while-po...
Because the value-add of SaaS is often worthwhile compared to roll-your-own (or some open source equivalent) on top of a self-administered server.
Some people prefer to pay for providers whose datacenters have fire protection.
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/fire-destroys-ovh...