Hacker News Reader

Comment by brazzledazzle | Hacker News Reader

The original comment asked “what about hosted kubernetes?” and the reply was discussing the benefits of that hosted solution. They didn’t say that running your own cluster would be the same. They didn’t even imply it.

Even if they had, it doesn’t justify your aggression. Maybe take a break from the internet for a bit to clear your head.

View on HN

Well I am sorry if you felt the wording of my comments was too "aggressive"; personal angle is weird though. Also I think you are trying pretty hard to misunderstand what I am trying to say. Obviously, using google's hosted version will make all your problems go "poof" at any scale, because they are Google's problems now. But that is precisely the point I am trying to make: It's not a feature of using kubernetes - it's a feature of paying Google!

Or Azure. Or AWS. Or probably in the future pretty much anyone. If you want to operate your own cluster you will be able to, for everyone else it will come from their cloud provider as a "cost of getting your business." This is a great thing.

Yes, and that was their point: That the hosted solution did that. They didn’t say it was a feature of kubernetes. The entire thread started with a question about the hosted solutions and they talked about their experiences with that. Can you specifically point out where they say the hosted version’s benefit should translate to the self-hosted version?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com