outime

Nostalgia and attacking Google (or almost any big corporation) is usually very welcomed here.

I’m yet another spaniard abroad for close to a decade and couldn’t agree more, it’s like night and day.

The only way to have a decent job in Spain is by working for a foreign company (as a remote worker or FTE if they have a spanish office) from which you can get a decent salary and work conditions or creating your own company if you’re successful. Otherwise, working for spanish companies in Spain is most of the times a death sentence and may as well make you hate your job forever.

I didn’t downvote and I’m very sorry you had/have to go through that. That being said, how I see it is that OP may be referring to the fact that the “hate speech” label is being overused similarly to “fascism” and other similar strong words.

As you can imagine I don’t know what happens to you but - I had itches in different parts of my body and even a rash showed up on my ankle. Turns out it was a nutrition issue. Over time you may develop allergies to stuff that you weren’t allergic before (also after sicknesses). It doesn’t mean you won’t be able to eat those things ever again, but you at least won’t for some time.

Consider also dust mites allergy and do extensive cleaning where you sleep and see if that helps.

We’re all getting used to insta-load but around half of us will leave a site if it takes more than ~3 seconds to load about half of the people give up and the majority won’t come back [1]. It’s that dramatic, and I’ve seen myself doing it - or well, I just fallback to Google cache/web archive.

[1] https://www.hostingmanual.net/3-seconds-how-website-speed-im...

I noticed more snarky comments in general in the last 1-1.5 years. I just downvote/flag them and move on. If it some day becomes unbearable then I'll just click on the links and not read the comments anymore - which would be a shame because it's what most of the value of this site is about.

I can understand how they seamlessly integrate with their own products (and I like Vault a lot) - not sure how it'd work with other secret backends if you'd prefer them over Vault. It's also fine you picked an individual item of a long list to rebut what I said. But this is what I said:

>Perhaps in few areas there are some support but it's not what Nomad intends to do anyway

Look, I think we can agree that K8s have many features that Nomad don't and that's just how it is (not good or bad, just different). This comes with added complexity. If you wanted to have all these features in Nomad it'd cost you a lot to the point of being impractical. "I don't need all of those" then don't use K8s - but then don't complain when you bring a vast machine that does 1000 things to do 100 and complain it's too complex.

>Who would you say are in the target audience of Kubernetes?

Everything else - I literally said "K8s is enterprise stuff". Now if we go to specifics then it depends of what the company does, maybe they'd do just fine with Nomad or a managed solution like ECS.

>If you want Kubernetes it's probably a better idea to use a hosted Kubernetes solution like Google's offering.

Well I agree? All of the big companies I've been in used EKS and before EKS was decent there was some maintenance overhead. It'd still be less than the maintenance overhead to maintain the full list of features that K8s provides with Nomad, as Nomad doesn't provide any of those and you'd need to seek solutions outside of the product and try to fit them in.

The same way you'd not buy a car if you're going to drive yourself quarter of a mile once a week, you'd not use such a complex solution to run a few dozen containers.

K8s targets a long list of things that Nomad just doesn't want to deal with in the name of simplicity - and that's ok, if that suits your use case.

Some are mentioned in the post but I can think of secret management, load balancing, config management, routing, orchestration beyond workloads (e.g. storage), rollbacks/rollouts and many more. Perhaps in few areas there are some support but it's not what Nomad intends to do anyway. I also like these points from another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26142658

In order to supply those needs in Nomad you'll need to spend time finding out how to integrate different solutions, keep them up-to-date, etc. At that point, K8s may be a better answer. If you don't need any of those, use Nomad or anything else that's simpler (e.g. ECS if you're in AWS, K3s if that's simple enough for your home server, etc).

The biggest problem with these posts is that authors seem to fail to see how K8s isn't targeting home servers or small companies. Sure, there's K3s which allows you to have a more minimalistic experience but it's still K8s.

K8s is enterprise stuff and should be seen as such. It's complex because the problems that are being attempted to solve are complex and varied. That doesn't discount that Nomad is a great piece of software though.

This is one of the things I sometimes dislike from this site when it happens. It's not so difficult to explain what the link is about even if I personally know what del.icio.us is/was about. More so while the webpage is down since it's been in the frontpage.

I can recommend Hetzner. For non-production stuff I highly recommend checking lowendtalk.com / lowendbox.com to see offers from different providers.

You may want to know that this also happens in more expensive providers like AWS.

As a counterpoint, in my experience of a bunch of years with Scaleway they have always worked quite well. I left them due to the price getting out of hand.

I don’t have this problem but I know of someone who does and would probably like to hear about these inserts. Do they have some specific name?

Totally agree. I had a couple groups which were moved from WhatsApp to Telegram and they work great. So I’m aware (and happy) this happens but also I’m that kind of special early-adopter user who cares about things that non-tech users don’t.

This is something I want to highlight. I know we’re not all product managers but as people working in tech we should be able to take different perspectives and understand that what matters to us doesn’t matter at all for the 99% of the people outside our tech world.

We could also say 1M and still be a valid statement. I don’t know if that tells anything though.

Perception does matter a lot, and that’s why I used the 1% figure. It means one percent of WhatsApp users are investigating a competitor (not even deleting their account in WhatsApp, but I guess few did) and here people seem to see it as a clear tipping point to which I disagree - raw numbers don’t mean much if you have nothing to compare with.

WhatsApp worldwide usage is estimated to be more than 2B+ users. Even if this article is accurate, it doesn’t really mean much. In the HN bubble lots of people have migrated to Signal with all of their contacts but outside of that bubble nothing much seems to be happening. Note that I’m not agreeing with these changes, I’m just observing reality.

To put things into perspective, let’s assume that 25M users (as stated in the article) actually moved to Telegram - which I use and like by the way. Let’s assume they fully moved and stopped using WhatsApp (very unlikely). That means less than 1.25% users moved to another platform - and this means assuming many things that aren’t probably real.

It reminds me a bit of the articles about DuckDuckGo vs Google where many people think big changes in usage are happening while ignoring that the average Joe will keep using whatever it’s using unless there’s way too much trouble to continue using it.

Here in Finland authorities use them at least in the airport and it’s claimed that “testing has shown an accuracy level of nearly 100% even 5 days before actual symptoms appear” [1].

[1] https://unric.org/en/finland-first-in-europe-to-use-dogs-to-...

I don’t think anybody really believed such thing except a loud minority, mainly thanks to social networks and journalists wanting to gain eyeballs with provocative headlines so people get mad at absurd stuff and come back for more.

The formula worked and keeps working very well.

It’s great to see some balance about the Signal discussion here at HN. All I could see in the frontpage for several days is how great Signal is but nothing about what’s not so bright. This article brings up the same concerns I always had and I hope we all start being more conscious about it.

I guess the people who loathe it (not me though) are very well aware of this particular benefit and still think isn’t enough justification to enable it by default.

Deep down Bumble doesn't seem that different from Tinder (from the perspective of a non-user like me anyway). The crucial difference is that women message first but from what I've heard they'll just say "hi" or some other low-effort message in most of the cases.

Why? The answer is simple: women have plenty of options and also absolute power over those choices so no need to do much - it's a natural, rational and logical choice. Hence the dynamics aren't going to change no matter what tech you apply to the "problem". If you forced somehow to write a more thoughtful initial message, they'd just go to some other app (or the majority anyway).

How I see it is if Bumble grows as much as Tinder, it'd suffer from the same problems. Except that women will receive less initial gross messages (if that's an actual wide issue, I have no idea). Men are left in the same situation, which is how it should be I guess.

The thing with WhatsApp is that besides the largest user base (most important reason IMHO) it just works very well. I don’t know about Signal as I’ve briefly used it but why would anyone switch apart from us?

You can’t just convince the majority of the users with privacy arguments or even hypothetical extra features from Signal. Only if WhatsApp would introduce something really annoying (huge ads, fees, constant technical issues) people would start to move. But even Telegram which is so much better IMHO (albeit privacy by default isn’t better) will hardly be #1 ever if nothing of the above happens.

> How did you go from "manual upload to file server" to Docker+Gitlab?

When I learned what I said: it takes little time to set it up and you reap the benefits. If you don’t know how to use it then it’ll take some time to learn, in such case I see value going with whatever you know.

>We've been shipping MVPs long before those were a thing.

That reasoning can be used with almost any technology and doesn’t tell anything.

>./deploy.sh runs the commands you used to run manually.

You went from “manually copying” to having a script with reproducible steps. You’re closer to CD than what you were thinking.

I think the rest of the comment doesn't need to be addressed.

I agree with the main point but:

>Kubernetes, and Docker and CI? Cool tech, I suppose, but time wasters. Your release process should be scp-ing and extracting a zip file on the prod machine, or git checkout the files.

Ok, let's accept that K8s is overkill most of the times. But containerization and CI/CD? If you've some experience with it you know it's something that takes little time and money to set up (e.g. GitLab CI) and you get tons of benefits - you don't need to get super fancy either.

To me it sounds like the time waster would be doing what you describe, specially because it's so easy to mess it up after you do it a bunch of times on a single day. I used to do that when I started with PHP several years ago (replace scp-ing with FTP and git with cvs or svn) but IMHO it's not worth it once you deploy your product live.

I can’t talk specifics about CDC as I’m european but this way of acting was present in most of the countries around the world and I think it’s somewhat safe to think that it decreased masks demand to a certain point (1%? 20%? 30%?). Even in solid democracies with high trust like Finland they lied so that people wouldn’t hoard that much.

Also I IMHO doubt that Fauci didn’t know about mask effectiveness - sure, maybe he didn’t know the very specifics but it was kind of obvious back then it wasn’t going to harm and one could infer that it’d probably help somewhat (nowadays it’s clear). IMHO all authorities just agreed to transmit a similar message around the world so they could in the meantime arrange more mask orders and sort out the distribution as production speeded up while avoiding massive riots and/or poor masks made at home that could’ve been worse than nothing.

It’s a pick your poison situation. Reputation may have been damaged (who knows really, masses seem to forget rather quickly nowadays) but the alternative might just have caused a lot more trouble.

The benefit was to save masks so health workers would get them (at least most of them) and the goal was more or less met. Cost? Probably too high. Alternatives?

Again I don’t defend these actions, I’m just trying to reason why they decided to go that way and not the most instintive one “let’s be fully transparent” (at least for HN anyway).

Yeah there are better solutions but they’re not the easiest nor the fastest. Lying ticked those boxes and so they did it that way in many places.

Politics is IMHO all or a majority about deception unfortunately and once you accept this these actions just make more sense and you stop playing their silly game. I decided to move to a smaller and more healthy democracy because I knew degeneration of politics back in my (somewhat big) country was only going to get much worse and in some cases that can mean literal death to me and I could do nothing to change it. Well, all this is way too off-topic so let’s leave it for another time as it’s an interesting one :)

We can’t know for sure but I bet many people didn’t hoard or didn’t even bother to buy any in the beginning because of this announcement. At big scale (e.g. USA) this means millions of saved masks.

And I agree with your last point of course.