The statement is bothersome because it says more about the person saying it than anything else. If your job is to manage infrastructure and you have to deal with thousands of snowflake deployments by other teams then k8s is a godsend.
I feel that service mesh integration in k8s is still very immature. Be aware that running any sidecar model service mesh requires setting elevated permissions on the entire pod. Your pod security policy will need to allow NET_ADMIN at the very least, since service meshes mostly operate by manipulating iptables rules in the pod. Often there are other elevated permissions required. Usually this means people are setting elevated permissions globally on the default svc account, which is scary.
I think your choice of words isn't the greatest. There is absolutely no such assumption behind the ideal of fair and open markets. The assumption is both sides benefit when competition is open and fair.
It's on a completely different release schedule. Sure anything can have bugs but this is not going to get bugs introduced through feature-adds. It doesn't get these feature updates. It's stable. This is the entire point. You test and validate before your deploy and then you deploy and it remains stable.
There's an LTS version of win 10 without the constant feature updates. Do you actually support desktop Windows in any of those industries with mission critical desktops? If so, you need to educate yourself. If not, your rant is coming from an uninformed position.
My guess is your comment (not the thread) was flagged because it contained a string of logical fallacies. Edit: This is not intended as a flame just an observation. You're free to disagree. Specifically straw man, false equivalency, conclusion doesn't follow.
Thanks for the detailed reply. These should be posted big and up front in the project Readme. One of my, and my teams', biggest concerns and unknowns getting into Kubernetes, as we were coming from a traditional environment and deciding on a strategy or platform, was security.
Kubeadm does set up a few security features as long as its a fairly recent version. There are others you still need to configure and/or enable if you need them. (eg NetworkPolicies, OIDC, Encrypted data at rest, etc, etc.) I don't see openshift setting many of these either.
How precisely does it provide a secure default configuration. As far as I can tell it enables very few security features built-in to kubernetes (of which there are many not enabled by default or require configuration to properly enable). It's still up to the administrator to secure.
Edit: Not to mention your comment doesn't address half the article, which dives into security tangential to kubernetes itself such as AWS
I've been working with Terraform and Kubernetes a bit as well. Their strengths seem to be very complimentary when aiming for a platform agnostic system.
It wouldn't even be THAT bad (except maybe in principle) if Bing wasn't the worst search engine and Edge wasn't the worst browser. It's like they want their customers to suffer.
Yeah the firewalls were ancient and already scheduled for an upgrade. This helped accelerate the schedule for sure. The company had about 800 employees doing all kinds of things, watching Netflix, watching videos on YouTube and Facebook, downloading whole ISO's, not to mention many business processes transferring files around, but the second one person started using this video downloader tool it brought everything to a crawl.
I believe something like that was the underlying tech. I researched it at the time but I just can't remember 100% now, although I think that was it. It actually was implemented via a Java applet in the browser, so there was no way we could block or restrict a specific exe with group policy. The firewalls were already scheduled for replacement/upgrade, so for a few weeks we ended up just watching traffic and slapping wrists if more than one person ever tried to use the tool at the same time.
CNN has a video transfer tool for b2b subscribers that uses multiple UDP streams to increase transfer speeds. Instead it saturated and brought down our company firewalls, which were older and our main bottleneck. All for just a potentially few more megs of speed on TB sized videos. Gotta be careful with UDP.
Sure the leader may have a strong opinion. But most people do, and often about complete BS, which is particularly obvious during election season. So it means nothing. The more important differentiator is the leader is more persuasive in backing the opinion. The nuanced opinion/argument is often more difficult to make persuasive though.
The difference is, traditional media normally holds itself to a higher standard and is tasked with filtering out or at the least refining the typical "some guy's blog" content. But "some guy's blog" will always be just that.
No, it's inherently impossible as it's a moving target. However it's important to strive toward that goal. It's part of the whole point of what makes the web successful. Once you give up and start developing for some particular platform you risk corrupting the space.
Yes, and silly Google for making the URL for Go "golang.org". Someone should let them know it's called Go, not golang!
This is like the new "It's GNU/Linux - NOT LINUX!" Except with less validity. It's totally interchangeable in common usage, and in fact much more explicit to use the term "golang".
I'm no philosopher nor a physicist either, but I don't see why that would even be a problem. We know by now that time is relative. To a photon, all of our infinite time, if it is infinite, "happens" all at once, so why would it matter if it took an infinite amount of it to get here. If you could stop a photon and ask it, it would reply that we were always here.
Here we are having philosophical debates about it, but I suspect if we just stuck with the math -- regardless of our intuitions -- most of these kinds of arguments would turn out to be a distraction rather than a solution to the problem. That's kind of the point many empiricists like Krauss are trying to make.
In a sort of self-referential loop, a large part of the propaganda value to many of these, certainly D.Z. in particular, is the fact that it was banned/censored in the USSR in the first place. Obviously that wasn't the only factor that gave it value. It had to have other elements to it (such as being written by one of the greatest Russian authors, provoking unconventional thought, etc. -- obviously banned garbage would have remained garbage). But a large part of its hit on the credibility of the leadership of the USSR, which is what gave it propaganda value, was essentially self-inflicted.
Fucking seriously? I know it's popular to hate "America" lately -- since it makes a nice big clean target and it gives you a nice fuzzy "edgy" feeling to do so -- but it seems more like Australia's leading the pack when it comes to overreaching soft-authoritarian policy.
I love having the server and client share the same codebase.
I'm working on a webapp that mimics functionality of an existing desktop application -- mostly as a self-educational project. As I'm writing it and adding features, I can push processing from server-side to client-side and vice versa with hardly more than a copy and paste of the relevant chunk of code.
Say I don't really care about the security of some particular process, and I really don't want to use up any additional resources on the server for it, I can just push that load to the client browser in a couple clicks.
Did I just write some feature into the client that I suddenly realize presents a security problem? With node, there's no need to change my frame of mind or rethink how to do something in a different language -- just copy and paste from client.js to server.js and do some slight cleanup.