5 ms·

It's almost becoming a cliche for companies to release damage control follow-ups like this after they pull a bait and switch. It's always "we're sorry that we

It's almost becoming a cliche for companies to release damage control follow-ups like this after they pull a bait and switch. It's always "we're sorry that we didn't communicate our bait and switch effectively". Not we're sorry that we pulled a bait and switch. We're sorry you didn't understand the value in this bait and switch. It's your fault, actually. But we're sorry you're angry. Now stop giving us negative attention.

jeron 4y ago
Ah, but there’s no such thing as negative press. Look how many people are talking about Docker now!!
- irrational 4y ago
  On our team we are mainly talking about how will we divest of Docker.
- user3939382 4y ago
  > No such thing as negative press Tell that to Silicon Valley Bank after that WSJ article that started the run lol
AbraKdabra 4y ago
We're deeply sorry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15HTd4Um1m4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15HTd4Um1m4.
dheera 4y ago
The forces of capitalism reward this, it will continue to happen as long as we pick pure capitalism as a system, and keep assigning values to companies purely on financials with no consideration toward their ability to empathize and communicate.
- wizzwizz4 4y ago
  There's no such thing as "pure capitalism" – not if you're talking about things that exist. In an ideal free market with perfectly-rational omniscient actors, this issue wouldn't occur. I don't think you even need the omniscience: trust, memory, reputation/vouching and basic game theory should be sufficient (though I haven't proven this). Alternatively: a free market with contracts, where all things go through the system, would work. In the real world, the system consists of people, each of whom is optimising for a particular thing. Very few people are optimising for "make the most money, at the expense of all else". Show me anyone (even a billionaire), and I'll show you somebody who values other things higher than the accumulation of money. And plenty of things don't go through "the system of capitalism": we have commons, and volunteers, and favours, and coerced unpaid labour / wage theft. "The forces of capitalism" might be a good shorthand for the reasons behind this problem, but it's not strictly an accurate one: these issues aren't inherent to capitalism. They're not problems with capitalism, but problems with this system. (Capitalism does have other, different problems that are pretty baked in, like how capital is power and power lets you accrue capital, but I don't see how that relates to this issue.)
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- vlunkr 4y ago
  This feels like a win for capitalism to me. The actually innovative Docker did is open source, and replacements already exist for DockerHub. So, we get the good tech they created, and the company with the user-hostile choices dies, or becomes irrelevant.
slantedview 4y ago
This is somewhat an extension of modern politics, which is largely seen by political professionals as a problem of "messaging", where policy details are secondary to how people can be persuaded to think about those policies.
exac 4y ago
This speaks to the product culture at Docker. They are unable to admit they are changing direction after negative customer feedback, so they are pretending this was always their plan, and shifting the blame to their customers. It is similar to pseudo-blameless engineering cultures, where engineers won't admit to bugs, or update the status indicator, least they face the shame of writing a post mortem, or having it brought up in their performance review.

jeron 4y ago

Ah, but there’s no such thing as negative press. Look how many people are talking about Docker now!!

irrational 4y ago
On our team we are mainly talking about how will we divest of Docker.
user3939382 4y ago
> No such thing as negative press Tell that to Silicon Valley Bank after that WSJ article that started the run lol

AbraKdabra 4y ago

We're deeply sorry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15HTd4Um1m4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15HTd4Um1m4.

dheera 4y ago

The forces of capitalism reward this, it will continue to happen as long as we pick pure capitalism as a system, and keep assigning values to companies purely on financials with no consideration toward their ability to empathize and communicate.

wizzwizz4 4y ago
There's no such thing as "pure capitalism" – not if you're talking about things that exist. In an ideal free market with perfectly-rational omniscient actors, this issue wouldn't occur. I don't think you even need the omniscience: trust, memory, reputation/vouching and basic game theory should be sufficient (though I haven't proven this). Alternatively: a free market with contracts, where all things go through the system, would work. In the real world, the system consists of people, each of whom is optimising for a particular thing. Very few people are optimising for "make the most money, at the expense of all else". Show me anyone (even a billionaire), and I'll show you somebody who values other things higher than the accumulation of money. And plenty of things don't go through "the system of capitalism": we have commons, and volunteers, and favours, and coerced unpaid labour / wage theft. "The forces of capitalism" might be a good shorthand for the reasons behind this problem, but it's not strictly an accurate one: these issues aren't inherent to capitalism. They're not problems with capitalism, but problems with this system. (Capitalism does have other, different problems that are pretty baked in, like how capital is power and power lets you accrue capital, but I don't see how that relates to this issue.)
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
vlunkr 4y ago
This feels like a win for capitalism to me. The actually innovative Docker did is open source, and replacements already exist for DockerHub. So, we get the good tech they created, and the company with the user-hostile choices dies, or becomes irrelevant.

slantedview 4y ago

This is somewhat an extension of modern politics, which is largely seen by political professionals as a problem of "messaging", where policy details are secondary to how people can be persuaded to think about those policies.

exac 4y ago

This speaks to the product culture at Docker. They are unable to admit they are changing direction after negative customer feedback, so they are pretending this was always their plan, and shifting the blame to their customers. It is similar to pseudo-blameless engineering cultures, where engineers won't admit to bugs, or update the status indicator, least they face the shame of writing a post mortem, or having it brought up in their performance review.