5 ms·
They really think we're idiots!
by nikolay 4y ago
They really think we're idiots!
- bombcar 4y agoWe have learned that public images are NOT organization data!
- golem14 4y agoWith the organization data gone, will there be a way to update the retained images, like security fixes etc? If not, then this could become very dangerous.
- mbreese 4y agoReally, if they delete the org data and images can’t be updated, it might just be better to delete them all just to avoid these inevitable issues (maybe with a longer delay). Just rip the band-aid off and be done with it.
- brianwawok 4y agoMarketing people try to explain away mistakes with doublespeak. Isn’t it grand? They keep digging deeper at this point.
- jrumbut 4y ago"Actually" is not a great word to use in the context of an apology.
- goodpoint 4y agoRelying on a free service for important work? Maybe they are right.
- dns_snek 4y agoSilly us, I suppose we should stop relying on APT/RPM/what-have-you Linux package mirrors, NPM, NuGet, PyPi, Hex, RubyGems, Crates, ... too.
- goodpoint 4y agoNo. There's a huge difference between a volunteer driven organization and a for-profit company. Their goals are completely different. The latter is not there to give you services. It's there to maximize shareholder value. It's sad to see that HN can't even tell the difference anymore.
- dns_snek 4y agoNeither npm nor NuGet are volunteer driven organizations. npm is owned by Github, NuGet is owned by Microsoft, and I'm sure that there are dozens of other examples behind many key pieces of free dev&ops infrastructure that are owned by for-profit companies. Are they allowed to do it? Of course! Are we allowed them to call them out on their bait & switch tactics? Of course, what else are we supposed to do? Just because something is common, like building a user base based on implicit promises and then pulling the rug once the service reaches critical mass, doesn't mean it should be accepted and normalized.
- goodpoint 4y ago> npm is owned by Github And GitHub is owned by Microsoft, duh. And they don't do this stuff out of the kindness of their hearts. > what else are we supposed to do? How about not falling for the same trap again and again instead? > ... pulling the rug once the service reaches critical mass, doesn't mean it should be accepted and normalized. Then don't sit on that rug.
- dns_snek 4y agoYou don't have to lecture me about the pitfalls of willingly relying on for-profit companies or the benefits of decentralization, but in the case of Docker we don't really have much of a choice unless you're suggesting that don't use it at all. Images are published wherever the author decides that they're published and these changes are going to affect everyone who relies on an image that used to be hosted on Docker Hub.
- nikolay 4y agoWe all rely on many free services and code. And, by the way, I'm a paying customer - I don't use their services but do this to support the pioneer!