81–90 of 129 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes all the sense in the world when you realize how board's actually work.
Can you expand on that? I'm not familiar enough with how boards operate to understand what you mean.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. But I want to give them a fair opportunity to justify this statement. Can someone give me examples of diseases being cured via docker, or planes being kept in the air (etc)
Reproducibility is a big problem in analytic pipelines, specifically genomics. Researchers tend tweak their tools here and there and it has always been quite difficult to "package" a pipeline. Docker makes that much easier. We've seen a huge movement in the containerization of genomics pipelines, the results of which (we hope) help cure serious disease. In my world, we're using Docker every day to try and find cures…
I'm sorry to see Solomon go. I think Docker has a challenge on their hands with Kubernetes and that a founder would be the one with the authority to make a drastic change. It is inspirational to see that nowadays you can build a huge company when you make a product developers want.
Solomon isn't going anywhere :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> obstinate old ops person will throw up because they'd rather keep their job comfortable than try to accommodate a need beyond their own Oh, come on. This is why I hate Docker. Right here. It's like a heat seeking missile that looks for the friction points between engineering and operations, then explodes in a fireball of "do we really need operations? They're just old and obstinate and in the way of progress," with…
For what it's worth, I'm older than you and started in ops. If it helps to put things into context, I spent a ton of 1997 using a chisel to shave a bit off standard RAM to help avoid Sun's near 10x markup. The startup I worked at was provisioning around 20 Sun boxes per week and we had to patch together tools to manage infrastructure of that size before off-the-shelf tooling to do that really existed. I wrote a lot o…
In my view, you've got that completely backwards. Both departments serve customers in a roundabout way. Dev is responsible for turning user stories (generated either by other devs, focus groups, and so forth - which may, but doesn't necessarily involve an actual paying customer) into code, ops is responsible for keeping that code running.
If dev screws up, user gets bugs, or the app goes down. Same for ops - it's just the class of bugs are different.
Application developers are telling you they want the kind of functionality that Docker offers. That makes it your job to figure out how that happens, not if it happens.
As long as me and my ops team are the primary people with skin in the game (read: getting 3AM wakeup calls), me and my team will maintain a say in what tech stack we're responsible for the care and feeding of. The dark days of dev throwing code over the wall to ops is long gone - I am gobsmacked that you'd suggest that this is for some reason improper.
What dev often forgets, and the cause of much strife, is this justification. If you want a team of n people to learn this new thing and its new ways of operating, then you need to do an honest, dispassionate cost/value analysis. And show your work, dammit. When this never happens, it conveys an "Oh great, Dev is on one of their 'Ooh, shiny!' kicks again" mentality to the rest of the team, especially those that aren't politically connected enough in the org to know any different. I know it's because you're busy and have insane deadlines to meet. Meanwhile, the phones ring at 3am, and the message is lost.
The result is a strained and adversarial relationship, often to the customer's detriment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. But I want to give them a fair opportunity to justify this statement. Can someone give me examples of diseases being cured via docker, or planes being kept in the air (etc)
Reproducibility is a big problem in analytic pipelines, specifically genomics. Researchers tend tweak their tools here and there and it has always been quite difficult to "package" a pipeline. Docker makes that much easier. We've seen a huge movement in the containerization of genomics pipelines, the results of which (we hope) help cure serious disease. In my world, we're using Docker every day to try and find cures…
Not that I'm anybody to say so, but I think it's worth posting a friendly reminder that Solomon is a beneficial HN contributor here in good standing (shykes), and will likely read the remarks we post here at some point. I see some of the posts trending towards vitriolic here, but it's worth remembering that CEO or not, he's one of us, and deserves to be treated as well as any other member of the community. Personally…
HN rules dictate one be civil, and if someone isn't being that you can flag their content. This is worse than a "why the downvotes" post, it's "pls be nice guyz i love Docker it great company".
Honestly, I think this is a really strange top post. It feels to me like this is an attempt at manipulating the discourse by providing social proof for Docker and by discrediting the posters that are unhappy about the direction Docker has been heading.
My company has been a partner of Concur for several years, starting back in 2012 when the original founders (Steve, Raj and Mike) were all still there. Steve was easily the most-respected leader in the travel industry- even people that disliked Concur admired Steve. He was articulate, created a clear vision for Concur that they maintained even as they grew like wildfire, and he inspired trust and goodwill with Concur…
This is standard PR stuff. Docker's PR machine has been working hard and churning out stuff like this. > Steve was easily the most-respected leader in the travel industry... When you read "easily the most-respected", it triggers some doubt. > They didn't build Concur to sell it, they built it to conquer, which they had basically done when SAP bought them. You meant they were conquered when they were bought by SAP, ri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reproducibility is a big problem in analytic pipelines, specifically genomics. Researchers tend tweak their tools here and there and it has always been quite difficult to "package" a pipeline. Docker makes that much easier. We've seen a huge movement in the containerization of genomics pipelines, the results of which (we hope) help cure serious disease. In my world, we're using Docker every day to try and find cures…
Neural networks that construct ontologies from gene similarity matrices for discovering cancer pathways are tools that help cure cancer. There are a myriad of technologies supporting these type of applications; Torch, Python, Tensorflow... Docker is a minor detail that has as much to do with curing cancer as JSON or HTTP. When you make a claim like the one Docker is making, you should be a critical piece of the pipel…
There is a legitimate fundamental issue with reproducing people's setups and Docker solves this. Ergo docker is valuable technology for data science.
Literally typing `docker run...` to reproduce results (vs. VM setup, installation etc.) seems important enough to justify their phrasing.
Fact: there are handfuls of data science startups that essentially rebrand docker and have been funded in the hundreds of millions of dollars specifically to solve this problem.