Live data from Hacker News

“I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

twitter.com

81–90 of 475 posts

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could also just use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

But systemd :). Honestly the main servers I am thinking of moving use zfs and zfs on FreeBSD is more of a first class citizen than on Linux.

The zfs reason makes sense, but in recent releases Debian and Ubuntu take the same approach to systemd, so switching between those two wouldn't meaningfully change the init system situation. (I did see the smiley face; this comment is just in case that smiley is more self-deprecation than sarcasm, or for other readers.)

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#82
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was purchased from Canonical?

A free copy of Ubuntu, packaged specifically for use on Azure.

That's not a purchase. Every dictionary I've read has described a purchase to include transferring money and ownership.

Starting a VM isn't a purchase of Ubuntu. It's a rental of compute, storage, and network resources. Any other definition is, quite simply, wrong.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if you purchase something from Canonical on MS's Marketplace. That's what marketplaces do.

What was purchased from Canonical?

An instance of Ubuntu from a pre-prepared image, in exchange for $0.00 and your contact details.

The pre-prepared image part does perpetually have value - it saves you installing from a standard ISO and Azure-ifying the result, or having your own image pre-prepared from earlier.

It is a short while since I last spun up a fresh VM in Azure so I'm can't remember if this arrangement is made clear at all, though I do remember getting an email like the one discussed at least once last year.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#84
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, in this case, people are mad at Azure/MS and Canonical for betraying developer trust, not the individual salesperson. He's just a pawn in the game. It's not like this guy went rogue; this is his job. It's still his linkedin profile plastered all over twitter right now though more than Azure's EULA/T&C's.

But no one is calling this guy a villain. For example, his name is not mentioned once in all these HN comments. It's not his fault. And indeed the Azure T&C's are definitely referenced a in the Twitter discussion with the OP. Such as: https://twitter.com/dezren39/status/1359726235929223168

"On February 10th, a new Canonical Sales Representative contacted one of these developers via LinkedIn, with a poor choice of word. In light of this incident, Canonical will be reviewing its sales training and policies.""

My reading of this statement is that they are scapegoating the guy.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#85
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You buy a dishwasher from Best Buy. They send your name and address to Maytag. You buy soap from Walmart. They send your name and address to Johnson & Johnson. You buy a sandwich at your local deli. They send your name and address to Boar’s Head. Cool?

Pretty much. What do you think "loyalty" cards are actually for?

I am somewhat OK setting up a loyalty card with a grocery store. I am much less OK with that info being shared. But also grocery stores tend not to check your info when you sign up so I have a whole lot of cards in the name of e.g. Deez Nuts.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I just lost a whole lot of respect for Canonical. “If you read the document we expect nobody to read, you’d know that you sold your soul to us. We didn’t mean for you to find that out but one of our salespeople got overeager and tried to sell you your soul back. He will be reprimanded. Can we all forget about this real quick?”

Why Canonical? Isn't this a Microsoft feature?

Its an example of a risk with cloud providers that isn't talked about often or is ignored. For example, why doesn't WalMart use AWS?

Companies now leak alot of metadata about what they are doing. If a teeny company like Canonical is mining stuff like this, consider what Microsoft knows about how you use their products, and I'm sure your EA negotiation as a big company is at some level driven by what they know.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#87
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means that Microsoft is providing information that they shouldn't.

And Canonical decided to take that data, search him on Linkedin and contact him. Seems reasonable to see that as a reason to loose respect for Canonical over.

Again, the user's relationship was with Microsoft, not Canonical. Microsoft is the one who the user entrusted to protect their data, and they didn't.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I just lost a whole lot of respect for Canonical. “If you read the document we expect nobody to read, you’d know that you sold your soul to us. We didn’t mean for you to find that out but one of our salespeople got overeager and tried to sell you your soul back. He will be reprimanded. Can we all forget about this real quick?”

Why Canonical? Isn't this a Microsoft feature?

Because Canonical’s response was “oops you actually found out.”

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I just lost a whole lot of respect for Canonical. “If you read the document we expect nobody to read, you’d know that you sold your soul to us. We didn’t mean for you to find that out but one of our salespeople got overeager and tried to sell you your soul back. He will be reprimanded. Can we all forget about this real quick?”

Why Canonical? Isn't this a Microsoft feature?

This is the 'not on prem' tax that will be the norm going forward.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#90
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Canonical decided to take that data, search him on Linkedin and contact him. Seems reasonable to see that as a reason to loose respect for Canonical over.

Again, the user's relationship was with Microsoft, not Canonical. Microsoft is the one who the user entrusted to protect their data, and they didn't.

how makes that Canonicals side of things better?
Post reply on HN