Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

linuxserver.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 153 posts

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#101

Post by pbronez »

tuyiown wrote: post #36
akudha wrote: post #22

I don’t understand why companies/people don’t respond. Apply for a job, they talk to you for months and stop suddenly. Go on multiple dates, then the person stops responding. Etc. A simple polite “we’re not moving forward with your application” email is better than silence. How hard can it be to show some basic decency and courtesy?

I think you're underestimating how explicit rejection triggers awful behavior to seemingly way too many people, so one can be wary of releasing it, plus the fact that rejecting others is not easy for people, automating it seems dehumanizing, so the things stays as they are, so silence it is. I've been related several times about people that wanted explicit reasons of why they've been rejected, and ending up mad at th…

Yes. People don't like being confronted with their shortcomings. Cultivate humility - you'll learn more.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#102

Post by ahoef »

bayindirh wrote: post #78
ilaksh wrote: post #28

I think they have a valid complaint about that open source program Docker is running and lack of response, but the overall tone seems like they are scolding Docker for not giving away it's services for free. I have always felt that was strange how quickly people started taking Docker for granted, while simultaneously relying on them completely but also somehow dismissing their core utility as a trivial and unsophisti…

FWIW, I have a personal Docker license, but I avoid containers where I can (because containerizing everything by default has its own set of problems). I use containers as "very fat, stateless" binaries which are run when I need to do something (generate a webpage, take backups, etc.). People got Docker for granted because startups and modern sysadmins absolutely despised installing software on physical or VM servers.…

I started using it to get rid of all the moving parts of library versions, moving Debian releases, etc. Everyone has the exact environment locally and there is no confusion.

It has its own flaws, but it was so much better than the alternatives.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#104

Post by cjbgkagh »

akudha wrote: post #22

I don’t understand why companies/people don’t respond. Apply for a job, they talk to you for months and stop suddenly. Go on multiple dates, then the person stops responding. Etc. A simple polite “we’re not moving forward with your application” email is better than silence. How hard can it be to show some basic decency and courtesy?

I think the main problem is lawsuits. Say that someone is too junior or unqualified and you may end up in a lawsuit having to prove it - especially if they’re in a protected class of some sort.

I live in a place where I don’t have to worry about such lawsuits so I did give negative feedback, and most frequently the kind of people who apply to jobs they are obviously unqualified for are not the kind of people who take negative feedback well. They would rather argue with you.

The public sphere has been polluted to such an extent that these days I no longer openly advertise for jobs and instead go through contacts, luckily I don’t need many people so it remains a viable approach.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#105

Post by [deleted] »

sealeck wrote: post #11
concerndc1tizen wrote: post #6

If you don't like it, then why don't you use a different provider? If you want free stuff, is your strategy to smear them into giving you more free stuff? Storage, compute, and traffic, isn't free. You've been the beneficiary of charity for years. Yes, the open source community has relied on this implicit charity as a parasite, by exploiting whatever free services they could. And now we're paying the price, as you sa…

This is really a question of framing. The other way you can look at it is: Docker has benefitted from a community adopting its products, and developing software that makes Docker more useful. As someone who sells Docker services, you benefit from a greater market size. It's like how WordPress have benefitted from people authoring plugins – even though wordpress.org has hosted them for "free", this has been good comme…

[deleted]

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#106

Post by stronglikedan »

akudha wrote: post #22

I don’t understand why companies/people don’t respond. Apply for a job, they talk to you for months and stop suddenly. Go on multiple dates, then the person stops responding. Etc. A simple polite “we’re not moving forward with your application” email is better than silence. How hard can it be to show some basic decency and courtesy?

For personal matters, I prefer ghosting (receiving and giving). It's better for everyone in the long run. Just rip the bandaid off. The person has made up their mind, so discussing it just prolongs the inevitable.

For business matters, it's just common courtesy to not leave someone hanging.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#107

Post by ascendantlogic »

concerndc1tizen wrote: post #6

If you don't like it, then why don't you use a different provider? If you want free stuff, is your strategy to smear them into giving you more free stuff? Storage, compute, and traffic, isn't free. You've been the beneficiary of charity for years. Yes, the open source community has relied on this implicit charity as a parasite, by exploiting whatever free services they could. And now we're paying the price, as you sa…

> If you want free stuff, is your strategy to smear them into giving you more free stuff?

Docker literally offers free stuff if you follow their process. They followed the process and have gotten silence in return. Somehow that doesn't strike me as "smear them into giving you more free stuff".

Don't say you're going to do a thing if you're not going to do the thing.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#108

Post by nickjj »

joshstrange wrote: post #75
tuyiown wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're underestimating how explicit rejection triggers awful behavior to seemingly way too many people, so one can be wary of releasing it, plus the fact that rejecting others is not easy for people, automating it seems dehumanizing, so the things stays as they are, so silence it is. I've been related several times about people that wanted explicit reasons of why they've been rejected, and ending up mad at th…

This 100%. I managed a hiring process last year (my first) and from the outset I wanted to make sure I let every applicant that we talked to know if we had decided to pass. It was a lot easier said/thought than done. That email is horrible to send. My stomach dropped out every time I hit “send”, for exactly the reasons you stated. I dreaded the replies which often included some kind of “Why?” question. I completely u…

I would much rather get an honest answer in any scenario, no matter what it is. There are people out there who would take that feedback and reflect on it in a positive way.

How else can you improve or be mindful of things in the future if you don't even know what happened or what went wrong?

I sort of feel like the people who don't give honest feedback or ghost aren't trying to protect anyone's feelings or are avoiding conflict. They themselves have something going on internally that bothers them when it comes to giving or receiving feedback. They are maybe letting unrelated previous experiences dictate their current life and decisions.

So now you have 2 types of people. People who want honest feedback and people who never give it. You can't force either one to do the other thing so we're always left with 1 side feeling unhappy.

It doesn't make sense to me that this is how most folks are ok with operating.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#110

Post by jeroenhd »

Kovah wrote: post #39

I'm absolutely stunned by all the negative comments in here bashing the Linuxserver project. "Run your own registry", "you get everything for free be grateful", and so on. What the hell is wrong with you? They are a couple of guys trying to make software more accessible to thousands of people. Indeed it's a large project and one may question if they should get _everything_ for free. But that's not the point of this a…

Eh, ignoring a project isn't "absolutely horrendous", it's a little dickish at worst. They're free to accept or ignore any charity, and they're free to ignore requests for renewal. I don't know why they're not communicating (maybe they're trying to have less details publicly available for the inevitable post this would generate?) or why they'd be dropping this project entirely, but it's not like they're sending them cease & desist letters.

Many containers hosted by this project have the sole purpose of pirating media, so maybe it's not even Docker's choice to ignore the project. If they're being sued for providing piracy tools (and are smart enough to shut up about it until the lawyers clear them) it'd be stupid to explain what's going on and why. Last thing they'd need is for the copyright lawyers to make it seem like Docker is directly in kahoots with the piracy ecosystem. I'm not condemning piracy tools here, but everyone knows what you should expect if you're hosting piracy adjacent services.

It was pretty cool of them to offer DSOS to open source projects but I guess that's coming to an end if they don't even bother replying to their form anymore. But it's not like Docker is known to the public for giving other projects free hosting, the only reliable free hosting Docker provides are the containers they put under their own name spaces. It sucks people fall for the openwashing these large technology companies do, but I think people have unusually high expectations of Docker here.

Post reply on HN