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

Open Source on its own is no alternative to Big Tech

berthub.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 199 posts

Re: Open Source on its own is no alternative to Big Tech

#141

Post by globular-toast »

Pooge wrote: post #93
BoredPositron wrote: post #66

The problem is that docker compose starts 20 containers and the fans go full bore just because you wanted to try a new wiki or notes app. The complexity of relatively simple software is getting insane.

I am one of the 10 users[1] in the world that uses Docker Swarm (container orchestrator like Kubernetes or Nomad), and I disagree with that statement. I have over 25 containers running (including Jellyfin, Nextcloud, Gitea, TeamSpeak, ...) and it barely uses 10GB of RAM (Jellyfin is eating up more than half of this). Most of my Compose files contain 2 services (1 for app + 1 for database), but some contain 3 and some…

I think k8s can be managed by one person too, if you are only using it like docker swarm. Especially if you use something like k3s with SQL database.

I found setting up gitops via flux quite easy, apart from order of operations, like installing controllers and custom resource definitions before resources that need those CRDs etc.

What were you thinking of things to take into account for k8s over swarm?

The main difference for me is k8s needs a hell of a lot more boilerplate yaml for doing basically anything.

Re: Open Source on its own is no alternative to Big Tech

#143

Post by globular-toast »

BoredPositron wrote: post #66

The problem is that docker compose starts 20 containers and the fans go full bore just because you wanted to try a new wiki or notes app. The complexity of relatively simple software is getting insane.

I do agree we are exposing way too many low level details to users these days. Probably because we expect an expert to be setting up these network services. The dream would be to have some low power appliance people can just plug in to provide a data persistence service for applications. Then applications just use that (discovered via zeroconf/avahi) for their "sharing" needs. Everything else should be bundled into the app and invisible to users just like it used to be.

Re: Open Source on its own is no alternative to Big Tech

#144

Post by Pooge »

BoredPositron wrote: post #139
Pooge wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am one of the 10 users[1] in the world that uses Docker Swarm (container orchestrator like Kubernetes or Nomad), and I disagree with that statement. I have over 25 containers running (including Jellyfin, Nextcloud, Gitea, TeamSpeak, ...) and it barely uses 10GB of RAM (Jellyfin is eating up more than half of this). Most of my Compose files contain 2 services (1 for app + 1 for database), but some contain 3 and some…

We are talking about normal users.

Starting one wiki/note-taking software is not going to make your fans go crazy more than running your favorite JetBrains IDE. I had a non-Arm MacBook Pro and sometimes the fans would go crazy for no reasons, so all my Arm-based colleagues who had an M1 were laughing.

Re: Open Source on its own is no alternative to Big Tech

#145

Post by kkfx »

eesmith wrote: post #118
kkfx wrote: post #37

Let's simplify: FLOSS domain is the internet domain, where anyone own a desktop, a homeserver, a company machine room etc. The big tech model is the old mainframe model, or the modern web where only few own anything. Try to mimicking them is a waste of time and can't work, pushing the society toward ownership and freedom might work, because in a way or another we will end up there being technically the sole solution.

FLOSS is the personal computer model, where you own the computer and have final say on what data is processed on your machine. If you can't try to make your software or computer lie in on your behalf, it is not FOSS. The big tech model where trust is in the company, not the person. Business love the big tech model because it's easier to let a few credit card companies deal with the trust issue than establish a trust…

I mean the "mainframe model" of a single large system and many dumb terminals, now dumb terminals are named enpoints and the mainframe is someone else computer across the world.

The trust problem is easy to solve, with an open society: as long as payments got processed with open APIs and the government takes care of the frauds there is no trust problem. I do not need to trust a third party with eCash, I only need to trust my State protections.

The idea is already tempted, see not only the historic eCash, witch are the modern GNU Taler chosen (it seems) by the EU for the digital Euro https://www.ngi.eu/ngi-projects/ngi-taler/ and https://social.network.europa.eu/@EC_NGI/111499172838284606 but also https://openfisca.org and https://github.com/CatalaLang/catala or few others alike.

That's still embrional but in FLOSS terms we have already more than enough, we just miss the law enforcing it and the schools teaching it to the masses.

Re: Open Source on its own is no alternative to Big Tech

#147

Post by Pooge »

globular-toast wrote: post #141
Pooge wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am one of the 10 users[1] in the world that uses Docker Swarm (container orchestrator like Kubernetes or Nomad), and I disagree with that statement. I have over 25 containers running (including Jellyfin, Nextcloud, Gitea, TeamSpeak, ...) and it barely uses 10GB of RAM (Jellyfin is eating up more than half of this). Most of my Compose files contain 2 services (1 for app + 1 for database), but some contain 3 and some…

I think k8s can be managed by one person too, if you are only using it like docker swarm. Especially if you use something like k3s with SQL database. I found setting up gitops via flux quite easy, apart from order of operations, like installing controllers and custom resource definitions before resources that need those CRDs etc. What were you thinking of things to take into account for k8s over swarm? The main diffe…

> Especially if you use something like k3s with SQL database

I'll admit I've never used K8s outside of work very much, so I can't really argue on that!

> What were you thinking of things to take into account for k8s over swarm? The main difference for me is k8s needs a hell of a lot more boilerplate yaml for doing basically anything.

I think that's a big one, yes. Stateful services (i.e. volumes) are also much easier to setup and understand with Docker Swarm - which is the same as Compose. The routing mesh[1] is also lovely. I didn't use the Kubernetes routing mesh at work because the infrastructure department didn't allow us to, why is one a reason I was arguing against it; we used a very powerful and complex system without profiting from one of its most powerful feature.

[1]: https://docs.docker.com/engine/swarm/ingress/

Re: Open Source on its own is no alternative to Big Tech

#149

Post by paulnpace »

A sales position I was working in 2017 was the first time I'd used Windows 10. I had a very urgent issue with a customer who needed our small business to confirm a change they were requesting. I needed to go through the technical details of the customer's request by reviewing their documents over the phone on my computer.

As I was on the phone and going through their documents, Windows 10 decided to install updates. I'd experienced this before and had done everything I could to try and configure Windows 10 to require my permission to run updates, but it doesn't work that way at least when you are a small business without an I.T. team.

After a few minutes I told the customer I would call them back when my computer completed its updates. The update ended up taking over 40 minutes to complete. What really bothered me the most is that Microsoft is setting the priorities of our organization - software update instead of resolving a critical customer issue.

I've never had a Linux update require so much time and definitely I've never been spontaneously and without requesting my permission locked out of my computer so Linux could run an update.

"Big Tech", as discussed in the article, appears to me to be no longer concerned with small customers and operating in such a way as to assume we are all just their guaranteed customers so they are free to do with us as they please.

Post reply on HN