21–30 of 53 posts
I'm thinking of behavior analysis, such as the one some network firewalls do... not sure if that's even feasible at the process level, though.
Maybe it is possible to detect the kind of activity or identify processes that are written to mine crypto? Then abort those ones. I'm thinking of behavior analysis, such as the one some network firewalls do... not sure if that's even feasible at the process level, though.
The question is whether or not it's worth the effort (for Dockerhub). If they were leading in their space, and had a successful business, then maybe, but in the current situation it would be a large investment in providing something for free.
Remember that this change only applies to the free plans, not to anyone paying.
cryptocurrencies are ruining hardware availability (both GPU and now storage devices), the environment and now free cloud services. When are we gonna admit it? EDIT: typo
By cryptocurrencies do you just mean BitCoin? Most new crypto's use proof of stake which doesn't use up GPUs. Not heard it blamed for using up hard drives before.
cryptocurrencies are ruining hardware availability (both GPU and now storage devices), the environment and now free cloud services. When are we gonna admit it? EDIT: typo
By cryptocurrencies do you just mean BitCoin? Most new crypto's use proof of stake which doesn't use up GPUs. Not heard it blamed for using up hard drives before.
> Most new crypto's use proof of stake
What (of any substantial volume) uses proof of stake at the moment? That's Ethereum's path, but it's not there yet.
Regarding hard drives, I think it's "Chia" that just purposely uses an insane amount of disk space; "proof of space": https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/26/new-crypt...
TBH I'm surprised that they managed to keep this going as long as they have. Giving away free compute is a tricky thing to make financially viable.
Docker, the company, is such a sad story. They have such an impactful technology but completely failed to monetize it and lost multiple revenue streams to competitors. Shows how hard "open source companies" are. Others OSS companies have similar problems. It would be nice to find economic models where impact is correlated with revenue.
It is a shame since I rooted hard for them in the early days.
cryptocurrencies are ruining hardware availability (both GPU and now storage devices), the environment and now free cloud services. When are we gonna admit it? EDIT: typo
Who is denying it? Who is "we"?
Docker, the company, is such a sad story. They have such an impactful technology but completely failed to monetize it and lost multiple revenue streams to competitors. Shows how hard "open source companies" are. Others OSS companies have similar problems. It would be nice to find economic models where impact is correlated with revenue.
I remember the early days when Docker had just released, all devs were super excited but nobody had run containers “in production”. AFAIK I believe it was mesos that was used widely for orchestrating containers in production. Docker swarm/compose just took too long to get there and k8s just rapidly took over and became the standard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to make more money if all people expect is more free service.
I see the dilemma there. Most people I know of treats Docker.com as some kind of infrastructural service, it's like GitHub/GitHub Action+a Package Manager (Registry). For those who use these kind of service, they're expecting some kind of advanced (feature rich) free package for individuals, and a more advanced version for people who makes money out of the image/product they uploaded. So, I think the nature of the se…
For me, it is part of what makes some of these technologies leaders of what they do. If Node.js has NPM; Rust has Crates.io; and Debian has their repos, why wouldn't Docker have DockerHub? From my POV of 100% user of these technologies, it just seems natural (or at least that's just what they have made us to expect).
Actually what doesn't seem natural is if NPM suddenly deleted old package versions just mere months after they didn't get any download. I know we're talking about containers, which take more disk space than a NPM package... but still, that policy change from Docker Hub felt odd. Now we have to worry about regularly refresh the containers we care about.
(regarding the mantra "you should rebuild them anyway", well, when you want to reproduce a bug, you don't need to rebuild old packages in other repositories, right?)
Maybe it is possible to detect the kind of activity or identify processes that are written to mine crypto? Then abort those ones. I'm thinking of behavior analysis, such as the one some network firewalls do... not sure if that's even feasible at the process level, though.
I'd rather docker spend engineering time on improving their paid service to legitimate customers.