Isn't it all Steven Wilson playing the mellotron on Opeth records? Damnation is one of those albums where if you hear a song from it, the whole thing is getting played.
I do this for a living (help companies migrate to k8s).
The advice I give everyone is: Stay off k8s until you care about binpacking. That is, making sure you're fully utilizing the instances you pay for. When the cost of your architecture is taking up some brain cycles, start digging in.
If that's low down on your priority list, it's not worth the investment. If you're reasonable considered "a startup", invest your time/money elsewhere. PMF and getting to default alive is far more important.
How do you suggest companies which don't need binpacking run their workloads, and is it really that much simpler than using k8s?
If you need automated deployments, centralized logging, autoscaling, etc which many teams do, then you're going to be dealing with a bunch of complexity anyway.
Honestly, package a container and run it Serverless. AWS Fargate, GCP Cloud Run, and similar are better fits.
There will come a time when cost of paying the overhead for a devops person (and eventually) team is worth it. At that point, k8s can be a great fit.
In my experience, that tends to be when you're at scale enough to care about costs a lot. Total spend and/or reducing COGS make it worth while. But when you look at it from the time an engineer costs, it's easier to see.
Are you gonna save 200k/year (minimum) in costs moving to k8s? Then do it. If you don't have line of sight to that, pay AWS/GCP to manage that for you, and focus on your business.
Also note, there's stages even with running k8s. Don't go all in running it all.
Start with a container, run it serverless.
When k8s becomes a better fit (to reduce costs, or with other small exceptions), use EKS or GKE. Don't run your own control plane.
If you really have a need for a lot of custom stuff, then start to run your own control plane. But by this team, you probably have a team managing all this. If that cost (remembering how expensive engineers are) is shocking, you should be running a different solution.
Generally not. The guidelines say you should submit the actual title, unless the title is clickbait, uninformative, otherwise misleading, or longer than the character limit.
It's market cap weighted, so they make up more than 1% of the index. Just based on the numbers shown (+2%, -5%, and +37%) they must represent about 17% of the S&P 500.
OP said bulking or cutting. Bulking is easier from an energy standpoint (compared to cutting), but it's not trivial. Your body is still tired. Your capacity for problem solving is still limited. And eating (and buying, and prepping) the amount of food needed for bulking is time consuming.
And cutting is even worse. You feel drained. And you sleep more when cutting then you did when bulking.
Both are hard enough that it makes me wonder if you've done either for a decent period of time. If you had, it'd be pretty easy to see OP's point without a flippant answer that ignores what they're saying.
So, zero excuse, as long you have the money to pay someone to do all the thinking/planning for you. And as long as you have the money (and live in the right locations) to have someone do all the actual work of cooking for you.
None of those things cost that much compared to alternatives. Food delivery is a huge industry. A consultation with a nutritionist isn’t a big deal, might even be covered under your insurance.
I can't read the story, but I'm living this. And I don't blame folks for finding it too tough.
It's crazy that so many commenters here seem to think that everyone is well equipped to be a teacher with zero training or experience. It's hard.
It's even more crazy that no one seems to realize that most parents are acting as teachers, while trying to maintain full time jobs.
This isn't just "teachers not adapting", or "we need VR". This is fundamental to the fact that most households need two working parents just to survive.
My household doesn't need this, but my partner wants to work. There's a lot of situations where this is the case. A large percentage of women want to be in the workforce and are not forced to be there.
I think it's very natural to want to work. Women having the option to work is a wonderful thing, and we need to keep making progress towards equal opportunities and pay.
I think a good amount of the problem then became, these new normal double income households then decided they also wanted children. So we slowly convinced ourselves that both parents can work while raising children, which doesn't really work. Your child ends up being raised by day care.
It's a good example of having your cake and eating it too.
AFAIK, studies and history demonstrated opposite to be true, if there is an opportunity not to work and lead comfortable life, most people choose not to work.
If you have enough of a guarantee of leading a comfortable life (e.g. you inherit a large fortune), then sure.
But for most people, leaving their professional career is hardly reversible in the long term, and means becoming economically dependent on their partner. Which only works if the couple stays together (and the partner keeps their job).
I hope I can stay together with my partner for life but even if so, I wouldn't be too comfortable if she left her career and became economically dependent: what if I die early, for example? A career is a hedge against adversity.
Even staying together, if a big economic crisis comes, with two jobs it's easier that at least one of us will keep their income than with one.
On the other hand markets like real estate have somewhat inelastic supply and higher household incomes as a result of dual earners might just bid up prices.
Elizabeth Warren wrote a book about this called the Two Income Trap. It’s a shame for someone who’s not an American that America has deep thinkers like Warren in politics but people like Trump and GW Bush become president.
For many, they're trying to work, act as teacher, and dealing with disruptive younger children. One of our friends is insanely effective and focused at her job, handles every family stress thrown at her, but neared her wits' end recently trying to handle it all. Capable older child and needy middle child was one thing, but the very distracting youngest tipped it over the edge.
Just had the same discussion with my wife. We are a single income household. My wife, got a degree in early education, but never went into teaching. Our household is very fortunate to be in this position. While I work in my office she is able to help the kids. She spends a lot of time helping them. Even she mentioned how sad it was that lots of kids were not participating in their learning (she talks with the teachers). But I reminder her about how she went to school for early education and she has the time to devote to helping our kids succeed. She agreed. Not easy at all. Without her my kids would not be coping as well as they are. It would be difficult for me to assist as much as she does with my normal day job.
