You can, but there is a procedure that 95% of people fail to follow.
I’m surprised to see someone advocating for “if you haven’t done anything wrong you don’t have anything to hide” on HN. The cognitive dissonance must be in overdrive here!
despite the whackadoodle precedent that corporations are people, corporations are not people. they may be made of people, but the affairs of those people are within the course of their employment, acting on behalf of the corporation.
Masks work dramatically better when the person wearing the mask is the one who is sick. A grocery store where the one infected person is masked is better than the grocery store where the one infected person is openly coughing around 30 masked people. Everyone masked works best, but the heavy lifting is done by the sick persons mask.
In short; You wear a mask to protect others from you, not the other way around.
However, this creates a severe social stigma problem however: People wearing masks are outing themselves as being sick (whether or not they actually are). The result is people don't wear masks for fear of social retaliation.
So now you, as a scientist, have to figure out what the messaging around masks is going to be. Wear a mask to protect others? Wear a mask to protect yourself? Everyone wear a mask all the time because we say so?
It was a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. They went with everyone wear a mask all the time, alluding to the implication of masking being a tool of self preservation. Of course masks don't work great at stopping you from getting sick (outside of being specially trained in their use), which is easily proved, and half the country recognized they were being lied too (while never acknowledging that the sick person wearing a mask works great).
but deciphering that is part of the problem, the layman had to come to terms with the difference between IIR masks and the other more protective to self standards.
the messaging was unclear but it required the avg person to do their own research.
imo, the real problem was the culture war?
i don't think there's any problem with someone making it clear that they're sick; society needs to be more accepting of the sick and more accepting of call-outs of work due to illness. this would help everybody in the long run.
"knight Movemetns and Casstle?"
the complexity in one way or another must be preserved within the abstraction (in all likelihood) or you will have cases you cannot create in that layer or breakages which now have the total complexity of both the abstraction itself AND kubernetes itself required to fix.
i would not say IaC is going to provide you a magic solution to learning k8s, although the value in using IaC (e.g. Argo CD / Flux CD + Kustomize + ...) in K8s land is that you are no longer imperatively managing your cluster resources and therefore can keep them within a repository, managed like code. the point of the solution is not to make it easier for newcomers, but to make it easier to have teams manage and work together on an established cluster for deployments, ...
in the case of Pulumi, you leverage the single language with typechecking instead of relying upon K8s flavoured YAML, which is itself beneficial in many ways (since you can use your regular developer tooling)
wrt pkl, pretending K8s manifest structure underneath does not help because you will need to know how the keys within a manifest interact with the underlying system regardless, especially to understand functionality, e.g. node selectors, taints and tolerations, node affinity, ...
i prior managed a terraform-based deployment of several k8s clusters and it still required knowledge of those keys and values, alongside knowledge of the underlying resource types.
without those you can't implement things like GPU-based node selection for jobs which require a GPU, ...
On EKS, you need to do the same version updates with the same amount of terror.
You do pay the extra for the further management to just run containers somewhere!
(you might want to say "every" instead of over, "is" instead of "ist")
a warning would've been nice about a lack of support? ^^
Looking at:
- https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Randell_Mills
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Light_Power#Criticis...
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Light_Power#Peer-rev...
I assume you are related to, an investor in or some kind of shill for this organization, because many of your submissions are related to the organization you are speaking about. This could be untrue, but I would not trust any "theory" that you posit at ground value without peer review and all of this is never going to make it into the scientific mainstream.
If your theory depends upon denial of quantum physics and things which have experimental proof, it has no rigor. Especially if the organization in question feels the need to take wikipedia editors to court in order to silence them. Shame on this organization.