Comment by justinsb | Hacker News Reader

Comment by justinsb | Hacker News Reader

The problem with this sort of argument is that it sets up a straw-man, without describing what you should do instead. Kubernetes could be better - of course - but what better approach is the author recommending to use instead? It would be better if we could use one language on frontend and backend - of course - but what is this one language that works everywhere? It would be better - of course - if there was a SaaS that could do everything for us, is cheap and is open source - but what is that SaaS?

It's very easy to say something could be improved, but much harder to propose something to replace it that doesn't have its own shortcomings.

It's a pity because this article actually makes a good point, that we should think about what the actual user/business goal is before making technical decisions, and be careful lest we spend all our time on technology. I've heard this idea described as "innovation tokens". It's disappointing that the article chose to wrap this idea in clickbait, but I guess we wouldn't be talking about it otherwise!

Disclaimer: I have no end of personal biases in favor of kubernetes!

> The problem with this sort of argument is that it sets up a straw-man, without describing what you should do instead. Kubernetes could be better - of course - but what better approach is the author recommending to use instead?

The article explicitly advocates for high-level PaaS tools as an alternative to Kubernetes.

Maybe it could be read that way, but I think it's a good indication of the problem that a strict reading doesn't include that. The article advocates that you should be using Heroku or Vercel or Netlify or Fly as not doing so is an antipattern, but it then says that instead of k8s "Most organisations should consider some of the higher-level building blocks available via cloud providers", which seems contradictory.

I quite liked the actual message of the article (which I take as "be mindful of your technology choices") - but I think that it is really devalued by the less coherent but more click-baity arguments (e.g. "javascript is the only rational language choice")

Edit: Actually, re-reading the article yet again, I think I can see your reading (though I wish you had written the article, as your writing is much clearer). As I understand it, the article says you should use a PaaS-style solution until you outgrow it, when you should move to something from the cloud providers. For me, that would be CloudRun -> GKE-Autopilot -> GKE (skipping CloudRun if you don't want to learn two systems), but there may be some google-bias there!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com