CoreOS, the company's name, is a bit of misnomer now. Their original product, CoreOS, is their namesake and a good foundation for the rest of their platform.
As a company, they've been putting out a number of products, such as etcd, fleet, flannel, and more. It seems that Clair is another product under their umbrella.
So it's not a pivot, it's just another product as a part of their larger offering.
CoreOS's products are all open-source and openly developed, which is awesome. They make their money from their managed service offerings, such as Quay.io container registry (which Clair seems to bolster), CoreOS managed linux, and Tectonic (Kubernetes as a service).
So each product announcement you see is another facet of CoreOS's larger offering.
Quay.io has been outstanding for us so far. Much better overall than Docker Hub for our organization. Particularly in ergonomics and team/permissions granularity.
Please don't use Quay for official open source images if you care about international users, or at least offer a Docker Hub option as well. Quay is super slow compared to Docker Hub. When I contacted support back in July, they were very polite and professional, but in the end "everything is being served from AWS's US East region". Peak time performance is intolerable. It was so bad that our systemd units were timing out even with a massive 5min TimeoutStartSec.
To worsen the issue, Quay still doesn't seem to support parallel layer downloads, and Docker 1.9 even complains that "this image was pulled from a legacy registry. Important: This registry version will not be supported in future versions of docker."
I just ran a quick test (way off peak time) and Quay was 2.5x slower than Docker Hub for an image built from the same Dockerfile.
I'm looking forward to more usable international service at some point, but right now it just isn't really worth it.
Kelsey was a leader in product at CoreOS. He did a lot of what you say, yes, but there was a lot more he did out of the spotlight. He spent the most time talking to users and could have been considered their best advocate, for example.
I enjoyed arguing with him because he and I were cut of the same cloth and have largely the same goals for the operations industry. He brought some great perspective and experience to product, so I'd suggest against shoehorning him as a pitchman. I was kind of bummed out to read that people think the demos are all he did, given how much respect I have for him and the work I've observed.
Perhaps I was too blunt. I didn't intend a negative tone. I'm a big fan of Kelsey and very appreciative of his work. My comment was about what practical effect I think him being employed by Google vs CoreOS will have, which I think is very little. His recent change was just to better align him with the work he had already been doing.
I came to CoreOS because of the open source nature of the company and the awesome collection of projects such as etcd, CoreOS Linux, and their work around containers. The release of Clair proves this will continue without me.
While much of my work at CoreOS was seen through the eyes of people attending conferences and readers of my blog entires, my true contribution was helping grow a community around containers, and more importantly exposing the benefits of distributed computing to a much larger audience.
Based on feedback, I consider my community efforts largely successful for many reasons including the following:
* I've been willing to help anyone learn this stuff by doing 1:1 hangouts, engaging in social media, or writing a book on Kubernetes. Whatever it takes.
* Building and sharing open source projects like confd[1], and my collection of prototypes such as motorboat[2], or exploring new integrations between tools like Docker Compose and Kubernetes[3].
I also spent a fair amount of time hacking on open source projects at CoreOS including rkt, etcd, and working with the community to ensure they could adopt our technologies, then incorporating feedback from users when we (CoreOS) made it hard too. As a result I gained Product Management responsibilities to go along with my advocacy work.
During my time at CoreOS Kubernetes came out, which represented a turning point for what I consider the majority of the industry (well the part that cares about application containers). Kubernetes represented many of the ideas we had been working towards at CoreOS, and in many ways was the perfect addition to the CoreOS stack.
I was an early code contributor of Kubernetes, which resulted in gaining commit access. But once the number of outside contributors grew, I felt I would have a larger impact building tools to fill in the gaps between Kubernetes and people adopting the platform. One of those tools being kube-register[4], which made it easy for people to automate the scaling out of a Kubernetes cluster using fleet.
Overtime I started to shift focus towards education, because what use is a platform for next generation infrastructure if no one knew how to use it? So came the workshops, book, and more conference talks.
In many ways I'm doing the exact same things -- working to improve the future of computing based on containers and core concepts of distributed computing, but at a different company, Google, which has many of the same core values regarding open source, community, and vision.
What happens to CoreOS?
I expect CoreOS to keep shipping stuff based on the same core values that attracted me there in the first place, and regardless of who provides my paycheck I'll always be a member of the CoreOS family. This is the power of community. I never had to leave.
The evolution in tasks a Developer Advocate takes on are still very much misunderstood by many people who think of Advocates/Evangelists/Relations as primarily "pitch & demo" people.
Thanks Kelsey for distilling your perspective on your time at CoreOS -> Google here.
> Where did the rest of the $42.5 million go if it only costs $500,000 to construct a CNG plant in Afghanistan?
When this question was being investigated, it turned out that the construction was managed by an agency that no longer exists (as of a year ago iirc), and that there were absolutely no records kept and no way to answer how the money was spent for this project, or for $750 million worth of other projects that they managed.
They spent $42.5mm on the station. Other comparable stations in the region cost ~$500k. The title is a little misleading. The Pentagon asserts they cannot provide information on the gas station project because it was part of a discontinued program with a total budget of $800mm. Thus, the extrapolation that they have no idea where any of the total budget went.
Nitpick: Can we stick to ",000,000", "M", "e6", or even "kk" if really needed? "mm" are millimeters, or two "m"s - it really doesn't make sense for "million".
I know. It still doesn't make sense when people use k/M for 1,000, M/m/kk/MM/mm for 1,000,000 and B/MM/mm for 1,000,000,000. (sorted by ~popularity)
It's even more annoying when someone uses "k" and "mm" in the same post, since the whole idea of "mm" comes from repeating roman "M" (1,000). So why not stick to k/kk (WoW-style) or M/MM (almost-roman style)?
At least "k" and "M" are based on some kind of standard.
From the link: "It is commonly abbreviated as m or M; further MM [...], mm, or mn in financial contexts." Note the semicolon.
Also note that the only cited source additionally claims that "M" is often used to indicate one thousand, as in $60,000 = $60M, which for all I know may be true in the financial world but is definitely not true for anyone outside that world who wants to be understood.
As long as we're being pedantic, abbreviation does not refer strictly to "subtractions of letters existing in the word," it is any shortened form of a word or phrase.
The infamous "toilet seats" were actually what people would usually think of as a whole toilet without the plumbing parts. And they were specialized pieces that had to fit in a very specific place on a combat aircraft and meet lots of exacting specifications.
Saying the military paid $640 for the same kind of toilet seat you might put on your toilet at home is more than a little misleading.
Not the kind of toilet seat you are talking about, but you can easily spend that kind of money for a home toilet seat: https://www.liftcaregiving.com/shop/products/urinary-tract-i... (Not an endorsement -- I just grabbed it at random from a Google search).
I actually do have a similar type of toilet seat (as do most other people in Japan). Some optional extras you can get on toilet seats include a heated seat (highly recommended if you don't have heat in your house) and a fan that vents odours.
There are only 2 furnishings in my house that I wouldn't give up. One is the toilet seat and the other is a bath that pours itself and maintains a constant temperature with a recirculating pump. Worth every penny and more.
Because the CNG station was only one project under the $800M TFBSO program. Quoting slide 2:
"Frankly, I find it both shocking and incredible that DOD asserts that it no longer has any knowledge about TFBSO, an $800 million program that reported directly to the Office of the Secretary of Defense and only shut down a little over six months ago."
Considering that's (AFAICT) my only comment that ever ended up dead, I'm guessing it's a word-based block. Which is amazing considering Wix itself would likely trigger the same block if HN were German-speaking.
Nice writeup, this article is easy to read yet still covers shellshock in granular detail.
I think this is the same company responsible for MHN [0], and FWIW I've found their distributed honeypot system to be one of the more powerful and by far the easiest to get up and running with.
