Yes, but be patient, we're 1.24 light-seconds away (so lower bandwidth) and we have a lot of science to get done in the next 14 days, and that's the main objective of the NASA CLPS program.
I agree unlike other commenters here that the apple intelligence ads try too hard to be quirky and appease this weird flavour of incompetence being popular. Theres nothing inspiring or awe inducing about the ad that induces excitement about technology
US universities are too focused on homework in general. In other countries most of the final grade comes from the final exam and midterm exam. Homework just creates extra work for everyone involved. It’s upto the student to decide if he wants to study or not and consequently pass
I think the key word is “needless” in terms of complexity. There are a lot of k8 projects that probably could benefit from a simpler orchestration system— especially at smaller firms
For me it was DC/OS with marathon and mesos! It worked, it was a tank and it's model was simple.There was also some nice 3rd party open source systems around Mesos that where also simple to use. Unfortunately Kube won.
While nomad can be interesting again it's a single "smallish" vendor pushing an "open" (see debacle with Teraform) source project.
Every time I read about Nomad, I wonder the same. I swear I'm not trolling here, I honestly don't get how running Nomad is simpler than Kubernetes. Especially considering that there are substantially more resources and help on Kubernetes than Nomad.
Well, for starters, you don't have to have your apps containerized to work with Nomad (though it can handle containers as well as executables).
But for some deeper details, I'd suggest checking out the comments in this reddit thread[0] (as well as some of the linked articles therein).
E.g. From a comment by /u/Golden_Age_Fallacy: A great use of Nomad is on reduce the burden of on-boarding a team(s) of developers who are unfamiliar with cloud native deployments / systems(even containers!).
Nomad jobspecs are very simple and straight forward, as compared to the complexity and pure option overload you get in k8s and helm.
From /u/neutralized: It's much easier to use than k8s. Easy to setup, easy to manage, much more shallow learning curve. Nothing super fancy. Just works. I migrated a startup I was at off of a self-managed k8s setup to Nomad a few years ago and they've never looked back.
From /u/esity: My team is currently building out a fully automated nomad cluster service offering internally(fortune 10)
It's super awesome. Easy. Little headache. Integrates with consul and vault. We are literally planning to replace thousands of vms for K8s with nomad. Containers are faster, more resilient and writing hcl is actually fun once you learn it
Now, there is a rather more lengthy comment, by /u/thomasbuchinger, that goes through the pros and cons he experienced in trying Nomad out and his conclusion is that, while he wouldn't discourage anyone from using it, "k3s and a few well-known simple projects give you 80% of Nomands [sic] features. Are as easy to operate, afford you more options in the future and have a ton of documentation/tutorials...available."
There are more comments in the thread and again links to a bunch of blogposts/articles/etc., including one from fly.io that seemed pretty detailed, discussing the Googly origins of both k8s and Nomad (fly.io used Nomad but found that it wasn't the best fit for them, which is also discussed in their post -- actually, I'm going to put the link to their post below[1], since I think it is worthwhile).
