A computer with Docker installed and the daemon running.
It can process Docker and non-Docker workloads.
One of my purposes for 2021 is to simplify Docker for beginners.
Let's start with some definitions:
🏠Docker host
⚙️Docker engine
❓ Docker client
📝Dockerfile
📑Docker Image
🐳Docker Container
🐙Docker Compose
🪣 Docker Registry
🐳🐳🐳Docker Swarm
Definitions Below 👇
A computer with Docker installed and the daemon running.
It can process Docker and non-Docker workloads.
A Client-Server application. It has 3 components:
- "daemon process": A server that is a type of long-running program.
- "Rest API": to specify interfaces that programs can use to talk and interact with the daemon.
- "CLI": A command-line interface client
It sends commands to dockerd, using the Docker API.
It can communicate with multiple daemons.
It's a text document that contains all the commands a user could call on the command line to assemble an image.
It's a file, composed of multiple layers, often based on another image, that contains everything you need to run your application.
Containers run on top of existing images.
It's a standard unit of software that packages up code and dependencies, running as a process on the host machine.
It's a tool for defining and running multi-container Docker applications, called services.
You use a YAML file to configure the services, that can be created/started/stopped with a single command.
It works well in development, testing, and production.
More from Internet
Well, this should be a depressing read -- notably because the UK and the US are both terrible when it comes to data protection, but the UK appears to be getting a pass. So much for 'adequacy'.
A few initial thoughts on the Draft Decision on UK Adequacy: https://t.co/ncAqc93UFm
The decision goes into great detail about the state of the UK surveillance system, and notably, "bulk acquisition" of data, and I think I get their argument. /1
For one, while the UK allows similar "bulk powers," it differs from the US regime both in terms of proportionality, oversight, and even notice. Some of this came about after the Privacy International case in 2019 (Privacy International) v Investigatory
Powers Tribunal [2019]) /2
Whereas, other bits were already baked in by virtue of the fact that the Human Rights Act is a thing (This concept doesn't exist in the US; rather we hand-wave about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and then selectively apply it) /3
For example, UK bulk surveillance (I'm keeping this broad, but the draft policy breaksk it down), substantially limits collection to three agencies: MI5, MI6, and GHCQ). By contrast, it's a bit of a free-for-all in the US, where varying policies /4
At least we have a draft of the adequacy decision. I haven't read it yet, mostly because I'm afraid I'll be disappointed that it doesn't address the UK's penchant for surveillance. https://t.co/puJiVET2SJ
— Don Edwards (@DMEdwards) February 20, 2021
A few initial thoughts on the Draft Decision on UK Adequacy: https://t.co/ncAqc93UFm
The decision goes into great detail about the state of the UK surveillance system, and notably, "bulk acquisition" of data, and I think I get their argument. /1
For one, while the UK allows similar "bulk powers," it differs from the US regime both in terms of proportionality, oversight, and even notice. Some of this came about after the Privacy International case in 2019 (Privacy International) v Investigatory
Powers Tribunal [2019]) /2
Whereas, other bits were already baked in by virtue of the fact that the Human Rights Act is a thing (This concept doesn't exist in the US; rather we hand-wave about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and then selectively apply it) /3
For example, UK bulk surveillance (I'm keeping this broad, but the draft policy breaksk it down), substantially limits collection to three agencies: MI5, MI6, and GHCQ). By contrast, it's a bit of a free-for-all in the US, where varying policies /4
