Maybe it's comforting to think that somehow the Docker people strong-armed the whole world (maybe they're part of the Lennart conspiracy), but realistically they're not that powerful. People are adopting Docker because they actually like it.
Except that a great many people are using it for the wrong reasons, mostly mistakenly thinking Docker somehow is providing huge security benefits to them, when it really is not. Docker (and all containers for the matter) are about application portability... the running applications can still modify your rootfs by design -- it is not a "super chroot" that some people think it is. The worst part is when Docker employees come on and start feeding this fire with promises about future features, etc, people read them as-if it's like that today.
"citation needed", solomon hykes (hn username: shykes) has been OVERLY forthright about container security. I could easily find a dozen posts showing so, but don't think you can find 2 to the contrary.
"""Docker will soon support user namespaces, which is a great additional security layer but also not a silver bullet!
When we feel comfortable saying that Docker out-of-the-box can safely contain untrusted uid0 programs, we will say so clearly."""
You simply don't get any more authoritative than the guy who wrote docker.
I think most users of Docker would agree with you. We value the dependency management and portability. The fact that the software is running inside a container doesn't magically relieve the burden of ensuring the application is secure. I'll also say that you seem to have a little bit of an axe to grind in these posts. If your mission is to undo Docker's success in the market place, then I would begin with fresh research rather than resurrecting old articles.
