Slashdot Mirror
SETI@Home Install Leads To School Tech Supervisor's Resignation
An anonymous reader writes "Apparently the most prolific of users in the SETI@Home community has resigned his job as a school technology supervisor after it was revealed he had the software installed on some 5000 school machines. The school claims to have lost $1 million in upkeep on the affected machines."
Correction: I did this with FOLDING@home, not SETI. I think SETI isn't as useful.
"Thank you for using Stop-n-Drop, America's favorite suicide booth since 2008"
I heard this story on NPR this morning.
He probably shouldn't simply be installing software that isn't essential to his work function on machines that he does not own.
I also heard on NPR that they found lots of equipment that belonged to the school at his residence. The criminal charges probably stem from that and not just for installing SETI@Home (haven't read the TFA so just speculating).
Vivin Suresh Paliath
http://vivin.net
I like
40 watts x 24 hours x 365 days x 10 years x 5000 machines x $.06 /kwh = $1,051,200
The criminal part (that apparently wasn't in TFA) was the 18 school computers they found at his house that he'd taken home with him. This is a better source: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/11/30/20091130searchforaliens1202.html
Yes, because those CPU's are now running 100% load all the time. So no speedstepping down to a couple of hundred Mhz and saving power that way (which can be a lot). Plus he probably left them running 24x7.
http://virtualize.wordpress.com/
It actually does use more power running the CPU full throttle vs idle. The rule of thumb I learned was a buck a watt per year. By which $200 sounds nuts. School PCs do not have 200W worth of CPU in them.
But..oh, over 10 years. That's $20/year/system. Very plausible.
This guy learned the following lesson the hard way: Systems you manage are not yours. They are your employers. The potentially mitigating factor here from TFA, is that he claims he had permission. If so, whoever granted permission should be fired. $1m is real money, especially if you're a school district.
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/147847
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
The other article linked here really should be in the story: Higley firing tied to alien-search software. This one makes it pretty clear that the guy was fired because he's a bad employee and a lousy manager, not because he wants to find aliens.
Quite frankly, it's a little annoying that the OP's story only mentions "ET". That's irresponsible reporting, and it's why newspapers are folding all over the country; when your reporters can't even write a proper, coherent, unbiased story, people go elsewhere for their news.
Is it really likely that the computers weren't on anyway? If not, then surely someone would have noticed the fact that the computers were running all night for no reason sometime in the past 10 years...
Plug your computer into the wall through a power meter and you'll notice the difference between idle and heavy CPU use being easily over the 40 W the GP used.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Well, that, and lying about removing the software when the problems caused by it came to light and he was ordered by previous administrators to remove it.
...and downloading pornography using school computers.
...and, on top of all that, generally not doing the job he was hired to do.
At least, that's what he is being accused of, according to this more complete article on the story.
SETI@Home is not the only issue here.
The article says the district hired "five experts" and reports on "one company" that did a district-wide technology audit.
It doesn't say "five companies". It also doesn't identify the problem the five experts were hired to address as being "why the PCs were running slow?" I suspect from the description of the problems (though its not clear which were uncovered when, and which motivated the action) that a variety of intermittent problems with systems and higher than anticipated maintenance and replacement costs, which their in-house tech staff couldn't adequately explain, are what the outside experts were brought in to explain, which goes beyond "why computers are running slow?" to "why are paying so much for tech and still having so many problems?".
That screen saver will also allow the computer to go to sleep mode after a few minutes, slashing the power consumption. SETI@Home cannot allow this, or it would defeat the entire purpose of the program (which is to crunch numbers during idle time).
When a computer is in sleep mode, it is essentially off. The only power flowing through it is the power that keeps the data in RAM, and the power that allows the BIOS power management to monitor for that little mouse wiggle and bring everything back up. The CPU is off, the hard drive is off, virtually all of the motherboard is off, and the monitor is off.
To compare that to a program crunching numbers (which is a CPU intensive task) is silly, the number crunching app needs the CPU at almost full throttle, obviously the motherboard powered up, the NIC powered up and actively sending and recieving data. Depending on how well it was written, they may get away with little or no hard drive usage, but that's iffy.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
The school computer may be "on" all day, but you can bet your ass any half way competant IT manager is going to have those computers sleep after 10 minutes or less of inactivity. In sleep mode, most of the PC is off, with primarily just the BIOS and RAM recieving power. It sips, as opposed to guzzles power like even an idle desktop does. If he had set it up to hibernate during off-school hours, they would have used no power at all for 16 hours a day. That's a massive difference.
Besides that, even a complex screensaver (like thos nifty aquarium screen savers) uses almost no resources and adds very little to the power consumption of an idle PC, but SETI@home is a number crunching app, and number crunching is extremely CPU intensive.
Why the hell do you think they need to do this distributed number crunching and data sifting in the first place? It's because they cannot afford the super-computer it would require to get the work done in a reasonable amount of time.
It's not cheap to run, SETI@home will tell you that your power consumption will definitely go up, but for an individual user it ends up costing $20-30 per year for something they care about. In the case of this guy, he was costing the school district upwards of $300,000+ every year, and if he was doing this for several years the total cost could easily be in the millions of dollars.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
Some of those computers date back to 2000 - sleep mode?
Also, as comments in this article point out, the techs were forbidden from rolling out a script that would have turned the computers off at night, as it was against school policy.
Read the comments - some are from people who worked there, some from people who live there. It looks more like the guy was fired because someone - Superintendent Denise Birdwell - wanted to polish her image.
I figure removing SETI@home alone will cost at least $50,000
Oh please. The worst-case scenario is that someone writes a script that calls msiexec to uninstall the software, and either makes it a startup script for all PCs using group policy, or they use psexec to call it on all systems by name. If someone thinks they have to pay $50,000 for that I'll give them a great deal and do it for $10k, but the actual cost should be 1-2 days' wages for one person.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
Bullshit! You need a budget and you need authorization. Without both of those, you end up with a rats nest. Same as telephone systems from Ma Bell. Same as anywhere else.
OMG BLOCK PORT 80 (http) AND PORT 443 (https/ssl) NOW!
It wasn't until right before the school board elections that the board member pushed this. The hardware problems with the white boards have been covered elsewhere on slashdot - they're not unique to this school. Teachers complained about being given the hardware and no training beyond "Here's the install cd. Good luck."
The $2 million is for updating hardware and a new secure building - infrastructure improvements - NOT to "fix his unethical and incompetant (sic) behavior"