It's the Slashdot Effect! All these people are using their super-high-power computers to post comments at Slashdot! The same site that brought chaos to your site if someone linked to it is now bring chaos to the power grid! It must be found and stopped! No, wait... Umm, nevermind.
I hate it when this happens -- someone posts something that I'm both in favor of and against, and I get the urge to post a reply...:)
Personally, style does matter, but not as much as the practicality of the case. That's why I'm building my next computer in a file server case. I've seen several that actually look pretty cool, but, at the same time, are very practical -- I can start off with a simple system, but build up a quad Xeon and massive RAID...
There were about 15 comments when I clicked the link to pcmods.com, nine of them met my very tough viewing standards of "1". The site is already telling me "Too many users! Try again later."
Perhaps Slashdot should enter the webhosting business... "Host with us, and you'll never be affected by the Slashdot effect, unless we are.":)
Umm... I followed the link to the article, and there was no text. There was a header and all, and the page title was "Crappiest Jobs" or something to that effect. But the article was missing! I decided to view the source, and they seem to have forgot to put the article into their source code...Can somebody help me? Am I having a problem, or are they?
I'm not entirely positive if you can get many yet. They're a fairly new product; I'd be concerned if there was such a quick turn-around time. It's sorta like trying to buy a used car when the model line has just come out -- it can be done, but it requires quite a bit of looking.
Just wanted to suggest something that occured to me.
Why don't we ensure that every country, or other place that will need one, has a TLD, and then allow them for general registration? Of course, we would have to set the fee rather high, or else they would all disappear practically instantly.
But for $10,000, wouldn't someone register ".dot"?? I see no practical reason why this couldn't be done.
Anyone ever read any of the Ted Nancy books? (Gimme a minute, this *is* related to the topic at hand.) He writes a bunch of crazy letters to people and companies. They range from dumb to silly to just plain scary.
One of the stranger ones (in his first book; his second two books are exponentially funnier) was a letter to Shasta Soda about how he heard that they were changing their name to "Laarksvard's Hot Cream." (He also wrote to the Taj Mahal, saying that he heard they were being converted into a Staples Office Supply Chain Store...)
When I read this, all I could think of was "Shasta" and "Laarksvard's Hot Cream"...
Hmm... Sounds like you could have become one more server pounding Undernet!
Actually, maybe someone can help me out. A few weeks ago, I stopped being able to telnet into my system. This didn't bug me at all; I never do anyway. But I wanted to check something, I don't even remember what, and I was refused access. I just figured that it was yet another thing I munged while trying to fix it.
Do you recall the filename of whatever was installed in your/root partition? I don't know why a cracker would disable telnet; it would keep them from regaining entry (unless they created some other backdoor), and it would tip people off more quickly, but, well... Does anyone know of anything like this happening?
Posting a Slashdot story, and making a huge deal out of this is a horrible way to try to resolve this problem.
Had no one ever mentioned anything, this "script kiddy" would have wondered what was going on and stopped the whole thing. But now he's probably seeing that "Underworld" has acknowledged the attack (it's written in a sad, melanchony tone; and it also gives the impression that they are clueless and helpless -- I know this isn't the case, they just seem to have worded it poorly.) And seeing an article on Slashdot about something you're doing is probably a good way to egg him (or her) on.
Just let it die of inattention -- it's remarkbably amazing how well this works.
Just wanted to quickly share my take on this; I think it's a much smaller deal than people are making of it.
Essentially, this is no different than my Catholic school blocking access to porn sites. My school has every right to do this. If I don't like it, I can go to a different school. (Which will probably have the same policy, but I digress.) The issue at hand is no different, except that it is a statewide thing, and is all governmentally...
Essentially, I interpret this no differently than what you'll see at a workplace. The employer is telling you how you may and may not use their resources. Personally, I'd rather see this in my contract with them, rather than state law, but it shouldn't really matter if you're not a government employee.
What does concern me is the rising trend of judges making decisions that are made with no knowledge of technology at all. In my opinion, the Internet should be free from all legislation. Now, personally, this isn't entirely what I'd want. I'd much rather see laws passed against spammers, pop-up ads, and such. But if you know anything about computers (which most Slashdot people do; that's why I think most people will at least partially share my view), you will know that, except for rare cases, the "client" initiates contact. Now, in a DoS attack or something, yes, it's initated by the "server" (or some other foreign party). I once argued a bit with a teacher about this -- when a little kid tries to write to the White House and types in "www.whitehouse.com", I do not believe that the staff at WhiteHouse.com should be held responsible. Why? No, I'm not some freak obsessed with porn. So why? Let's see a little review of what's going on.
1. Person sends HTTP packets to a server, requesting that it respond with a page "/index.html"
2. The server responds "Yep, here's the code. You'll need to go get these images."
3. The client's browser goes out and gets the images. In no way was the user forced to see any images; their browser went out and got them automatically.
4. The page is layed out and displayed on the screen
So how are the people owning the site responsible? Technically, the "client" requested them!
Sorry, I guess I got a little off-topic, but I feel this point needs to be made. I have no doubt that many/. readers support what I'm saying, but perhaps a judge or someone will read this? And get a clue? Also, one last comment. Users are connecting to a network of computers voluntarily. They are not in any way *forced* to be put on the Internet. (As much as AOL may bug you with their CD's, you can always play frisbee. You aren't obligated to use them...) If I allow strangers to walk into my house, and you see something that offends you, can you sue me? Well, given the current state of the legal system, maybe you can. But I don't think you should be able to.
I didn't even watch them, aside from a brief section (I saw someone else watching a 400 meter dash, and since I do track, I watched briefly).
Quite frankly, the Olympics used to enthrall me -- I can remember staring continuously into the TV at the Atlanta Olympics. But now the TV companies bicker and pay billions of dollars to air one or two events, none of which really interest me.
The "Official whatever of the Olympic Games" thing has gone way too far, too. Wasn't IBM and Windows the official hardware/software combo of the Olympics, or something like that? If Nike was the official shoe or something, that I could understand. But official computer? WTF?
Perhaps Linus is not against odd numbers; he is actually against square numbers. If you drop the "." (which will subsequently cause havoc on the internet, as thousands of people try to access "http://slashorg"), it becomes 25, which is 5^2.
Wait, that's it! Linus must hate the idea of 2.5 because it is 5 -- an odd number -- squared.
(Disclaimer: I am not an IT expert. In fact, I do a horrible job maintaining my desktop PC...)
It seems to me that the company could just make a copy of the user's home directory -- if they delete everything, who would care? They just saved IT staff some time...
Personally, though, if the staff has the nerve to lay you off in such a cold manner, I'd stand behind someone who deleted everything they owned. If the IT staff doesn't care enough to back it up, or if their boss doesn't care about the work enough to keep a copy for themselves, who really cares? I'd figure that if you had some ultra-important research, it would not just sit on your local desktop...
Image and the snap photograph in the can tongue they take
This was one of their headlines... I don't quite want to know what a camera has to do with a tongue...
Are they saying that the knitting machine will take your tongue? What type of product is this? You buy something for your Nintendo, but you find out that it's actually for a knitting machine. And then the knitting machine lashes out at you and takes your tongue?!
The name of the organization that claimed to have done this is "Some People". The article doesn't even mention what the group does, and I personally can't pull many details out of the name. (I assume that it consists of some people; that's all I can figure out.)
Then it suddenly mentions that they are trying to save the human race. Umm... Right. Putting this big monolith in the middle of a park is going to save the human race. (I know about the movie, but still... That's not going to help save the world, unless they really believe the movie is true...)
Good question. Unfortunately, I'm legally prevented from telling you. (In addition, I don't have the slightest clue.)
If I recall correctly, Oracle and other database companies have something in their EULA that prohibits you from benchmarking their database. Supposedly, the point of this is to prevent Oracle's competitors (which are... who?) from running 'crooked' tests (not optimizing Oracle, or whatever). But it still makes me nervous when a company puts something in the EULA preventing you from benchmarking it...
I decided to head over to Sun's site to price a few of these desktop systems out... (I have a titanium-reinforced desk. Umm... yeah, that's it.)
The base price for their low-end "midrange server" is over $40,000. It has a single SPARC processor, and 1 GB of RAM. It appears to be exactly like a $5,000 Ultra5 Workstation, but in a much bigger box. (Personal refrigerator vs. pizza box) Am I overlooking something, or is this outrageously expensive? I'd just as soon get the Ultra5 and then buy myself one of Cogent Communications' 100 Mbps Fiber lines for $1,000 a month.
Hmm... I have a nice Sun 3/60 that lacks a hard drive (and, subsequently, an OS), but it's yours if you pay shipping. I figure - the model numbers are bizarrely close. The two systems must be copies of each other, right?:)
Is this correct? I've wondered about this for a while, actually. If I, willingly and in good mental health, signed a contract saying that I could not make a statement of any sort without first obtaining permission from Bill Gates, would I actually be bound by it? I would have agreed to be bound by it, wouldn't I? The judge can rule it unconstitutional, but what if I signed it knowing that?
I personally believe that, in this situation, I should be held by it. Of course, anyone who agrees to not speak unless they get it approved by Bill Gates is obviously not sane...:)
Some people seem to be complaining about their ISP not doing anything about spam. But is anyone here complaining about their ISP sending out spam?! I will!
Several times I've gotten "Updates" from them (ads for new services, usually). I typically delete them, but I've been tempted to forward the message to "abuse" at their domain. Yes, report my ISP to my ISP for spamming me. And if that doesn't work (if they don't reply "We're very sorry about that. We have deleted our account and are considering a lawsuit against ourselves."), I'm somewhat tempted to report them to whoever provides their Internet service... (You don't really think that they have the know-how to manage an OC-48 or something, do you?! The very first week they installed our cable modem, it was down for days -- while they replaced a T1 line with a DSL line. So my cable modem ultimately leads to a DSL line... Figures.)
Slashdot Mirror
It's the Slashdot Effect! All these people are using their super-high-power computers to post comments at Slashdot! The same site that brought chaos to your site if someone linked to it is now bring chaos to the power grid! It must be found and stopped! No, wait... Umm, nevermind.
Personally, style does matter, but not as much as the practicality of the case. That's why I'm building my next computer in a file server case. I've seen several that actually look pretty cool, but, at the same time, are very practical -- I can start off with a simple system, but build up a quad Xeon and massive RAID...
Perhaps Slashdot should enter the webhosting business... "Host with us, and you'll never be affected by the Slashdot effect, unless we are." :)
Who would actually want to go there? :)
Umm... I followed the link to the article, and there was no text. There was a header and all, and the page title was "Crappiest Jobs" or something to that effect. But the article was missing! I decided to view the source, and they seem to have forgot to put the article into their source code...Can somebody help me? Am I having a problem, or are they?
I'm not entirely positive if you can get many yet. They're a fairly new product; I'd be concerned if there was such a quick turn-around time. It's sorta like trying to buy a used car when the model line has just come out -- it can be done, but it requires quite a bit of looking.
Just wanted to suggest something that occured to me.
Why don't we ensure that every country, or other place that will need one, has a TLD, and then allow them for general registration? Of course, we would have to set the fee rather high, or else they would all disappear practically instantly.
But for $10,000, wouldn't someone register ".dot"?? I see no practical reason why this couldn't be done.
Love your autosig!
One of the stranger ones (in his first book; his second two books are exponentially funnier) was a letter to Shasta Soda about how he heard that they were changing their name to "Laarksvard's Hot Cream." (He also wrote to the Taj Mahal, saying that he heard they were being converted into a Staples Office Supply Chain Store...)
When I read this, all I could think of was "Shasta" and "Laarksvard's Hot Cream"...
Actually, maybe someone can help me out. A few weeks ago, I stopped being able to telnet into my system. This didn't bug me at all; I never do anyway. But I wanted to check something, I don't even remember what, and I was refused access. I just figured that it was yet another thing I munged while trying to fix it.
Do you recall the filename of whatever was installed in your /root partition? I don't know why a cracker would disable telnet; it would keep them from regaining entry (unless they created some other backdoor), and it would tip people off more quickly, but, well... Does anyone know of anything like this happening?
Posting a Slashdot story, and making a huge deal out of this is a horrible way to try to resolve this problem.
Had no one ever mentioned anything, this "script kiddy" would have wondered what was going on and stopped the whole thing. But now he's probably seeing that "Underworld" has acknowledged the attack (it's written in a sad, melanchony tone; and it also gives the impression that they are clueless and helpless -- I know this isn't the case, they just seem to have worded it poorly.) And seeing an article on Slashdot about something you're doing is probably a good way to egg him (or her) on.
Just let it die of inattention -- it's remarkbably amazing how well this works.
Essentially, this is no different than my Catholic school blocking access to porn sites. My school has every right to do this. If I don't like it, I can go to a different school. (Which will probably have the same policy, but I digress.) The issue at hand is no different, except that it is a statewide thing, and is all governmentally...
Essentially, I interpret this no differently than what you'll see at a workplace. The employer is telling you how you may and may not use their resources. Personally, I'd rather see this in my contract with them, rather than state law, but it shouldn't really matter if you're not a government employee.
What does concern me is the rising trend of judges making decisions that are made with no knowledge of technology at all. In my opinion, the Internet should be free from all legislation. Now, personally, this isn't entirely what I'd want. I'd much rather see laws passed against spammers, pop-up ads, and such. But if you know anything about computers (which most Slashdot people do; that's why I think most people will at least partially share my view), you will know that, except for rare cases, the "client" initiates contact. Now, in a DoS attack or something, yes, it's initated by the "server" (or some other foreign party). I once argued a bit with a teacher about this -- when a little kid tries to write to the White House and types in "www.whitehouse.com", I do not believe that the staff at WhiteHouse.com should be held responsible. Why? No, I'm not some freak obsessed with porn. So why? Let's see a little review of what's going on.
So how are the people owning the site responsible? Technically, the "client" requested them!
Sorry, I guess I got a little off-topic, but I feel this point needs to be made. I have no doubt that many /. readers support what I'm saying, but perhaps a judge or someone will read this? And get a clue? Also, one last comment. Users are connecting to a network of computers voluntarily. They are not in any way *forced* to be put on the Internet. (As much as AOL may bug you with their CD's, you can always play frisbee. You aren't obligated to use them...) If I allow strangers to walk into my house, and you see something that offends you, can you sue me? Well, given the current state of the legal system, maybe you can. But I don't think you should be able to.
Quite frankly, the Olympics used to enthrall me -- I can remember staring continuously into the TV at the Atlanta Olympics. But now the TV companies bicker and pay billions of dollars to air one or two events, none of which really interest me.
The "Official whatever of the Olympic Games" thing has gone way too far, too. Wasn't IBM and Windows the official hardware/software combo of the Olympics, or something like that? If Nike was the official shoe or something, that I could understand. But official computer? WTF?
Perhaps Linus is not against odd numbers; he is actually against square numbers. If you drop the "." (which will subsequently cause havoc on the internet, as thousands of people try to access "http://slashorg"), it becomes 25, which is 5^2.
Wait, that's it! Linus must hate the idea of 2.5 because it is 5 -- an odd number -- squared.
Okay, I'm baffled. Not a single one of these manufacturers has even one "C" in their name. What does "4C" stand for?!
Umm... Buy more coffee makers?! :)
It seems to me that the company could just make a copy of the user's home directory -- if they delete everything, who would care? They just saved IT staff some time...
Personally, though, if the staff has the nerve to lay you off in such a cold manner, I'd stand behind someone who deleted everything they owned. If the IT staff doesn't care enough to back it up, or if their boss doesn't care about the work enough to keep a copy for themselves, who really cares? I'd figure that if you had some ultra-important research, it would not just sit on your local desktop...
Cool. He got it to boot on a Dreamcast. But what about my Knitting Machine?
This was one of their headlines... I don't quite want to know what a camera has to do with a tongue...
Are they saying that the knitting machine will take your tongue? What type of product is this? You buy something for your Nintendo, but you find out that it's actually for a knitting machine. And then the knitting machine lashes out at you and takes your tongue?!
Help me. I'm afraid of the knitting machine.
Then it suddenly mentions that they are trying to save the human race. Umm... Right. Putting this big monolith in the middle of a park is going to save the human race. (I know about the movie, but still... That's not going to help save the world, unless they really believe the movie is true...)
If I recall correctly, Oracle and other database companies have something in their EULA that prohibits you from benchmarking their database. Supposedly, the point of this is to prevent Oracle's competitors (which are... who?) from running 'crooked' tests (not optimizing Oracle, or whatever). But it still makes me nervous when a company puts something in the EULA preventing you from benchmarking it...
The base price for their low-end "midrange server" is over $40,000. It has a single SPARC processor, and 1 GB of RAM. It appears to be exactly like a $5,000 Ultra5 Workstation, but in a much bigger box. (Personal refrigerator vs. pizza box) Am I overlooking something, or is this outrageously expensive? I'd just as soon get the Ultra5 and then buy myself one of Cogent Communications' 100 Mbps Fiber lines for $1,000 a month.
Hmm... I have a nice Sun 3/60 that lacks a hard drive (and, subsequently, an OS), but it's yours if you pay shipping. I figure - the model numbers are bizarrely close. The two systems must be copies of each other, right? :)
I personally believe that, in this situation, I should be held by it. Of course, anyone who agrees to not speak unless they get it approved by Bill Gates is obviously not sane... :)
Several times I've gotten "Updates" from them (ads for new services, usually). I typically delete them, but I've been tempted to forward the message to "abuse" at their domain. Yes, report my ISP to my ISP for spamming me. And if that doesn't work (if they don't reply "We're very sorry about that. We have deleted our account and are considering a lawsuit against ourselves."), I'm somewhat tempted to report them to whoever provides their Internet service... (You don't really think that they have the know-how to manage an OC-48 or something, do you?! The very first week they installed our cable modem, it was down for days -- while they replaced a T1 line with a DSL line. So my cable modem ultimately leads to a DSL line... Figures.)