Enron, Worldcom, Nortel, and RedHat all admit that they were lying to investors, and restate their earnings downwards. "Greedy, heartless, bloodsucking corporate bastards!", we scream.
I know this is Slashdot, and R'ing of TFA doesn't happen a lot by people posting, but did you catch the bit where it's a change in methodology that is shifting numbers around, reporting them in a different way? It's the same numbers, the same results, the same totals, just a different way of organizing them.
So, for you to equate this to Enron's "Wups, where did that 100 billion go? Oh yeah, we hid it in shadow companies and fraud" is asinine.
...giving some of Redhat's money to that sleaseball lawyer.
Not exactly. how these suits work, is the sleaseball lawyer comes up with his target, and his scheme, and initiates the lawsuit. People then join the lawsuit, saying "Yes, I was 'harmed' also" (witness the CD settlement of late). If only two people would sign up, those two split the total that's left over after the lawyer gets his cut.
Of course, the lawyers take their cut first. The settlement amount is fixed, though, and independant of the number of people joining the lawsuit. So, if it goes anywhere, Redhat will already have lost that bucket of money, the lawyer gets his cut regardless, and the number of people in the lawsuit would only change how much each person gets. Since it's spent money already (if it goes), might as well take a dip into the pool & send it right back in.
I patently reject your characterization of me as an "ambulance chaser." I am one of the many investors who lost significant amounts of money in redhat stock,
Waah. I bought in on the day it opened at about 50, got out of half of it at 300 (pre-split), and kept the rest. The paper losses are a result of the.com bubble bursting, not a trivial restatement of earnings. The only thing you can claim to have lost as a result of this is today's change in price.
But, by all means, please do sell while it's undervalued, I'll be buying up your shares. Any lawsuit here is strictly driven by greed, either yours for not knowing when to get out (welcome to the stock market, it's gambling, deal with it), or (ahem) somene else's greed in trying to hurt the competition.
Is posting of contract revenues unusual?
on
Red Hat Vs. The Lawyers
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
People don't like to be lied by management when they invest their money into the company, and people will launch lawsuits when they deem something inappropriate had been done.
I suppose some of 'em will, but this holder of a non-trivial number of shares of Redhat stock, sees this as a ploy by an external hostile force (the lawsuits, not the restating, obviously). As such it pisses me off more than it makes me want to take part in such a lawsuit.
If there's a class-action lawsuit, I will take the proceeds and dump it right back to Redhat, in the form of subscriptions or straight donations. The P/E ratio isn't relevant to the fact that some sleaseball lawyer, probably in Redmond's pocket, is making a stink about this.
That having been said, it's a true sign that you're succeeding when your competition feels threatened by you. Sleep well, Bill... the penguin is gonna get you.
Problem with that, is that you also won't be able to run stats on your site with Analog or another tool, if you want to see which search engines folks are using to get to it. For almost everyone that doesn't matter, but sometimes it'd be nice to be able to show that like for a marketing site, or whatever. I just do a quick grep -v of a few strings before running through analog, so I can still get the search engine info (how folks found the site) without all of the M$ worm/virus stuff.
Looking at my email inbox, I see a ton of junk generated by the Windows virus/worm of the week. Looking at my firewall logs, I see very little probing for any of the Unix exploits.
When the difference in use of exploits is an order of magnitude or two higher for the 'doze stuff, it's hard to see how a mere "count of vulerabilities fixed" means much at all. The basic design differences between unix and 'doze are profound, which is why the 'doze exploits do so well.
Now, we just need some clueless politician and/or judge to decree that we need to be able to keep the same VIN when we switch cars. After all, it's just as personal as a phone number or an IP address, right?
Who cares if it completely neuters the data model, is hard if not impossible to implement, and results in massive confusuion and overhead nightmares, it's the in thing to do, making all these pesky numbers portable.
Come to think of it, my VIN already is portable, I put a few hundred miles on it a month.
My content was 100% available, and I don't have Akamai as the only source of DNS information for our servers, so our customers had no problem getting to our sites. A DDOS on DNS servers is going to make things slow; slow things are going to timeout. But, people whose DNS doesn't have a secondary server on a different network just got a lesson on why you're not supposed to do that.
Al Gore was talking about creating *legislation* that helped foster the Internet.
Why do Conservatives bitch to high hell when anything they say it taken out of context
"I took the initiative in creating the internet".
If he was honest, he would have said "I voted to fund the project that became the internet", not that he initiated and created it.
But why are MS always trying to put all the other browsers out of business for something they get nothing back from?
Keeps 'em in good practice maybe? Seriously, it's probably so they can maintain their user's ignorance that there are options out there to consider. If a consumer knows that a choice _exists_, they'll think about using it. When they don't even have a thought that there is another choice than (windows|IE|Outlook), they'll never leave the Microsoft fold. I'm thinking that's the motivation.
Yes, but the other 20% aren't coming from compromised non-windows systems, they're being sent by spammers who know they're sending it. If the other 20% were coming from trojan'ed *nix boxes, then I'd say you're on to something.
Fact is, 4 out of 5 emails that end up in my spam bin are there because (a) some sleaseball wrote a trojan to deliver them, and (b) someone else wrote a trojan-friendly OS to enable it in the first place.
I understand that some ISPs are now cutting off infected folks until they can show they've patched. I think that we'll be seeing more of this, and I can't say I disagree (as long as they understand what a Unix, Linux, or MacOS box is).
topozone.com has USGS maps
on
Open Maps?
·
· Score: 1
I wonder if the USGS maps at topozone.com are the starting point you're looking for. take a look: here.
First, let's execute some spammers, _then_ we can move on to the virus & spyware folks. Viruses and worms only are a problem for one segment of the online population, spam has to be dealt with by all of us.
I'm pretty sure the SLA says something about "proportional to the part of the month down". Maybe the day free, I dunno. Either way, I'm gonna call our Akamai sales guy and hit him up for a dozen or so Akamai shirts, just because.
As to the AC who is blasting you for bringing up the SLA, well...what's the point of having a contract if there's not terms in there for violation of uptime promises? This stuff is all defined, and is part of why one would contract with someone like them.
If the downtime had lasted much longer (as in, until I got to work), we would have pointed the cname to our origin server, bypassing Akamai's network until they got back up. Trivial workaround, if you're using Edgesuite - can all be handled at your own DNS servers. Worth switching to edgesuite for that reason if no other - cheaper incremental bandwidth costs and the ability to make it look like one of your own hosts in the URL is nice too.
It could be that your internal DNS infrastructure doesn't talk nice with cname'd addresses. I've had customers with _very_ old versions of BIND running in-house which saw similar problems. The customer in question wasn't keen to do anything about it for akamai-ish reasons, but when I pointed out the security fixes that have gone into effect since that version of BIND was released, well, they upgraded and the problem went away.
You're probably behind a net-nanny type filter that blocks anything with "akamai" in the URL - at least one of them defaults to that behavior.
At a certain usage point, it made sense for us to switch from a g123.a.akamai.net/blah/blah type URL to one that has our company's name in it, which is cnamed over to an akamai server. So, the URL looks like a host in our domain to the customers (and their filtering software), but resolves through the cname to the nearest akamai edge server to them. It's more complicated than that, but you get the idea - gets the word "akamai" out of the URL. This is why some of the sites which went all b0rken this morning (including ours) don't look like they're akamaized untill you start doing some nslookups or whatever to see where the content comes from.
As to being a monopoly - well, when I implemented Akamai for our company, I shopped around to a couple of competitors, one of whom went away during the selection process, the other who only serves some domains...there isn't anyone out there doing it as well as Akamai is. It's a good businses model, and some of their technology is patented, so it'd be hard to start up and compete with them. I could see someone like google (or eBay) with a large, distributed architecture pulling it off, but other than that, not a lot of opportunity to get into it at this point.
Anyway, your "problems" not seeing akamai images - bet they're a filtering issue on your end. This is the first downtime in years, and things don't just randomly not work with them, that's why it's so remarkable when something does go wrong.
I've been using Akamai for several years now at work, this is the first time we've had any interruption. The bandwith they serve for us for a couple grand a month offsets about 3 times as much cost if we had to bring it in ourselves, our customers get pages in half the time (better than
that further away), and with the exception of this morning, _it just works_.
Wish I could point to one of my servers here that hasn't been down unexpectedly in 2 years. I don't think I can. It's cheaper, it's faster, and it's more reliable than trying to serve that content from here; even with this downtime, it's still the appropriate solution.
Now, if they go down _again_, without explaination, it could get messy.
I don't understand. Fuddruckers has been around for a long time, is there something you're trying to point out or just playing with the name of the place, or what?
Slashdot Mirror
Enron, Worldcom, Nortel, and RedHat all admit that they were lying to investors, and restate their earnings downwards. "Greedy, heartless, bloodsucking corporate bastards!", we scream.
I know this is Slashdot, and R'ing of TFA doesn't happen a lot by people posting, but did you catch the bit where it's a change in methodology that is shifting numbers around, reporting them in a different way? It's the same numbers, the same results, the same totals, just a different way of organizing them.
So, for you to equate this to Enron's "Wups, where did that 100 billion go? Oh yeah, we hid it in shadow companies and fraud" is asinine.
Boggles my mind.
Indeed.
...giving some of Redhat's money to that sleaseball lawyer.
Not exactly. how these suits work, is the sleaseball lawyer comes up with his target, and his scheme, and initiates the lawsuit. People then join the lawsuit, saying "Yes, I was 'harmed' also" (witness the CD settlement of late). If only two people would sign up, those two split the total that's left over after the lawyer gets his cut.
Of course, the lawyers take their cut first. The settlement amount is fixed, though, and independant of the number of people joining the lawsuit. So, if it goes anywhere, Redhat will already have lost that bucket of money, the lawyer gets his cut regardless, and the number of people in the lawsuit would only change how much each person gets. Since it's spent money already (if it goes), might as well take a dip into the pool & send it right back in.
I patently reject your characterization of me as an "ambulance chaser." I am one of the many investors who lost significant amounts of money in redhat stock,
.com bubble bursting, not a trivial restatement of earnings. The only thing you can claim to have lost as a result of this is today's change in price.
Waah. I bought in on the day it opened at about 50, got out of half of it at 300 (pre-split), and kept the rest. The paper losses are a result of the
But, by all means, please do sell while it's undervalued, I'll be buying up your shares. Any lawsuit here is strictly driven by greed, either yours for not knowing when to get out (welcome to the stock market, it's gambling, deal with it), or (ahem) somene else's greed in trying to hurt the competition.
People don't like to be lied by management when they invest their money into the company, and people will launch lawsuits when they deem something inappropriate had been done.
I suppose some of 'em will, but this holder of a non-trivial number of shares of Redhat stock, sees this as a ploy by an external hostile force (the lawsuits, not the restating, obviously). As such it pisses me off more than it makes me want to take part in such a lawsuit.
If there's a class-action lawsuit, I will take the proceeds and dump it right back to Redhat, in the form of subscriptions or straight donations. The P/E ratio isn't relevant to the fact that some sleaseball lawyer, probably in Redmond's pocket, is making a stink about this.
That having been said, it's a true sign that you're succeeding when your competition feels threatened by you. Sleep well, Bill... the penguin is gonna get you.
Ya think? Microsoft, doing devious things against a Linux provider? Come on, how likely is that?
Get a Diamond video card and call it an anniversary present! Warning: Only do this ONCE.
...per wife...
Yeah, because the MAC address is so hard to change. ifconfig on some systems can do it, and a D-Link router can assume any MAC you'd like it to.
SetEnvIfNoCase Request_Method "SEARCH" nolog
Problem with that, is that you also won't be able to run stats on your site with Analog or another tool, if you want to see which search engines folks are using to get to it. For almost everyone that doesn't matter, but sometimes it'd be nice to be able to show that like for a marketing site, or whatever. I just do a quick grep -v of a few strings before running through analog, so I can still get the search engine info (how folks found the site) without all of the M$ worm/virus stuff.
Looking at my email inbox, I see a ton of junk generated by the Windows virus/worm of the week. Looking at my firewall logs, I see very little probing for any of the Unix exploits.
When the difference in use of exploits is an order of magnitude or two higher for the 'doze stuff, it's hard to see how a mere "count of vulerabilities fixed" means much at all. The basic design differences between unix and 'doze are profound, which is why the 'doze exploits do so well.
Now, we just need some clueless politician and/or judge to decree that we need to be able to keep the same VIN when we switch cars. After all, it's just as personal as a phone number or an IP address, right?
Who cares if it completely neuters the data model, is hard if not impossible to implement, and results in massive confusuion and overhead nightmares, it's the in thing to do, making all these pesky numbers portable.
Come to think of it, my VIN already is portable, I put a few hundred miles on it a month.
My content was 100% available, and I don't have Akamai as the only source of DNS information for our servers, so our customers had no problem getting to our sites. A DDOS on DNS servers is going to make things slow; slow things are going to timeout. But, people whose DNS doesn't have a secondary server on a different network just got a lesson on why you're not supposed to do that.
Al Gore was talking about creating *legislation* that helped foster the Internet. Why do Conservatives bitch to high hell when anything they say it taken out of context
"I took the initiative in creating the internet". If he was honest, he would have said "I voted to fund the project that became the internet", not that he initiated and created it.
We don't want this wastrel getting off on a technicality, do we?
Oh, come on, what kind of Shylock would take a case like that?
If he accompanies his apology with a pound of flesh, I'll accept it. My choice is his cerebellum.
But why are MS always trying to put all the other browsers out of business for something they get nothing back from?
Keeps 'em in good practice maybe? Seriously, it's probably so they can maintain their user's ignorance that there are options out there to consider. If a consumer knows that a choice _exists_, they'll think about using it. When they don't even have a thought that there is another choice than (windows|IE|Outlook), they'll never leave the Microsoft fold. I'm thinking that's the motivation.
Seems fairly obvious to me.
Yes, but the other 20% aren't coming from compromised non-windows systems, they're being sent by spammers who know they're sending it. If the other 20% were coming from trojan'ed *nix boxes, then I'd say you're on to something.
Fact is, 4 out of 5 emails that end up in my spam bin are there because (a) some sleaseball wrote a trojan to deliver them, and (b) someone else wrote a trojan-friendly OS to enable it in the first place.
I understand that some ISPs are now cutting off infected folks until they can show they've patched. I think that we'll be seeing more of this, and I can't say I disagree (as long as they understand what a Unix, Linux, or MacOS box is).
I wonder if the USGS maps at topozone.com are the starting point you're looking for. take a look: here.
First, let's execute some spammers, _then_ we can move on to the virus & spyware folks. Viruses and worms only are a problem for one segment of the online population, spam has to be dealt with by all of us.
I'm pretty sure the SLA says something about "proportional to the part of the month down". Maybe the day free, I dunno. Either way, I'm gonna call our Akamai sales guy and hit him up for a dozen or so Akamai shirts, just because.
As to the AC who is blasting you for bringing up the SLA, well...what's the point of having a contract if there's not terms in there for violation of uptime promises? This stuff is all defined, and is part of why one would contract with someone like them.
If the downtime had lasted much longer (as in, until I got to work), we would have pointed the cname to our origin server, bypassing Akamai's network until they got back up. Trivial workaround, if you're using Edgesuite - can all be handled at your own DNS servers. Worth switching to edgesuite for that reason if no other - cheaper incremental bandwidth costs and the ability to make it look like one of your own hosts in the URL is nice too.
It could be that your internal DNS infrastructure doesn't talk nice with cname'd addresses. I've had customers with _very_ old versions of BIND running in-house which saw similar problems. The customer in question wasn't keen to do anything about it for akamai-ish reasons, but when I pointed out the security fixes that have gone into effect since that version of BIND was released, well, they upgraded and the problem went away.
You're probably behind a net-nanny type filter that blocks anything with "akamai" in the URL - at least one of them defaults to that behavior.
At a certain usage point, it made sense for us to switch from a g123.a.akamai.net/blah/blah type URL to one that has our company's name in it, which is cnamed over to an akamai server. So, the URL looks like a host in our domain to the customers (and their filtering software), but resolves through the cname to the nearest akamai edge server to them. It's more complicated than that, but you get the idea - gets the word "akamai" out of the URL. This is why some of the sites which went all b0rken this morning (including ours) don't look like they're akamaized untill you start doing some nslookups or whatever to see where the content comes from.
As to being a monopoly - well, when I implemented Akamai for our company, I shopped around to a couple of competitors, one of whom went away during the selection process, the other who only serves some domains...there isn't anyone out there doing it as well as Akamai is. It's a good businses model, and some of their technology is patented, so it'd be hard to start up and compete with them. I could see someone like google (or eBay) with a large, distributed architecture pulling it off, but other than that, not a lot of opportunity to get into it at this point.
Anyway, your "problems" not seeing akamai images - bet they're a filtering issue on your end. This is the first downtime in years, and things don't just randomly not work with them, that's why it's so remarkable when something does go wrong.
I've been using Akamai for several years now at work, this is the first time we've had any interruption. The bandwith they serve for us for a couple grand a month offsets about 3 times as much cost if we had to bring it in ourselves, our customers get pages in half the time (better than that further away), and with the exception of this morning, _it just works_.
Wish I could point to one of my servers here that hasn't been down unexpectedly in 2 years. I don't think I can. It's cheaper, it's faster, and it's more reliable than trying to serve that content from here; even with this downtime, it's still the appropriate solution.
Now, if they go down _again_, without explaination, it could get messy.
Right, got it. I thought he was going down the path of Ruddf... and couldn't see how it fit.
never mind, nothing to see here, move along...
I don't understand. Fuddruckers has been around for a long time, is there something you're trying to point out or just playing with the name of the place, or what?
Wow, way to go.
Now you've gone and done it, ArthurDent, you've annoyed an AC who may or may not be the astroturfing submitter. OH, the horrors...