Slashdot Mirror


User: Just+Your+Average+Li

Just+Your+Average+Li's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
32
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 32

  1. passmass on Distributed Password Files? · · Score: 1

    There's a shell script common to many variants called passmass which connects to the many systems and then uses whatever passwd command is there to change the password. It's definitely not the most secure thing out there, but it works.

  2. Their plans could be worse on LinModems? · · Score: 1
    Ockman sees the value of this approach. "Any options that allow Linux appliances to be more inexpensive to the consumer [are] good, but [the option] needs to be examined to see if it makes sense," he said. "The question is, do people really need Linux-based iToasters that plug into the phone?"

    Well it could be running worse: embedded Win CE (which in my book stands for Windows: crappier edition)

  3. Re:Research finds..... on Building a Teraflop Donated Beowulf Cluster · · Score: 1

    localhost% whois teraflop.net
    [rs.internic.net]

    Access to Network Solutions' WHOIS information is provided to assist persons in
    determining the contents of a domain name registration record in NSI's
    registrar database. The data in this record is provided by NSI for
    informational purposes only, and NSI does not guarantee its accuracy.
    Compilation, repackaging, dissemination, or other use of the WHOIS database
    in its entirety, or a substantial portion thereof, is not allowed without NSI's
    prior written permission. By submitting this query, you agree to abide by
    this policy. All rights reserved.


    Registrant:
    Teraflop Communications (TERAFLOP3-DOM)
    611 Main St.
    LaCrosse, WI 54601
    US

    Domain Name: TERAFLOP.NET

    Administrative Contact:
    Administrator (AD8172-ORG) roark@WHITEHOUSE.COM
    (530) 690-8876
    Fax- (530) 706-9490
    Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
    sayward, eric (ES3891) t1-spsys@EXECPC.COM
    608 779 4249 (FAX) 608 782 1331
    Billing Contact:
    sayward, eric (ES3891) t1-spsys@EXECPC.COM
    608 779 4249 (FAX) 608 782 1331

    Record last updated on 15-Jul-99.
    Record created on 15-Jul-99.
    Database last updated on 19-Jul-99 09:13:25 EDT.

    Domain servers in listed order:

    NS1.GRANITECANYON.COM 199.239.20.4
    NS2.GRANITECANYON.COM 208.146.254.90

    localhost%


    ---------

    Notice who the administrative contact is. If I'm not mistaken, the whitehouse.com domain name is owned by a porn site. Fits well with the picture of the adult store next door.

  4. Research finds..... on Building a Teraflop Donated Beowulf Cluster · · Score: 1

    He *does* have a non-hotmail account. At least one.

    From an altavista search of "eric sayward", we found one link to http://www.moneysearch.com/cgi/message.cgi/view/12 77 where we find that:

    1) mailto:way@lacrosse-inter.net
    I wonder why he didn't use that email address?
    maybe because the site is down?

    2) He owns lacrosse-inter.net. Kinda makes you
    wonder why he has to get a "free hosting".
    Again. His site is down. Kinda makes you
    wonder if he can keep 10,000 working. This in
    turn leads to the internic listing. Shows that
    Superior Systems owns lacrosse-inter.net and
    that Eric Sayward is its contact.

    sayward, eric (ES3891) t1-spsys@EXECPC.COM
    608 779 4249 (FAX) 608 782 1331


    3) This also yields another phone number 608-386-4298 in addition to his posted 608-782-3006.

    4) According to the DNS records, it doesn't maintain its own records, but granitecanyon.com
    does for them. Searching the records reveals...
    just about nothing. a MX to the system named MAIL, which, like all the other hosts is a CNAME to the main system. Nice ISP. This equipment seems like it could be housed in that little shack from the pictures. Easily.

    I wonder how his "customers" use the ISP.

  5. Re:Beowulf, Schmeowulf on Building a Teraflop Donated Beowulf Cluster · · Score: 1

    What a sob story.

    This guy should be doing spin for Clinton. I hope he doesn't go into politics. Everybody else would fall for it.

  6. Re:Security??? on Building a Teraflop Donated Beowulf Cluster · · Score: 1

    Security? for 386's, 486's and low level pentium's? Who's gonna want to steal those? "top-secret"? You have a rogue government as a sponsor?

  7. Re:Some Things are Legit... on Building a Teraflop Donated Beowulf Cluster · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it *could* be legit. But in addition to the webpage being on a free hosting site, a couple of other things have changed since this morning when I first read about it and the time when I am making this post.

    The "ideas" link still doesn't work, but now gives a 404 instead of the default ad for click2site.com.

    The hotmail contact and the yahoo contact are however explainable. Superior systems may have said "Do this on your own time." So they had to use external email, rather than business email. But then how can they receive all these boxes that are (not) going to be streaming in at that work place. And why does the web site for their "workplace" refuse connections?

    The logistics behind this project would not be feasible. According to them, they want the equivalent power of 10757 K6-2 350s. How many of those do they think they'll get? Based off of distributed.net's client speeds for rc5, k6-2 350s crack at (avg for linux) ~590000 Kkeys/sec. The high end 386dx/40 gets ~20558 Kkeys/sec. This is approximately 28.7x slower. This would mean that if they get a large portion of 386s, they could end up with as many as (rounding down to 28x) 301,196 machines. If they get to an average speed of a 486dx4/100, they would still have about 100,000 machines. I don't know of many people who would part with even a low speed pentium. They still work sufficiently even with M$ Windoze.

    Setting up 100,000 machines? Most users don't have networks at home so they would have to purchase say, 50,000 network cards. Even at the low cost of $5 per machine for a NIC, cabling and a share of the hub, that's $250,000. Since they're mainly asking for machines, they would need to invest a considerable amount. And can you imagine setting up the IP addresses, host tables, .... INSTALLING THE OS? Well, they might use remote boot workstations. Can you imagine the traffic generated by those machines? I guess those $5 NICS aren't gonna cut it. You're going to need 100base-t. Or more.

    Power? According to PG&E (my local electric utiltity) at http://www.pge.com, a PC uses .08 kW per hour. Let's see.... .08 times 24 hours, times 100,000 computers, is 192,000 kW per day, or 5,952,000 kW per month. In contrast, the average residence uses 6,400 kW per year (about 17.5 kW per month). Who's paying the bill? Also, given that the average family uses 6400kW per year, and their larger Pittsburgh power plant with 7 energy generating units has a capacity of 2,022 MW (per year) or a mere 168,500 kW per month. Oops. And we haven't even run the A/C to cool them yet.

    Maintenance. With 100,000 machines and 99% uptime (1% downtime is not really reasonable given the hardware) is 87.6 hours per year of maintenance per machine. Multiplied by 100,000 machines and you need to have 8,760,000 hours a year to fix them. Well, you would need 4211 technicians, working 40 hour weeks to fix it. And this is only the routine maintainence. Not counting unplanned hardware failures. Remember, this isn't high quality stuff. And how long would it take to find the right machine if you have to open the case or find the console (i.e. crashed)?

    And space requirements. Even if all the boxes are those compact 18" x 18" x 4" boxes, if you set up a row of these, if you put it in a room seven-feet high, you would have 4761 stacks 21 boxes high, which in a line would stretch 7142.85 feet, or approximately a mile and a half. "Machine Z434 is not responding!" "Damn, that one's on the end!" Since you need access to the backs, if you put them front to front with aisles in the back (say 3 feet wide) in rows, you would need 32,142 sq. feet, approximately 3/4 of an acre.

    My vote? Either a scam or a not-well-thought-out project.