And you think this is a scoop? That Sun should be burned alive? You fools...
I have been working for several Start Up's in my life. Let me tell you one thing about it: They don't care about the GPL. They take programs, they use it, the MODIFY it and they don't even think about realesing the modifications to the original author.
When someone like me comes on staff and tell them about the license abuse they are doing, they don't give a shit.
I can't recall a single book I've read on SQL Server that did not instruct the reader to change the sa password
immediately after installing. That is one of the most basic principles and if you don't know that, you have no business
installing SQL Server at the professional level.
Amen brother!
But hey, welcome to the world of NT admins. I am not criticizing Microsoft, but rather the bozos who think they know how to do stuff just by clicking nifty icons.
My roomate is the best NT admin I know. His expertise in network engineering and security is amazing. He is an exception. Most of the folks I know that are in his position (NT Admin) suck! They think they have a clue but when you talk to them about BUGtraq, NTBUGtraq and the like they start looking at you funny.
And they take the liberty to tell you that Unix sucks 'cause it's not user friendly enough... like if an admin needed user friendly stuff.
When I resigned from my position at my previous company, I needed to write a letter of resignation. The WWW is such a great thing, I even found this link.
Enjoy!
PS: After a month, I am still looking for a job though!
Disclaimer : I am a French Jew and I live in the US for about 2 years now.
There are several points one needs to think about when you read this whole Yahoo-French story. Let me try to explain them one by one. Some of the points I will discuss have been brought up by Lionel Jospin, French Prime Minister regarding this very story with Yahoo. I really want to emphasize the fact that I am not trying to put my opinion in place, I just want to explain how come the Frenchs can do that.
First, France has been invaded by the Nazi's. When you get the enemy on your land, it leaves pain for a long long time. The Frenchs are still wounded by the war. Far worst than the US.
Second, You guys see that story from an American Point of Vue (point de vue in French). The USA is the country of Freedom, Liberty, the right for everyone to be armed, etc... The US have a much stronger "I have the right to do and say whatever I want as long as I don't mess up with what my neighbor thinks or wants" than the French. You want an example? Look at the topic this story has been put into : censorship. For an American, this whole thing is considered as censorship, as someone trying to keep someone else from expressing his/her thoughts. In France, things are a little bit different. Taboos are not the same. Here, sex in the worplace is taboo (Lewinski affair.), in France Nazi stuff is taboo.
Third : The French's in general, especially the french government have no clue what the Internet is about. The don't get the whole picture. They want to translate CD-ROM with cederom. Email -> mel. Does it make sense ? Of course... since they don't get it. They see the Internet as something new, frightening, that is going to eliminate their culture and they don't really like it. 15% - 20% of the houses in France have access to the Internet. This can explain that.
When they issue some ruling like this one, they are misinformed. They think that technicaly Yahoo can filter French people with 95% accuracy. Well, I am a Network Engineer, and I am wondering how they are going to do that with 95% accuracy. Who tells them that? Looooonnnnnggg story. For more info, look for keywords like polytechnique, Ecole Normale d'Administration (ENA), etc. The Elites in France are the one reponsible for that mess.
I hope this will help you understand why and how they came to that point. Cultural differences are a value in this world (especially my accent with women:) ). It's just a matter of getting the information.
If you read that and wonder what I think of all this, you came to the wrong place. I hate the Frenchs! (there was a song like that somewhere)
if I opt to not accept the agreement, that doesn't mean that I must return it for a refund
No it doesn't mean that you have to, it just mean that you can. Let's get into an analogy. You win the lottery, if you don't go cash your ticket, no money comes to your pocket. You don't have to, you just can cash it. (End of analogy)
whether I agree to a license or not
If you don't agree with the license, you have the right (and the obligation maybe, I have to check) to return the software for a full refund. I hope you understand better now.
Yes, and the NDA is a contract that those employees agreed to. They were given a piece of paper and told to sign it. They decided to sign it (and thereby agree to it) since it was a requirement for working at Apple. They signed it and were therefore bound to the terms of the contract. Apple can even produce the original signed document if anyone ever disputes that fact. But when you buy retail software, or a computer that comes preloaded with software, did you sign anything? I never have.
Ok. You have a point... almost:-)
I can't work at Apple unless I sign the NDA. I agree. You can't use MS Software unless you agreed to the EULA. End of story. If you don't agree, go get a refund bla bla bla. I think you are attaching a lot of importance to the fact that you sign an NDA and you just agree to the EULA. You have Valid point. (I put it in bold 'cause it's a good one). You are right again when you talk about Apple being able to show a copy of the agreement, etc.
It has been discussed on/. (my best source of info as you can see by now) the validity of those EULA and other "Click here to show that you accept the terms of the agreement". The story was about MS (yes them again) and the kerberos specifications for Windows 2000. I don't want to go there because I am not a lawyer and it's an endless debate. But I repeat myself, you have a point.
When you buy a x86 box from a retail store, you don't agree to any special terms from Microsoft.
Absolutly correct again. But heh... you agree to it when you turn the computer on and load the OS. Read the Windows Refund Page for more details.
Of course I read and understand the article.
I give you the benefit of the doubt. If you read and understood it then why don't you understand that they (Microsoft) are talking about two different programs! I mean come on... They are not that stupid. They are not going to make you pay for the SAME EXACT THING!. They are going to make you believe that the same program can be interpreted as two different products.
So, Dudle, if you think the differences between the OEM and retail version of the EULA are relevant, then please explain how the user can be bound by the terms of an agreement that he never made.
For the record, it's dudle (all lowercase). I direct you to your nearest Windows Box, read the legal documents that came with it and you will see by yourself.
I actually think that this debate is going somewhere. Thanks Sloppy.
If I go to CompUSA to get a x86 box, it will come with 'Doze preloaded whether I want it or not.
Ever heard of Windows Refund Day? You don't have to get Windows. By the way, the topic is on companies using ghost to image their computers. I don't know many companies who buy their PC's at CompUSA.
The EULA says very clearly that if you don't agree with it (the EULA), you can get a refund. -> Windows Refund Day and all the like
whether I agree to a license or not
Like I just told you, this statement is flat out wrong.
There's no contract between me and Microsoft.
Of course there is one. An agreement is a contract. If you read/. as much as I do, you will notice the story about Apple pursuing employees over breaking their NDA and spreading rumors. As you know, an NDA stands for Non Disclosure Agreement. There's the word agreement in there. If you read the comments related to the Apple story, you will see people yelling that an Agreement (an NDA in that case) is a contract. Now you are telling me the opposite... I chose to believe that you are wrong.
I don't see anything in the Copyright laws that says I have to buy a second copy of something that I already have.
There is none. Your sentence shows that you didn't read or fully understood the article. Microsoft is talking about 2 different products. That's a fact! Wheter or not you think that they are different, this is were the discussion starts.
I am trying to focus your arguments on the topic. I am glad that you replied to my comment, it's getting interesting:-)
This is not an attempt to create a troll, it's just me being the devil's advocate.
I read the article. I read the EULA. I know Microsoft's practices when it comes to licensing and believe me, it's not that bad.
When you use that type of software, you agree to the EULA (End User License Agreement). It's very clear that an OEM license is different from retail. What Microsoft is doing is legitimate. I would even go further as to tell Microsoft : Go baby go!
The more people realize what's behind the EULA, the more they will consider, research, understand and use GPL software.
It's funny how news on Slashdot come and go. Yesterday we had this excelent piece about RMS. Read it! The more you know about commercial practices like the ones MS is doing, the more you want to get your freedom back.
BTW, look at how Oracle licenses its software and you will see what a real PAIN this is. MS is piece of cake next to this.
Be positive guys. MS is just trying to make money out of people who don't know about alternatives. You don't want them to tell you about alternatives do you?
It's quite simple actually. The machine that accepts the TCP connection (the load balancer) forwards it on to one of a pool of webservers. Sometimes also called reverse proxying. Obviously the load balancer and the webservers do not need to run the same OS, as you see in this example.
Get REAL! A load balancer IS NOT doing reverse proxying. The exception would be mod_backhand and I am quite sure that's not what you were talking about. When you do load balancing and you have Microsoft's wallet, you use real stuff. Big-IP, Webserver Director, stuff like that. Those appliances are dedicated to do that type of stuff. You can use the excellent mod_backhand but since it does not do failover, it's a plus not a replacement. Now let's see: Obviously the load balancer and the webservers do not need to run the same OS. You are supposing that the load balancer is running an OS like Win2000 or BSD? AHHHHH!!!!!. I would be damn if they dare to do that. When you engineer a network that size, you use appliances, not home made PC or that sort of boxes. For the Info, you can customize the header Apache returns when you send him a request. Go on Netcraft and check www.real.com. They are running Apache on Linux but as you can see that's not what they show on their Apache headers.
If an IRCop help them, there's no way I can secure a channel. Period.
and why the hell would you want to scour the IRC channels except if you feel that you could bust warez pirates and kiddie prOn peddlers? think about all of the meaningless banter that you'd have to record and store somewhere.
Judges? Bzzzzttt!!!! Wrong answer! If I understand you well, you only have meaningless conversations and w4r3z t4lk on IRC. I disagree. And even if my conversations are meaningless to you, they might be very interresting for someone else (FBI, News Papers, my employer, etc..)
I am a Unix System Administrator. As any SysAdmin, I care about reliability and redundancy. I want to give my opinion as someone who is NOT a developper. The fact of the matter is, I don't even know SQL that much.
When you work with a web site (as it's the exampe given in the benchmark), your motto is 24/7, 24/7 and more 24/7. I want the web site to be up all the time.
To be able to do so, I use good and reliable hardware and software. But it's not enough. It has to be redundant.
Redundant hardware is "easy" : RAID, 2 power supplies, etc. Redundant software is more of a pain and unfortunatly it's as important as hardware. There are Hardware tools out there (BIG-IP, Radware Webserver Director, etc.) who can load balance and manage fail over for web server. But what about Databases?
This is something that is extremely important. I want to use good stuff (Open Source) without leaving my network having a single point of failure. I can pretty much have everything redundant. Linux has High-Availability kernel modules, Apache has mod_backhand (a Must!), DNS and NIS have master/slaves concepts... but what about my databases?
When Slashdot moved to the Matrix, Rob was talking about some project to make MySQL able to be redundant (or fail over capability, same thing). This is very important. Again, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT.
Just like programmers want the best fonctionnality from a database (STORE procedures, etc) in order for them to code less, I want my DB to be redundant-ready so that I don't have to do it myself. Unfortunatly, this is not something that I can see happening soon in Open Source databases.
So to the MySQL and PostgressSQL developers: please work on this. My roomate runs an NT shop and the main reason he uses Oracle and SQL7 is because of how easy it is to set up a Database Cluster (or Fail Over solution if you like) and how stable it runs once setup. Given that full index search doesn't work when SQL 7 runs on a cluster but's that's Microsoft hey:)
That gives me a great idea! Next time I go on a date and I plan on seeing a movie, I will make sure there's a cheap ass motel around the corner:)
By the way, does your girlfriend Kelly has any other friends that are willing to score on the second date? Like the saying says, women needs feelings to have sex, mens just need a bed:)
I understand why you posted this comment as an AC. Imagine if your girlfriend Kelly reads slashdot. She would be really pissed off you talk about that kind of stuff on a site like this one:)
Hardware : Look at www.raidware.com and their web server director. For your NFS solutions, look at www.netapp.com and their network filers.
Topology : Think about putting some cache engines, proxy servers of some sort in front of your web servers. Think about mod_backhand for your load balancing at an Apache level (www.backhand.org).
Since VA hired a lot of good developpers, it does not surprise me. Most of the guys who are working on NFS, some part of the Linux Kernel, Enlightenment, etc... All at VA.
I just want to add my $0.02 and say this:
Somebody did not repesct the law. PERIOD. Wether Slashdot is reponsible or not is another story.
Microsoft did not make change Kerberos by adding something new or removing something that existed before, they used an optionnal future.
Like someone said here so nicely, I wonder what would have happenned if it was not Microsoft who was involved but a more friendly company like O'Reilly.
I don't want to get into the details, a lot of readers did that a lot better than I can. However I would like to express two distinct points.
First Point: Is Slashdot/Andover/Va Reponsible? I am French, and there was a huge debate a while ago in France about the reponsibility that a free web hosting organization was entitled to as far as illegal materials hosted on its servers. Basically, it was something like "You are hosting those pictures of this chick right there, naked. It is illegal. We (the chick's lawyer) are going to sue you (The admin) and not the author of the page. Does Microsoft has the right to traithen to sue Slashdot ? They are hosting the comments, they are not the ones who created them.
Second Point: Let's reverse the situation? Let's say I hack into Andover's network and find some copyrighted material. I post it on an MSN forum. What do you think would happen?
I think someone might argue the following : Nobody hacked into Microsoft's network to get that.. True, but someone bypassed the EXE in order not to sign the agreement. For me, it's the same. You are accessing information in a way that was not predicted by the original author. This time, the author is Microsoft, and it changes everything.
Devil's advocate? Maybe. Microsoft fan: NO! Slashdot Fan : Yes! But you know what, I am sad to see that type of shit happening because after all, it's all about being a true geek : bein in love with the technology
from their front page (I couldn't find a better since the source of the page shows "meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0"")
update 5/14/00 We expected some publicity but we didn't know Slashdot would print a front page story about us (www.slashdot.org). At the moment the site is not able to keep up [...].
update5/13/00 We were HACKED. Lost some web files and shows. Sorry.
update 4/27/00 We were written up in Yahoo Internet Life today which has once again made things overwhelmingly busy today. [...] Things will probably be slow for the next 2-3 days, sorry.
Updated 4/11/00 17:34 pst We just updated our servers to Windows 2000 Advanced Server [...].
Slashdot Mirror
And you think this is a scoop? That Sun should be burned alive? You fools ...
...
I have been working for several Start Up's in my life. Let me tell you one thing about it: They don't care about the GPL. They take programs, they use it, the MODIFY it and they don't even think about realesing the modifications to the original author.
When someone like me comes on staff and tell them about the license abuse they are doing, they don't give a shit.
Food for though
Did you check mod_vhost_alias?
dudle
Amen brother!
But hey, welcome to the world of NT admins. I am not criticizing Microsoft, but rather the bozos who think they know how to do stuff just by clicking nifty icons.
My roomate is the best NT admin I know. His expertise in network engineering and security is amazing. He is an exception. Most of the folks I know that are in his position (NT Admin) suck! They think they have a clue but when you talk to them about BUGtraq, NTBUGtraq and the like they start looking at you funny.
And they take the liberty to tell you that Unix sucks 'cause it's not user friendly enough ... like if an admin needed user friendly stuff.
Enjoy!
PS: After a month, I am still looking for a job though!dudle
Disclaimer : I am a French Jew and I live in the US for about 2 years now.
There are several points one needs to think about when you read this whole Yahoo-French story. Let me try to explain them one by one. Some of the points I will discuss have been brought up by Lionel Jospin, French Prime Minister regarding this very story with Yahoo. I really want to emphasize the fact that I am not trying to put my opinion in place, I just want to explain how come the Frenchs can do that.
First, France has been invaded by the Nazi's. When you get the enemy on your land, it leaves pain for a long long time. The Frenchs are still wounded by the war. Far worst than the US.
Second, You guys see that story from an American Point of Vue (point de vue in French). The USA is the country of Freedom, Liberty, the right for everyone to be armed, etc... The US have a much stronger "I have the right to do and say whatever I want as long as I don't mess up with what my neighbor thinks or wants" than the French. You want an example? Look at the topic this story has been put into : censorship. For an American, this whole thing is considered as censorship, as someone trying to keep someone else from expressing his/her thoughts. In France, things are a little bit different. Taboos are not the same. Here, sex in the worplace is taboo (Lewinski affair.), in France Nazi stuff is taboo.
Third : The French's in general, especially the french government have no clue what the Internet is about. The don't get the whole picture. They want to translate CD-ROM with cederom. Email -> mel. Does it make sense ? Of course ... since they don't get it. They see the Internet as something new, frightening, that is going to eliminate their culture and they don't really like it. 15% - 20% of the houses in France have access to the Internet. This can explain that.
When they issue some ruling like this one, they are misinformed. They think that technicaly Yahoo can filter French people with 95% accuracy. Well, I am a Network Engineer, and I am wondering how they are going to do that with 95% accuracy. Who tells them that? Looooonnnnnggg story. For more info, look for keywords like polytechnique, Ecole Normale d'Administration (ENA), etc. The Elites in France are the one reponsible for that mess.
I hope this will help you understand why and how they came to that point. Cultural differences are a value in this world (especially my accent with women :) ). It's just a matter of getting the information.
If you read that and wonder what I think of all this, you came to the wrong place. I hate the Frenchs! (there was a song like that somewhere)
Cheers!
That's what my signature says for a while now:
Spaghetti Code is Tasty Code!
For more funny signature, you can check http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/data/comments (When it becomes available again.)
dudle.
Piracy won't kill ya.
...
Whereas smoking
Interesting ...
Thanks for the post.
Hi Dudle, pleased to meet you.
... almost :-)
/. (my best source of info as you can see by now) the validity of those EULA and other "Click here to show that you accept the terms of the agreement". The story was about MS (yes them again) and the kerberos specifications for Windows 2000. I don't want to go there because I am not a lawyer and it's an endless debate. But I repeat myself, you have a point.
... you agree to it when you turn the computer on and load the OS. Read the Windows Refund Page for more details.
... They are not that stupid. They are not going to make you pay for the SAME EXACT THING!. They are going to make you believe that the same program can be interpreted as two different products.
Hi Sloppy.
we seem to be missing each other's point.
We might, let's clarify.
if I opt to not accept the agreement, that doesn't mean that I must return it for a refund
No it doesn't mean that you have to, it just mean that you can. Let's get into an analogy. You win the lottery, if you don't go cash your ticket, no money comes to your pocket. You don't have to, you just can cash it. (End of analogy)
whether I agree to a license or not
If you don't agree with the license, you have the right (and the obligation maybe, I have to check) to return the software for a full refund. I hope you understand better now.
Yes, and the NDA is a contract that those employees agreed to. They were given a piece of paper and told to sign it. They decided to sign it (and thereby agree to it) since it was a requirement for working at Apple. They signed it and were therefore bound to the terms of the contract. Apple can even produce the original signed document if anyone ever disputes that fact. But when you buy retail software, or a computer that comes preloaded with software, did you sign anything? I never have.
Ok. You have a point
I can't work at Apple unless I sign the NDA. I agree. You can't use MS Software unless you agreed to the EULA. End of story. If you don't agree, go get a refund bla bla bla. I think you are attaching a lot of importance to the fact that you sign an NDA and you just agree to the EULA. You have Valid point. (I put it in bold 'cause it's a good one). You are right again when you talk about Apple being able to show a copy of the agreement, etc.
It has been discussed on
When you buy a x86 box from a retail store, you don't agree to any special terms from Microsoft.
Absolutly correct again. But heh
Of course I read and understand the article.
I give you the benefit of the doubt. If you read and understood it then why don't you understand that they (Microsoft) are talking about two different programs! I mean come on
So, Dudle, if you think the differences between the OEM and retail version of the EULA are relevant, then please explain how the user can be bound by the terms of an agreement that he never made.
For the record, it's dudle (all lowercase). I direct you to your nearest Windows Box, read the legal documents that came with it and you will see by yourself.
I actually think that this debate is going somewhere. Thanks Sloppy.
If I go to CompUSA to get a x86 box, it will come with 'Doze preloaded whether I want it or not.
/. as much as I do, you will notice the story about Apple pursuing employees over breaking their NDA and spreading rumors. As you know, an NDA stands for Non Disclosure Agreement. There's the word agreement in there. If you read the comments related to the Apple story, you will see people yelling that an Agreement (an NDA in that case) is a contract. Now you are telling me the opposite ... I chose to believe that you are wrong.
:-)
Ever heard of Windows Refund Day? You don't have to get Windows. By the way, the topic is on companies using ghost to image their computers. I don't know many companies who buy their PC's at CompUSA.
The EULA says very clearly that if you don't agree with it (the EULA), you can get a refund. -> Windows Refund Day and all the like
whether I agree to a license or not
Like I just told you, this statement is flat out wrong.
There's no contract between me and Microsoft.
Of course there is one. An agreement is a contract. If you read
I don't see anything in the Copyright laws that says I have to buy a second copy of something that I already have.
There is none. Your sentence shows that you didn't read or fully understood the article. Microsoft is talking about 2 different products. That's a fact! Wheter or not you think that they are different, this is were the discussion starts.
I am trying to focus your arguments on the topic. I am glad that you replied to my comment, it's getting interesting
This is not an attempt to create a troll, it's just me being the devil's advocate.
I read the article. I read the EULA. I know Microsoft's practices when it comes to licensing and believe me, it's not that bad.
When you use that type of software, you agree to the EULA (End User License Agreement). It's very clear that an OEM license is different from retail. What Microsoft is doing is legitimate. I would even go further as to tell Microsoft : Go baby go!
The more people realize what's behind the EULA, the more they will consider, research, understand and use GPL software.
It's funny how news on Slashdot come and go. Yesterday we had this excelent piece about RMS. Read it! The more you know about commercial practices like the ones MS is doing, the more you want to get your freedom back.
BTW, look at how Oracle licenses its software and you will see what a real PAIN this is. MS is piece of cake next to this.
Be positive guys. MS is just trying to make money out of people who don't know about alternatives. You don't want them to tell you about alternatives do you?
my 2 cents.
I wasn't aware that Cisco had a "real" Load Balancer ...
It's quite simple actually. The machine that accepts the TCP connection (the load balancer) forwards it on to one of a pool of webservers. Sometimes also called reverse proxying. Obviously the load balancer and the webservers do not need to run the same OS, as you see in this example.
Get REAL!A load balancer IS NOT doing reverse proxying. The exception would be mod_backhand and I am quite sure that's not what you were talking about. When you do load balancing and you have Microsoft's wallet, you use real stuff. Big-IP, Webserver Director, stuff like that. Those appliances are dedicated to do that type of stuff. You can use the excellent mod_backhand but since it does not do failover, it's a plus not a replacement. Now let's see
learn to secure your channel.
If an IRCop help them, there's no way I can secure a channel. Period.
and why the hell would you want to scour the IRC channels except if you feel that you could bust warez pirates and kiddie prOn peddlers? think about all of the meaningless banter that you'd have to record and store somewhere.
Judges? Bzzzzttt!!!! Wrong answer! If I understand you well, you only have meaningless conversations and w4r3z t4lk on IRC. I disagree. And even if my conversations are meaningless to you, they might be very interresting for someone else (FBI, News Papers, my employer, etc..)
... you will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
:-)
Oups! Wrong cube
I am a Unix System Administrator. As any SysAdmin, I care about reliability and redundancy. I want to give my opinion as someone who is NOT a developper. The fact of the matter is, I don't even know SQL that much.
... but what about my databases?
:)
When you work with a web site (as it's the exampe given in the benchmark), your motto is 24/7, 24/7 and more 24/7. I want the web site to be up all the time.
To be able to do so, I use good and reliable hardware and software. But it's not enough. It has to be redundant.
Redundant hardware is "easy" : RAID, 2 power supplies, etc. Redundant software is more of a pain and unfortunatly it's as important as hardware. There are Hardware tools out there (BIG-IP, Radware Webserver Director, etc.) who can load balance and manage fail over for web server. But what about Databases?
This is something that is extremely important. I want to use good stuff (Open Source) without leaving my network having a single point of failure. I can pretty much have everything redundant. Linux has High-Availability kernel modules, Apache has mod_backhand (a Must!), DNS and NIS have master/slaves concepts
When Slashdot moved to the Matrix, Rob was talking about some project to make MySQL able to be redundant (or fail over capability, same thing). This is very important. Again, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT.
Just like programmers want the best fonctionnality from a database (STORE procedures, etc) in order for them to code less, I want my DB to be redundant-ready so that I don't have to do it myself. Unfortunatly, this is not something that I can see happening soon in Open Source databases.
So to the MySQL and PostgressSQL developers: please work on this. My roomate runs an NT shop and the main reason he uses Oracle and SQL7 is because of how easy it is to set up a Database Cluster (or Fail Over solution if you like) and how stable it runs once setup. Given that full index search doesn't work when SQL 7 runs on a cluster but's that's Microsoft hey
I did not get this one ... anyone cares to explain?
That gives me a great idea! Next time I go on a date and I plan on seeing a movie, I will make sure there's a cheap ass motel around the corner :)
:)
:)
By the way, does your girlfriend Kelly has any other friends that are willing to score on the second date? Like the saying says, women needs feelings to have sex, mens just need a bed
I understand why you posted this comment as an AC. Imagine if your girlfriend Kelly reads slashdot. She would be really pissed off you talk about that kind of stuff on a site like this one
If I can play Unreal Tournament on a Sun, I buy one tomorrow! :)
...
More seriously, I wonder
Hardware : Look at www.raidware.com and their web server director. For your NFS solutions, look at www.netapp.com and their network filers.
Topology : Think about putting some cache engines, proxy servers of some sort in front of your web servers. Think about mod_backhand for your load balancing at an Apache level (www.backhand.org).
Software : I am not qualified to say anything.
BTW : good job guys.
Eat suchi frequently.
Since VA hired a lot of good developpers, it does not surprise me. Most of the guys who are working on NFS, some part of the Linux Kernel, Enlightenment, etc ... All at VA.
I just want to add my $0.02 and say this:
I don't want to get into the details, a lot of readers did that a lot better than I can. However I would like to express two distinct points.
First Point: Is Slashdot/Andover/Va Reponsible?
I am French, and there was a huge debate a while ago in France about the reponsibility that a free web hosting organization was entitled to as far as illegal materials hosted on its servers. Basically, it was something like "You are hosting those pictures of this chick right there, naked. It is illegal. We (the chick's lawyer) are going to sue you (The admin) and not the author of the page.
Does Microsoft has the right to traithen to sue Slashdot ? They are hosting the comments, they are not the ones who created them.
Second Point: Let's reverse the situation?
Let's say I hack into Andover's network and find some copyrighted material. I post it on an MSN forum. What do you think would happen?
I think someone might argue the following : Nobody hacked into Microsoft's network to get that.. True, but someone bypassed the EXE in order not to sign the agreement. For me, it's the same. You are accessing information in a way that was not predicted by the original author. This time, the author is Microsoft, and it changes everything.
Devil's advocate? Maybe. Microsoft fan: NO! Slashdot Fan : Yes! But you know what, I am sad to see that type of shit happening because after all, it's all about being a true geek : bein in love with the technology
The answer : Network Appliance Filer F740. Check their website at www.netapp.com.
from their front page (I couldn't find a better since the source of the page shows "meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0"")
:)
update 5/14/00
We expected some publicity but we didn't know Slashdot would print a front page story about us (www.slashdot.org). At the moment the site is not able to keep up [...].
update5/13/00
We were HACKED. Lost some web files and shows. Sorry.
update 4/27/00
We were written up in Yahoo Internet Life today which has once again made things overwhelmingly busy today. [...] Things will probably be slow for the next 2-3 days, sorry.
Updated 4/11/00 17:34 pst
We just updated our servers to Windows 2000 Advanced Server [...].
Now I understand
It's kind of offtopic, but if somebody could answer this question for me I would be able to get totally rid of my win98 partition.
.unr files locaed under Maps/)
How come Unreal Tournament under linux can't find the maps for the game (you know, those
Everything has been installed properly (over a thousand times). The different patches don't do anything better and it pisses me off.
If you have had the same issue, and you fixed it, I would be extremelly pleased if you could tell me how you made it to work.
Thanks for advance.
dudle