14 posts • joined 17 May 2010
Let's just use a recent, clearly profit making, example for a benchmark...
"Betfair floated on the London Stock Exchange with a stock symbol of BET on 22 October 2010 at £13, valuing the company at £1.4bn ($2.2bn)."
Opened today at 754.00, you do the math.
Pint, because there's no spliff icon which is what someone must be smoking.
Yeah but if you've got the domestic intelligence nous to configure a Blue Coat cluster to do that sort of thing you certainly couldn't manage to then strip the x-bluecoat header off before it hit FB, oh no. Nor would you have the savy to replicate what the Blue Coat was doing with an open source solution of say Pound and Apache (mod_proxy) clusters I'd guess, that having the benefit of not sending any vendor intrinsic fingerprints, probably being slightly more configurable at a very low level and being "more" scalable per buck than a Beowulf cluster of Blue Coats.
Just to note, I'm not saying Blue Coats aren't scalable, I'm not that familiar with their products but I'd guess even they'd wince at the technical difference between proxying a large company's worth of traffic (usual purpose) and an entire country's worth of FB connections. You'd also hope that they'd at least wince at the moral difference as well but they are a publicly listed business so...
And of course pro-revolutionary bloggers aren't your average Intersnizzle jockeys either, "Yeah, I'll except this random certificate whilst reporting from whatever repressive régime." is clearly the analogous chlorine in the pool of genetics.
Fair enough on the million-machine-cloud front, that's not just scaling that's epic scaling, even big ISPs probably wouldn't need that size of cloud. I don't think they should be slated too hard for not making a system that scales that far straight out of the box but the damming part is this...
"... and because his engineers weren't able to submit patches to the open source Eucalyptus project that would have improved its ability to scale."
...if you want serious community support then it has to be as simple as either requesting write access to the source repository or just emailing patches in for maintainers to merge in. I can't imagine there'd be any other excuse beyond plain Fail, if someone with a @nasa.gov email address sends you a patch you aren't just going to file it in the circular file are you?
The fact that it's described as "open core" will give it the whiff of Sugar (CRM) to the hard liners out there who, rightly or wrongly will accuse them of jumping on the open source bandwagon as well perhaps.
A rocky start and now they've got some serious competition in the shape of NASA, I'd be worried if I was them.
Have they sorted out an alternative to the Windows only management server yet? Some sort of nice HTTP interface with accompanying API? That way I can get Nagios to kick off a script when the load exceeds a certain threshold to boot another VM and get my F5 iControl to add it into the LTM load balancer pool auto-magically.
I think you might have reasonable grounds to argue that "Eclipse developers" have a fair bias towards open source. When I use Eclipse I'm mostly either doing Java or PHP I'm not even sure you can use it for say .net or classic ASP for example. As to Oracle, accepting the above argument you're basically asking "What database do most open source developers use?" and is anyone surprised that MySQL would come out on top?
This sounds disturbingly like like a fast track to confused, bandwagon-jumping GUI fragmentation, does canonical really have the resources to be chasing all these different targets? Hopefully they'll get it right so that I can have multi-touch on my desktop or whatever cut-down interface is developed for smaller tablets on my 30" LCD monitor if I really want but what on Earth is the point of (what I thought was?) a desktop-centric distro chasing "in-car systems" and "set-top-boxes" (slightly more understandable I guess)?
For the sake of full disclosure I'm a Red Hat "fan" but Canonical efforts towards providing a "it-just-works", polished desktop Linux distro have been very important and can clearly be seen influencing other distros like Fedora but I just don't get this?
Are they aiming for Apple-like device OS ubiquity? So you'd have Ubuntu on your Desktop, tablet (something I consider a fad anyway), STB and car so that you can sync your MP3 collection over to your car when you park it on the drive and then control the music server with your tablet?
Analogy Fail, should of stuck with cars. IANAL but... theft, larceny or burglary require intent to deprive or harm. Since they didn't deprive them of anything you'd have to show that Google intended to harm the people they "snooped" on. Given that it would have been random data received and that there was no processing of it beyond determining that it was unencrypted that would seem a bit difficult.
This is much closer to what http://pleaserobme.com/ are doing and no one is suing them, yet, Google are locating and publishing the location of unsecured WiFi, if anything they might be considered to be doing the police and other law enforcement agencies a potential favour.
As others have said, it should be the people unintentionally leaving their wireless wide open that need talking to.
Paris; because if Playboy TV started broadcasting their signal unencrypted it wouldn't be the people taking screen shots for free that got in to trouble!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019