* Posts by Peter Hoare

6 posts • joined 6 Jun 2007

Acronis CEO: Anyone can undercut Amazon. Reg hack: Prove it

Peter Hoare

Re: Confused

The first calculation is for 100TB. They assume they need to cater for 150TB of storage (RAID perhaps?) and hence to provide 100TB, they need six servers of 25TB each.

So those servers cost you a one-off $30,000 which, divided by 100,000 GB (yes I know...) and divided by 36 to get a monthly priced by GB over a three-year period (i.e. you write-off the servers after three years) gives you...

... drum roll please....

... the $0.0082 per GB per month quoted.

Really can't be bothered with the rest of the calcs... someone else can take it from here!

Ever had to register to buy online - and been PELTED with SPAM?

Peter Hoare

+1

Completely agree - especially when the validation message appears says "This is not a valid email address"! Go and read the RFC on valid email addresses before making up your own rules as to what is and what isn't a valid address. It's not exactly hard to create a regexp or similar to validate an address.

Peter Hoare

Is unsubscribing really the worst possible thing to do?

The article repeats the age-old saying that clicking the unsubscribe link is the worst possible thing to do. Is there actually any evidence for that being the case? That it merely confirms to the spammer that the address is valid?

Give the ease with which spammers can throw out email (usually via botnets) I really find it hard to believe that there is any benefit to them in validating any of the email addresses. Why would they go through that bother? When they can easily acquire 10 million addresses, and can easily email each and every one of those, what do they gain by whittling that list down?

So yes, it's a perfectly feasible scenario that spammers DO use that method to confirm the address is valid, but I'd really like to see some evidence that this is in fact the case. Personally, I put it down as being a myth. In fact I'd be more worried - given the 'morals' of the spammer - that clicking the link to unsubscribe was likely to lead to an infected webpage that made me part of the botnet used to send out the next wave of spam.

Nominet to launch .wales and .cymru

Peter Hoare

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wales is not a country......

Well Wikipedia is *sometimes* inaccurate... is the Welsh Government a good enough source for you?

"Wales is a country in it's own right." (see http://www.wales.com/en/content/cms/faqs/faqs.aspx#Question 11)

Mesh Computers goes titsup

Peter Hoare
Stop

@YAAC

Sorry but that's wrong. There is no EU Directive requiring a two year minimum warranty and consequently there is no UK opt-out. What you have mistakenly picked up on is the Directive that requires a two-year limitation period during which consumers can seek redress for a fault <b>that was there at the time of delivery</b>. That's not a warranty or guarantee and is significantly worse that the equivalent UK period which is six years.

So what's in a URL? The Reg URL?

Peter Hoare

Stay with .co.uk BUT...

So my tuppence-ha'penny's worth is to say stay with .co.uk...

BUT on a slightly related note, could I beg for a clearer indication in stories as to whether we're talking UK or US. Too many times on your site I'm reading things like "The Government" or "The Courts" and it's only half way into the story you actually get enough context to realise whether it's talking about the US or the UK.

Natural enough when you get a UK writer talking about a UK news story, or a US writer etc.. but given the mix you have, it does get confusing at times!!

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019