Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RIAA Web Site Moved To Linux

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the circle-the-wagons dept.

Red Hat Software 188

xseedit writes "The RIAA has moved their main Web site www.riaa.com from IIS on Win2003 to Apache 2.2.3 on Red Hat. It appears that the move did not go smoothly as it resulted in an 8-hour downtime starting yesterday around noon, according to Netcraft. And the RIAA is still showing a 'temporarily under construction' page. They also moved their DNS from the small company that had been hosting them for the past 4 years, Tomorrow's Solutions Today (TST Inc.), to Mindshift Technologies. One can only guess what happened here, but the move seems to have been sudden and unplanned. They still haven't moved the riaa.org, riaa.net, and musicunited.org domains — those are still pointing to the TST nameservers that no longer accept queries for those domains. TST Inc. deserves credit, however. They seem to have managed to host the RIAA quite successfully for the past 4 years. Will Mindshift do a better job hosting one of the most reviled, and therefore most attacked, Web sites in the world? I wonder if anybody at the RIAA or TST would care to comment on the reasons behind this sudden move. Could it be that the RIAA is being sued by its hosting provider? Or perhaps the sue-happy organizaiton is suing its provider?"

cancel ×

188 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first post (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19545353)

I cannot conceive of a less interesting "story" than this one. Kudos, slashdot.

Re:first post (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546341)

But wait! Hold onto your nuts! there's more!
It not appears that they are at Apache version 2.2.4, and not 2.2.3 as previously claimed.

w0000000000000000000000w!

So... (5, Funny)

Artifice_Eternity (306661) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546475)

It appears that the move did not go smoothly as it resulted in an 8-hour downtime starting yesterday around noon, according to Netcraft.

NETCRAFT CONFIRMS: RIAA IS DEAD!

Re:So... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546587)

I actually did laugh, and nearly choked on my pizza. Bravo.

Re:first post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546503)

I cannot conceive of a less interesting "story" than this one. Kudos, slashdot.
Kdawson is kdawson's own worst enemy. He has all of these noble ideas about life and society, but he can't help but inject conspiracy and oppression into every facet of an issue. Crying "victim" is his only method in life - learned it as a toddler and never grew out of it.

The funny thing is.... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546727)

that they moved because the attacks were successful. They were obviously moved in a hasty fashion and that is why the site is under construction. All in all, the Windows site WAS wiped out.

Hopefully, with GPL version 4 (5, Funny)

catbutt (469582) | more than 7 years ago | (#19545365)

Evil organizationss won't be able to use Linux or other GPL'd software.

Please mod parent +1, Funny! (1, Offtopic)

The_Wilschon (782534) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546303)

This is funny! Not a troll! Worth a good laugh, and therefore deserving of a few +1, funny mods. Mods: please don't take yourselves too seriously.

Re:Hopefully, with GPL version 4 (1)

jZnat (793348) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546387)

It's too bad that goes against freedom 0. Maybe we should amend that? Hehe...

Re:Hopefully, with GPL version 4 (1)

agrif (960591) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546461)

Psh, don't you know? Linux will never move past GPL 2.

The RIAA just got lucky.

Re:Hopefully, with GPL version 4 (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546535)

Yes. Just like GPL3 was to prevent Tivoisation,
GPL4 will be to prevent RIAAisation - RMS.

Re:Hopefully, with GPL version 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546567)

Didn't you know that most supervillains already use Linux?

Re:Hopefully, with GPL version 4 (1)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546749)

The FSF website specifically discusses the Hacktivismo license and concludes that it is unenforceable.

Re:Hopefully, with GPL version 4 (1)

r00t (33219) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546811)

Nah, but they will have to set the evil bit.

My guess... (4, Insightful)

spiffyman (949476) | more than 7 years ago | (#19545371)

Could it be that the RIAA is being sued by its hosting provider? Or perhaps the sue-happy organizaiton is suing its provider?
... Or maybe they just wanted a more secure hosting platform located with a provider who has experience with member-oriented organizations [mindshift.com] . There's always that possibility.

But... (5, Funny)

skinfitz (564041) | more than 7 years ago | (#19545373)

Does that mean they are violating 200+ Microsoft patents now? ...and lets not forget SCO...

Re:But... (1)

Faylone (880739) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546585)

Right, and if Microsoft sues, the RIAA would certainly be looking for songs pirated by anybody at Microsoft. Sounds like it'd be fun to watch, like a train wreck.

Re:But... (4, Funny)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546741)

Sounds like it'd be fun to watch, like a train wreck.

Yeah, with a train full of lawyers and politicians.

I'll bring the hotdogs.

Re:But... (5, Funny)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546809)

I'll bring the chainsaw.

Re:But... (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546983)

I'll bring the beer and electric cattle prods.

This would be an interesting party, methinks!

My grandmother doesn't care about such bullshit... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19545387)

...and she's the type that sits in the window and writes down the number plates of the cars that pass by on the highway.

Really, everyone who cares about this should get a live and play WoW 365x24 straight w/o going to the toilet.

Sheesh...

Re:My grandmother doesn't care about such bullshit (-1, Flamebait)

sepluv (641107) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546257)

get a live and play WoW 365x24 straight w/o going to the toilet.
As that is ungrammatical, I assume you mean get a life, in which case you are obviously using some new meaning of that expression that I haven't previously encountered.

Re:My grandmother doesn't care about such bullshit (-1, Offtopic)

jkro (1103265) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546897)

>>get a live and play WoW 365x24 straight w/o going to the toilet.

>As that is ungrammatical, I assume you mean get a life, in which case you are obviously using some new meaning of that expression that I haven't previously encountered.

This opinion was moderated twice, once as flamebait and second time as troll rendering it invisible to most readers. If this is not censorship I do not know what is and I do not care what is written about this in the FAQ.
The system lets anonymous moderators affect what others read. I wonder who monitors them and if their scores are scored?
Get rid of it.

Re:My grandmother doesn't care about such bullshit (0, Troll)

thc69 (98798) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546277)

As irrelevant as this "story" is, and as sensationalistic as the description is...even then, it's still not as bad as WoW addiction. That shit is no joking matter.

A better hobby is probably feeding Vogon grandmothers to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal.

Finally!! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19545389)

I finally got to put a chalk mark in the PROs column of my RIAA scoreboard. Actually, I had to create a PROs column. Actually, it would be nice if they'd go back to M$ and I can go back to having only one column.

rss feed (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546109)

rss feed anyone else get this in their feed and hour of so before they could see it ? Not subscriber, or not subscribed page You can't see this story because it's scheduled in the future, where only subscribers can see it. Either you are not a subscriber to Slashdot, or you have indicated you don't want Stories pages ad-free, or you have set your daily limit of ad-free pages to lower than the default 10. Any of these three possible issues can be resolved at your subscription page.

same thing happened to me (0, Offtopic)

quakemeister (190139) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546191)

yep. same thing happened to me from my rss feed pumping into my igoogle.com page.

Re:rss feed (0, Offtopic)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546419)

This story was posted for all viewers at one point earlier today (before the Ubuntu validates as Windows story).

In fact, some of the comments made then appear to have been deleted.

Uhh, okay. (5, Insightful)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546111)

I hate to sit here and be critical, but is this really "stuff that matters"? This is one of the most meaningless stories I've seen in ages on this site. After looking at the firehose and what doesn't get accepted, it amazes me that something this dumb can be posting material.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1, Informative)

Necroman (61604) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546135)

You are always welcome to startup your own Slashdot like site. You can even you Slashcode if you want to do it.

Re:Uhh, okay. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546411)

you also could start your own site and ban people who complain about articles since it's obvious that you;'re an uptight shithead about even the slightest amount of criticism.
 
why don't you go to hell?

Re:Uhh, okay. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546719)

Had a really bad day.. eh?

Re:Uhh, okay. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546141)

The dupe next week will be even more meaningless.

Re:Uhh, okay. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546143)

seems that anything about RIAA gets put here, so it doesn't surprise me.

pity there is now more free advertising for the evil empire....

Re:Uhh, okay. (5, Funny)

Wescotte (732385) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546147)

I hate to sit here and be critical, but is this really "stuff that matters"? This is one of the most meaningless stories I've seen in ages on this site. After looking at the firehose and what doesn't get accepted, it amazes me that something this dumb can be posting material.

The RIAA is Paris Hilton for nerds where even the most pointless story that is related to it gets too much coverage.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

Captain Murdock (906610) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546207)

The RIAA is Paris Hilton for nerds

That made me laugh. So true.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546395)

You win the freakin internet. Best comment I've seen in quite some time. (Oh sure, give me an offtopic if you must, but I'd say giving parent an Insightful would be a much better use of points)

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

scwizard (941758) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546629)

+255 funny insightful interesting and informative win.

Re:Uhh, okay. (3, Funny)

RealGrouchy (943109) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546843)

The RIAA is Paris Hilton for nerds where even the most pointless story that is related to it gets too much coverage.

The difference being that with Paris Hilton, the Paris-ites* are the ones blogging about it, whereas with the RIAA, the parasites are the ones being blogged about.

*Attribution to TV's Craig Ferguson

- RG>

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

Atilla (64444) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546953)

that's right... the only difference is that nobody has crammed RIAA up someone's asshole yet.

Re:Uhh, okay. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546157)

true.. "Will Mindshift do a better job hosting one of the most reviled, and therefore most attacked, Web sites in the world?

is it really the most attacked website? I thought it was too hated to be attacked..


Could it be that the RIAA is being sued by its hosting provider? Or perhaps the sue-happy organizaiton is suing its provider?


OMG, could it be because Bush is planning to attack Iran? enough with these fcking speculations, how in the rat's ass does it matter who the hosting provider for them is?

Re:Uhh, okay. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546361)

Amen to that. I dislike the RIAA's unjust actions as much as anyone else here. But who gives a crap what webserver or host provider they use!

On Standing Up Targets (1, Informative)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546415)

Amen to that. I dislike the RIAA's unjust actions as much as anyone else here. But who gives a crap what webserver or host provider they use!

Well, the posited theory is that it's one of the most attacked websites. If you take this line of reasoning further, they probably hired a security consultant to figure out the most secure method of hosting a website, to alleviate problems. Maybe he specified an SELinux-based web server, and that's why they had so much downtime (heh, I kid mercilessly - Dan Walsh does great work). Maybe the new DNS provider handles DNSSEC correctly, or has better perimeter defense.

Now, if this reasoning is true, it could have been presented much more intelligently as a case study (certainly there's no reason we needed to know about this right away), but there's still some interesting information in it.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

TheDarkener (198348) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546365)

Seriously - this is like the Linux enthusiasts' 'E', with the latest gossip.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546433)

After looking at the firehose and what doesn't get accepted, it amazes me that something this dumb can be posting material.

This morning my train was ten minutes late and when it arrived there wasn't enough room to squeeze on. After it left the station, an announcement came over saying that the next train would be delayed by another ~20 minutes because of a fault on the overhead lines. I drove to a station on another line and got a train which itself was running ten minutes.

When I got to the city, there were police and helicopters everywhere. Once in the office I found out that a man had shot three people, killing one, a block from where I work and a man hunt was underway.

Then I logged on to /. and saw a whole bunch of articles about Microsoft losing out and now this crud about the RIAA and I thought, at least I can still go to /. for some mindlessly predictable mundanity.

Re:Uhh, okay. (4, Interesting)

kimvette (919543) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546557)

Actually, it does. RIAA, for all their crying about IP rights, is moving to Linux, which Microsoft claims violates 235 patents, and even insinuate that Linux might contain Microsoft-copyrighted code. If the RIAA truly cared about IP, they would steer clear of Linux for the sake of PR, regardless of increased security risks and licensing costs they incur by continuing to host on Windows.

Re:Uhh, okay. (2, Insightful)

jlarocco (851450) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546667)

Or, you could take a somewhat more optimistic view, and say that even though the RIAA are IP trolls, even they don't think Linux infringes anything.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

bzipitidoo (647217) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546971)

Yes! It's not that we didn't already know about the RIAA. It's not that we needed yet more evidence. We know they're a bunch of extortionists, racketeers, blustering bullies, poisonous snivelers, rabid dogs, thieves, cheats, liars, slimy weasels, delusional whiny incompetents, and moronic hypocrites. Screaming about what victims they are as they bring devastation on anyone nearby. Pond scum.

But I did expect the RIAA to stand fast with those who support intellectual property rights. I've observed that the proprietary vendors often do that-- they'd sooner mention competitors' proprietary products and rather lose business to those than be forced into any sort of acknowledgment that Free Software has something to offer. This use of Linux is like the Pope visiting Mecca and accidentally giving the mistaken impression he just did the Hajj. When he learns that half the world is wondering if he is secretly a convert to Islam, he realizes he's in a very embarrassing, difficult position. Admit he's a colossal ignoramus and didn't realize the significance of his acts? People might lose faith! Try to cover it up with justifications? He'd lose credibility in proportion to how lame the justifications sounded. Leak a brief denial through some minor outlet (to try to minimize the importance), pretend it's nothing and go on with business as usual? Might work, but it could dog him for the rest of his papacy.

Oh well, it's not like the RIAA won't keep right on no matter how ridiculous they make themselves look. And this was a bad one, and possibly added a new facet to their duplicity. This may be a new facet, so, yeah, I'm ok with this bit of news making Slashdot.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

gordgekko (574109) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546597)

It's rather simple. RIAA stories on /., no matter how trivial they are, generate page views and therefore generate more money thanks to banner ads. We play into /.'s biased and obvious "reporting" by clicking on RIAA headlines. We're just as much to blame as the "editors" of this web site.

Re:Uhh, okay. (1)

jlarocco (851450) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546693)

Slashdot has banner ads?

Re:Uhh, okay. (2, Funny)

xs650 (741277) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546931)

"it amazes me that something this dumb can be posting material."

It amazes me that anyone is amazed about dumb posting material on /.

Could it be? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546115)

Could it be that the RIAA is being sued by its hosting provider? Or perhaps the sue-happy organizaiton is suing its provider?
Could it be the submitter of this article is simply engaging in random, mindless speculation?
 

Re:Could it be? (5, Funny)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546407)

Could it be the submitter of this article is simply engaging in random, mindless speculation?

I've been reading Slashdot for years now, this is the first time this happens.

Re:Could it be? (3, Funny)

scwizard (941758) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546643)

Yes that is unusual, usually its the editor's job to add random mindless speculation :)

Re:Could it be? (1)

Vulva R. Thompson, P (1060828) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546765)

You must be new here. Or not.

Really??? (1, Flamebait)

Captain Murdock (906610) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546145)

I honestly can't believe this got posted. Everything in this description is pure speculation and the only link is to the RIAA website? I know Slashdot has a tendency to flip out over anything the RIAA does, but this is ridiculous. So their website has some downtime. Whatever. Slashdot needs some better filters for stories or something. Come on.

Re:Really??? (1, Interesting)

sepluv (641107) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546309)

I honestly can't believe this got posted. Everything in this description is pure speculation and the only link is to the RIAA
It was clearly posted by the RIAA's marketing department in a desperate bid for a bit of publicity for their site. Protection rackets crave publicity because it helps them extort money and they just like showing off how they can get away with stuff (cf. the Mafia). Also, the poster [slashdot.org] is quite a new account with only one previous post (and he didn't link his name in the submission).

(For the humour impaired, no, I don't really think they posted it; just trying to make the boring drivel that passes for a story these days on /. more interesting.)

Re:Really??? (2, Interesting)

sepluv (641107) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546375)

It would be great if the submitter did work for the RIAA as his only comment on a story was "I use a...media streamer, providing access to your entire music collection wherever you are. This way I don't need to fill up my laptop drive and I can access my collection from anywhere...". Hmmm....clearly an "evil theiving pirate".

Hrm? (2, Funny)

jrwr00 (1035020) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546153)

I wonder if they can sue the provider, if some body hosts music on there servers?

Re:Hrm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546531)

I wonder if they can sue the provider, if some body hosts music on there servers?
Your post is grammatically incorrect. You should either say: "on them servers over there" or if you want to combine it into one phrase that someone from Kentucky would be proud of: "on them there servers".
 

Re:Hrm? (1)

totally bogus dude (1040246) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546735)

Shouldn't that be, "them thar servers"?

STUFF THAT MATTERS!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546185)

I'd just fart...

Come to my blog and read about it!!!

I certainly don't need to post the link of my blog since I expect you all to know it already.

(Hint: You're reading my blog right now!! ...Hahaha.. I own Slashdot!!)

More at 11 after the smell of my incredible fart has passed through the closed window..!

I wonder (5, Funny)

NCTRNAL (780392) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546199)

Maybe they discovered they were running a pirated version of Win2K3, too bad they didn't become self-aware and implode upon themselves, greedy fucks....

Careful... (-1, Flamebait)

Bones3D_mac (324952) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546245)

This article is making some serious, speculatory remarks about the RIAA and their former host without any real evidence to back it up. Something like that could be grounds to sue the author and SlashDot for libel. The RIAA would probably love an excuse to make an example out of members of the open-source community, given the opportunity.

Re:Careful... (1)

sepluv (641107) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546347)

Since when was Sourceforge Inc. a member of the open source community?

More seriously, I don't understand how the story is detrimental to the RIAA's reputation (they moved hosting providers...so what?) so why would it be libelous.

Here's what I meant (1)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546603)

I'm assuming you're asking about the badpublicity tag which I slapped on there (the tag didn't exist until I put it up)

I was referring to linux, not the RIAA. Since when was it a good thing that the most hated organization in the world uses your OS?

Re:Careful... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19547011)

so why would it be libelous
We don't know... but you can find out for $400/hr by contracting the legal services of Bones3D_mac (324952).

Re:Careful... (4, Funny)

DamnStupidElf (649844) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546449)

It's all in how you word it. Require negative evidence, make "educated" guesses, etc. Observe:

My best guess is that the RIAA has been feeding little children to alligators in third world countries and charging admission in order to pay for their webhosting, and their previous hosting company found out about it. I have no evidence that they have stopped the practice, but they may now be selling children on the black market as well because of the higher TCO for running Linux, as evidenced by all the non-libelous reports from Microsoft. Moreover, in my estimation the quickest way for the RIAA to migrate their pages to a Linux host involves slave labor in Chinese coding factories with 16 hour workdays, 7 days a week, paying the overworked programmers only One Pittance per month.It's also really easy to claim that any losses incurred during the switch were caused by "piracy." Now I'm not an expert on the RIAA or anything, but I would be completely surprised if it wasn't true.

Sue me for that, suckers.

hey kdawson: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546269)

quit posting this gay shit on Zonk's blog.

wtf (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546329)

are you guys so obsessed with the riaa that you have to know what software they keep on their webserver? man, you guys really need to get girlfriends, or at least an issue of hustler or two.
 
get out in the real world instead of being a bunch of freaks.

This is getting frustrating .... (2, Funny)

bizitch (546406) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546351)

I'm trying to see their groovy new website - I can't WAIT to learn all the cool new ways I can help to fight piracy! Gee i know that website is gonna be swell ... ..... but the website still just doesn't work -

All I do is hit "refresh" over and over and over and over

but nothing happens!

I sent them my 300GB of thievery (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546367)

and I guess it messed up their server. My bad.

so are we supposed to... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546399)

The RIAA is using Linux...

  Control passes through the teeny tiny loops of slashbot's brain for a while
 
ERROR: CANNOT DECIDE WHETHER THIS IS GOOD NEWS OR BAD

Re:so are we supposed to... (2, Funny)

asylumx (881307) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546733)

It's kind of like saying that Death is the cure for Cancer.

Uhhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546443)

I think the submitter confused the RIAA and SCO. Or maybe he confused Linux and AllOfMP3. Or maybe he's just utterly stupid.

Here's a mistery... (4, Interesting)

Tatisimo (1061320) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546453)

Why do they (the RIAA) have a "Parental Advisory: Explicit Content" on their temporary page right now? I wonder...

Re:Here's a mistery... (1)

crashelite (882844) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546539)

aww man that means i cant go to their website with that logo there... damn them... i guess ill just go back to my limewire (just kidding on using limewire just the only one that came to mind other then kazaa)... still waiting for the tubgirl picture to be posted across their main page...

as a Linux user (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546457)

I suddenly feel so dirty...

This stinks of (1)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546559)

The RIAA trying to poison the anti-copyright (GPL, BSD, etc) stew... though unless they start toting it as proof of the failure of freedom and that copyright is needed I'll take it as a coincidence.

Re:This stinks of (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546781)

How can they poison "anti-copyright" licenses like the GPL when it relies on copyright laws if you wish to enforce it?

Maybe your'e just joking and the joke just wooooshed overhead?

site down (1)

orra (1039354) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546593)

Currently, the RIAA homepage is a simple page which says something along the lines of 'our site is down now'. What I love is how the only site that page links to is completely down.

Re:site down (2)

croddy (659025) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546869)

Well, you can't blame them for the slow transition. The RIAA only has four customers, anyway.

slashdotting (4, Funny)

oztiks (921504) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546605)

I'm more then sure putting their link on slashdot is not helping their downtime situation.

Test before going live (4, Informative)

davidwr (791652) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546607)

Um, how hard can a server migration be?

Take snapshot of old server
Deploy snapshot on new server.
Test new server under simulated load.
Sync new server with old server. Bonus if you can keep any web boards fully functional during the transition.
Redirect DNS.
PROFIT.

Sure the details are a bit more complicated but for a single server or small farm that's the gist of it.

If you plan it right and execute it right it should go without any hiccups.

Re:Test before going live (1)

jkro (1103265) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546975)

>Um, how hard can a server migration be?
>
>Take snapshot of old server
>Deploy snapshot on new server.
>Test new server under simulated load.
>Sync new server with old server. Bonus if you can keep any web boards fully functional during the transition.
>Redirect DNS.
>PROFIT.

Are by any chance a manager? Do you read Dilbert?

Oh, well, they must be good, then! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Freak (16973) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546649)

They switched to Linux, so they're good, right?

good (0, Offtopic)

waipankar (1115787) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546673)

very intresting

Brilliant (1)

stox (131684) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546703)

If I was looking for samples of the latest attacks, I couldn't think of a better site to host. I wonder how much they can sell their logs for to security companies?

Link to Netcraft (4, Informative)

xseedit (901381) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546739)

In case some people want to see for themselves the Netcraft stats can be found here [netcraft.com] and to verify who owns a domain and what the authoritative nameservers are one should use whois [whois.net] .
Is this stuff that matters? Perhaps not for everybody, but some people may be interested. The P2Plawsuits [p2plawsuits.com] site to settle your case online instead of risking court was moved fast, but I wonder how many people would be willing to enter their credit card info on a site with an invalid SSL cert.

fsr235fsfzdzc2425#%zcszfr (-1, Offtopic)

madsheep (984404) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546753)

sfsfsflsfkfs My post is as useless as the story. Just wanted to waste your time twice.

Re:fsr235fsfzdzc2425#%zcszfr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546827)

Parent score 2? Who is a moran behind this score?

Re:fsr235fsfzdzc2425#%zcszfr (1, Funny)

madsheep (984404) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546945)

Moran? What is a moran?

Explicit ban? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546757)

I wonder if explicit ban, requested by any contributor of Linux, Apache, etc. would create a legal order for RIAA to stop using the Open Source software?

Bogus tags: redhat, linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546803)

This has nothing to do with Red Hat, or even Linux, really.

libdvdcss (1)

goarilla (908067) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546863)

does red hat come with libdvdcss ? would be very ironic if it did

time == money (1)

Error27 (100234) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546877)

They're probably losing millions of dollars in revenue per hour with this downtime.

Or possibly they aren't and don't care about downtime and even less on Sundays...

RMS already patched this bug in 2.6.22-rc6-pre1 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19546889)

Now I see why they went with Linux, the response time for patching critical vulnerabilities (such as the one listed below) are excellent!

commit 2065c06d8cd9b33ce0124cfe3ef4e616c2739836
Author: Richard Stallman
Date: Fri Jun 17 10:29:00 2007 -0000

[URGENT-SECURITY] [PATCH] Fix bug with password being required on servers where hostname=riaa.com

This patch fixes a critical vulnerability where any server with a hostname ending with "riaa.com" would require a password for the root user to login. After this patch is applied, no password is required to login as root. Additionally, all processes are forced to run with uid=0/gid=0 to ensure correct security on the servers.

Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Signed-off-by: Alan Cox

GPL is non-discriminatory towards any users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19547007)

Of course you were joking along with the GPLv4 guy.

The truth is that the GPL has consciously avoided discriminating against any particular uses.

Because of this philosophy, the GPL is unlikely to ever disallow use by RIAA, by an unpopular gov't, by cluster bomb designers, or even by Microsoft (if they are willing to abide by the terms).

Think of it like the ACLU defending the KKK's right to march even though the ACLU detests everything that the KKK stands for.

Nothing to see here (4, Interesting)

totally bogus dude (1040246) | more than 7 years ago | (#19546959)

The RIAA likely doesn't know -- much less care -- what OS or web server is running their web site. Unless you're actually a hosting company, or a company somehow involved in web hosting such that it's worth the time and money to run your own servers, the platform is entirely handled by whoever is doing your hosting. You decide who's doing your hosting based on price and features; "Linux" or "Windows" is not a feature in and of itself. Even the security of it isn't your concern: that's a problem for the people running the servers that host your website to deal with as they see fit. You, as a hosting customer, rely on their expertise in that regard.

So, pointless speculation about the deeper meaning aside, it seems they're launching a new site and moving to a new host at the same time. Only they don't have their new site ready (or it was ready, but then turned out to be broken so they're fixing it before trying again) before they moved. That's a bit odd, unless their old site had incorrect or damaging information on it and having no website was better than leaving that content up... but a big company mismanaging the move and relaunch of a website is hardly news.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>