These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why dont we use the cloud?

Author
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#101 - 2014-03-05 22:43:07 UTC
Aih-Li Tahn wrote:
i get the cloud alright its relevent to my job
I pity your employer. Hell, that makes the video even more spot on.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#102 - 2014-03-05 22:46:37 UTC
Aih-Li Tahn wrote:
i get the cloud alright its relevent to my job Roll what qualification do u have? i know everyone on the internet is a "expert" in stuff but srsly?
So far you've not shown much if any knowledge on the subject, so I do not envy your work place one jot.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#103 - 2014-03-05 22:51:45 UTC
I love how people who have heard some vague computer terms like to throw them around like it means something.

The solution is simple, CCP needs to just wave their magic wands, say "The cloud!" and the problem disappears. Roll

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Alyth Nerun
Foundation for CODE and THE NEW ORDER
#104 - 2014-03-05 23:03:07 UTC
Aih-Li Tahn wrote:
i dont get it...... what dose a guy disrupting a good argument with farm and poop jokes have related with this thread?
Now you are trying too hard Big smile

The sad thing is I hear stuff like the OP all day from people in IT who really should know better. Usually they are people who used to work as engineers and are now in a position where they get more and more disconnected from the actual tech.
Salene Gralois
K-2
#105 - 2014-03-05 23:18:46 UTC
Aih-Li Tahn wrote:
i get the cloud alright its relevent to my job Roll what qualification do u have? i know everyone on the internet is a "expert" in stuff but srsly?


If you really "get" the cloud, you're trolling.
If you're not trolling, you really don't "get" the cloud.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#106 - 2014-03-05 23:43:06 UTC
Here is how you stop DDOS attacks: turn off the Internet. Nice and easy, no need for discussing nonsense like "the cloud" or how "sharding is the secret sauce behind web scale."

One option is to require all (retail) ISPs in the world refuse to forward packets from their end-point clients with source addresses that would never legitimately exist inside their network (i.e.: reverse path forwarding). Thus you would never be able to trigger an NTP-based DDOS by sending UDP requests to a NTP server with a source address of your intended victim. Unfortunately this is a processor-intensive system which also bears the risk of breaking your network if you make a mistake (or do something that might seem intelligent like multi-home a mail server).

Another option is to make it legal to find zombie PCs and break into them to fix the problem (which could include simply turning the hardware off or uninstalling the operating system). As a very flawed analogy, in the UK there are rules in place that allow a citizen to "claim" an abandoned property for maintenance work, perform the required maintenance work, then claim the cost of the work from the local government. I'm not sure of the details, but the system is basically in place to ensure that neighbourhoods don't turn into slums. In Australia there are provisions for land owners to take remedial action on a neighbours property (such as culling pests or removing noxious weeds) and then claim the cost of the work back from the council (who then charges the land-owner).

There are also provider-side problems to fix, such as people running world-accessible NTP servers that respond to UDP requests. Configuring an NTP server this way might seem sensible to someone concerned about processor and memory consumption on their NTP server, but opens up the avenue to spoofing attacks as part of a DDOS.

One might also try to make it illegal to run certain operating systems when connected to the Internet, such as Windows XP or earlier (mainly Windows XP or earlier, there are few other systems so widely exploited). This solution pleases me because it opens the path to banning all Windows installations. And this pleases the Mac fanatics.

"Solving" DDOS attacks is a multifaceted solution because the problem is also multifaceted.

But I like my Final Solution better. Just turn off the Internet.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2014-03-06 00:49:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Mara Rinn wrote:
One might also try to make it illegal to run certain operating systems when connected to the Internet, such as Windows XP or earlier (mainly Windows XP or earlier, there are few other systems so widely exploited). This solution pleases me because it opens the path to banning all Windows installations. And this pleases the Mac fanatics.




I agree, to a degree.

I stopped using Windows the moment I'd learned enough about Linux to run a stable Ubuntu build all by myself, without help from anyone (like my brother, who essentially taught me everything I know about computers). However...

When Windows 7 came around, even he was telling me, "this is actually worth having," so I started dual-booting. I also started using Mint instead of Ubuntu, because **** Unity. (I now use Mint 13 XFCE and haven't upgraded). I still use Win7 and I've never experienced an issue with it. I had some malware shortly after a fresh install on my new PC, but we were expecting that and isolated it quickly. Anyway, it was hard to admit at the time, but it's much easier these days, because I know a quality product when I see it, and Win7 is quality. It's practical, it's user-friendly.... not unlike every Win release though, it has its vulnerabilities, but they're easily patched if you know what you're doing.

But yes, every Win OS prior to 7, burn it. Burn it with fire and brimstone.

EDIT: I think the crux of the matter is, people don't know what they're doing with computers. Carl Sagan said something relevant to this regard: "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." If more people knew what they were doing, computer systems around the world would be more secure, more stable.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#108 - 2014-03-06 00:54:06 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Lykouleon wrote:
"The Cloud" is an incredibly over-used buzz word that people (see: mostly higher ups at Microsoft) throw around without really understanding what it is. Hooray "Cloud".


Sales people love using that word. Cloud is just a fancy word for saying Internet.


Not exactly. A cloud service is as simple as running up virtual machines to increase capacity as your load requirements increases due to usage. Not all internet services are hosted in that manner or can be at the moment. But yes, it's used as a horrible buzzword, however no where near as bad as internet 2.0 or HD. Even people who say app should consider what they're saying.
Inzax
#109 - 2014-03-06 01:05:38 UTC
Does anyone ever just say "Damn, sorry. I didn't understand. My idea won't work."

DSpite Culhach
#110 - 2014-03-06 01:14:26 UTC
I'm only getting into this because that way I get to do some googling and maybe learn something. Most are old articles that describe how the CCP cluster is doing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing

"... cloud computing is a phrase used to describe a variety of computing concepts that involve a large number of computers connected through a communication network such as the Internet."

such as the internet" but I'm pretty sure that the CCP setup ...

http://news.softpedia.com/news/EVE-Online-Readies-the-Largest-Supercomputer-in-the-Gaming-Industry-35225.shtml

Is pretty much already a "cloud" of it's own, and anyway ...

"Each of EVE's 5000+ star systems is loaded as a separate process onto any one of hundreds of IBM blade servers, with some high-load systems being given a server all to themselves"

the current code cannot apparently run more then one star system per core. If an attempt was made to "spread" the load out further by connecting to distant - and by that I mean computers connected via more conventional "internet" type lines ...

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=682229

"CCP aims to link the processors and RAM drives of every SOL server together with high-speed low-latency "Infiniband" technology, allowing data transfer at rates of several gigabytes per second."

... and since it's already stated that only infiniband might be able to save EVE from lag, distributing EVE load across connections that are further then out then where Infiniband can reach, ie, anywhere outside the cluster room, would not solve any speed problems.

It might only look like the amount of information floating around in the cluster might be small, but it's not. Hence why based on what it's written on those articles, the server load can not be spread out more.

I'm surprised the damn system manages to work at all Shocked

Feel free to correct me If I got something wrong.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#111 - 2014-03-06 01:14:33 UTC
Inzax wrote:
Does anyone ever just say "Damn, sorry. I didn't understand. My idea won't work."

It happens. Don't expect it in threads in GD that actually belong in some other forum section though… being that wrong that early is rarely a good sign. Blink
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#112 - 2014-03-06 01:57:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Aih-Li Tahn wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Aih-Li Tahn wrote:
distributed databases exist, right? in ur scenario its like u use more utility companies for more water
OK, I'm calling it now, you are just trolling.
You've literlly just skipped past the post explaining exactly why what you are stating is impossible and just carried on commenting to the next post. Why don't you go back and reread this post, then understand that you have no clue what you are talking about and request a thread closure. What you are asking for is impossible. The end.

holy **** calm down, dude, i read it and i get how it works and yes thats why you cant just put TQ as it is now, on the cloud but with real good code and planing ((eg localise procesing to minmize hi latency/bandwith stuff)) it CAN WORK. they're is no reason to flip out and call discusion over because someone cant reply to evry single post. geez
Nobody here is flipping out. You simply don't understand what you are talking about, so you are throwing out buzzwords like CCP could just go "oh yeah, cloud, why didn't we think of that?". Their codebase would need a total overhaul just to support balancing, and even then, that wouldn't solve the issue. They still would have too much load to sustain a DDOS attack and keep secured connections and gameplay up and running. Whatever it is you work with, whatever you think is so simple is not the case, hence your ridiculous comparisons to amazon. Go back to your cubicle and let CCP do what they do.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Commissar Kate
NulzSec
#113 - 2014-03-06 02:05:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Commissar Kate
Wow this is still going on?


Just look at the quote in my sig for explanation....
Yang Aurilen
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry
Templis CALSF
#114 - 2014-03-06 02:41:25 UTC
Commissar Kate wrote:
Wow this is still going on?


Just look at the quote in my bio for explanation....

0/10 too tall and skinny would not pod even with full slave set.

Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!

Commissar Kate
NulzSec
#115 - 2014-03-06 03:14:34 UTC
Yang Aurilen wrote:
Commissar Kate wrote:
Wow this is still going on?


Just look at the quote in my bio for explanation....

0/10 too tall and skinny would not pod even with full slave set.


haha I meant signature not bio.
Fredfredbug4
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#116 - 2014-03-06 03:16:03 UTC
The "cloud" is nothing more than a remote server. It's not some mysterious entity that can absorb all information.

Watch_ Fred Fred Frederation_ and stop [u]cryptozoologist[/u]! Fight against the brutal genocide of fictional creatures across New Eden! Is that a metaphor? Probably not, but the fru-fru- people will sure love it!

Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#117 - 2014-03-06 03:24:48 UTC
Aih-Li Tahn wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Kristalll wrote:
Does the OP not realize that the cloud is just computers just like the current server structure?

Does the OP think the cloud is some magical internet entity?
I'm pretty sure when he is saying "use the cloud", what he really means is "distribute it over more hardware", I just don't think he realises that is what he means, since he has no idea what he's talking about.

that is only sort of what im saying. right now can eve dynamic start servers and instances to manage load and lots of stuff? no!! ccp is limiting by the PHYSICAL SERVERS THEY HAVE! i am understanding and i know that eve is distributed on 'internet servers' (do u guys think im stupid?) but the diff is the curent model is like hiring 3 people to do tech support and their overwelmed sometimes, vs out-sourcing to a tech support company to not get overwelmed because they have 'standby backup'!


EvE online server model
Ralen Zateki
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#118 - 2014-03-06 03:28:04 UTC
Batelle wrote:
the cloud is not filled with magic fairy dust that will solve all the worlds problems.



NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2014-03-06 03:47:02 UTC
Ribor wrote:
wrote:

Hell .. Western Digital IIRC is now marketing a "personal cloud" that I have not looked at but suspect is a HDD that is on your home LAN and accessible via the internet via some client software .. you are your own cloud .. prepared to be DDoS'd !


The "personal cloud" is hilarious to me in ways I don't fully understand. Just like this entire thread.


"Personal cloud"? Isn't that called a remote access log in?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#120 - 2014-03-06 03:52:54 UTC
Caviar Liberta wrote:
"Personal cloud"? Isn't that called a remote access log in?

You're making the marketing department very upset now. Meanie. Evil