Comment As an ex-Akamaiite, I can only say (Score 1) 205
nothing.
nothing.
I can only say nothing.
From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_pluralism#Hindu_views
Hindu views
The Hindu religion is naturally pluralistic. A well-known Rig Vedic hymn says that "Truth is One, though the sages know it variously." (Ékam sat vipra bahud vadanti).[11] Similarly, in the Bhagavad Gt (4:11), God, manifesting as an incarnation, states that "As people approach me, so I receive them. All paths lead to me" (ye yath m prapadyante ts tathiva bhajmyaham mama vartmnuvartante manuy prtha sarvaa).[12] The Hindu religion has no theological difficulties in accepting degrees of truth in other religions. Hinduism emphasizes that everyone actually worship the same God, whether they know it or not.[13] Just as Hindus worshiping Ganesh is seen as valid by those worshiping Vishnu, so someone worshiping Jesus or Allah is accepted. Many foreign deities become assimilated into Hinduism, and some Hindus may sometimes offer prayers to Jesus along with their traditional forms of God.
Note - I can dislike but still accept others philosophies or ideas as their paths. BUT accepting still doesn't imply liking their ideas, particularly, when they are forced upon me.
But I digress, what I originally started out saying was that disliking somebody for what they are (by birth, e.g. their skin color) is Wrong. BUT disliking their believes or disliking them for what they believe in, is not.
So, then, it's okay to hate Jews. Or Christians or Muslims. Or atheists.
Notice, I didn't say 'hate' but 'dislike' someone's ideology. Doesn't subscribing to a particular philisophy (Disclaimer: I'm borderline Agnostic, was raised a Hindu, and practice Buddhist meditation as well) automatically imply a disliking alternate philosophies? Otherwise, why would one prefer or choose one over another?
But yeah, the basis of Hindu philosophy does include accepting all religions (look up Pluralism on wikipedia) as alternate paths to the same underlying Reality.
It is hateful and bad to dislike someone for what they are (e.g. their skin color).
It is NOT hateful NOR wrong to dislike someone for what they think or believe in.
It's as simple as that!
Akamai had a role to play in the defense as well.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20025477-281.html
Akamai says it can defend against Anon attacks
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20025477-281.html#ixzz187QnPlDV
Akamai managers say they could have bolstered the Web sites that buckled under attacks launched recently by Internet vigilantes.
The world's largest content delivery network says it has enough servers and the right kind of network to "mitigate distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks," Neil Cohen, Akamai's senior director of product marketing told CNET. DDoS describes the practice of overwhelming a Web site with traffic so that it can't be accessed.
Some well-known sites were the targets of DDoS attacks launched by a loosely connected group of WikiLeaks supporters who call themselves Anonymous or Anon for short. The group lashed out at companies they consider to be hostile to WikiLeaks, the service responsible for publicizing an enormous amount of classified U.S. government documents. Some of those attacked were MasterCard, Visa, PayPal, and Amazon.
MasterCard, Visa, and PayPal stopped processing donations made to WikiLeaks while Amazon stopped hosting WikiLeaks servers. At this point it appears that Amazon was able to withstand the attack while MasterCard and Visa's sites were inaccessible for extended periods.
Cohen said few other companies have as much experience as his with defending Web sites from this kind of threat. He said that late last month, a number of U.S. retail sites came under DDoS attack from multiple different countries. Cohen said he was unaware of who was behind it or why, but he said that Akamai helped some of the retailers withstand the onslaught of hits to their sites, which in some cases reached to 10,000 times the normal daily traffic to some of these sites. None of the sites went down, he said.
"What we did over the last decade was built out our network and we now have 80,000 servers in 70 countries," Cohen said. "We can mitigate DDoS attacks by having a server extremely close to the court rather than try to absorb the attack in one centralized location. As an attack grows in size and distributes out to more bots, we have a server near the compromised machines. As the attack gets bigger, our network scales on demand."
While there are reports that Anonymous is giving up on DDoS attacks related to the WikiLeaks case, it is unlikely that we've seen the end of them. In retaliation against the entertainment industry's antipiracy attempts, Anonymous knocked out the Web sites belonging to the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, Hustler magazine, and the U.S. Copyright Office.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20025477-281.html#ixzz187QiBtJU
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion