Absolutely false. Ingress traffic is much cheaper than egress traffic. Try negotiating bandwidth pricing as an eyeball network (consumer ISP), vs as a hosting provider, and the difference in cost can be an order of magnitude. Peering is often based on equal ratios, and that applies for both egress and ingress traffic. When the traffic is balanced, the network that has more egress traffic may have to pay the other network for the difference. Therefore, ingress traffic not only costs these providers nothing, but can actually reduce their paid peering costs. As such, they will sell transit connections to eyeball networks for pennies on the Mb.

On the hosting side of things, data centers never purchase Microsoft Server licenses outright, as the actual instances of Windows Server are run by clients. Therefore, the only way to be compliant with Microsoft's terms is to offer licensing under the SPLA program, which offers licensing Microsoft Software for a monthly cost. Also, with Windows Server 2012, they have gotten rid of Windows Server Enterprise, and there is now only really Windows Server Standard and Windows Server Data Center, which is functionally identical software. The only difference is that Standard allows for up to two instances on the same hardware, whereas Data Center Edition allows for unlimited instances on the same hardware. However, you need licenses for each physical processor. You can just add on additional Standard licenses until the Data Center Edition pricing makes sense. Perhaps one of the reason they're raising prices, is that with the increases in processing power per server, unlimited instances result in far many more virtuals now than before.

Nvidia has been making a FreeBSD binary driver for at least a decade. http://www.nvidia.ca/object/freebsd_archive.html

And pretty close to a decade already with OpenOffice: http://www.freshports.org/editors/openoffice-1.1/

Just because many people use it incorrectly does not make that usage correct.

No, inbound port 80 for http was correct Although some ISP's do block outbound port 25 for smtp. I don't think any ISP would stay in business for long if they blocked outbound port 80 traffic.

What exact benefit does this supposedly 'open' laptop have over just buying something like a Thinkpad that uses Intel components that are well-supported by open source drivers on open source operating systems (Linux, *BSD, etc.)? If it's to promote the use of standardized components that can be re-used in different laptop designs, it may serve to reduce costs or to increase the useful life of some of those parts. On the other hand, the standardization would also limit designs and prevent some cutting edge innovations from being utilized. All-in-all, as great as it's been to have interchangeable components on desktop builds, there's a reason why there's been limited standardization on laptops and servers, where innovation has more benefit. And considering how inexpensive laptops have already become simply due to competition, I see there being little to gain but much to lose from this approach.

Yes, Darwin does use a MACH kernel. But the MACH kernel itself is also derived from BSD, originally developed as additional code written directly into the 4.2BSD kernel.

Hosting their Internet facing servers at the office, behind a sonicwall firewall, is also a recipe for disaster in general let alone when being attacked. If they had hosted their servers in a proper data centre with DDoS mitigation services, the 'hackers' would have had a much harder time taking their servers offline.

Not nearly enough has been presented to demonstrate whether or not the technology is truly compelling or not. Is this purely a storage enclosure, or is there some type of cpu/mainboard for which this can be used as a high density, low cost SAN? Why type of bus/connectors/interfaces are used? Does this use fiber channel or 10Gb Ethernet? Can the full potential of all the drives' IO and IOPS be realized? What is the latency involved? Also, what's so specialized that the technology can be patented, and not easily replicated by a competitor?

Martha Stewart's prosecution was highly publicized so that it would appear that white collar criminals were being cracked down. If you're going to make the argument that this goes beyond an isolated case, and was a general and significant trend, please provide a citation.

Uhh, the Xeon E3 V2's which are the single socket Ivy Bridge server processors have been out for several months. However, the Xeon E5 V2's i.e. Ivy Bridge-E(P|N) for 2 sockets aren't going to come out until Q3 2013, which is quite the delay from Ivy Bridge's initial release, and well after Haswell will be released.

It's Jordan Hubbard, not John Hubbard. He was one of the original founders of FreeBSD. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Hubbard http://www.turbofuzz.com/jkh/

Serverbeach is a dedicated hosting company. They're not going to be scanning memory as they don't have local access to the server. It must be some sort of web crawling or spidering that they do.

If content is visible to your dedicated (not managed) hosting company, who doesn't have any login access to your servers, then yes, the content is visible to the public. Access to it may be obscured, due to removed links to it or however it was supposedly 'removed', but still available to the Internet and henceforth public.

That's because you're trying to buy an old CPU in brand new condition, long after production has stopped. Usually, the best window to buy a CPU new is when the next generation comes out, but you are already 4 (2 ticks + 2 tocks) generations behind. You can easily find the Q9550s used for less than $100.