Does a low success rate really deserve so much scorn? They are *trying* to do something good. Their daily job is the safe return of children. As apposed to say the multitudes of people who are only out for themselves or their own family. If one of those children they rescued from kidnapping was *your* child, would you not be thankful as all hell that someone cared enough to look for them on your behalf? Would you even be able to express the gratitude you felt?

Granted, all these arguments along the lines of "they could be doing better" are not wrong, but it seems that you are focusing from exactly the wrong angle. They may not add a significant value beyond what already exists for the amount of dollars spent, but including more people who are caring enough to be involved is absolutely not the wrong thing to do. Less modding up 'lolnoobs' comments and more 'this is how they could do more while spending less' would increase the value of *this* page.

What happens when >50% of Windows computers are using MSE, will malware be written specifically to bypass it the same way it does for the other major AV players? Is too much success a bad thing?

It seems much more plausible that either this wikileaks.info related cybergang is performing the DDoS themselves, stirring up other communities to perform DDoS, or both. I have no experience with this AnonOps group, but I have spent a lot of time looking at *chan culture. As haphazard as a collection of 'anonymous' users generally is, they do not actually get to the point of performing an attack against something without hearing many sides to the story. That is one of the benefits of having so many individuals actively involved rather than an army unthinking zombie computers.

For example, given enough .jpg's, between their collective experience they can collate enough data to link seemingly completely unrelated photos to the same household or person. I have seen this happen over the course of a few threads and the experience was like watching a higher consciousness at work. It totally blew me away.

They will have people who actually do look at what is specifically being blocked by Spamhaus, why, and verify the authenticity of said claims. When you have threads of people calling for destruction it may be hard to turn away the mod mentality, but when people start posting clear facts it can and will do so, leading to the impending attack falling apart before it reaches critical mass.

I don't know much about this AnonOps group as of now, but if they are made up of enough individuals even this article will definitely reach them. As to if they will care, depends what their real goal is I suppose.

Why would they have to get out? That doesn't even make sense. That's like "Well, we don't have enough food for everyone, so all of you have to leave." It may not be as much spending as maintaining our current fuel source, but probing for alternatives and helping them to not die out before they can reach something beneficial is nothing to be angry about.

Throwing more cores at a problem for cheap is exactly the kind of solution they are not providing with the T4. They are solving a very different problem where each threads performance needs to be maximized and I applaud them for the effort. We run a big replication tree of MySQL servers and it seems like every day we are trying to figure out new ways to offload as much as we can to new groups of servers. I look forward to some serious overhaul in per-thread CPU performance (and synergy with MySQL core) as this will decrease individual query time whereas multiple threads would help only in query concurrency. Also for applications like haproxy which are single-threaded specifically for quantifiable performance reasons, this type of push will be much appreciated. If I had to chose development towards a problem that is not getting enough attention and impressing people with "more cores and ghz", I chose the problem solving solution. Thankfully they are not marketing their server-grade hardware to same people who need the iPhone with the bigger geebeez. At least I hope not. It pains me to hear the masses cry murder about how everything Oracle sucks, and everyone in the company is an idiot too. Like how we saw all the people saying the developers of Hudson should branch away for barely even a misunderstanding between Oracle management and the devs. How over-hyped was that? So many people popping in to contribute "Stick it to that bastard Ellis!" and then leaving. If you've worked a decent amount of time with other people, you've probably been witness to how many developers don't exactly agree amongst themselves. Also, branching is not a solution to the problem of "We need to find a reliable place to host our project." and splitting the existing community is the worst possible thing you could be do for the project. The whole situation reminds me of my friend who worked alongside us every day for years and one day was promoted to manager. Before this day, it was easy for my co-workers to say things like "Hey, don't store pictures in the database. The filesystem will handle it much better." After he was promoted to manager they would just keep to themselves and mock him for doing a bad job. It's childish and stupid. But in reality for Oracle, aside from the mass exodus of sun developers, keeping a tight lip on plans for the future, and possibly re-branding splash pages as a first priority, I can't blame Oracle for a whole lot. Any transition of this size will be difficult and probably suck for a long time, but at least let Oracle play their cards before becoming another fanboy of hate.

Perhaps, but only because they wouldn't assume the party escort submission position.

This was funny but being +4 insightful made me lol in front of my boss. He wants to try the Bender vending machine now.