As a big mass scale hoster, Go Daddy makes repeated appearances in this forum, http://moodle.org/mod/forum/search.php?id=5&words=godaddy&forumid=94 - not all of them flattering.
;-(
Recently they made a big blunder in the wider "political arena" . No idea, whether by mistake or there's a pattern behind this. Still, it is worth noting.
23. Dec. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/12/23/0253207/godaddy-backs-sopa
23. Dec. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/12/23/198234/go-daddy-reverses-course-on-sopa
25. Dec. http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/12/25/1452251/go-daddy-loses-over-21000-domains-in-one-day
29. Dec. http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/12/29/0350237/imgurcom-why-we-dumped-godaddy
29. Dec. http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/29/2053252/wikipedia-to-dump-godaddy-over-sopa
What were they thinking??? 
The SOPA-PIPA scare moved to the "Lounge": See "Black Wednesday" http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=194293.
"GoDaddy hosted websites down 'in possible hack attack'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19549367
For example coursera students received this message today:
"Today, GoDaddy (our domain registrar) suffered from a service outage which resulted in millions of sites going down. Unfortunately, https://www.coursera.org was one of those. GoDaddy's servers are still recovering, but we've since switched to using Amazon's domain name services instead. Our site was down for a few hours in the transition period but everything should be back to normal now, though you might encounter a few residual issues as our domain name changes propagate through the internet."
There is a possible connection to SOPA-PIPA:
"Anonymous Takes Down Godaddy & Millions Of Sites With It"
http://leimobile.com/anonymous-takes-down-godaddy-millions-of-sites-with-it/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19549367
For example coursera students received this message today:
"Today, GoDaddy (our domain registrar) suffered from a service outage which resulted in millions of sites going down. Unfortunately, https://www.coursera.org was one of those. GoDaddy's servers are still recovering, but we've since switched to using Amazon's domain name services instead. Our site was down for a few hours in the transition period but everything should be back to normal now, though you might encounter a few residual issues as our domain name changes propagate through the internet."
There is a possible connection to SOPA-PIPA:
"Anonymous Takes Down Godaddy & Millions Of Sites With It"
http://leimobile.com/anonymous-takes-down-godaddy-millions-of-sites-with-it/
Good I left time ago!
This has been confirmed as an internal routing misconfiguration, not any malicious behavior from outside attackers.
Matt
Whether "confirmed" I don't know, yes, that is the latest explanation by GoDaddy:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/godaddy-denies-anonymous-attack/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/11/godaddy_outage_not_a_hack/
Intersting coincidence: It is just today that a GoDaddy success story http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=201882 turned into a rant http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=201882&parent=921192.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/godaddy-denies-anonymous-attack/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/11/godaddy_outage_not_a_hack/
Intersting coincidence: It is just today that a GoDaddy success story http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=201882 turned into a rant http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=201882&parent=921192.
In reply to Howard Miller
Why GoDaddy Linux Virtual Dedicated Hosting Sucks & How to Fix It
by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
Not really an update since the report is from Feb 2008. Still worth reading:
"Why GoDaddy Linux Virtual Dedicated Hosting Sucks & How to Fix It"
http://www.colinmcnamara.com/why-godaddy-linux-virtual-dedicated-hosting-sucks-how-to-fix-it/
"Why GoDaddy Linux Virtual Dedicated Hosting Sucks & How to Fix It"
http://www.colinmcnamara.com/why-godaddy-linux-virtual-dedicated-hosting-sucks-how-to-fix-it/
This is news, for me at least!
I was having an e-mail communication with a friend about putting some documents on-line. He says, he can see new footers in his sent mails advertising GoDaddy.
Here is an annonymized version:
===
Go Daddy - $1.99 .coms at Go
Daddy
Get your website online today - it all starts with a .com. Limited time -
Get yours for just $1.99.
===
His mail provider is Gmail. Has anybody seen this?
I was having an e-mail communication with a friend about putting some documents on-line. He says, he can see new footers in his sent mails advertising GoDaddy.
Here is an annonymized version:
===
Go Daddy - $1.99 .coms at Go
Daddy
Get your website online today - it all starts with a .com. Limited time -
Get yours for just $1.99.
===
His mail provider is Gmail. Has anybody seen this?
friend has gd email forwarding to gmail??
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/export-daddy-emails-google-emails-51451.html
In my early days of administering EMail servers I once setup a double loop between two servers where I had mail delivered - using faulty human logic ... not unlike server 'logic' sometimes. Mail never 'landed' anywhere (doh!). Just went back and forth and back and forth. This just to say we are sometimes our own worst enemies. :|
'spirit of sharing', Ken
Hi Ken
I think you've misunderstood.
I am not talking about an e-mail loop. This was a private mail communication which worked perfectly, technically. The content was about putting some documents on-line, I repeat, the content, the subject line was neutral. Suddenly the other party finds additional text in his sent mails, advertisements for GoDaddy. His mail provider is Gmail. The mailbox I was using was also indirectly under Gmail. (The original provider outsourced their mail service to Gmail.) Therefore one can say that both ends were on Gmail.
Now the question is, does Gmail _read_ e-mail? Or, were those ads just coincidence? There was this story that Facebook knew about the pregnancy of a customer, without she announcing it explicitly. Or, was it a hoax?
I think you've misunderstood.
I am not talking about an e-mail loop. This was a private mail communication which worked perfectly, technically. The content was about putting some documents on-line, I repeat, the content, the subject line was neutral. Suddenly the other party finds additional text in his sent mails, advertisements for GoDaddy. His mail provider is Gmail. The mailbox I was using was also indirectly under Gmail. (The original provider outsourced their mail service to Gmail.) Therefore one can say that both ends were on Gmail.
Now the question is, does Gmail _read_ e-mail? Or, were those ads just coincidence? There was this story that Facebook knew about the pregnancy of a customer, without she announcing it explicitly. Or, was it a hoax?
"Now the question is, does Gmail _read_ e-mail?" --> Yes gmail reads your email.
Want to prove your email is read? Within gmail, compose a message to a gmail/nongmail user and make reference to attaching something but fail to actually attach a file, then send. Gmail will prompt saying you mentioned attaching something but did not do so and ask if you want to continue.
While google services may seem free, you pay with your personal data.
Hi
The attachments check is a special case. Even Thunderbird could be configured to warn the user before sending mail. It is under Preferences -> Composition -> Check for missing attachments.
In a strict sense Thunderbird also reads the mail. The question is what a local mail client like Thunderbird could do with that information and what a (web) server-based mail client could do with it.
The attachments check is a special case. Even Thunderbird could be configured to warn the user before sending mail. It is under Preferences -> Composition -> Check for missing attachments.
In a strict sense Thunderbird also reads the mail. The question is what a local mail client like Thunderbird could do with that information and what a (web) server-based mail client could do with it.
Hi
The attachment example was to demonstrate easily that the content of your email is scanned.
http://dottech.org/84167/google-is-sued-for-showing-ads-in-gmail-based-on-email-content/
They knew that right from the beginning, how could they plan a "free" service otherwise?
Unfortunate that one of my mail providers outsourced their mail to Gmail, I use that account sparingly though
Unfortunate that one of my mail providers outsourced their mail to Gmail, I use that account sparingly though
Just for the record:
Two months later hell broke loose, http://valleywag.gawker.com/facebook-google-apple-and-more-working-directly-with-511753680 !!!
Two months later hell broke loose, http://valleywag.gawker.com/facebook-google-apple-and-more-working-directly-with-511753680 !!!
In the news yesterday, "The dip is mostly the result of GoDaddy switching to IIS from Apache" http://apache.slashdot.org/story/13/08/12/2236256/apache-web-server-share-falls-below-50-percent-for-first-time-since-2009.
Another nail in the coffin of ...
Another nail in the coffin of ...
LOL! Nice move! May, whoever they believe in, help them.
Seems that this article contradicts itself.
First it states that Apache has dropped below 50%. Then it states that GoDaddy has moved from IIS to Apache, causing this change.
Maybe it should have said that the dip is the result of GoDaddy moving to IIS?
So I really don't know how to interpret these quotes.
I am misinterpreting something here?
Hi Rick
> First it states that Apache has dropped below 50%.
Correct. http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2013/08/09/august-2013-web-server-survey.html
> Maybe it should have said that the dip is the result of GoDaddy moving to IIS?
That is what it says: "The dip is mostly the result of GoDaddy switching to IIS from Apache. Which is to say GoDaddy hosts a whole lot of sites." http://apache.slashdot.org/story/13/08/12/2236256/apache-web-server-share-falls-below-50-percent-for-first-time-since-2009
> First it states that Apache has dropped below 50%.
Correct. http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2013/08/09/august-2013-web-server-survey.html
> Maybe it should have said that the dip is the result of GoDaddy moving to IIS?
That is what it says: "The dip is mostly the result of GoDaddy switching to IIS from Apache. Which is to say GoDaddy hosts a whole lot of sites." http://apache.slashdot.org/story/13/08/12/2236256/apache-web-server-share-falls-below-50-percent-for-first-time-since-2009
Yep, now I see it. Sorry about that. Thanks.
Wasn't it the other way round? From Apache to IIS?
Hmmmm ok a dip ... but 364 Mil to 137 Mil.
| Developer | July 2013 | Percent | August 2013 | Percent | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apache | 364,696,792 | 52.19% | 336,622,050 | 46.96% | -5.23 |
| Microsoft | 137,351,211 | 19.65% | 163,098,703 | 22.75% | 3.10 |
| nginx | 95,017,255 | 13.60% | 104,311,568 | 14.55% | 0.96 |
| 27,406,059 | 3.92% | 30,550,914 | 4.26% |
0.34
|
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/category/web-server-survey/
If I re-call correctly, when GD moved many of it's parked domains ... ie, not active ... web sites to IIS there was a jump also a few years back.
The ones to watch (IMHO) ... nginx and Google, of course. ;)
'spirit of sharing', Ken
The free world hasn't forgotton the SOPA issue. Read
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/15/11/02/0654244/how-godaddys-quest-for-respect-led-to-an-improbable-partnership-with-mit.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/15/11/02/0654244/how-godaddys-quest-for-respect-led-to-an-improbable-partnership-with-mit.