[tech] Content Management for UCC
Adrian Chadd
adrian at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au
Thu Dec 23 11:04:53 WST 2004
On Thu, Dec 23, 2004, Michal Gornisiewicz wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 12:56:04PM +1100, Duncan Sargeant wrote:
> > Davyd Madeley wrote on Wed December 22, at 01:08 +0800:
> > > I disagree with this policy of having machines on for the sake of having
> > > them on.
> >
> > I disagree with this policy of having machines off for the sake of
> > having them off.
> >
> > It costs you nothing, so leave it on. Its a win-draw situation.
>
> Bah. It still costs you power, even if not in monetary terms. If the
> machine sits there doing nothing the whole time then it should be off.
Make a decision - to maintain or to not maintain.
Having a machine /off/ until you want to use is going to have you bitten
in the ass. At least by having it /on/ its counted as Yet Another Machine
To Keep Patched.
Case in point: a run of 'xploited-turned-spammeh machines on campus about
three months ago were, in all cases, windows 98 machines that had been off
for about a year. They were turned on and pwned very, very quickly.
Its much easier to justify it in UCC terms then - "can I be assed mantaining
more than three pieces of shit pentium 1s?" If noone says "yes" then turn
it off. :)
Adrian
More information about the tech
mailing list