# 100TB a month challenge



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

The new crazy VPS offer bar is 100TB a month.

Group contribution / mind pooling here.   How do you think would be best way / most likely to consume 100TB a month.  

Rules are no downloading 10GB size file repetitively.   No hosting anything that would get you a DMCA slap.   

Have to be cognizant of the CPU limits.   50% CPU usage vs. 4 cores.

Ideas?


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

tor
CDN
steaming repeater?
Proxy Server
apt-get cache
mirrors
(vpsboard mumble server with 10,000 listeners in one channel) <.< >,< >.>
Nginx load ballencer
IMG sharing website
Video sharing website, couple movies a day?
A VPSBoard proxy to http
Webpage checker for changes? pull page, store, check next day, if different alert!
Website is it up? Backend?
SIP

Mun


----------



## joepie91 (Jan 21, 2014)

UStream archiving script


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

Mun said:


> tor
> CDN
> steaming repeater?
> Proxy Server
> ...


Why not do this on a GVH $5 VPS and see Jon's feedback?


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

joepie91 said:


> UStream archiving script


Or one of joepies archive warriors


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

Net said:


> Why not do this on a GVH $5 VPS and see Jon's feedback?


Can I still get them, I will take two 

Mun


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

Mun said:


> Can I still get them, I will take two
> 
> Mun


Go ahead:

https://secure.greenvaluehost.com/cart.php?a=add&pid=192

I'm going to get a few as well, let's max out the bandwidth .


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

Mun said:


> Can I still get them, I will take two


Only Buffalo available....  why is that always the story?  Like an endless well in Buffalo.


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> Only Buffalo available....  why is that always the story?  Like an endless well in Buffalo.


Maybe they have too much bandwidth overage bills in other locations? lol.

BTW: Try to pay using a credit card, and see who owns the credit card processor


----------



## telephone (Jan 21, 2014)

Porn.

@joepie91 your video must have used 50 TB by now, right?  :lol:


----------



## peterw (Jan 21, 2014)

Varnish cache for vpsboard for not logged in users. Or be a mirror for some open source movies:

http://www.sintel.org/wp-content/content/download.html

http://route66.vebfilm.net/free/en

http://www.bigbuckbunny.org/index.php/download/

http://orange.blender.org/download


----------



## GIANT_CRAB (Jan 21, 2014)

Looked through their ToS, we can host minecraft but no video encoding, file sharing, porn, etc.

Minecraft, anyone?


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

Net said:


> Why not do this on a GVH $5 VPS and see Jon's feedback?


I see no reason not to do that... That's what it is sold for.


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

GIANT_CRAB said:


> Looked through their ToS, we can host minecraft but no video encoding, file sharing, porn, etc.
> 
> Minecraft, anyone?


The file sharing part is:

*File Hosting Sites * --- which is unduly vague.  Isn't every website by definition hosting files?

*"Copyrighted Material that does not belong to you"* - that's another gotcha - obvious one there.  Isn't possession 9/10th's of the law  ?

Pornography is covered in first two points. "Child Pornography" "Adult Pornography".... I do note it seems to miss teenage pornography, senior pornography, and pornography other sorts.


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

> Backup & Personal Storage
> 
> GreenValueHost permits the use of all allocated disk space for backup storage and personal storage on VPS AND DEDICATED SERVER HOSTING SERVICES ONLY as long as the content is legal and the user uploading the content to their account has permission and full rights to use it. Users may NOT run any file hosting/sharing services; doing so will result in immediate termination of your account with or without notice. Disk Space on Shared and Reseller Hosting services may not be used for backup storage and can only be used for files related to the website(s) being hosted on the shared/reseller account.


We can also WGET 1/10GB speed test files, fill the 250GB disk space and use the 100TB bandwidth.


----------



## GIANT_CRAB (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> The file sharing part is:
> 
> *File Hosting Sites * --- which is unduly vague.  Isn't every website by definition hosting files?
> 
> ...


Copyright materials not allowed, what about copyleft materials as stated in GentooPlayLicense v3?

Or Furry/Pony pornography?

**lels intensifies**


----------



## Setsura (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> Rules are no downloading 10GB size file repetitively.


Honestly, this is the most practical one. I suspect it doesn't use much on the CPU(compared to other ideas anyway), it is consistant, and probably doable as long as they don't start limiting you or whoever you are downloading it from freaks out and blocks you/removes the file.

All those ideas mun said are kinda it, and all of them take some time to "spin up" to the kind of BW levels we are talking. The apt-get cache/repo mirror one is probably one of the more likely to work ones, and you could easily pin it hard on x company if they pull it, something like "they don't support open software" or something. Kinda looks bad for them.


----------



## willie (Jan 21, 2014)

100TB/month is 300 megabits/sec 24/7.  Good luck with that.


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 21, 2014)

> Pornography is covered in first two points


That ban will probably be lifted when he's 18 and old enough to look at it...


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

willie said:


> 100TB/month is 300 megabits/sec 24/7.  Good luck with that.


We can have 3-4 VPS' running at full speed to max out their 1Gbps connection.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

If targeted at GVH I don't think this is a good idea.  Even if one VPS maxed out its bandwidth allocation it's likely to push GVH into overages.  Even if we look at a reasonable $4 Mbps it's going to very easy to slap $1000s worth of dollars of overages onto the company. 

This is severely going to diminish their ability to pay twelve techs and continue their plans for world domination.

I ask you all to think of the poor Buffalos.


----------



## peterw (Jan 21, 2014)

Virtovo said:


> I ask you all to think of the poor Buffalos.


Then they should not offer that.


----------



## mtwiscool (Jan 21, 2014)

Virtovo said:


> If targeted at GVH I don't think this is a good idea.  Even if one VPS maxed out its bandwidth allocation it's likely to push GVH into overages.  Even if we look at a reasonable $4 Mbps it's going to very easy to slap $1000s worth of dollars of overages onto the company.
> 
> This is severely going to diminish their ability to pay twelve techs and continue their plans for world domination.
> 
> I ask you all to think of the poor Buffalos.


$4 per Mbps what crack are you smocking.

alot of datacentres will do it for less then $1 per Mbps and some even below $0.50


----------



## NodePacket (Jan 21, 2014)

I'm waiting to hear about when he suspends the servers for the 'Violations'. I hope he has some money saved up to pay the BW overages.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

mtwiscool said:


> $4 per Mbps what crack are you smocking.
> 
> alot of datacentres will do it for less then $1 per Mbps and some even below $0.50


Crack?  You do understand overages are paid for outside of your initial commit.  You generally don't benefit from commit pricing with overages.  $4 is a very reasonable overage rate and was my best case.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 21, 2014)

Theoretical, haven't tried this myself to see if it'll even work.

Remotely mount the GVH VM's /dev/null to a couple of machines that can actually use their CPU/etc, and have bandwidth to spare.  'DD' out test files the size of your choice to the mounted path.. for example, creating a 100TB file should continuously push data to the GVH, which dumps the incoming right into /dev/null without using disk or really that much CPU, while eating away at the bandwidth.


----------



## mtwiscool (Jan 21, 2014)

Virtovo said:


> Crack?  You do understand overages are paid for outside of your initial commit.  You generally don't benefit from commit pricing with overages.  $4 is a very reasonable overage rate and was my best case.


why don't they just get an unmeated 1gbps like 

datashack $300 (0.29296875 per Mbps) + $45 colo fee + ip address at $0.50 each

or if you want to go crazy Fdcservers 10Gbps $399 inc colo ip's are $1 each ($0.03896484375 per Mbps)


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 21, 2014)

We'll give a free iPad mini to the first person who can legitimately use 100TB.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 21, 2014)

Define legitimate.  And how about some proof that you won't be capping transit?


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 21, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Define legitimate.  And how about some proof that you won't be capping transit?


Legitimate as in not downloading files back and forth from one server to another or running any useless scripts that only just consume bandwidth. And we don't cap transit. How about you provide us some proof that we do?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Legitimate as in not downloading files back and forth from one server to another or running any useless scripts that only just consume bandwidth.



And how exactly do you plan on checking this, outside of snooping on your clients' data?



GVH-Jon said:


> And we don't cap transit. How about you provide us some proof that we do?


According to your VPS Page: *[bW]* **@ 1Gbps*

So, let's do some math.  100TB is 102400GB per month.  1Gbps is 128MB/s.  If we take a month with 31 days, that's 334,800GB per month (60s * 60m * 24h * 24d == 2678400 seconds * 128 == 342835200MB / 1024 == 334800GB).

So what you're telling us, is that you guarantee a client can burn 1/3 of the 128MB/s (a constant 42MB/s) all month?


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

mtwiscool said:


> why don't they just get an unmeated 1gbps like
> 
> datashack $300 (0.29296875 per Mbps) + $45 colo fee + ip address at $0.50 each
> 
> or if you want to go crazy Fdcservers 10Gbps $399 inc colo ip's are $1 each ($0.03896484375 per Mbps)


Most likely because they are with Colocrossing/HVH in Buffalo, NY.


----------



## joepie91 (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Legitimate as in not downloading files back and forth from one server to another or running any useless scripts that only just consume bandwidth. And we don't cap transit. How about you provide us some proof that we do?


So you can't run anything that "just consumes bandwidth", but you can't use a lot of CPU either (which leads to only being able to use bandwidth)? I'm not sure how exactly anybody is supposed to "win" this challenge.


----------



## mtwiscool (Jan 21, 2014)

joepie91 said:


> So you can't run anything that "just consumes bandwidth", but you can't use a lot of CPU either (which leads to only being able to use bandwidth)? I'm not sure how exactly anybody is supposed to "win" this challenge.


website with loads of photos and meme then post to reddit.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

joepie91 said:


> So you can't run anything that "just consumes bandwidth", but you can't use a lot of CPU either (which leads to only being able to use bandwidth)? I'm not sure how exactly anybody is supposed to "win" this challenge.


Well at least everyone now has Carte Blanche to try.  This is going to get ugly.


----------



## William (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We'll give a free iPad mini to the first person who can legitimately use 100TB.I


Ok, i'm in. Currently doing around 700TB in NL and 100TB in Austria, i just migrate a reverse proxy to you.

Deal?

No matter how shitty that line is, i manage to push 100TB easily, and trust me - I will take you on it and pay not a single cent. And sue you if you don't give me the iPad then with some vague reason, that also.


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

If they accept bitcoin, local caching TPB proxy <.<

Mun

NM.... "pirated software"


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We'll give a free iPad mini to the first person who can legitimately use 100TB.


Possible to limit it to those who have already posted in this thread?  That way someone who then manages to use it won't get a "Sorry, someone has already claimed it"


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

William said:


> Ok, i'm in. Currently doing around 700TB in NL and 100TB in Austria, i just migrate a reverse proxy to you.
> 
> Deal?
> 
> No matter how shitty that line is, i manage to push 100TB easily, and trust me - I will take you on it and pay not a single cent. And sue you if you don't give me the iPad then with some vague reason, that also.



.. what are you plannning?


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

@GVh-Jon, my order is pending


----------



## NodePacket (Jan 21, 2014)

You know, just thinking about the ways people will get around his TOS and AUP, I wonder how many times he will modify it before he suspends everyone. 100TB is just.... Why? Especially on a what $5, VPS?


----------



## MannDude (Jan 21, 2014)

NodePacket said:


> 100TB is just.... Why? Especially on a what $5, VPS?


So people will talk about it/GVH.

It's a stupid plan, not sustainable, and if I was a 'regular' client with just a normal use site I'd be super pissed off at the network degradation because of this. But yeah, it's to get people to talk about them.


----------



## NodePacket (Jan 21, 2014)

MannDude said:


> So people will talk about it/GVH.
> 
> It's a stupid plan, not sustainable, and if I was a 'regular' client with just a normal use site I'd be super pissed off at the network degradation because of this. But yeah, it's to get people to talk about them.


I hope that Jon has the capital to cover all of the bandwidth. If he doesn't, we may just start seeing 'ColoCrossing' on the CC and PayPal statements.


----------



## MannDude (Jan 21, 2014)

NodePacket said:


> I hope that Jon has the capital to cover all of the bandwidth. If he doesn't, we may just start seeing 'ColoCrossing' on the CC and PayPal statements.


Judging by his financials he posted in the past, I'd say he doesn't cover the cost but I don't know what sort of deal he got from HVH who got hooked up due to their _financial relationship_ with CC.

Doesn't seem sustainable in any way, shape, or form. How many 100TB clients can you put on one node? Hopefully they're in low numbers, and isolated with each other. If I was a regular client I'd be super pissed being on a node with such users. My little wordpress blog may only get 12 hits a day but you can rest assured I'd be rightfully pissed if I had network issues because I was put on a node with customers like some of you in here. But then again, if you only put 10 customers on a node... that's $50/mo revenue. Obviously operating at a loss but I don't think it matters due to the upstreams.


----------



## William (Jan 21, 2014)

Mun said:


> .. what are you plannning?


I just use a lot of BW on HTTP. Legal. (And no, it's not Tor.)


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

William said:


> I just use a lot of BW on HTTP. Legal. (And no, it's not Tor.)


What do you have going william


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We'll give a free iPad mini to the first person who can legitimately use 100TB.


Now we are talking...   GVH is becoming my favorite niche brand this quarter no doubt.

I like the kid's gusto.


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> Now we are talking...   GVH is becoming my favorite niche brand this quarter no doubt.
> 
> I like the kid's gusto.


It's easy to say he'll give an iPad mini to the first person who "legit" uses 100TB. Buffalo's network is so awful that it's impossible to do so, and anything that will use 100TB I'm sure he can write off as "not legitimate". I'll give you a million dollars if you can locate bigfoot.


----------



## Neo (Jan 21, 2014)

TOR and 100TB.... you get already problems with 3TB per month because of the CPU usage.

So would be inpossible to burn 100TB with TOR on a VPS, your provider would fuck you up before you could burn up 100TB.


----------



## raindog308 (Jan 21, 2014)

I'd like to point out that he's not promising 100TB of bandwidth.

He's promising 100TB of *premium* bandwidth.


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

they canceled my order


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

raindog308 said:


> I'd like to point out that he's not promising 100TB of bandwidth.
> 
> He's promising 100TB of *premium* bandwidth.


We even got a meme on here! About time!

*"He's promising 100TB of premium bandwidth."*

In all fairness, isn't Buffalo now mainly / often / sometimes Level 3 upstream?  That would be premium if so.   

I need to look at their other location upstreams.

I want 100TB in San Jose CC location


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

Mun said:


> they canceled my order


What?  Why?


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

SkylarM said:


> It's easy to say he'll give an iPad mini to the first person who "legit" uses 100TB. Buffalo's network is so awful that it's impossible to do so, and anything that will use 100TB I'm sure he can write off as "not legitimate". I'll give you a million dollars if you can locate bigfoot.


Million dollars?   Remember about that check your a$$ can't cash 

Even if he writes use off as not valid, the dent on resources still happens and overall usage balloons.

I smell the end of the 100TB plans coming... Smell that blood in the air?


----------



## NodePacket (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> What?  Why?


Theyre too good for him.


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> What?  Why?



Just canceled, nothing stated 

@GVH-Jon what gives


----------



## blergh (Jan 21, 2014)

Let's stream uncompressed music! KEXP-style.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 21, 2014)

Mun said:


> Just canceled, nothing stated
> 
> @GVH-Jon what gives


Your order was marked as Fraud because you paid through a proxy.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Your order was marked as Fraud because you paid through a proxy.


You mean like Paypal?  Or is there another way to pay through a proxy?  Escrow?


----------



## NodePacket (Jan 21, 2014)

I've got extra popcorn guys.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 21, 2014)

Virtovo said:


> You mean like Paypal?  Or is there another way to pay through a proxy?  Escrow?


No, I mean, he ordered/paid while being on a proxy. For the majority of hosts, that = automatic fraud status.


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

blergh said:


> Let's stream uncompressed music! KEXP-style.


I use to love some KEXP... still love some of their shows.. Wo' Pop tonight... rocks.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> No, I mean, he ordered/paid while being on a proxy. For the majority of hosts, that = automatic fraud status.


That indeed makes sense.  You have to be a firm gatekeeper.  Is the iPad new?


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

So are the 100TB offers still continuing  to be offered or did CC/HVH put a stop to this insane raping of their pocketbook yet?


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike -- I explained this in depth to you via PM.

also yes the iPad is new. We'll order it straight from Best Buy and have it shipped.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> drmike -- I explained this in depth to you via PM.
> 
> also yes the iPad is new. We'll order it straight from Best Buy and have it shipped.


Im in the UK, will this be a problem?


----------



## vRozenSch00n (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> So are the 100TB offers still continuing  to be offered or did CC/HVH put a stop to this insane raping of their pocketbook yet


So, will there be a proof of concept, Doc?


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> drmike -- I explained this in depth to you via PM.
> 
> also yes the iPad is new. We'll order it straight from Best Buy and have it shipped.


Is it fine if I post extracts of that PM Jon?  I don't want to go Skylar on you with this out of the blue.   Other folks are interested and I think you mean well and have a fight + hammering some things out with upstream and customers.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 21, 2014)

No, it's fine. I will post a summary of the conversation we had here.

Basically, what is happening right now is that a lot of our advisers and also our upstream is expressing a major concern for us regarding our LET plans and I have been approached several times by many key people with requests to immediately pull stock on all the 100TB plans. Now I know you guys may be skeptical and think, "Why would ColoCrossing or HVH care about what GVH does if it's going to earn them cash?". The answer to this is simple. Despite what everything is doing to try and depict them as devil childs/conspirators, they are people too; and good people to say the least. I genuinely, genuinely believe that. You guys don't know how much I try to defend our upstream and such on a daily basis, however I'm strictly prohibited from doing so. But since this isn't anything really sensitive to business, I just want to put it out there that the people that work at ColoCrossing and the people that work at Hudson Valley Host are really kind, passionate, and caring and I've formed strong friendships with many of them. And much like in any strong friendship, during cases like this, your own personal money gain in the situation doesn't become a facor -- your concern for whom you consider a friend is.

Now putting all of that to the side, I just want to say to everyone here that we don't have any bad intentions with our 100TB bandwidth plans. We really don't, I swear it. We want to provide a good service and we try very hard to do so. Part of what Curtis (MannDude) said is correct, we are using the 100TB as a marketing ploy and we aren't really looking to make much of a profit out of it. It got people talking about us, and it very much worked. There's all of these threads about us now, and I'm finding myself constantly being pushed to handle public relations which is essentially a good sign and I don't really mind. We legitimately would allow a customer to use 100TB if they were using it for a legitimate purpose, such as a retail VPN service, proxy service, etc. However though, these threats to utilize our virtual servers for the sole purpose of uselessly burning bandwidth with tasks such as downloading files back and forth between virtual servers, we can't allow that and we're going to be putting new policies in place in our Terms of Service to prohibit such actions. We want our vrtual servers to be utilized for legitimate uses only and we are not looking to screw anyone or BS anyone in any way.

.. I don't really know what else to say. We don't have any bad intentions. We want to provide a good service and we try very hard to do so and I don't see why we have to be attacked for it.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 21, 2014)

To put it bluntly... it's your attitude.  Case in point:







Is Fabozzi really that much of a role model to you?  And sure, it's great that you want to be friendly with your upstream.  But you should not let that blind you others' experiences.  Call a spade a spade - no matter how nice Biloh is to you directly, the plain fact is that he has no qualms with screwing other people over (such as the "leased" hardware stolen from us).  Reputations are rarely earned out of hearsay - for every generally vague "they are dishonest" thread about CC, you can find an individual that can tell you a direct example of how they were poorly treated.

As to why you're being attacked?  It has very little to do with your CC affiliations.  Your blatant lack of humility, and downright lies when attempting to brag about your company are what bring those reactions.  And to clarify - yes, you are a liar.  You've shown sufficient savvy that surely you couldn't actually think a few weeks worth of improved sales justify a major growth trend.  The logical conclusion is that you attempted to brag, got caught with your pants down about it, and have been directly evading since.  You never did answer my questions in the other thread that would prove otherwise.

But let's suppose, just for the sake of arguement, that you truly are stupid enough to think that a few weeks worth of decent sales is enough to warrant rapid expansion.  If you were that stupid, you'd have no hesitation about posting more figures, something that you continue to evade.  Not to mention the logistics - there is simply no way you could've gone from a pitiful 5k/mo income (before expenses) to "one of the largest/best" within a month.  Not on your own.

And that's where CC ties in - Biloh is already proven dirty, and it's well established that he backs shell companies such as yourself.  A low end provider simply couldn't pony up that kind of capital in a short time - that is simply fact.  Not to mention that you've been their little crusader from the start - and with Fabozzi becoming more and more a liability, you're simply being pimped up to eventually take his place in fronting the ColoCrossing VPS division.

The absolute best thing you can do, is simply say "I will not say another word on this matter", and walk away.  But do *NOT* think you can insult an entire community with such obvious lies, and not have someone take the piss of you for it.  You're not just insulting independent providers that actually worked hard to get to where we are - you're insulting the clients, hobbyists, and other folks here by thinking they would actually be stupid enough to believe you.


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

*"a lot of our advisers and also our upstream is expressing a major concern for us regarding our LET plans"*

 Do you have advisers, like people semi versed with say bandwidth and above say the age of ummm nicely, 35?  I ask because the basic functional math component in a 100TB offer is lacking.  Equally lacking are the Terms of Service, which I am a stickler about and often a heckler of.

While this is an interest generator, 100TB for $5 along with a truckload of RAM and 4 cores and a heap of disk, using the resources within ToS / AUP would be very hard to impossible.  It's really too close to being false advertising.   There are regulations over such things by law, as there are regulations about having contests and not issuing prizes.   Ho hum..   VPS Kickstarter x2....

*"depict them as devil childs/conspirators, they are people too"*

Some book of wisdom told me, "You shall know them by their deeds".  Arguably Chairman Mao and Adoph the Hitler were both people too.  Just saying, if it's made of meat, walks upright, less hairy, few other identifiers and yeah, human too 

You point of them being helpful, meh, you are cash flow positive, current on invoices, etc.  Who are they to tell you?  If my upstream was impacting my sales and efforts or threatening / helping such like this I'd be shopping elsewhere and quick.  Cause, way I feel, seems like maybe they don't like the house brands being upstaged and perhaps you aren't the dirty house brand.

*"We legitimately would allow a customer to use 100TB if they were using it for a legitimate purpose, such as a retail VPN service"*

Don't think it was said here, but was in PM's.  Disallowing of ToR forthcoming.   ToR vs. VPN, meh, much of the same bad behavior and legal implications.  Depends on the VPN provider and target niche.  Certainly troubling traffic though.

This drawing of opinion on what is legitimate use is TROUBLING.  I can draw one parallel.

I picked up a MagicJack for calling.   Cheap, darn near free in big picture.   Went and dialed a radio listen line.  The number is disallowed.  Dialed another network, same thing.  Here they limit my calling based on their policies, be them random.

Contrast that to other VOIP providers / options that just a tad more, well none of the blocks and random might be an issue type thing.


----------



## Dylan (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We don't have any bad intentions. We want to provide a good service and we try very hard to do so and I don't see why we have to be attacked for it.


"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

You may well believe that what you're doing is both good business and pro-consumer, but it's neither and anybody with a modicum of business and/or technical sense can see that.

So there are two possible conclusions to be had here: one, you're full of it; or two, you genuinely don't know what you're doing.

I'm not sure which is worse.


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

In fairness, many providers have idle capacity. 

So offering a few big deal giveaways is understandable.   Saw that with the storage VPS craze and 1TB at $10-14 / month.

Now you don't see many folks playing in that niche at that price.  Why?  Because eventually more users actually use their resources and the cash flow is so low that if solely running that mainly in sales pipe, well, self starvation.

Offering 100TB on each plan, math isn't there and risk is so high that it will end bad.   I think we saw the alpha stage here today on this thread and actual use starting.


----------



## blergh (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> I use to love some KEXP... still love some of their shows.. Wo' Pop tonight... rocks.


Yeah, too bad they discontinued the uncompressed streams, or at least their website says so, haven't visited in a good while so wasn't aware of it.


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We'll give a free iPad mini to the first person who can legitimately use 100TB.


Do you do international shipping??


----------



## Awmusic12635 (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> In fairness, many providers have idle capacity.
> 
> So offering a few big deal giveaways is understandable.   Saw that with the storage VPS craze and 1TB at $10-14 / month.


I still get requests for the 1TB for $7 that I did once and that was almost a year ago


----------



## texteditor (Jan 21, 2014)

So where does William's example of swapping you in for one of his reverse proxies/caching frontends stand?


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

Fliphost said:


> I still get requests for the 1TB for $7 that I did once and that was almost a year ago


Have one of those idle for me  ?


----------



## drmike (Jan 21, 2014)

blergh said:


> Yeah, too bad they discontinued the uncompressed streams, or at least their website says so, haven't visited in a good while so wasn't aware of it.


I never realized they had uncompressed streams  sad.   What sort of bit rate were those streams?


----------



## Awmusic12635 (Jan 21, 2014)

drmike said:


> Have one of those idle for me  ?


Nope sorry. The ones who bought them originally have held onto them tightly, even changing hands a few times.


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

@GVH-Jon

Can I try now? I am still going to pay through my little socks proxy.

Mun


----------



## BuyCPanel-Kevin (Jan 21, 2014)

How about to DDOS facebook.com?


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

BuyCPanel-Kevin said:


> How about to DDOS facebook.com?


How about to DDOS greenvaluehost.com and get his RamNode VPS suspended/ force him to pay Nick a hefty overage bill?


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 21, 2014)

BuyCPanel-Kevin said:


> How about to DDOS facebook.com?


But but but but but how could u say this!? We pay you so much monies. ;(



Net said:


> How about to DDOS greenvaluehost.com and get his RamNode VPS suspended/ force him to pay Nick a hefty overage bill?


We'll pay Nick overages if needed. We bought DDoS protection from him for a reason too. To be protected from DDoS attacks.


----------



## willie (Jan 21, 2014)

As mentioned earlier you'd have to transfer at 300mbit/sec 24/7 for the whole month, to use up 100TB.  I've never seen a VPS that could transfer at that speed, except possibly downloading from a CDN egress that was right there in the same data center (the usual cachefly test).  If someone can report here that these GVH VPSes can transfer outbound at that speed for even 5 minutes let alone a whole month, I'll be pretty impressed.


----------



## Nett (Jan 21, 2014)

willie said:


> As mentioned earlier you'd have to transfer at 300mbit/sec 24/7 for the whole month, to use up 100TB.  I've never seen a VPS that could transfer at that speed, except possibly downloading from a CDN egress that was right there in the same data center (the usual cachefly test).  If someone can report here that these GVH VPSes can transfer at that speed for even 5 minutes let alone a whole month, I'll be pretty impressed.


Get lots of them


----------



## Mun (Jan 21, 2014)

BuyCPanel-Kevin said:


> How about to DDOS facebook.com?





Net said:


> How about to DDOS greenvaluehost.com and get his RamNode VPS suspended/ force him to pay Nick a hefty overage bill?


Just gonna say it "you two are a bunch of dicks that need to be kicked in the  balls"

Mun


----------



## vRozenSch00n (Jan 22, 2014)

Mun said:


> Just gonna say it "you two are a bunch of dicks that need to be kicked in the  balls"
> 
> Mun


As George Carlin said, "Bada bing bada boom"


----------



## willie (Jan 22, 2014)

Net said:


> Get lots of them


That would be 100tb each then.  Same issue.

I think of setting up a VOIP switch for private voice chat. All clients would run 24/7 to prevent traffic analysis.  Not too much cpu since it's just UDP streams being cross-routed through an in-memory lookup table: all encryption is done at the endpoints.  2400 clients at 64 kbps full duplex (i.e. each client uses 8 kbyte/sec upstream and another 8k downstream) and there's the 100TB.  How's that?


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

Now Willie that is just wasting resources   Even though I disagree with that vague rule, it has some merits.


----------



## willie (Jan 22, 2014)

You mean running all the clients full time?  That's very standard practice on military radio networks.  You don't want the opponent to be able to know who is talking when or to who.  It definitely needs doing in the current regime of pervasive internet monitoring.


----------



## joepie91 (Jan 22, 2014)

drmike said:


> Now Willie that is just wasting resources   Even though I disagree with that vague rule, it has some merits.


It's actually just a form of a normal security/crypto technique; padding.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

Now I get it  Oh yeah very legitimate..  Funny as all heck...

Been doing similar thing for literally decades over wireless transmissions and over umm analog wire lines....  Ho hum... didn't realize.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

willie said:


> As mentioned earlier you'd have to transfer at 300mbit/sec 24/7 for the whole month, to use up 100TB.  I've never seen a VPS that could transfer at that speed, except possibly downloading from a CDN egress that was right there in the same data center (the usual cachefly test).


Fastest day I've seen there something like this:

150 Mbit/s+ over the 24 hour period.


----------



## willie (Jan 22, 2014)

drmike said:


> Fastest day I've seen there something like this:
> 
> 150 Mbit/s+ over the 24 hour period.


That's still faster than any vps I've ever used by quite a large margin.  This is that $5/month product?  If yes it's impressive.  But there's no way to use up 100tb/mo.

The 250GB of disk is also interesting though I guess not insane in the same way as the purported ram and bw allocations.  But, there is more angst involved with storage plans, since you can lose a lot of data if the host deadpools.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 22, 2014)

willie said:


> That's still faster than any vps I've ever used by quite a large margin.  This is that $5/month product?  If yes it's impressive.  But there's no way to use up 100tb/mo.
> 
> The 250GB of disk is also interesting though I guess not insane in the same way as the purported ram and bw allocations.  But, there is more angst involved with storage plans, since you can lose a lot of data if the host deadpools.


It's *impossible* for us to deadpool.

As you guys said, "We're backed by the CC mafia" right?

In all seriousness though, it's really impossible for us to deadpool so nobody has anything to worry about.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

That's a really, really ballsy claim to make with no proof to back it up.

Seriously, if you want assholes like me to stop reaming you a new one, you should either give some solid backing to this idiocy, or stop making claims you can't possibly maintain.


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

drmike said:


> Now we are talking...   GVH is becoming my favorite niche brand this quarter no doubt.
> 
> I like the kid's gusto.


Challenge accepted.


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> It's *impossible* for us to deadpool.
> 
> As you guys said, "We're backed by the CC mafia" right?
> 
> In all seriousness though, it's really impossible for us to deadpool so nobody has anything to worry about.


_impossible_, give me 7 days on a VPS and we'll see what happens.

Little bit of fun and you could have the good ol' police knocking at your door


----------



## ChrisK (Jan 22, 2014)

Can you please provision my order

@GVH-Jon

9074789728

Thanks


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

I am absolutely loving where this is going.


----------



## ChrisK (Jan 22, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> I am absolutely loving where this is going.


Can't wait for my new iPad


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 22, 2014)

> It's *impossible* for us to deadpool.


Two months ago you were having a "financial crisis" because a bank transfer was late getting into your PayPal account and your LLC was in bad standing with the state of Illinois.

It's possible for any company to "deadpool".  Market conditions can change, management can make a few bad moves, etc.  During the DotCom boom there were a lot of cocky young'uns who thought they were set for life.  After the bubble popped more than a few former Silicon Alley dotcom CEO's and VPs (whose companies had received tens of millions in VC funding) went from riches to rags and ended up waiting tables and doing other low wage jobs for a while to pay the bills.

For the TL;DR crowd: here's a picture which sums it up:


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

This is just getting good, popcorn is ready.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

Does anyone here actually have service with the kid?  The few folks here I've seen try to get a VM were denied.  More and more I'm getting the feeling that the company doesn't even exist - all just a front with no actual activity, and the kid's just a troll out to see how long he can make people think it's all real.


----------



## ChrisK (Jan 22, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Does anyone here actually have service with the kid?  The few folks here I've seen try to get a VM were denied.  More and more I'm getting the feeling that the company doesn't even exist - all just a front with no actual activity, and the kid's just a troll out to see how long he can make people think it's all real.


I was just refunded, probably true.


----------



## blergh (Jan 22, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> That's a really, really ballsy claim to make with no proof to back it up.
> 
> Seriously, if you want assholes like me to stop reaming you a new one, you should either give some solid backing to this idiocy, or stop making claims you can't possibly maintain.


I understand your concern, but what makes you think they would? Judging by your earlier posts it seems like you want to stir it all up for no apparent reason? If you feel they are a CC-shell then so be it, why would they have to prove you anything?

Of course this offer is completely ridiculous and unsustainable in a real-world situation, and that goes for them and them only.

All these posts back and forth just makes you come across as a pretty rude, and you aren't one are you?


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 22, 2014)

ChrisK said:


> I was just refunded, probably true.


My bets are on William winning the iPad.


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

#!/bin/bash

while :

do

      echo "Challenge Accepted"

      wget http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

      rm -rf 100mb.test

      sleep 1

done


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

blergh said:


> I understand your concern, but what makes you think they would? Judging by your earlier posts it seems like you want to stir it all up for no apparent reason? If you feel they are a CC-shell then so be it, why would they have to prove you anything?


If he just wanted to walk around going "Nope, I'm not CC", that's perfectly fine. There are others willing to take the piss for that particular claim.

My issue stems from the outrageous claims of superiority - being part of a team that actually put in hard work to get to a successful position, it's pretty damn insulting. So I call out the BS - and when that's met with more lies, I just thrust harder. Sure, it just keeps wheels spinning.. but he could very easily shut me up simply by providing the simple proof I've asked for multiple times (which he ignored), answering the few simple questions I've put forth several times (which he ignored); or hell, if he even just had legitimate clients step in to say "Y'know, I have this service and it's doing pretty well" - that would go a LONG way towards his credibility.

(inb4 a number of _clients_ suddenly show up to his defense after saying that)



blergh said:


> All these posts back and forth just makes you come across as a pretty rude, and you aren't one are you?


... you don't know me very well, do you >_> I will always speak my mind, and I don't sugarcoat anything. That being said however - if he proves my claims wrong, I will be the very first to hattip and publicly apologize for the slights.


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

I figured out why they can never deadpool - they have no customers and no servers.

Sounds logical.


----------



## ChrisK (Jan 22, 2014)

SrsX said:


> I figured out why they can never deadpool - they have no customers and no servers.
> 
> Sounds logical.


Sounds about right


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

SrsX said:


> #!/bin/bash
> 
> while :
> 
> ...


Won't work. Cachefly will end up rate limiting after they catch on. Found that out when we had someone try this on us awhile back.


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 22, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> or hell, if he even just had legitimate clients step in to say "Y'know, I have this service and it's doing pretty well" - that would go a LONG way towards his credibility.


Inb4 I'm just bashing GVH for the sake of bashing. This is an honest report of what has happened thus far.

I bought a VPS in Buffalo with them. First time ever having anything in Buffalo. It's as shitty as people say it is. Network aside, the node incurs downtime with _some_ regularity. Typically the VPS itself is rebooted or goes offline for periods at a time during the late evening to early morning hours, resulting in uptime being reset. The node itself seems to become unreachable during that same period (typically), so looks like it may be a node crash of some form. Network as a whole doesn't go out as I'm monitoring the switch prior to the node. Last week it was every single night, now it seems to be hit or miss if it happens (so it's improved I guess?). Started monitoring after it happened back to back for a few days.

I've got a ticket in, but I had to provide "proof" at the request of Jon because their "logs indicate everything is fine".

I started a statuscake on my existing stuff for the sake of having proof that this issue occurs as my earlier tickets had a "it's fine, we promise, we'll look into it" reply, and I simply didn't have any evidence outside of running "uptime" on my vps, and their support blaming me for the VPS "restarting".

Public reporting: http://uptime.statuscake.com/?TestID=HPzjmKe4ss

Edit: For the sake of clarity, there's a chance earlier issues prior to the monitoring had been related to NodeWatch, but I never got a straight answer about what I was doing wrong to be triggered by NodeWatch, and nobody bothered looking into it (or the _outsourced support_ didn't have access to it, because they kept insisting that nothing was being done via abuse tools to turn the box off or restart it)


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

ahahaha, well, you just debunked my theory of the whole operation being a fake for trolling 

I was honestly almost a client myself as well when they first started up... but the first time he started sucking off CC in public I decided "nope, no way in hell they're getting my info".


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Won't work. Cachefly will end up rate limiting after they catch on. Found that out when we had someone try this on us awhile back.


Damn, was worth a shot though.


----------



## MartinD (Jan 22, 2014)

BuyCPanel-Kevin said:


> How about to DDOS facebook.com?


You really are a moron.


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 22, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> ahahaha, well, you just debunked my theory of the whole operation being a fake for trolling


My bad!


----------



## ChrisK (Jan 22, 2014)

SkylarM said:


> My bad!


Can I borrow the 100TB VPS?


----------



## blergh (Jan 22, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> .. you don't know me very well, do you
> 
> I just thrust harder.


Indeed i do not, I assume it makes sense now tho.


----------



## MartinD (Jan 22, 2014)

Any more ddos bullcrap and the perpetrator gets a timeout.


----------



## Mun (Jan 22, 2014)

Jon never said If I could get a VM or if he was going to continue to deny it, yet he responded to other people.

q_q

Mun


----------



## Francisco (Jan 22, 2014)

Mun said:


> Jon never said If I could get a VM or if he was going to continue to deny it, yet he responded to other people.
> 
> q_q
> 
> Mun


Is he still doing the offer? There was a mention that his upstream's were on his case to suspend the plan.

Francisco


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 22, 2014)

Mun said:


> Jon never said If I could get a VM or if he was going to continue to deny it, yet he responded to other people.
> 
> q_q
> 
> Mun


You can, but please don't order through a proxy.



Francisco said:


> Is he still doing the offer? There was a mention that his upstream's were on his case to suspend the plan.
> 
> 
> Francisco


We haven't taken down the 100TB offers, _yet._ I'm weighing our options.


----------



## ChrisK (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> You can, but please don't order through a proxy.
> 
> We haven't taken down the 100TB offers, _yet._ I'm weighing our options.


Why was I refunded?


----------



## Mun (Jan 22, 2014)

Its... pending...... pending......


----------



## texteditor (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We haven't taken down the 100TB offers, _yet._ I'm weighing our options.


What _options_ did your _upstream_ give you?


----------



## GoodHosting (Jan 22, 2014)

I could easily use 100TB a month, I'd get internal IPs and get ColoCrossing to add them to my VLAN exported to SingleHOP, and use the VPSes as HBA (de-centralized storage) nodes.

Problem?


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 22, 2014)

texteditor said:


> What _options_ did your _upstream_ give you?


I said this before and I'll say this again. GreenValueHost is independent. *We* call the shots. *We* are *not* being ghost operated by our upstream. The decision is ultimately *ours.* I'm weighting the options of what action will get what result.



GoodHosting said:


> I could easily use 100TB a month, I'd get internal IPs and get ColoCrossing to add them to my VLAN exported to SingleHOP, and use the VPSes as HBA (de-centralized storage) nodes.
> 
> Problem?


Not at problem at all. Feel free to order and if you hit 100TB before anytime else, you get a free iPad Air. If you're outside of the US then you're paying for international shipping.


----------



## MCH-Phil (Jan 22, 2014)

I might put my hand in and give it a shot, lol with backups it wouldn't be all that impossible. As long as the hardware will allow for it


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I said this before and I'll say this again. GreenValueHost is independent. *We* call the shots. *We* are *not* being ghost operated by our upstream. The decision is ultimately *ours.* I'm weighting the options of what action will get what result.
> 
> Not at problem at all. Feel free to order and if you hit 100TB before anytime else, you get a free iPad Air. If you're outside of the US then you're paying for international shipping.


But earlier you said your upstream was pulling the plug on the 100TB plans and "expressed concern". My upstream doesn't tell me what I can and cannot sell in my VPS packages.


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I said this before and I'll say this again. GreenValueHost is independent. *We* call the shots. *We* are *not* being ghost operated by our upstream. The decision is ultimately *ours.* I'm weighting the options of what action will get what result.
> 
> Not at problem at all. Feel free to order and if you hit 100TB before anytime else, you get a free iPad Air. If you're outside of the US then you're paying for international shipping.


ChicagoVPS said the *exact* *same thing*.

ColoCrossing said *they *did *not* own *lowend**.

I'm not sure who to believe still.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 22, 2014)

SrsX said:


> ChicagoVPS said the *exact* *same thing*.
> 
> ColoCrossing said *they *did *not* own *lowend**.
> 
> I'm not sure who to believe still.


The day that ColoCrossing owns ChicagoVPS is the day that dogs can fly. Let's just put that out there. ColoCrossing has no shell brands ..



SkylarM said:


> But earlier you said your upstream was pulling the plug on the 100TB plans and "expressed concern". My upstream doesn't tell me what I can and cannot sell in my VPS packages.


Please do not put words in my mouth.


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Please do not put words in my mouth.


I did't.





GVH-Jon said:


> also our upstream is expressing a major concern for us regarding our LET plans and I have been approached several times by many key people with requests to immediately pull stock on all the 100TB plans.


 

 







GVH-Jon said:


> The day that ColoCrossing owns ChicagoVPS is the day that dogs can fly. Let's just put that out there. ColoCrossing has no shell brands ..


How would *you* know if this is true or not? Being the independent company that has no influence from ColoCrossing, how does one know the inner workings of their business and what they do? Or is the way you get your information _classified._


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 22, 2014)

'key people' as in key people *internally *within our company. and *concern* as in "You're going to be hit with a large overage bill, it is best for you to pull these plans if you do not want to pay thousands of dollars in overages. This is just a strong recommendation". With all of the upstream's revenue being put aside.

And my knowledge of information is *classified.*


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> And my knowledge of information is *classified.*


I'm the Queen of England. I'd prove it to you, but that's classified.

So lets recap!

1) You are in no way controlled by your upstream, being both HVH and CC in this particular case.

2) You know details about HVH and CC that is _classified_ but you are in no way controlled by your upstream

3) You are CONFIDENT that you will never deadpool, it's _impossible_ but has nothing to do with your upstream provider(s)


----------



## Nett (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> The day that ColoCrossing owns ChicagoVPS is the day that dogs can fly.


My dog can fly


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

*ColoCrossing has no shell brands ...   *

This isn't true.  Must I?  

We can start by the "company" they keep.

Go over to LET and LEB and research the seedy history of BuffaloVPS aka ChicagoVPS shell company.

Then go ask Jeremiah Shinkle who was dual employee of both and employed by CC about the shenanigans at play at CC.

Then of course, you have UGVPS and that fiasco.  The fraud of a woman owner when not involved.  And you have that lad and Fab lounging in CC's offices.   I don't have an office at my providers HQs and my customers don't hang out there.

Then in case you missed it, CC denied owning LET/LEB even though someone gut punched them for many months about it.

Then look at the 20 offers from ServerMania and their shell companies on LEB in 2013.  The "Blanchard Boys" with their cohort Chris K.  Biloh is such good friends with those turkeys it isn't even funny.  That Level3 BW in Buffalo, thank them for chipping in so you have that.

Come on now Jon,  you lost massive credibility points on that.


----------



## Nett (Jan 22, 2014)

Where is Biloh on this forum o_0?? I must force him to sign up...


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

*The day that ColoCrossing owns ChicagoVPS is the day that dogs can fly. *

CC owns an "investment" interest, significant chunk in CVPS.   CVPS is routinely / has been routinely been slid former customer equipment freely.   Yeah CVPS is in CC's billing system, but that doesn't mean squat.   

I mean come on, Fabozzi's daddy is a big wig accountant and I won't even go other places.   Structuring and hiding assets, it's in their blood.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> "You're going to be hit with a large overage bill, it is best for you to pull these plans if you do not want to pay thousands of dollars in overages. This is just a strong recommendation".


Ahh yeah, they are right.  But your deep pockets can slide those thousands over from non use profits to compensate for the abusers customers that actually use their resources.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

*I WISH WE'D QUIT YANKING HIS UPSTREAM INTO THINGS *

Even I am rather tired of their semi-useless asses.   Volumes have been wrote (I wrote many of them) about CC.  Humans, yeah... Crooked, very.  Liars, proven.  Scamming, certainly.  Failed attempt to corner the lowend VPS industry,  they tried.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 22, 2014)

100TB plans are being pulled tomorrow.


----------



## Jade (Jan 22, 2014)

This all sounds like abunch of dramalama if you ask me. Skylar is the *queen* of England indeed I can vouch for that, however for this 100 TB challenge I find it rather amusing, I mean let's be real here, how can anyone legit use 100 TB bandwidth in one given month, it almost seems impossible. Offering 100 TB bandwidth for the price its being offered is ridiculous because if someone even came close to using that amount, they were most likely be terminated for "abusing".


----------



## Nett (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> 100TB plans are being pulled tomorrow.


LOL. Reason?


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 22, 2014)

drmike said:


> Ahh yeah, they are right.  But your deep pockets can slide those thousands over from non use profits to compensate for the abusers customers that actually use their resources.


Uhh ... I think it's important to note that here in the US, *it's tax season.* :/


----------



## WebSearchingPro (Jan 22, 2014)

SkylarM said:


> I'm the Queen of England. I'd prove it to you, but that's classified.


I have been cleared to say he is not *nods yes* the Queen of England.


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> The day that ColoCrossing owns ChicagoVPS is the day that dogs can fly. Let's just put that out there. ColoCrossing has no shell brands ..


Holy fucking shit, did you see that?

I swore I just saw not one, but *two* dogs fly.

Don't worry, I already called the media and they said it's old news.


----------



## joker48 (Jan 22, 2014)

wanna create ssh account n sell/share it,,,it's really huge bandwith


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 22, 2014)

> I have been approached several times by many key people with requests to immediately pull stock on all the 100TB plans.





> 'key people' as in key people *internally *within our company. and *concern* as in "You're going to be hit with a large overage bill, it is best for you to pull these plans if you do not want to pay thousands of dollars in overages



Who the fuck are these _"key people *internally *within our company"_?  Are you hearing voices in your head as you're sitting in your parents basement typing?



> also our upstream is expressing a major concern for us regarding our LET plans



Your upstream is a service provider, just as your your parent's cable company and electric company  are also service providers.  Why would any service provider be so closely involved in, and have such a strong influence on, your business decision making?



> information is *classified .*



somebody find me a facepalm meme


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 22, 2014)

SrsX said:


> Holy fucking shit, did you see that?
> 
> I swore I just saw not one, but *two* dogs fly.


http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-parachuting-dogs-of-the-british-army-in-world-war-ii-a-939002.html


----------



## SrsX (Jan 22, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> Are you hearing voices in your head as you're sitting in your parents basement typing?


_The voices in my head tell me that he should rm -rf / --no-preserve-root_


----------



## telephone (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> GVH has plans to expand to Asia in either Singapore or South Korea (likely South Korea) and offer our 100TB plans there as well. After we expand to Asia, we're expanding to the UK. We're also planning to expand to Arizona so that West Coast customers who don't want to go with CC can buy from us, and also to Boston Massachusetts (super rare location) so that east coast customers that dont want Buffalo can buy from us. All of those locations will most likely have our signature 100TB for $5.





GVH-Jon said:


> 100TB plans are being pulled tomorrow.



Wait, aren't those 100TB plans your signature? How are we suppose to identify you in the vast hosting industry without your signature plan???

I think I'm already forgetting... GVH, hmmm GVH, I think I know it... Is it Gaylord Vampire Hosting? Nah, that's too trendy. What about Greedy Venture Hosting? Meh, close enough.


----------



## ChrisK (Jan 22, 2014)

that didn't last long.

i still want my 100tb $5 vps GVH, you didn't tell me why you refunded me.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

Who's calls these things on the dot every time?  Hovering over head, target locked, bay doors open.  Drop 'em. BOMBS!

GVH-Jon,  I HATE THAT YOU BUCKLED.  HATE IT.  Gave in to upstream corporate.  Makes 0 sense.   You can afford to pay it  Not recommended, but you can do it.

I umm, warned you in PM that monkeying with too many ingredients and changing how you operate would be self induced death kiss to GVH.

Expect that 45 day refund policy to be invoked by customers if you don't continue their plans on the 100TB.   Not fun there.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

The only word I have for this kid now is _embarrassment_.  Something he doesn't seem quite capable of.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Uhh ... I think it's important to note that here in the US, *it's tax season.* :/


It's only tax season for wage slaves.  Corporations tend to file quarterly.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

But wait 

<JonGV> we're gonna offer 1U colocation in buffalo for $25

 <JonGV> with 60 cent per month IPs and 200TB bandwidth

Sign me up for 2


----------



## Epidrive (Jan 22, 2014)

Was a little bored tried to browse through the gvh website.


Been trying to not mendle with this but i just cant take what im seeing.

Like this for example http://www.greenvaluehost.com/whychooseus.html



> 4) Our servers are not overloaded and never will be!
> 
> 
> Unlike other hosts who try to stuff thousands of clients into one already overloaded server, we don't believe in taking profit over performance. We lightly load our servers and on top of that, we only deploy top of the line servers with RAID-10 Protection and LiteSpeed Web Server to ensure stability and speed. We make sure that your websites will always have plenty of breathing room in our server, meaning that the days of slow page loads are over.


"...are not overloaded and never will be"


What happened here then? http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/20262/green-value-host-stay-away-end-customer-review



> 6) Our pricing structure is reasonable AND profitable!
> 
> 
> Unlike other companies that attempt to underprice their hosting services until they collaspe or disappear, our services are sold at profitable prices that bring long-time success. 5000TB for $1/month? No thanks. Not at GVH.


"5000TB for $1/month" I havent seen anything like that so far, the most ive seen is 100TB for $5/month and that doesnt make it any less

and this http://www.greenvaluehost.com/codeofethics.html



> 2. We won't "sugar coat the truth" - Ever.
> 
> 
> Unlike other companies that will delibrately lie to their clients to prevent them from going elsewhere, we don't. We believe that lying to your clients is a horrible business practice and won't lead to success in the long run. We promise that everything we tell you will be the absolute straight-out truth, and nothing but the truth. We want you to know that we have nothing to hide from you and that you can always trust that we'll never deceive you.


How in the world can you say this...


Like allocating resources that clients arent able to use 100%?


Or that CPU load that "can never happen" in your servers?


"We wont sugar coat the truth" - Ever.


----------



## Eased (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> 100TB plans are being pulled tomorrow.


The "100TB a month challenge"  was apparently successful...


----------



## Mun (Jan 22, 2014)

My order is still pending


----------



## Nett (Jan 22, 2014)

Mun said:


> My order is still pending


Apparently Jon does not like his plan himself.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

Haha, the Almighty Mun got shun.  Daddy, those 100TB offers are gone like 2013.


----------



## Mun (Jan 22, 2014)

drmike said:


> Haha, the Almight Mun got shun.  Daddy, those 100TB offers are gone like 2013.


When the hell did I get Almight?


----------



## maounique (Jan 22, 2014)

As much as I like this contest, I am strongly against wasting anything. 

Someone will pay for that, if "only" the environment or poor people in sweatshops.

How the bill is switched to others is not relevant, but please, do not waste anything just for fun or even for a prize.

If the plan is not sustainable, it will die by itself, be sure tehre are cohosrts of abusers busy now. It is not worth the cost for policing even. Just switch your BW hogs over there and it will be enough, IMO.

Wasting resources in purpose is really bad please dont.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 22, 2014)

I'm just loving how fast things went from "We can do this forever" to "We can't afford overages, plan's going away now".


----------



## Mun (Jan 22, 2014)

Mao_Member_no_signature said:


> As much as I like this contest, I am strongly against wasting anything.
> 
> Someone will pay for that, if "only" the environment or poor people in sweatshops.
> 
> ...


I actually was going to run mine for a purpose 

I wasn't going to waste bandwidth at all.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

Come on Mao, I am public television supporter.  Everyone needs fresh PBS programming.  Supporting the good socialism programming. 

Bow.


----------



## drmike (Jan 22, 2014)

Mun said:


> When the hell did I get Almight?


You earned your stripes @Mun.

I am still wondering why GVH doinked around with provisioning folks and dejected ya'all.


----------



## maounique (Jan 22, 2014)

It was a general idea, there were people saying it should run dd to null and things like those.

I do use a few iSCSI targets mounted in various places, so I know what you mean, however, doing dd is a clear waste.

As for the impossibility of it, I do see people doing 100 k packets and 800 mbps (not same ones) for semi-legit stuff (legal BT last one) and we have to say no to them as that is abuse, but it certainly can happen.


----------



## Mun (Jan 22, 2014)

drmike said:


> You earned your stripes @Mun.
> 
> I am still wondering why GVH doinked around with provisioning folks and dejected ya'all.


Thank you, I didn't expect that at all.... 

Just in case anyone was wondering, I was planning on hosting a transmission-daemon with a bunch of linux and other legal torrents with an IOlimit and such, but as well have nginx share the backend folder.

I really wasn't aiming to "Win" but I thought I'd give it a shot and help out by providing some very high speed torrent servers.

Mun


----------



## nunim (Jan 22, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> ... And my knowledge of information is *classified.*


I don't believe you, I don't think the US government has much interest in your little VPS business.  I believe you meant confidential, even that wouldn't make sense but it'd be closer.


----------



## joepie91 (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> The day that ColoCrossing owns ChicagoVPS is the day that dogs can fly. Let's just put that out there. ColoCrossing has no shell brands ..






GVH-Jon said:


> And my knowledge of information is *classified.*


Still wondering who "classifies" your information, if you are the one running the show.


----------



## lbft (Jan 23, 2014)

joepie91 said:


> Still wondering who "classifies" your information, if you are the one running the show.


The CIA.


----------



## Thelen (Jan 23, 2014)

Jon is like:


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

Still pending ...


----------



## drmike (Jan 23, 2014)

Some funny graphics on this thread 

The 100TB offer is still up in the GVH cart... But who knows if they'll give one out now.   

Did I go ruin a good thing  ?

Seriously, Buffalo node uptime looks quite bad...

http://uptime.statuscake.com/?TestID=HPzjmKe4ss

96% for 01/22

94% for 01/23

(for the VPS)

98% for 01/22 

88% for 01/23 

(for the server or port upstream)

These are just 5 minutes monitors, so lots of network blips will get missed.

Pretty sure Skylar has more slots in there for monitoring... Who else wants to monitor their GVH VPS?

Let's have a node heap monitoring outcome to stare out and see how it all pans out


----------



## Nett (Jan 23, 2014)

drmike said:


> Some funny graphics on this thread
> 
> 
> The 100TB offer is still up in the GVH cart... But who knows if they'll give one out now.
> ...


My result (average): One minute of down time every 5 minutes. (approx. 80% uptime)


----------



## blergh (Jan 23, 2014)

What's up with some of you people? You are all acting like sheep and putting fuel on the fire for no real reason other than to cause drama.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

I meant for new orders only. Customers can keep their plans.


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I meant for new orders only. Customers can keep their plans.



 meaning my order as well. You are delaying its setup on purpose until today so that you can say "Sorry, we removed the 100TB plan" Which, I think you did with all the new requests.

Mun


----------



## shovenose (Jan 23, 2014)

I got a $5 100TB GVH server.

I did a wget cron for a 2GB speedtest file, every minute. Got to 1.66TB before my VPS mysteriously stopped working. According to a support ticket it got compromised and was participating in a DDoS, however I highly doubt that.

Now ticket replies are getting ignored and my VPS is still unusable.

What garbage.


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> I got a $5 100TB GVH server.
> 
> I did a wget cron for a 2GB speedtest file, every minute. Got to 1.66TB before my VPS mysteriously stopped working. According to a support ticket it got compromised and was participating in a DDoS, however I highly doubt that.
> 
> ...


You are a fucking idiot, why would you EVER do that @shovenose. You are participating in a DOS shovenose.

Mun


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> I did a wget cron for a 2GB speedtest file, every minute.


... did your parents have any children that survived?


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> I got a $5 100TB GVH server.
> 
> 
> I did a wget cron for a 2GB speedtest file, every minute. Got to 1.66TB before my VPS mysteriously stopped working. According to a support ticket it got compromised and was participating in a DDoS, however I highly doubt that.
> ...


Congratualations that qualifies as a DDoS and ColoCrossing nulled you.


Termination is going to be following shortly.


----------



## SrsX (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Congratualations that qualifies as a DDoS and ColoCrossing nulled you.
> 
> 
> Termination is going to be following shortly.


OK, that makes more sense....

One machine doing wget on 2gb file every mine is DDoS.... Do you know what DDoS is?

_facepalms_

DDoS is Distrubuted Denial of Service, where more than one machine / server is perticipating in a attack.

DOS is a single machine.

_facepalms_


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

The hilarious thing is, despite how absolutely moronic shovenose is for pulling that stunt, he did just prove that even if GVH had the network capacity for someone to actually burn 100TB, ColoCrossing will shut it down long before.

Which I pretty much saw coming, to be honest.  We had quite a few users get nullrouted for 'DDoS' at CC just for breaking 50-60MB transferring to another host nearby.  And they'd always refuse to remove the nullroute until the client was terminated for it, regardless of situation.


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

I gots it 



Sorry bad image crop


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 23, 2014)

What on earth kind of crop job is that Mun


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

SkylarM said:


> What on earth kind of crop job is that Mun



I dont even know.


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

Mun said:


> I gots it
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry bad image crop


swap out transmission for deluged 1.3.6 + rasterbar 0.15.10, deluge tends to be better at...sharing with others, with an easily-tweakable cache to avoid needless disk hits

also consider grabbing the ltconfig deluge plugin for tweaking libtorrent-rasterbar and adding in the following


```
low_prio_disk": false,
"allow_multiple_connections_per_ip": true,
"disable_hash_checks": true,
"max_allowed_in_request_queue": 2000,
"num_want": 400,
"max_suggest_pieces": 100,
```


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> I got a $5 100TB GVH server.
> 
> I did a wget cron for a 2GB speedtest file, every minute. Got to 1.66TB before my VPS mysteriously stopped working. According to a support ticket it got compromised and was participating in a DDoS, however I highly doubt that.
> 
> ...


hahaha, shovenose you're alright


----------



## Gary (Jan 23, 2014)

WOW! Who'd've thought this plan would get nerfed. *shockedface*

Noobhosts gonna noob.


----------



## willie (Jan 23, 2014)

I had two VPS with separate hosts at CC Buffalo a while back, and was never able to get more than about 5MB/s transfer speed from one to the other.  It made me chuckle, CC's network was so bad even within the same data center.


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 23, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> We had quite a few users get nullrouted for 'DDoS' at CC just for breaking 50-60MB transferring to another host nearby.


They can't tell the difference between someone doing a large sized backup to another server  and a DDoS?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

After lengthly conversations with their "network tech", I have a strong feeling they don't know the difference between bit and byte, let alone being able to properly read tcpdumps.


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

Well I have to give Kudos to GVH-Jon, I was downloading at above 99MBps *BYTES*  I capped it down to 100Mbps so I wouldn't harm other users though.

Mun


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/20525/100tb-greenvaluehost-you-mean-1-66tb-negative-review-of-gvh#latest

Can we get a facepalm meme?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

> Due to your actions, you are no longer welcome as a client of GreenValueHost and will be reported to the appropriate authorities for your deliberate violation and internet crime.


That's definitely worthy of a facepalm.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> That's definitely worthy of a facepalm.


Last I checked, DoS attacks were illegal in the United States.


----------



## shovenose (Jan 23, 2014)

My root password on that vps was dogememe. the irony!


----------



## nunim (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> ... I did a wget cron for a 2GB speedtest file, every minute. Got to 1.66TB before my VPS mysteriously stopped working. According to a support ticket it got compromised and was participating in a DDoS ...


Did you own the machine that is hosting the SpeedTest file?


----------



## shovenose (Jan 23, 2014)

nunim said:


> Did you own the machine that is hosting the SpeedTest file?


I'll happily buy a hosting plan with the company that was hosting the speedtest server - that company does offer an unlimited bandwidth plan for $20.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Last I checked, DoS attacks were illegal in the United States.


While a ridiculous waste of resources, wget-ing a single file from a SpeedTest network repeatedly is not a 'DOS'.  That's the excuse you use to justify terminating a stupid client after realizing you've bitten off WAY more than you can chew.  Hence why you no longer offer the plan at all.

Here's a tip - if you don't want users to download a file at high enough speeds to piss off daddy Biloh, PLACE A CAP.  Next you're going to try and claim that Mun was 'instigating a DDoS' by seeding legal torrents.


----------



## shovenose (Jan 23, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> While a ridiculous waste of resources, wget-ing a single file from a SpeedTest network repeatedly is not a 'DOS'.  That's the excuse you use to justify terminating a stupid client after realizing you've bitten off WAY more than you can chew.  Hence why you no longer offer the plan at all.
> 
> Here's a tip - if you don't want users to download a file at high enough speeds to piss off daddy Biloh, PLACE A CAP.  Next you're going to try and claim that Mun was 'instigating a DDoS' by seeding legal torrents.


Thank you! If GVH had not had the riduclous 100TB lie of an offer nobody (not me, not anybody else) would have even tried this.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

I'm not defending you.  You're still a moron for trying to pull such a stunt in the first place.


----------



## nunim (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> I'll happily buy a hosting plan with the company that was hosting the speedtest server - that company does offer an unlimited bandwidth plan for $20.


So... No?  If you owned the box hosting the file I'd be defending you but you were not only wasting GVH resources, which I guess was the idea, you were also wasting the resources of the speedtest server.

I still wouldn't call it a DOS attack, just moronic.


----------



## kaniini (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Last I checked, DoS attacks were illegal in the United States.


Since when was downloading a 2GB test file with the server owner's consent illegal? Just wondering.


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> Thank you! If GVH had not had the riduclous 100TB lie of an offer nobody (not me, not anybody else) would have even tried this.


A guy said If I took a gun and shot him in the head he wouldn't die..... I didn't believe him so I shot him in the head.... sadly now I am in prison for the rest of my life because I was an idiot, and shot a guy in the head knowing it would kill him.

q_q

Shovenose


----------



## kaniini (Jan 23, 2014)

Next up seems to be CatalystHost offering 333TB bandwidth at $12/year.


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

kaniini said:


> Next up seems to be CatalystHost offering 333TB bandwidth at $12/year.


Do not mess with my catalysthost >:|


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 23, 2014)

kaniini said:


> Since when was downloading a 2GB test file with the server owner's consent illegal? Just wondering.



You're forgetting that Jon also thinks it is illegal for a customer to entitle a thread _"GreenValueHost (not very knowledgable)" _

Mr Shove not too wisely wasted resources (not to mention using an incredibly insecure password), but what he did was in no way, shape, or form a DoS attack.

denial of service attacks for dummies



> but you were not only wasting GVH resources


The contract Mr Shove entered into with GVH entitled him to use 100TB of bandwidth monthly.  He only used 1.6% of the amount he paid for.  If Jon is engaging in false advertising by advertising 100TB and then not allowing people to use what they paid for (or altering the terms of the contract after the customer paid) then he should be reported to the FTC.  It's not a violation of the law to download a file with the owner's consent, but it is a violation of consumer protection laws to engage in deceptive/false advertising.


----------



## Hxxx (Jan 23, 2014)

I guess that what Mr. Shove needed to do is have a VPS at GVH and one with another company that offers the same plan (if any), then transmit the file back and forward between his own 2 VPS  using openVPN. That is for sure NOT a DoS of any kind. Both of your VPS are yours.


----------



## shovenose (Jan 23, 2014)

hrr1963 said:


> I guess that what Mr. Shove needed to do is have a VPS at GVH and one with another company that offers the same plan (if any), then transmit the file back and forward between his own 2 VPS  using openVPN. That is for sure NOT a DoS of any kind. Both of your VPS are yours.


Would have been smart. Or got a server at Wholesale internet which is unmetered. But I wasn't about to sink $50 into something. I shouldn't have to pay $50 to use a $5 VPS.


----------



## Hxxx (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> Would have been smart. Or got a server at Wholesale internet which is unmetered. But I wasn't about to sink $50 into something. I shouldn't have to pay $50 to use a $5 VPS.


But its worth. Remember the iPad! That's over $300.00


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> You're forgetting that Jon also thinks it is illegal for a customer to entitle a thread _"GreenValueHost (not very knowledgable)" _
> 
> Mr Shove not too wisely wasted resources (not to mention using an incredibly insecure password), but what he did was in no way, shape, or form a DoS attack.
> 
> ...


Do you think the owner consents to shovenose downloading that file repeatedly if they sent in an abuse report to ColoCrossing?


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Do you think the owner consents to shovenose downloading that file repeatedly if they sent in an abuse report to ColoCrossing?


So much time on forums, so little time addressing the Buffalo node issues I'm experiencing.


----------



## drmike (Jan 23, 2014)

SrsX said:


> OK, that makes more sense....
> 
> One machine doing wget on 2gb file every mine is DDoS.... Do you know what DDoS is?
> 
> ...


Shove was DoS'ing a speed test file.   Missed the first D for distributed.   He needed a GVH VPS in a second geographic location to achieve that.


----------



## mtwiscool (Jan 23, 2014)

If only gvh just used fdcservers they would not have this issue with less then $0.04 per Mbps bandwidth


----------



## drmike (Jan 23, 2014)

kaniini said:


> Next up seems to be CatalystHost offering 333TB bandwidth at $12/year.


But you can't buy that plan.  Never in stock.  Plus 128MB plan even further limits creative use of BW.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

Taken from LET:

This is what ColoCrossing sent us:





> We have received notice that 192.3.108.94, which is assigned to your machine la1.securenetworkpanel.com, has been participating in a DDoS attack. Please contact the end user responsible for for this machine/IP and take the appropriate steps to ensure that this machine has not been compromised. Let us know if you need any assistance in this effort and please be aware that failure to provide a timely update will result in immediate suspension of service.


This means that shovenose's repeated 1 minute cron downloads of the speed test file legitimately violated the policies of the owners of the speed test file and thus they have sent in an abuse report to ColoCrossing stating that shovenose was participating in a DoS attack against them.

TLDR: The owners of the speed test file that shovenose set a cron to download on *did not* warrant shovenose to perform the action, therefore it is legally considered a *DoS attack*. If anyone here would like, I could ask CC to provide us with the report.


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Taken from LET:
> 
> This is what ColoCrossing sent us:
> 
> ...


I'd like to see the report...

Mun


----------



## Amitz (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Do you think the owner consents to shovenose downloading that file repeatedly if they sent in an abuse report to ColoCrossing?


Could we please kindly see a copy of that abuse report? Would be great!

//esit: Mun was a bit faster...


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

I'm requesting them for you guys now.


----------



## Amitz (Jan 23, 2014)

Thanks!


----------



## drmike (Jan 23, 2014)

Shove wasn't slurping a 10G file...   There are some ... one in LA


----------



## shovenose (Jan 23, 2014)

Here's the thing - there is a possibility the VPS was compromised since I was not using a very secure root password. Perhaps that was the original problem. But I still don't think I did anything wrong esp. not illegal.


----------



## WelltodoInformalCattle (Jan 23, 2014)

Ah, the "I didn't know what I was doing so I'll pretend someone compromised my server and did it" excuse.


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 23, 2014)

mtwiscool said:


> If only gvh just used fdcservers they would not have this issue with less then $0.04 per Mbps bandwidth


*There's a reason* *FDC's* *bandwidth is only $0.04 per Mbps: their network* *SUCKS*

Cogent, Gogent, and more Cogent, *Gogent*



> _E3v3 series severs_



*WTF* *is a* *SEVER?*


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> *WTF* *is a* *SEVER?*



Wish I could get GVH sever(ed off from the rest of the internet)


----------



## Mun (Jan 23, 2014)

shovenose said:


> Here's the thing - there is a possibility the VPS was compromised since I was not using a very secure root password. Perhaps that was the original problem. But I still don't think I did anything wrong esp. not illegal.


I think a few minutes ago you admitted to running a cron job? I mean crime job....


----------



## MartinD (Jan 23, 2014)

Can't help but think this thread has run it's course. All I see now is bickering, point scoring and yet more publicity for an outfit most people don't like.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

MartinD said:


> Can't help but think this thread has run it's course. All I see now is bickering, point scoring and yet more publicity for an outfit most people don't like.


Then please close this thread and all the other threads relating to GVH and let's move on.


----------



## drmike (Jan 23, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> *There's a reason* *FDC's* *bandwidth is only $0.04 per Mbps: their network* *SUCKS*
> 
> Cogent, Gogent, and more Cogent, *Gogent*


Gogent  That's a  Biloh trademark... The lad even wrote that in his WHT ads multiple times.  But alas, the lure was too great and he too went Gogent.


----------



## MartinD (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Then please close this thread and all the other threads relating to GVH and let's move on.


Feel free to report the thread if that's how you feel. Also feel free to stop posting your usual gibberish - that will help the situation no end.


----------



## drmike (Jan 23, 2014)

MartinD said:


> Can't help but think this thread has run it's course. All I see now is bickering, point scoring and yet more publicity for an outfit most people don't like.


Nah the thread is still alive and well good sir.  

Just some speed bumps along the road, after the storm. Some folks just couldn't be creative and stooped to repetitive downloads.   Expected 

My BW consumption or rather one I am watching is way down.  Buffalo today has been a turd in the punch bowl and probably 80% or less uptime.


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

MartinD said:


> Also feel free to stop posting your usual gibberish - that will help the situation no end.


Glad someone said it


----------



## shovenose (Jan 23, 2014)

I'm not saying that as an excuse. It IS a possibility. HOWEVER I do not know that.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

By the way guys, non CC Dallas should be ready *tonight* or *tomorrow.*


----------



## SrsX (Jan 23, 2014)

I couldn't find the proper "MEME" for this facepalm, so I'll call this a GreenValueCrossingPalm, OK?


----------



## Nett (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> By the way guys, non CC Dallas should be ready *tonight* or *tomorrow.*


Haha, terminating 100TB plans for dallas...sucks


----------



## drmike (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> By the way guys, non CC Dallas should be ready *tonight* or *tomorrow.*


100TB available in non CC Dallas?


----------



## Hxxx (Jan 23, 2014)

Guys your "Mean power" is over 9000.

I'm looking forward to what are you guys going to say if in any future GVH turn into a GoDaddy full of profit LOL. All of you with your heads down.

Only time will set things right.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

texteditor said:


> Glad someone said it


I've been saying it.  The kid has VERY selective reading skills, and tends to avoid any topic he can't (poorly) counter with (misused) marketing jargon and lies.


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> I've been saying it.  The kid has VERY selective reading skills, and tends to avoid any topic he can't (poorly) counter with (misused) marketing jargon and lies.


Welp this isn't fair, I'm leaving; mods please sink the thread behind me as I head out


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

Ah! We even have one of this HF guys over at the thread on LET trying to offend the act of DoS. Wonderful! </sarcasm>


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 23, 2014)

> I'm looking forward to what are you guys going to say if in any future GVH turn into a GoDaddy full of profit


GoDaddy full of profit? LOL

This article is from 3 years ago but profits have been one thing that has been severely lacking from GoDaddy's balance sheet throughout most of its history.  It lost money each and every one of its first 10 years in business.

http://247wallst.com/investing/2010/09/11/godaddy-is-godawful/



> As I wrote for TheStreet.com in 2006, “Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Go Daddy hasn’t had a profitable year since it was founded in 1997. Last year, it had a net loss of $11.6 million.”  Two months after my story appeared, GoDaddy pulled its planned IPO ..


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> GoDaddy full of profit? LOL
> 
> This article is from 3 years ago but profits have been one thing that has been severely lacking from GoDaddy's balance sheet throughout most of its history.  It lost money each and every one of its first 10 years in business.
> 
> http://247wallst.com/investing/2010/09/11/godaddy-is-godawful/


And you fail to realize that GoDaddy's CEO is a billionaire.


----------



## Francisco (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> And you fail to realize that GoDaddy's CEO is a billionaire.


And that's probably why the companies balance sheets are right fucked.

Francisco


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

I've changed my mind -- The 100TB plans won't be pulled at this time. 

All of these threads are skyrocketing our orders like there's no tomorrow and all of this publicity is heavily increasing our capital.


----------



## Nett (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I've changed my mind -- The 100TB plans won't be pulled at this time.
> 
> All of these threads are skyrocketing our orders like there's no tomorrow and all of this publicity is heavily increasing our capital.


Why not do a 100TB dedi for the same $95 price?


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I've changed my mind -- The 100TB plans won't be pulled at this time.
> 
> All of these threads are skyrocketing our orders like there's no tomorrow and all of this publicity is heavily increasing our capital.


did you ask upstream if it's OK?

also, please respond in the form of an analogy, you are so good at them



> So if you buy a gun and you shoot someone with it, do you think you're going to get off the hook in court when you say "Oh I was just trying to use the gun I bought" ?





> So if I stole a penny from a bank, would that still not be stealing? It's only just very minor cash, but that's still stealing, right?
> Same case here. If you send useless traffic to a server, it's a DoS no matter how large or small.
> 
> And also, it's not the INTENT. It's the ACTION.





> So you mean that people under 21 in the United States shouldn't be punished for drinking alcohol underage because they were "baited" to do it because of all the social pressure and advertising by beer companies? That's not an excuse.


----------



## bauhaus (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I've changed my mind -- The 100TB plans won't be pulled at this time.
> 
> All of these threads are skyrocketing our orders like there's no tomorrow and all of this publicity is heavily increasing our capital.


You should thank us all. You welcome


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 23, 2014)

The sheer amount of bullshit is overwhelming.  Excuses, ignorance, lies... more lies... can't imagine why nobody likes this kid.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I've changed my mind -- The 100TB plans won't be pulled at this time.
> 
> All of these threads are skyrocketing our orders like there's no tomorrow and all of this publicity is heavily increasing our capital.


Chris?  Is that you?


----------



## Hxxx (Jan 23, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> GoDaddy full of profit? LOL
> 
> This article is from 3 years ago but profits have been one thing that has been severely lacking from GoDaddy's balance sheet throughout most of its history.  It lost money each and every one of its first 10 years in business.
> 
> http://247wallst.com/investing/2010/09/11/godaddy-is-godawful/


LOL yes, keep believing that. How about the amount of profit they are getting after purchasing Media Temple? GoDaddy may suck but know how to do the moves, specially now with the new direction. And Media Temple is like a GOD in this industry.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 23, 2014)

texteditor said:


> did you ask upstream if it's OK?
> 
> also, please respond in the form of an analogy, you are so good at them


Sure. Just for you.

So if you're Walmart and you sell orange juice from Tropicana for really cheap, and you're not owned by Tropicana but then decided you're going to pull stock on Tropicana orange juice but then change your mind because sales on Tropicana orange juice skyrocketed, would you have to ask Tropicana if it's okay?


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

Virtovo said:


> Chris?  Is that you?


There's no such thing as negative publicity B)

*drowns in debt due to overage charges while clutching a fistful of five dollar bills*


----------



## texteditor (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Sure. Just for you.
> 
> So if you're Walmart and you sell orange juice from Tropicana for really cheap, and you're not owned by Tropicana but then decided you're going to pull stock on Tropicana orange juice but then change your mind because sales on Tropicana orange juice skyrocketed, would you have to ask Tropicana if it's okay?


Yeah but you know god damn well you don't have enough orange juice


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 23, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Sure. Just for you.
> 
> So if you're Walmart and you sell orange juice from Tropicana for really cheap, and you're not owned by Tropicana but then decided you're going to pull stock on Tropicana orange juice but then change your mind because sales on Tropicana orange juice skyrocketed, would you have to ask Tropicana if it's okay?


Your analogising everyone to death.  Stop.


----------



## MartinD (Jan 23, 2014)

Same shit over and over.


----------

