Originally posted by cashthetrashThere is a third tool.
Russ, you really should think about doing this stuff for a living some day. You're actually pretty good. I am glad you got some of the kinks ironed out. I can imagine the stress was pretty tough. But you know what, I think everyone pretty much understands. Don't sweat it. I'm glad you guys got it up and running again. Always remember.
There are only ...[text shortened]... n any job:
1) Duct Tape
2) WD40.
If it wiggles use duct tape, if it don't use WD40.
Scissors. The all around hammer, screwdriver, pliers, cutters, and wrench.
Its been said a hundred times, but well done to you guys at RHP, you've kept us well informed and dealt with it under what must have been misserable circumstances in the middle of the night.
I didnt mind the outage for a day - it stopped the earache from the girlfriend that I spend every night playing chess!
Keep up the good work
Originally posted by cashthetrashIt will depend on exactly where they are located and which regulations they come under, but the basic idea will be the same.
I am starting to wonder just how it is carbon neutral. How does that work? Bicycle peddles?
When a company states that they are carbon neutral it doesn't mean that they produce no carbon (well, it might, but I've never heard of a case). What it means is that they have purchased carbon offsets of one form or another.
An example of carbon offsets could be that RHP has paid another company to plant enough trees to soak up the same amount of carbon that RHP is emitting, or (in some jurisdictions) has in effect compensated another company for the costs that they incurred in reducing their emissions.
The main problem with this whole set up is that if the trees were going to be planted anyway, or the third party company was already going to make those emission reducing changes then no actual carbon reductions has occured. In this situation the 'carbon neutral' tag is just a piece of clever accounting.
It is very difficult to tell if the offsets purchased by any particular company (ie. RHP) are actuall offsets are not.
Are there any visible changes in the update?
Also - if similar problem happens in the future, it could be better to assume some safe date, publish it on the website and keep system down until then even if ready sooner. If one is told "the system is down until Saturday, Mar 1, 12:00 GMT" he (or she) can safely stop visiting the site until then (without risking timeouts) and then just return, and admins need not to hurry that much. Promising to be down for 5 days and being down for 5 days brings more confidence than promising to be down for 1 day, then for 2 days, then for 3 days, then actually returning online after 3 days and 19 hours.
(yeah, that's always easy to be wise when it is not me who unexpectedly faces the problem ;-) )
PS Some other chess site had crash a few days ago, after which it restored from the backup which was ... 63 days old ;-)