Uni-Trend Schematics

[alm]

My impression is that Dave is currently pays below costs for 'unlimited' shared hosting, which will probably continue until they kick him out for causing too much traffic/load. The idea of those 'unlimited' shared hosting plans is that they bet on the average usage to be fairly low, so if you're a lot above average, you're costing them money.

Any reasonable alternatives will seem expensive, especially since hosting in Europe tends to be significantly more expensive than in the US. I don't think the US law is that much an issue for this forum, other venues can be used for sharing copyrighted material without consent of the owner.

[Wartex]

Following your logic Youtube would be permanently down.

In that case Youtube act as the service provider protected by safe harbor provisions, which are not likely to apply to Dave. I believe he would have to register an agent to handle copyright infringement with the US government, and would have to remove the content as soon as he was aware of it. Google being a big fish also helps a lot.

Yes, in theory the service provider only has to take down the offending content, but they can't go into a customers forum database to temporarily take down a single post, so in practice this usually means the whole website/forum unless you're a big customer.

Please read up on how DMCA takedowns work before posting.

Care to provide some details and references on where I'm wrong?

Also ISP and "hoster" are not interchangeable terms.

I believe the DMCA just calls it 'service provider', which includes both (assuming they satisfy all requirements).

[alm]

Gotta do something when you run out of arguments I guess.

[Wartex]

Gotta do something when you run out of arguments I guess.

No, I just stopped arguing with a fool.

[IanB]

No, I just stopped arguing with a fool.

Sorry Wartex, but alm is not the fool here. I've no idea why you think a hosting service would be so keen to give little guys the benefit of the doubt, but that isn't what happens in the real world. They act first and ask questions later. They have thousands of customers and they don't have time to investigate the details of any alleged copyright infractions. For them it's business and if pissing you off by taking down your site is better for them in the long run than waiting for the facts to be established and risking expensive legal proceedings, then they will take down your site. There are no laws that say they can't do that, and almost certainly the small print in your terms of service gives them every right to act in that way.

Since YouTube was mentioned, have you noticed that is how YouTube works? If someone alleges your upload is infringing they will take it down immediately, and then wait for you to prove otherwise.

[Wartex]

No, I just stopped arguing with a fool.

Sorry Wartex, but alm is not the fool here. I've no idea why you think a hosting service would be so keen to give little guys the benefit of the doubt, but that isn't what happens in the real world. They act first and ask questions later. They have thousands of customers and they don't have time to investigate the details of any alleged copyright infractions. For them it's business and if pissing you off by taking down your site is better for them in the long run than waiting for the facts to be established and risking expensive legal proceedings, then they will take down your site. There are no laws that say they can't do that, and almost certainly the small print in your terms of service gives them every right to act in that way.

Since YouTube was mentioned, have you noticed that is how YouTube works? If someone alleges your upload is infringing they will take it down immediately, and then wait for you to prove otherwise.

I know because I'm a hoster too and I know how this works. Youtube is no different from this site, get that thru your skulls. People upload copyrighted content, the first point of contact BY LAW is the site admin, NOT the damn datacenter!. Hoster is supposed to contact the customer if takedown was sent to them, and ask the site owner to take down the offending content, like youtube does. DMCA takedowns always specify a path to the infringing content.  If your hoster kills your entire site on DMCA notice, then you have an ultra-shitty hoster.

The legal proceedings are expensive for BOTH parties, no one is going to sue you on a whim. Also UNI-T is not a US company, so their requests mean shit on US soil.

[EEVblog]

My impression is that Dave is currently pays below costs for 'unlimited' shared hosting, which will probably continue until they kick him out for causing too much traffic/load.

I've been running at a massive load for a few years now, and haven't heard a peep out of them yet.
I think technically they may have shunted me over to my own server or something. Or at least I seem to be the only one sharing the IP address.
On my other shared server (that hosts the podcast video files among other things) has tons of other sites sharing the same IP address on the other hand.

Dave.

[EEVblog]

That is not how DMCA works. You will be contacted by your hoster and given a chance to take the files down. The only way entire website can be shut down if there is a court order. Also safe harbour provisions in DMCA protect you as a forum admin from liability.

Nope, I can assure you that my host (HostMonster) shut down ALL my domains on my shared server under my one account.
When asked why they shut down all my sites, they said they simply suspend the account, and it's not their problem if I run a dozen domains off that one account. They said they don't have the time to investigate and only shut down the file or domain under question. It's easier and quicker for them to simply suspend the account if the DMCA claim seems legitimate. And yes, they contact the account owner at the same time. It is clear that they cannot afford to contact the owner and then wait for a response and them to hopefully take down the offending copyright material. Less risk for them to just push the big red SUSPEND button.

I have heard that many other hosts do the same thing. And I don't really blame them.

Dave.

[EEVblog]

I know because I'm a hoster too and I know how this works. Youtube is no different from this site, get that thru your skulls. People upload copyrighted content, the first point of contact BY LAW is the site admin, NOT the damn datacenter!. Hoster is supposed to contact the customer if takedown was sent to them, and ask the site owner to take down the offending content, like youtube does.

That's not what I near from other Youtube partners I know. Your video is simply taken down, and you get an email telling you as such.

Dave.

[EEVblog]

Also UNI-T is not a US company, so their requests mean shit on US soil.

Then how did I, a lowly nobody from Australia, get someones site taken down within 10 minutes of having submitted a DMCA request to the web host?

(the offending site was siphoning my entire EEVblog site and changed some of the words)

Dave.

[patb]

Dave, if you feel that your current hosting is just fine and the costs are really low then of course there is no point of changing it unless people start complaining about shitty performance or some other errors. However, I only hope that you are doing daily backups of your sites (blog, forums, etc) and the backups are reliable. You know, shit happens... especially when a lot of people share the same server. And Murphy doesn't sleep at all.

[EEVblog]

Dave, if you feel that your current hosting is just fine and the costs are really low then of course there is no point of changing it unless people start complaining about shitty performance or some other errors. However, I only hope that you are doing daily backups of your sites (blog, forums, etc) and the backups are reliable. You know, shit happens... especially when a lot of people share the same server. And Murphy doesn't sleep at all.

Well, everything has been holding ok for quite some time now, and has gotten better once I switched to load balancing across three hosting accounts (TheAmpHour now has it's very own host).
Daily backups, no, more like every couple of weeks for the databases, as I don't have an automated way to do this. The Hosts themselves are supposed to do daily backups though.

Full file backup are much less often. To backup the forum files for example requires a LOT of time due to all the attachments.

Dave.

[patb]

Well, everything has been holding ok for quite some time now, and has gotten better once I switched to load balancing across three hosting accounts (TheAmpHour now has it's very own host).

From my side I think that response times from EEVBlog and the forum are right now ok (not so great, but definitely usable).

Daily backups, no, more like every couple of weeks for the databases, as I don't have an automated way to do this. The Hosts themselves are supposed to do daily backups though.

Full file backup are much less often. To backup the forum files for example requires a LOT of time due to all the attachments.

Dave.

Yeah, I understand that backups are really pain in the ass. Especially when you are using several different applications like blog, forum, etc. And doing proper backups and have really reliable workflow to restore a whole site (or sites) is hard. However, this is probably crucial for the business like yours (we can call it business, right?). Imagine that server that is hosting this form is being hacked and all data is wiped out (probability of such scenario is proportional to popularity of a site). Probably those backups done by the hosts are worthless, because they are just snapshots of the entire system and probably they only keep the last one in case of hardware failure. There is no guarantee that the last snapshot will contain data that has been wiped out. And restoring this forum from a backup made several weeks ago is... well... you know what people probably would think about that. The same of course applies to the blog. The bad thing about backups is probably that there is really no easy way to do them. Every application has its own way of preparing backups and restoring data from them. Really painful.

Ok, my two cents regarding backups from my perspective (user of this forum and a big fan of your blog and everything you share with us).

[EEVblog]

Yeah, I understand that backups are really pain in the ass. Especially when you are using several different applications like blog, forum, etc. And doing proper backups and have really reliable workflow to restore a whole site (or sites) is hard. However, this is probably crucial for the business like yours (we can call it business, right?). Imagine that server that is hosting this form is being hacked and all data is wiped out (probability of such scenario is proportional to popularity of a site). Probably those backups done by the hosts are worthless, because they are just snapshots of the entire system and probably they only keep the last one in case of hardware failure. There is no guarantee that the last snapshot will contain data that has been wiped out. And restoring this forum from a backup made several weeks ago is... well... you know what people probably would think about that. The same of course applies to the blog. The bad thing about backups is probably that there is really no easy way to do them. Every application has its own way of preparing backups and restoring data from them. Really painful.

Ok, my two cents regarding backups from my perspective (user of this forum and a big fan of your blog and everything you share with us).

I suspect that if the host did get completely nuked (never happened to me in >10years, but that doesn't mean it can't happen) and we lost say 2 weeks worth of posts, I do think most people would be too upset? I think we'd just pick up where we left off.
But yeah, I should be investing in something better. I know there are sites out there that will do it for you for a fee, but then how do you trust them?
I'm actually often having problems getting a database backup. I just tried phpMyAdmin and it exported the forum database at around 20MB ZIPed which is right, but it says the internal .sql file is only 3MB! (It should be around 60MB or so)
And I've noted that the SimpleMachines backup system has sometimes given me a shoddy zip backup too, but it works a treat today.
It sometimes takes a human to make sure everything is kosher 

BTW, Hostmonster (that this forum is hosted on) do automatic daily, weekly, and monthly backups, of both databases and site files, and they are supposed to be off-site.
Actually, I just noticed they have a new backup interface in cPanel that looks nice. Trying it now.

Dave.

[EEVblog]

My advice: don't traust your backups until you actually tried to restore them

Yes indeed.
Thankfully I'm moved this forum and the blog and other things back and forth a few times now, and the backups have always worked. So I think I now at least know what's needed and what the SQL's should look like, and what size they should be etc.

Dave.

[RJSC]

Hoster discussion apart, where can I download the file now?
My UT50A allays measures capacitors as 70% their value and I want to see if I can do something about it.
Can someone upload it to a one click file hoster? (like http://www.hotfile.com)

[nukie]

PM me your email.

[Lightages]

If anyone knows of a schematic for the UT71E, please PM me.

[nukie]

I'm looking for it too.

[Wartex]

I know because I'm a hoster too and I know how this works. Youtube is no different from this site, get that thru your skulls. People upload copyrighted content, the first point of contact BY LAW is the site admin, NOT the damn datacenter!. Hoster is supposed to contact the customer if takedown was sent to them, and ask the site owner to take down the offending content, like youtube does.

That's not what I near from other Youtube partners I know. Your video is simply taken down, and you get an email telling you as such.

Dave.

That is correct. Youtube deletes the offending content. The website does not get shut down because of it. In the same fashion you should get contacted and take the offending file down. If your hoster takes the site down without talking to you, you got a shitty hoster.

Akamai is hosting Apple and many many other huge customers. If I send DMCA takedown to Akamai, they will NOT take down Apple domain just because someone linked an illegal mp3 file on their forum or comment section. They will contact Apple and their admins will take action. The only difference between EEVBLog and Apple for example, the latter has an army of lawyers and if Akamai pulled the plug, they will assrape their hoster in court.

[EEVblog]

That is correct. Youtube deletes the offending content. The website does not get shut down because of it. In the same fashion you should get contacted and take the offending file down. If your hoster takes the site down without talking to you, you got a shitty hoster.

Sorry, but you ain't comparing apples with apples there.
Both Youtube and the web host do the simplest and quickest thing they can to comply with the DMCA request.

In the case of Youtube, they press a button to take the offending video offline. They have no reason to take down any other videos of yours because that would require extra work on their part and there is no point. Youtube can shut down individual videos because that's how the system works, it's an individual video sharing site.

In the case of a web host they push a button to suspend your account. They don't want to go into your account and system files to find and remove the offending file or database entry or whatever it is, that's far too much work and they can screw things up. They don't want to screw things up just in case you appeal

In they both cases the simply do what is easiest for them to comply as quickly as possible. And neither of them ask you first, they just do it and then contact you.

I'm with HostMonster, one of the biggest shared host providers with one of the biggest reputations (usually listed in the top 10 wordwide?)
Tell me one that you know for a fact goes to the effort to remove individual files or database entries for a basic <$10/month plan, and contacts them first for an explanation before doing it.

Akamai is hosting Apple and many many other huge customers. If I send DMCA takedown to Akamai, they will NOT take down Apple domain just because someone linked an illegal mp3 file on their forum or comment section. They will contact Apple and their admins will take action. The only difference between EEVBLog and Apple for example, the latter has an army of lawyers and if Akamai pulled the plug, they will assrape their hoster in court.

That's a HUGE difference, and that's how it work in the real world. Apple gets special treatment because they are Apple.
My web host doesn't give a toss about me because I'm just one of several hundred thousand customers paying my $6/month.

Dave.

[AntiProtonBoy]

I suspect that if the host did get completely nuked (never happened to me in >10years, but that doesn't mean it can't happen) and we lost say 2 weeks worth of posts, I do think most people would be too upset? I think we'd just pick up where we left off.

I still would not trust them. Our hosting company got hacked big time once. Vandals trashed all the index files, server configuration, even the back-end cPanel CMS. The whole server went up shit creek without a paddle. The backups maintained by the hosting company was ancient (several months old in fact). Lucky I did manual backups of the databases on a fortnightly basis, so the losses was bearable on our side. Needless to say, we dumped the hosting 3 days after.

How come you are not hosting on an AU server? VentraIP seem to be quite decent for simpler shared hosing, but not sure how attractive their pricing is for your kind of traffic.

[EEVblog]

How come you are not hosting on an AU server? VentraIP seem to be quite decent for simpler shared hosing, but not sure how attractive their pricing is for your kind of traffic.

Because the majority of my audience is US based. A server based here would presumably be slower than it already is.

My traffic is in the order of several TB/month (TB as in Tera Bytes, as in 1000 GB)

Dave.

[Zero999]

From what I've heard from other Australians I've met on-line, their Internet speed is shit compared to the US. Most probably because Austraila is sparsely populated and a long distance from anywhere so telecommunications are more expensive. They do however get cheaper, faster computer hardware than elsewhere, being close to the manufacturing centres in south east Asia.