Ancapistan Down Redux
A few people had asked me to check in on the ANCAPEX.com video below.
In the video, Intlibber Brautigan blames Yukiko for the failure of the exchange, and has even mentioned IBM's name in vain. When MySQL files are corrupted, they are corrupted. I tried to contact Yukiko, but she was unavailable at this time. However, it came to my attention that Yukiko was serving as a web host - she was providing a service, and part of the service included the backups regularly done by web hosts.
It doesn't make sense. As someone who has been dealing with MySQL with websites for over 8 years - sites like LinuxGazette.com, all of this is completely idiotic... So let me lay it out for you.
- The domain name 'Ancapex.com' never, ever belonged to Intlibber Brautigan or ACE. Ever. So claiming that they had 'problems with one of their domains' is inaccurate, and perhaps intentionally misleading.
- If you only have one backup you are depending on and it is the backup done by your host, you're wrong. It really is that simple. If you're depending on backups, you should have them archived off the site and stacked in chronological order. Period. The responsibility to back up any database belongs to the person who owns the site - not the web host.
- MySQL doesn't really require third party tools for backup. If BNT was using InnoDB, hot backups are possible with a 3rd party application - starting at $580. Is Innodb required for something like Ancapex? No, not really. It is an enterprise level application, not a 'playing with a nuclear device on sidewalk' level of application. No matter what Intlibber thinks, Ancapex is not an enterprise level of application. And blaming CPanel? Weak.
- Any organization depending on database transactions can easily create backups, regularly, with a
cron. But if you leave the backups on the server, and the server goes down, then you don't really have backups- do you? - If IBM can unscrew a corrupted MySQL database file, look for a new star in the sky. This was name dropping, plain and simple, and trying to lend credibility to Ancapex through the use of IBM's name.
The last I heard, 8 of 14 companies on Ancapex had copies of their shareholders lists. BNT - Intlibber Brautigan's 'company' - did not have this done, and he was quick to mention Yukiko's name on that, again. But let's take stock. 8 CEOs of companies listed on an exchange understood that their data was their problem. The owner of the exchange and of BNT did not. His claim of expecting a CTO to do the job implies an organizational structure that does not really seem to exist. It is, quite frankly, pitiful.
Ultimately, as Intlibber Brautigan himself notes, he is responsible. You can make Ancapex sound like the largest organization in the world, but everyone knows who Ancapex is - it's Intlibber Brautigan. Everyone else is incidental, and they have a tendency to show up like those ensigns in Star Trek who never make it to the end of the show.
I wonder who the next ensign will be...
Technorati Tags: 
Delicious
Digg
Technorati
What does this have to do with ANCAPEX.com
I don't understand why IntLibber had to do anything to the hosting, all he had to do was forward the new domains to the server. We all know that he uses GoDaddy.com to buy his domains. I was able to transfer Ancapex.com to frageurs Hock and it only to 30 minutes, and then it only took another 30 minutes for frageurs to forward the domain to his website.
Again another Intlibber Scandal and it is not his fault.
ACE TOS
22. Risks
22.12 Execution. The Services may at times be subject to communications problems, or may temporarily be configured in such a way that trades cannot be executed or account balances cannot be withdrawn. Denial of service attacks or other malicious actions by others may also temporarily compromise the capabilities of the exchange. BNT strives at all times to prevent these types of situations from occurring, but BNT cannot guarantee that the ACE is available for trading at all times.
22.18 Key personnel. Loss of members of BNT's key management and staff could have adverse consequences for BNT and could affect its financial viability. While the Company has employment agreements with its key personnel, with the aim of securing their respective services, the retention of such services cannot be guaranteed. BNT's success and growth strategy depends upon its ability to attract and retain appropriate management, technological and operating personnel. There is a risk that BNT will not be able to attract appropriate staff to meet its future requirements.