> We'll also assume they have a bug which makes the machine lock up after 300 days of uptime. Nobody knows about this yet, but the bug exists.
> So here's the trick: any time you see an announcement on date X of something bad that happens after item Y has been up for more than Z days, calculate what X + Z is and make a note in your calendar. That's the first possible date you should see a cluster of events beginning.
What? Doesn't this assume the announcement date X was when the bug was introduced into the software (in the example the Linux OS) and installed on your servers?
No, She's assuming on date X a whole bunch of people are going to kneejerk react and reboot things (like Boeing 787s) without enough thought or putting any process in place to actually manage or mitigate the problem, then on date X+Z all those things are going to crash at the same time (possibly into many smoking holes in the ground).
> So here's the trick: any time you see an announcement on date X of something bad that happens after item Y has been up for more than Z days, calculate what X + Z is and make a note in your calendar.
I thought she was making this suggestion to the 'kneejerk' admins, not us clever admins watching for failures externally.
Let me try restating one sentence. "That's the first possible date you should see a news story or otherwise notice a cluster of events around the world as sysadmins everywhere inadvertently synchronized their systems by rebooting on day X"
> So here's the trick: any time you see an announcement on date X of something bad that happens after item Y has been up for more than Z days, calculate what X + Z is and make a note in your calendar. That's the first possible date you should see a cluster of events beginning.
What? Doesn't this assume the announcement date X was when the bug was introduced into the software (in the example the Linux OS) and installed on your servers?