G-WAN Web server
Feedback

Theory vs. Practice

Diagnosis is not the end, but the beginning of practice. Martin H. Fischer


› What makes one deserve "(bad words)"?

When someone pointed me the 2012 forum post below, I believed that it made sense to ask people why they feel necessary to give you what they call themselves "(bad words)". The user 'Heist' registered a blog account on April 14 2012. Two days later, he posted the text below: (Cambridge Dictionary - "Heist: a crime in which property is taken illegally and often violently from a place or a person") 

  "You may have heard of G-WAN, a notoriously fast Web server. Other than the fact that the owner is a complete (bad word),
  and that it's useless to the general Web development community in its current state (due to it being written in C, and requiring 
   primarily C to extend it), it looks like the promised FCGI/SCGI support could make it something to look out for...
   what do you think of it?"
   Posted 16 April 2012 - 05:43 AM

G-WAN runs several threads, each with their own epoll event-loop. G-WAN does not use FCGI/SCGI because that's massively slower than running embedded G-WAN servlets. So, I was curious to learn what made me and G-WAN deserve such a delicate attention, since "Heist", alias "Jarrod", has erased and vandalised the G-WAN vs NGINX WikiVS with a rare persistence and intensity:

"GWAN is a piece of shit. The "Wikipedia Corporate Gang" are in place to stop delusional conspiracy theorists like the the GWAN author from pedalling their agenda and spreading disinformation."


beware satisfying your wishes

Since my goal was to get a clue rather than to engage a fight, I wrote a very neutral email to 'Heist', alias Jarrod Mosen: 

From: Pierre
To: Jarrod Mosen 
Subject: G-WAN and Pierre rants
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 09:09:01 +0200

Jarrod,

Someone pointed me to your post about me and G-WAN:

http://0x10command.com/forum/topic/51-g-wan/

I would like to learn:

1. what makes you write that I am "a complete (bad word)"

Since we are total strangers, I would not feel authorized
to tell anything about your personality.

So, permit me to be surprised to see you claiming that I
am a bad person while you do not know me.

2. why do you write that G-WAN is "useless to
   the general Web development community in its current 
   state (due to it being written in C, and requiring 
   primarily C to extend it)"?

G-WAN supports scripts in C, C++, D, Objective-C and Java,
today's most popular programming languages:

http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

So, writing that G-WAN is "requiring C to extend it"
is incorrect.

I have been working on PHP, extracting 170,000 requests
per second on one single CPU Core but the PHP runtime
is crashing as soon as a second thread (or CPU Core) is
involved because PHP is not thread-safe.

Consulted for assistance, Zend (the PHP company), never
returned my calls. Someone close to them suggested that 
they then would sell less "Zend Accelerators" if G-WAN
was supporting PHP.

I am now working hard on a caching reverse-proxy which 
will make it possible for G-WAN to boost PHP without 
making PHP crash.

I feel that my constant efforts to help Web developers
extract more from their machines are not reflected in
your rant and - at least - I would like you to keep the
record straight.

Here is his (very prompt) reply: 

From: Jarrod Mosen 
To: Pierre
Subject: Re: G-WAN and Pierre rants
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 10:25:26 +0000 (GMT)

While I do not deny that it's incredibly fast and secure 
(perhaps the fastest, and most secure) software, your 
shithouse personality and constant conspiracy theories 
let you down - you are smart, but you are a smarmy French
cunt.

Your software is powerful, secure, fast, but currently 
inaccessible to the vast majority. Companies and general 
developers alike may actually care about your software if:

It works with the code that their developers know - I 
understand you're working on this, but at the moment 
it takes far too much effort to get it working reliably.

If you hire someone else to do the talking. Do you not 
see that you're driving people away? Your technical 
knowledge is astounding, I'll give you that, but that 
stereotypical pompous French attitude always manages 
to shine through.

If you stop with the insane conspiracy theories. Maybe 
it's just because of the above reasons that nobody 
gives a fuck about G-WAN?

G-WAN is useless to the general Web development community. 
It's getting better. But maybe you should just keep your 
mouth shut for a while. I will continue to slander your 
work because I do not like you.

Let's review what we got:

  • "complete (bad words)" replaced by a less graceful but far more specific vocabulary
  • "complete (bad words)" is due to my supposed "constant insane conspiracy theories"
  • "G-WAN is useless" as, he said, it does not "work with the code that developers know"

Jarrod is obviously a PHP user: despite G-WAN supporting the top 5 most popular programming languages, he wrote that G-WAN does not "work with the code that developers know". Further, he states that "I'm used to visually logical documents, like HTML, so as you can imagine, any kind of ASM is hell for me to look at!".

No doubt that writing G-WAN scripts in Java, C, C++, D or Objective-C/C++ challenges PHP fans. Too bad that they cannot understand how much the reciprocity can be true: I would have loved to have G-WAN support native PHP scripts from day one, or to get support from the PHP company to help me do that when I saw PHP crashing under multi-thread loads. But, instead, I have had to find a convoluted workaround: not using PHP (and instead making G-WAN become a general-purpose reverse-proxy) to boost PHP to the level of performance of the "far too much effort to get it working reliably" (more efficient) C/C++ programming languages.

True, G-WAN enjoys only a few registered PHP users, but some thanked us for making C easier to use and they proudly submitted to us their first C programs, claiming that G-WAN inspired them in this direction and that there was no way back (!) for them.

As they do not know how to use Java, C, C++, D or Objective-C/C++, it is probably true for most PHP developers (including the boiling Jarrod) that "[close-to] nobody [in the PHP microcosm] gives a fuck about G-WAN". But G-WAN's author can hardly be blamed for this sad state of things – entirely due to PHP's technical and business choices.

Further, reducing the "general Web development community" to PHP users is forgetting that all Web servers and tools (PHP included), are written in those languages already supported by G-WAN: Java, C, C++, D or Objective-C/C++.

Web developers exist because Linux, Web servers (like G-WAN) and PHP exist in the first place (and they have not been written in PHP). This alone should push PHP users to consider other languages as not "useless to the general Web development community".


reasons so secret that they can't be said

OK, that was for PHP. Now this part is well-understood, let's focus on the mysterious "constant insane conspiracy theories" that make me deserve the personal hatred of this young PHP developer: 

From: Pierre
To: Jarrod Mosen 
Subject: Re: G-WAN and Pierre rants
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 14:22:19 +0200

Jarrod,

> you should just keep your mouth shut for a while

Can you tell me which of my public posts have created
so much discomfort for you - and why?

Then I will have a chance to be less of a problem for 
a furious New-Zealand resident (a wonderful place).

Despite the torrent of mud sent by Jarrod, my reply was respectful and intended to resolve his problem. But I never got a reply to my question. Jarrod was not shy of using offending (and groundless) words so the real reason behind his rants (past and future, he wrote: "I will continue to slander your work because I do not like you") is obviously not to be found in the inability for Jarrod Mosen to express himself freely. What we have here is an agenda that cannot be exposed.

The constant agression (you have a "shithouse personality", you "smarmy French cunt" with a "stereotypical pompous French attitude") is motivated by a so seriously wrong reason that it cannot be said, even privately.


Crossing the Yellow Line

As promised, Jarrod continued "to slander [G-WAN] because [he] does not like [me]". To demonstrate the true measure of his notivation, here constantly vandalised the "G-WAN vs Nginx" article:

  • 24 times on May 29/30, 2012 under an account named "SecurityMan"
  • 26 times on July 18, 2012 using IP addresses 122.58.43.60 and 131.203.124.145, the 'anonymizer' proxy server http://69.64.49.253/ to claim he was not himself and even a new account named "Pierre Gauthier" to impersonate me
  • many times before and after those dates, notably with an account deceptively named "GWanBalancer"

You read well, "Jarrod Mosen" (or whatever his real name) went as far as to spoof the identity of Pierre Gauthier, the author of G-WAN, to publicly denigrate the person and his work by publishing obscenities and defamatory statements. A school case of Cyber-harrasment, also called Cyberstalking which is defined as a Federal crime by international laws and which studied motives are:

"Envy; pathological obsession (professional or sexual); unemployment or failure with own job or life; intention to intimidate and cause others to feel inferior; belief they can get away with it (anonymity); intimidation for financial advantage or business competition; revenge over perceived or imagined rejection".

Incriminated behaviors include making (or soliciting) the transmission of any comment which is offensive, obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent, with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person.

In 2003 the Supreme Court of Western Australia awarded local Dr. Trevor Cullen $70,000 in compensatory damages (and a further $25,000 exemplary damages) for defamatory statements published by U.S. resident Bill White in over sites hosted outside Australia. The Court held that: "The conduct of the defendant can be attributed only to a conscious desire on his part to cause the plaintiff the maximum amount of damage, hurt and embarrassment by what amounts to a campaign of deliberately offensive vilification".

Stalking was first criminalised by Canada in 1985, and other countries followed:

  • 1985 Canada – "s 10; Criminal Code, RSC 1985, cl C-46"
  • 1990 The U.S.A. – "Protection from Harassment Act"
  • 1997 The U.K. – "Protection from Harassment Act"
  • 1997 Ireland – "Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act"
  • 1997 New Zealand – "s 264; Harassment Act"
  • 1999 Australia – "The Stalking Amendment Act"
  • 2001 Europe – "Convention on Cybercrime"

To say the least, Jarrod Mosen has been working hard to to be held liable for his actions.

Update: on July 23, Just after steps were taken to fill a claim in Switzerland, we requested David Lee (Berkeley, California), the Wikivs owner, to stop deleting the "User:Pierre Gauthier" description that I wrote to explain that this account was created by Jarrod Mosen to spoof Pierre Gauthier's identiy (an offense defined by the law as a crime when this is done to vilify the victim).

Then the whole G-WAN article was blanked-out yet another time by Jarrod, and David Lee, instead of restoring the text (like he used to do in the past), simply removed the G-WAN article from Wikivs – with all its history where Jarrod (under the cover of his fake Pierre Gauthier's identity) was using obscene terms to describe G-WAN and its author. David also deleted all the references to any misuse of the name "Pierre Gauthier", keywords which now cannot be found on his site.

In plain-English, that's called a "cover-up" (and deleting the evidences of a crime, a practice called "Evidence Tampering", is illegal and is punishable by law. The curious will find most of this now missing information saved here, just in case you need to understand how far some methods are allowed to go to fight technological innovation... that is, when such innovation is not made by the persons allowed to do so.

I forgot to mention that at the same time, a denial of service attack was hitting the gwan.com server. As it happens almost constantly the remarkable point this time was that no hosted servers were used to hide the identity of the offenders:

inetnum:         90.83.87.128 - 90.83.87.159
netname:         FR-SCOR-GIE-INFORMATIQUE
person:          Laurent Chartier
address:         5 AV KLEBER  75016  PARIS 16  FRA
country:         FR

   SCOR at a Glance                        Forbes Lists
   -----------------------------------     -----------------------
   Industry:     Diversified Insurance     #  863 Global 2000
   Founded:      1855                      #  864 in Sales
   Country:      France                    #1,284 in Profit
   CEO:          Denis Kessler             #  540 in Assets
   Employees:    1,822                     #1,616 in Market value
   Cash on hand: $906 Millions
   Sales:        $10.42 Billions
   Assets:       $40.66 Billions
    
   Key connections: AIG, AXA, Allianz

SCOR S.E. is a France-based reinsurance company. The Non-Life segment is divided into four operational 
sub-segments: P&C Treaties, Specialty Treaties, Business Solutions (facultative) and Joint Ventures and 
Partnerships. Life Reinsurance includes life, health and medical insurance, and personal insurance, such
as accidents, disability and illness.
 
The Company's life, accident, disability, health, unemployment, and long-term care operations are conducted 
by SCOR Global Life SE (SCOR Global Life). As of December 31, 2010, the Company operated through a number of
subsidiaries including, Prevoyance Re, SCOR GIE Informatique, SCOR Global and SCOR PCC Ltd, among others.

If you find it odd to see a prominent Finance player to be involved in a DoS attack towards G-WAN at the time this freeware was ousted from Wikivs (the only "trusted" media that did not censor G-WAN immediately, and a place where the "Lighttpd vs Nginx" article is protected by a read-only lock) then guess how I can feel when I see my work attacked by anonymous gentlement who seem to be only capable to eruct insults.

Hmm... Do you remember how "Jarrod", alias "Heist", etc. used to call this? Right, quoting him, that was "insane conspiracy theories".

To all the "Jarrod Mosen" of this world, I can only suggest:

Stop doing the wrong thing. Then you will have nothing to hide which is so shameful that you cannot even afford to spell it.


the clue that they can't afford to spell

When, for the last time, have you seen a software product (free or not) which, by comparison, makes all others bloated and obsolete?

That's what G-WAN does to all the other Web servers, application servers, reverse-proxy servers and cache servers.

There are (at least) three problems when you do such a thing:

  • competitors hate you because you destroy their business (G-WAN is so much more capable)
  • consultants hate you because you destroy their 'expertise' (G-WAN is faster without cryptic configuration files)
  • hardware vendors hate you because you destroy their sales (G-WAN does the same job with far less machines).

But there is an even more serious 'offense': you demonstrate that doing such a thing is possible. You inspire people, both to try to do better than incumbents and to stay away from existing solutions because they are no longer credible.

For an industry based on trust, that hurts: people buy from BigCos because they beleive that (with their billions invested every year in R&D, generous tax breaks, support of State universities, gold-plated government contracts and constant legal leniency) it would be futile for a far less capitalized start-up to merely try to do as well. So, what do you think happens when this trust is demonstrated to be so seriously mis-placed?

Users start to question the established state of things (a nightmare for incumbents):

How is it possible for a single guy to outdo in 2 years the work of the whole industry done for the past 20 years?
Why isn't G-WAN purchased by any of those software or Cloud leaders who all use so much inferior product lines?
Why are hundreds of billions invested in futile blog and picture sharing platforms instead at making software run faster?

These are recurring questions asked to me by G-WAN users who are firm believers of the merits of free and open markets.

And the only reply which makes sense is: "because they don't want something like G-WAN to exist: their interests are elsewhere".

Now you may better understand why total strangers feel the need to spread the word that I am "a complete (bad words)". All of a sudden, there is no longer any mystery about the (recurringly unpolite) Jarrod-like:

  • rants against my supposed "shithouse personality"
  • the accusations of my "insane conspiracy theories"
  • the injunction "you should just keep your mouth shut" (sic).

I am an engineer. Engineers resolve technical problems. People from too many companies' top-management and marketing department are rewarded to lie, cheat and betray customers – but this quasi-religious practice of 'altering the perception of reality' is something that engineers cannot afford to adopt if they want to stay able to resolve real-life problems.

So, yes, I am guilty of working in the interest of end-users and engineers, the people who, like me, are trying to do more with less.
And it is now so visible that it hurts the cheaters.

This is why, under ridiculous claims like "SPAM" (Mr. Ollie) or "Blatant Hoax" (Sam Blacketer) you will find G-WAN censored from places like Wikipedia, WikiVs, Stackoverflow (my account and all posts erased 3 times), etc. While it is "informative" to talk about inferior solutions, it is "SPAM" (or worse) to discuss G-WAN. The urgency for the cheaters is to remove any possible reference to G-WAN so people cannot even know that it exists (confirmed later by the "SCOR" update above).

I am the first to regret that some in this industry have interests that conflict with doing things right, but I do not have the choice: I will not write crappy software and hate myself for life just to please a few others. I want to use my capabilities to the maximum extent possible, and visit new unexplored territories to make progress for me and for others.

And I will not stop doing that any time soon: G-WAN means "Global-WAN". That's merely the beginning that you can see now.

It is most likely that someone, a large end-user or a solid competitor, will invest in G-WAN to seize the opportunity to disrupt this market. That will have more impact than to fund more mud-flying... because, for all, this is not the best way to restore the already severely damaged credibility of this industry. Inspiring people with excellence works better to build fanatic (deserved) loyalty.

It has been far too long that no software product inspired such a feeling to its users. Let's restore that lost enthusiasm for good things.