Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Categories

In this Discussion

› › Huawei Cloud - Free Cloud VPS for 12 months - Anyone tried? - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Huawei Cloud - Free Cloud VPS for 12 months - Anyone tried?

2»

Comments

  • BlaZeBlaZe Member, Host Rep

    @lovehc said:
    We have a lot of telecom fraud here, from Malaysia.

    We have a lot of fraud here too in India. Sometimes the total amount involved in the fraud is more than some countries' total GDP.

  • creepcreep Member

    @lovehc said:

    @creep said:

    @jsg said:

    @TimboJones said:
    We can question Huawei Cloud trust because they are fundamentally cheaters at all levels of the company. It's their DNA.

    That, the last sentence is a strong indicator of your statements being propaganda. It's usually heard/read when someone has a belief but no facts.

    Btw, you seem to not know that Huawei has offered to provide (or already provided) source code of quite some critical product lines like e.g. their cellular gen 5 products.

    Anything to do with Chinese is questionable to them. But cant blame them, I myself dont believe a lot of Chinese products too. The only reason I "give up everything" just to buy Chinese product is when the product is cheap and good when there's no better alternative (cheap + good). I myself still use Huawei phone, and have another Xiaomi phone.

    Both Murica and Chinese are having "baddest" people as we normally shouldnt trust them (Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Wechat, Huawei, etc). But I have a slight empathy for Murica, maybe because they don't scam me yet, and they build genuine products, no clone and copycats (well, idk).

    In Malaysia, we have this thing called 'Macau scam' and also other scam things. They are notoriously running by Chinese. And all those fake products in shopping malls, Shopee, and Lazada are from China. Thank god my Huawei phone is not fake (well screw my data, i dont care it myself, just fucking take my selfies or whatever).

    Your comments are biased and arrogant.
    We have a lot of telecom fraud here, from Malaysia.

    biased to who?
    here where?

  • bikegremlinbikegremlin Member

    @Sofia_K said:
    Locations: Hong Kong, Bangkok, Singapore, and Johannesburg

    That's all too distant for using RFC 2549 as backup in case server connection is broken.

    Another problem is that Chinese seem to have forgotten about the Serbian brothers - requiring phone registration, while there's no Serbian phone allowed.

  • TimboJonesTimboJones Member

    @jsg said:
    @TimboJones

    "3 + 4 = 7" is a fact. "water naturally flows downwards" is a fact. "some court said xyz", let alone "some attorney said xyz" doesn't make xyz a fact. Btw. while a court verdict or ruling creates something that is very similar to a fact, note that a verdict or ruling is not necessarily based on facts. Quite a few ruling overturned by higher courts demonstrate that clearly. And btw, the sun didn't run around the earth just because at some point in time the authorities declared that to be a "fact".

    As for "not knowing": I said "credible and capable organisation" - not "large company". Typically the organisation tasked with jobs like that is something like the german BSI (the federal agency for IT security) which just so happened to clearly state that they are content with Huaweis cooperation/openness; even more they indicated that they'd rather trust Huawei than some of their competitors.

    That is how it works pretty much everywhere. A "credible and capable organisation", typically a state agency, checks, looks into, verifies and then virtually all companies, at least of a given nation, as well as most citizens trust the result. No need for all "large companies" to each verify themselves everything and btw. the driver usually are insurance issues and insurances tend to accept e.g. BSI (or other state agencies like NIST) statements/rules/findings.

    You see, I know that you love to know better than anyone else but I'd suggest to think twice before trying that with someone who actually works in the field and knows and has experience with how e.g. BSI works, what insurances look for, etc.

    You don't like Huawei? No problem, just buy some other brand.

    You can read affidavits yourself from the civil cases and judge them yourself. Lawyers present the evidence and control the narrative, they don't make the evidence themselves. When you say shit like the thing about the sun, you try really hard to contort your reality. Saying the sun revolved around the Earth was never a fact (no air quotes needed). Saying something that isn't true isn't a fact just because you believe it.

    You trust this third party to validate software loads for some 150 telecoms worldwide, over years and across different equipment, is naive at best. If you think this is bullet proof, you're mistaken. It's just approvals, which the larger the project, the more exceptions that are made. Don't put so much faith in the process.

    Thanked by 1BlaZe
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @TimboJones said:
    You can read affidavits yourself from the civil cases and judge them yourself. Lawyers present the evidence and control the narrative, they don't make the evidence themselves. When you say shit like the thing about the sun, you try really hard to contort your reality. Saying the sun revolved around the Earth was never a fact (no air quotes needed). Saying something that isn't true isn't a fact just because you believe it.

    As usual you bend and turn and ignore just as you need it. It is a FACT that a courts ruling sometimes gets overturned and affidavits may enhance credibility but they are not proof (in the scientific meaning), hence your argumentation is broken.

    osu.edu said:
    In February-March 1616, the Catholic Church issued a prohibition against the Copernican theory of the earth’s motion.

    (source: http://origins.osu.edu/milestones/february-2016-400-years-ago-catholic-church-prohibited-copernicanism)

    Btw, they took a couple of hundred years to walk back on that and to accept that the sun does not turn around the earth. Until then however plenty of people were punished for disagreeing.

    But hey, feel free to - as usual - just brush off reality and facts not suiting your narrative.

    You trust this third party to validate software loads for some 150 telecoms worldwide, over years and across different equipment, is naive at best. If you think this is bullet proof, you're mistaken. It's just approvals, which the larger the project, the more exceptions that are made. Don't put so much faith in the process.

    • No, many companies trust in software verified by a credible and capable third party, not me. In fact, some of those companies, e.g. insurance companies, insist on conformity with such third parties, e.g. NIST.

    • anyone is free to check himself too.

    So you are wrong on both.

    Have a nice weekend

    Thanked by 1colingpt
  • TimboJonesTimboJones Member
    edited September 2019

    @jsg said:

    @TimboJones said:
    You can read affidavits yourself from the civil cases and judge them yourself. Lawyers present the evidence and control the narrative, they don't make the evidence themselves. When you say shit like the thing about the sun, you try really hard to contort your reality. Saying the sun revolved around the Earth was never a fact (no air quotes needed). Saying something that isn't true isn't a fact just because you believe it.

    As usual you bend and turn and ignore just as you need it. It is a FACT that a courts ruling sometimes gets overturned and affidavits may enhance credibility but they are not proof (in the scientific meaning), hence your argumentation is broken.

    osu.edu said:
    In February-March 1616, the Catholic Church issued a prohibition against the Copernican theory of the earth’s motion.

    (source: http://origins.osu.edu/milestones/february-2016-400-years-ago-catholic-church-prohibited-copernicanism)

    Btw, they took a couple of hundred years to walk back on that and to accept that the sun does not turn around the earth. Until then however plenty of people were punished for disagreeing.

    But hey, feel free to - as usual - just brush off reality and facts not suiting your narrative.

    You trust this third party to validate software loads for some 150 telecoms worldwide, over years and across different equipment, is naive at best. If you think this is bullet proof, you're mistaken. It's just approvals, which the larger the project, the more exceptions that are made. Don't put so much faith in the process.

    • No, many companies trust in software verified by a credible and capable third party, not me. In fact, some of those companies, e.g. insurance companies, insist on conformity with such third parties, e.g. NIST.

    • anyone is free to check himself too.

    So you are wrong on both.

    Have a nice weekend

    I directed you to look at all the evidence and make your own judgement. I don't think you've even done a basic Google search and just arguing to argue. Take your hands off your ears.

    I have no clue what you're getting on with about the sun and Catholic church. They are the shadiest fucks around and fought science and progress since the start. But what seals it for me that you don't know what facts are, you quoted something referencing a theory, not facts.

    Or were you just providing an example for when I said, "Saying something that isn't true isn't a fact just because you believe it." ? Because then you're just being redundant.

    And again, you keep talking about trust of testing, but don't understand the limitation of that testing and how it doesn't prevent or guarantee against malicious code. Insurance companies deal with risk and blame. Others care about interoperability and standards. They are not state sponsored level hackers or coders capable of reviewing latest technology in short time. That shit is hard and requires elite developers. It's also like you've never seen a magician work.

  • doghouchdoghouch Member
    edited September 2019

    @jsg said:
    It is a FACT that a courts ruling sometimes gets overturned and affidavits may enhance credibility but they are not proof

    You literally just made an argument (without defending it either) and called it a fact.

    Get your facts straight.

    Edit — just to be clear, a fact is something that we ALL agree is true.

  • BlaZeBlaZe Member, Host Rep

    @doghouch said:
    Edit — just to be clear, a fact is something that we ALL agree is true.

    Tell that to the Flat Earth Society, who think Earth is flat :p

    Thanked by 1colingpt
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @TimboJones

    I give up on you as you obviously are mercilessly stubborn and ignorant and actually don't care at all about discussing but only about keeping your "I'm right" alive at all cost.

    @doghouch said:
    You literally just made an argument (without defending it either) and called it a fact.

    Apologies, in my world it is accepted that logic is self-evident. What I said can be easily verified. Court rulings are sometimes overturned which creates a contradiction, which again actually is proof ("reductio ad contradictionem", a classical logical device).

    Edit — just to be clear, a fact is something that we ALL agree is true.

    No. That ("all agree something to be true") is a usual consequence of a fact.

    A fact is objectively and verifiably true, and btw independent of peoples acceptance.

    The closest (to a fact) we humans can offer is a ruling by authority. The vatican, for example, simply declared that the sun turns around the earth and punished and threatened people into accepting it as a "fact".

    But maybe our problem here is in different perspectives. Mine is scientific where the term "fact" has a certain definition, whereas others may look from another perspective where "fact" has a less stringent meaning and may include e.g. what the new york times or the president or some judge states. Well noted, I do accept that e.g. a judges ruling is binding; It's just not a fact (in the scientific meaning).

    @BlaZe said:
    Tell that to the Flat Earth Society, who think Earth is flat :p

    You actually did contribute to the discussion with that, albeit highly likely without knowing it. Thank you for that.

    Reason: you provided a good example why @doghouch 's statement is not correct. If it where a fact could only be something ALL agree to. Unfortunately there are precious few things ALL can agree to. You provided an example for that. Another example would be the "gender issue". TL;DR: There is almost nothing ALL can agree to, hence - according to doghouch's definition there could be virtually no facts.

    Thanked by 1colingpt
  • TimboJonesTimboJones Member

    @jsg said:
    @TimboJones

    I give up on you as you obviously are mercilessly stubborn and ignorant and actually don't care at all about discussing but only about keeping your "I'm right" alive at all cost.

    @doghouch said:
    You literally just made an argument (without defending it either) and called it a fact.

    Apologies, in my world it is accepted that logic is self-evident. What I said can be easily verified. Court rulings are sometimes overturned which creates a contradiction, which again actually is proof ("reductio ad contradictionem", a classical logical device).

    Edit — just to be clear, a fact is something that we ALL agree is true.

    No. That ("all agree something to be true") is a usual consequence of a fact.
    **
    A fact is objectively and verifiably true, and btw independent of peoples acceptance.

    The closest (to a fact) we humans can offer is a ruling by authority. The vatican, for example, simply declared that the sun turns around the earth and punished and threatened people into accepting it as a "fact".**

    But maybe our problem here is in different perspectives. Mine is scientific where the term "fact" has a certain definition, whereas others may look from another perspective where "fact" has a less stringent meaning and may include e.g. what the new york times or the president or some judge states. Well noted, I do accept that e.g. a judges ruling is binding; It's just not a fact (in the scientific meaning).

    @BlaZe said:
    Tell that to the Flat Earth Society, who think Earth is flat :p

    You actually did contribute to the discussion with that, albeit highly likely without knowing it. Thank you for that.

    Reason: you provided a good example why @doghouch 's statement is not correct. If it where a fact could only be something ALL agree to. Unfortunately there are precious few things ALL can agree to. You provided an example for that. Another example would be the "gender issue". TL;DR: There is almost nothing ALL can agree to, hence - according to doghouch's definition there could be virtually no facts.

    The bold part is contradictory.

    Anyone catch Howard Stern this week where they play a clip of an NFL player saying "you know what I'm saying?" every other sentence and is making no sense?

    Thanked by 1BlaZe
  • daxterfellowesdaxterfellowes Member

    On-topic...

    Has anyone actually been able register successfully? They don't seem to accept US registrations for mobile verification and any of my non-US SMS verification services doesn't work with Hauwei.

    Thanked by 1NANO
  • NANONANO Member

    After a lot of posts Im still trying to find a review about Huawei Cloud... lot of shit above... LOL

    Thanked by 1colingpt
  • Sofia_KSofia_K Member

    NANO said: Im still trying to find a review about Huawei Cloud

    same here. Seems nobody on LET used it.
    I'll give it a try later

  • moni099878moni099878 Member
    edited September 2019

    I got somthing interesting from HuaweiCloud: 32vCPUs (Intel Xeon Gold 6151 @ 3GHz) | 128GB | GPU huawei-atlas600x16 | ai1.8xlarge.4 (in Shanghai, China) @ 0.01CNY/Hour(1.04USD/Month). It must be a bug but it has been running for 22 days.

    Bench(from hostloc):

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Superbench.sh -- https://www.oldking.net/350.html
Mode  : Standard    Version : 1.1.5
Usage : wget -qO- git.io/superbench.sh | bash
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU Model            : Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6151 CPU @ 3.00GHz
CPU Cores            : 32 Cores @ 3000.000 MHz x86_64
CPU Cache            : 25344 KB
OS                   : CentOS 7.6.1810 (64 Bit) KVM
Kernel               : 3.10.0-957.21.3.el7.x86_64
Total Space          : 1.9 GB / 40.0 GB
Total RAM            : 1067 MB / 128769 MB (268 MB Buff)
Total SWAP           : 0 MB / 0 MB
Uptime               : 0 days 0 hour 17 min
Load Average         : 0.06, 0.04, 0.05
TCP CC               : cubic
ASN & ISP            : AS55990, Huawei Cloud Service data center
Organization         : Huawei Public Cloud Service
Location             : Shanghai, China / CN
Region               : Shanghai
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 95.3 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 98.6 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 90.6 MB/s
Average I/O Speed    : 94.8 MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------

    And this(Maybe a bug too? Anyway, I've been using it for more than a month and everything is fine.): 32vCPUs (Huawei Kunpeng 916 @ 2.4GHz Arm) | 116GB | rc3.8xlarge.4 (in Beijing, China) @ 0.01CNY/Hour(1.04USD/Month).

    Bench(from hostloc):

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Superbench.sh -- https://www.oldking.net/350.html
Mode  : Standard    Version : 1.1.5
Usage : wget -qO- git.io/superbench.sh | bash
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU Model            :                                             
CPU Cores            :  Cores @  MHz aarch64
CPU Cache            :
OS                   : CentOS 7.6.1810 (64 Bit) Dedicated
Kernel               : 4.14.0-115.5.1.el7a.aarch64
Total Space          : 14.0 GB / 40.0 GB
Total RAM            : 2752 MB / 118052 MB (24271 MB Buff)
Total SWAP           : 0 MB / 1024 MB
Uptime               : 4 days 12 hour 45 min
Load Average         : 0.34, 0.24, 0.15
TCP CC               : cubic
ASN & ISP            : , HWCSNET
Organization         : Huawei Public Cloud Service
Location             : Beijing, China / CN
Region               : Beijing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 170 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 156 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 156 MB/s
Average I/O Speed    : 160.7 MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thanked by 4ankitj1611 colingpt Sofia_K jsg
  • vimalwarevimalware Member
    edited September 2019

    The guy has convinced me.
    I am moving my selfhosted email and nextcloud to whoawe servers.

    Also, there's nothing happening in Donbas.
    FAKE NEWS !
    deep state gay frog pizza told me.

  • moduw123moduw123 Member

    @MPG said:
    Perfect for federated porn hosting. :-) Data is throw away who cares if Kim Jung and Putin want to parse through terabytes of PT. LoL

    huawei cloud is ban about sex website.

  • MPGMPG Member

    We'll just call it the fediverse. :-)

  • TimboJonesTimboJones Member

    @moni099878 said:
    I got somthing interesting from HuaweiCloud: 32vCPUs (Intel Xeon Gold 6151 @ 3GHz) | 128GB | GPU huawei-atlas600x16 | ai1.8xlarge.4 (in Shanghai, China) @ 0.01CNY/Hour(1.04USD/Month). It must be a bug but it has been running for 22 days.

    Bench(from hostloc):

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Superbench.sh -- https://www.oldking.net/350.html
Mode  : Standard    Version : 1.1.5
Usage : wget -qO- git.io/superbench.sh | bash
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU Model            : Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6151 CPU @ 3.00GHz
CPU Cores            : 32 Cores @ 3000.000 MHz x86_64
CPU Cache            : 25344 KB
OS                   : CentOS 7.6.1810 (64 Bit) KVM
Kernel               : 3.10.0-957.21.3.el7.x86_64
Total Space          : 1.9 GB / 40.0 GB
Total RAM            : 1067 MB / 128769 MB (268 MB Buff)
Total SWAP           : 0 MB / 0 MB
Uptime               : 0 days 0 hour 17 min
Load Average         : 0.06, 0.04, 0.05
TCP CC               : cubic
ASN & ISP            : AS55990, Huawei Cloud Service data center
Organization         : Huawei Public Cloud Service
Location             : Shanghai, China / CN
Region               : Shanghai
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 95.3 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 98.6 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 90.6 MB/s
Average I/O Speed    : 94.8 MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------

    And this(Maybe a bug too? Anyway, I've been using it for more than a month and everything is fine.): 32vCPUs (Huawei Kunpeng 916 @ 2.4GHz Arm) | 116GB | rc3.8xlarge.4 (in Beijing, China) @ 0.01CNY/Hour(1.04USD/Month).

    Bench(from hostloc):

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Superbench.sh -- https://www.oldking.net/350.html
Mode  : Standard    Version : 1.1.5
Usage : wget -qO- git.io/superbench.sh | bash
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU Model            :                                             
CPU Cores            :  Cores @  MHz aarch64
CPU Cache            :
OS                   : CentOS 7.6.1810 (64 Bit) Dedicated
Kernel               : 4.14.0-115.5.1.el7a.aarch64
Total Space          : 14.0 GB / 40.0 GB
Total RAM            : 2752 MB / 118052 MB (24271 MB Buff)
Total SWAP           : 0 MB / 1024 MB
Uptime               : 4 days 12 hour 45 min
Load Average         : 0.34, 0.24, 0.15
TCP CC               : cubic
ASN & ISP            : , HWCSNET
Organization         : Huawei Public Cloud Service
Location             : Beijing, China / CN
Region               : Beijing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 170 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 156 MB/s
I/O Speed( 1.0GB )   : 156 MB/s
Average I/O Speed    : 160.7 MB/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------

    You're checking your credit card bill for a heart attack, right?

    Thanked by 1easy
  • DignusDataDignusData Member

    no this is old bug and now they fixed it. : Huawei is a big company and often during beta testing something like this is always happening

  • moni099878moni099878 Member
    edited September 2019

    TimboJones said: You're checking your credit card bill for a heart attack, right?

    No, it's still 0.01 CNY per hour.

    Thanked by 2Sofia_K easy
  • mijganmijgan Member

    Is there any way to register if you are not from Zimbabwe, Laos or Ghana? I need access to Hong Kong data center

  • creepcreep Member

    @mijgan said:
    Is there any way to register if you are not from Zimbabwe, Laos or Ghana? I need access to Hong Kong data center

    there is one hosting who give free 7 months trial for Hong Kong vps. No credit card required. But I won't tell anyone.

  • LastHolyLastHoly Member

    I'll test

  • theblackesthattheblackesthat Member

    Wonder how much they care about DMCA since USA already hates Huawei and the feelings are probably mutual. Now they just need to accept cryptocurrencies!

  • angstromangstrom Moderator

    @LastHoly said:
    I'll test

    Congrats on your first post

    Thanked by 1ITLabs
  • mijganmijgan Member

    @creep said:

    @mijgan said:
    Is there any way to register if you are not from Zimbabwe, Laos or Ghana? I need access to Hong Kong data center

    there is one hosting who give free 7 months trial for Hong Kong vps. No credit card required. But I won't tell anyone.

    I need exactly huawei cloud, Hong Kong dc.

  • LastHolyLastHoly Member

    @angstrom said:

    @LastHoly said:
    I'll test

    Congrats on your first post

    Oh thank you so much

  • SomethingsoSomethingso Member

    I wouldnt trust the company, just my opinion

Sign In or Register to comment.