evilkittens:w {161} ./uptime -i
11:13AM up 3 inches, 1 user, load averages: 0.14, 0.15, 0.13

Every now and then someone on one of the linux help channels I'm on will show off with some "amazing" output from uptime. 300 days uptime might impress the kids, but surely just makes those with a clue shrugging. On linux more than on other unix based OSes 300 days without a kernel upgrade probably mean several denial of service attacks and local privilege escalation exploits. Worried to lose their face they will quickly point out that those systems are behind some sort of firewall, or internal servers, or protected some other way, which in some cases might be true and indeed cut down the number of possible attacks and damage, but surely that doesn't make it look good.
Long uptime on single machines are just a sign of negligence and poor security. If the machine is core even more so: it should have proper redundancy and means to operate the necessary maintenance work while others keep the service up and running.
I was having this discussion with some friends and one of them produced this rare piece of comedy like only the openbsd folks can deliver:

List:       openbsd-misc
Subject:    Re: 202 days Uptime in OpenBSD 3.6
From:       Gilles Chehade 
Date:       2007-01-17 17:23:49
Message-ID: 45AE5BA5.0 () epitech ! net

Marc Balmer wrote:

> hmm, why are people so proud of their uptimes when it only show they
> don't care for their systems?
>


Below is a patch which adds an -i flag to 'uptime' converting an uptime
period to a size in inches:

evilkittens:w {160} ./uptime
11:13AM  up 24 days, 16:42, 1 user, load averages: 0.14, 0.15, 0.13
evilkittens:w {161} ./uptime -i
11:13AM  up 3 inches, 1 user, load averages: 0.14, 0.15, 0.13
evilkittens:w {162}

As you see, I better let my system run a bit longer :(

For more fun have a look at the entire thread
Writing the equivalent patch for linux is left as an exercise to those kids, after all if they want to show off let's have them put some effort into it.