Free will is indeed at the core of the issue. If we're uncreated - simply a wonderful cosmic accident in a small corner of the universe - then we are just fancy robots. If we were created with some sort of predetermined outcome then we are just fancy robots. However, if we were created AND we have free will then the issue is a lot more interesting. Life would definitely have more meaning if we were more than the product of mere chance.
The question I recommend we all consider is why. If we're just the fancy robots, why do we react with such revulsion to things like the Holocaust or the recent tsunami in Japan? Why do we hate to see other people suffer and die? In short, why do we have a conscience? Does it serve an evolutionary purpose, and if so, from what is it and from what did it evolve?
I'm open to reasonable answers to these questions from all sides of the debate...
Agreed. The patents that i4i has are dangerous. They never should have been granted and certainly should have been revoked based on obviousness alone. It's easy to root against Microsoft's bad corporate behavior and also against just about anything Ballmer says. However, this is one of those rare instances where MS is actually on the right side and if they win then we all benefit.
That all being said, I have no confidence in the SCOTUS or the USPTO. The former is full of smart people who don't have even a rudimentary grasp of technology issues and the latter is full of total retards.
The FreeSWITCH developers are on an audio conference call all day long. Most of us use G.722 at 16k or G.722.1 at 32k. When someone calls in on a cell phone (GSM) or land line (PCMU, aka G.711u) the difference is more than remarkable. When you are on a nice headset in 16k (or higher) all day long then you begin to appreciate how horrible the legacy stuff really is. The sad part is that G.711 takes 64kbps for an audio signal at 8kHz. We do lots of codecs that are higher quality and use much less bandwidth. For example, we can get a single channel of 48kHz CELT audio in 64kbps. (If you have a nice headset and your partner does as well then you will find it almost eerie how crisp and clear the sound is!)
People who are content with G.711 and GSM need to ask themselves why. Is "good enough" really good enough? I've heard this from the Asterisk camp on more than one occasion: "You'll never need more than 8kHz audio!" I strongly disagree with that assertion. After using FreeSWITCH for the past few years I really appreciate the value of HD VoIP. I could not imagine telecommuting and being stuck on a crappy 8kHz connection all day, listening to other people on a crappy 8kHz connection.
If you haven't checked out HD VoIP then you owe it to yourself to see what's out there.
-MC
Just an interesting side note: in our conference we often play sound bites. We have a sound bite of crickets chirping - the sound that gets played when someone asks a question and no one answers.:) Interestingly, you can't hear the crickets on an 8k connection! Just thought I'd share that tidbit.
DarkKnightRadick is correct: there's nothing "fundamental" that can be "owned" (as in property) in all this. You can't patent abstract concepts. Unless the patent describes a very specific process that is both non-obvious to someone skilled in the art and is not already revealed in other prior art/pre-existing technologies then this is totally bogus.
I know I used the word "if" in the previous sentence, but I think we all know that there's no if about it: NTP are patent-trolling douchebags.
I recommend not posting anonymously when making such strong assertions. While I may share some of your feelings on the matter I don't believe that an anonymous post is a very effective means of communicating a message like this. If you aren't willing to sign your name to your post then how much weight can we really give it?
As to Asterisk fans "flaming people who offer an alternative" - I disagree with this statement. (Remember, I'm a FreeSWITCH fan here.) I've only seen some Asterisk guys react strongly to what I can only describe as obnoxious posts by Diego (and a few others). It's one thing to say, "I think FreeSWITCH suits my needs better than Asterisk because X, Y, Z..." but it is quite another thing to say, "Asterisk sucks! I don't know why people even use it any more..." I've seen strong reactions to the latter statements but not the former. The latter statements are pointless and take away valuable time and energy from the real issues at hand, namely making OSS telephony take over the world.
I appreciate everyone's passion for this subject. I only ask that you channel that energy into more positive discussions.
Thanks for chiming in. You are correct that attacks are not discriminating against only Asterisk or only OSS. Also, thanks for telling us what you actually said as opposed to what was reported. Maybe at next year's ClueCon you can give a talk on this subject? The FreeSWITCH footprint is much smaller than Asterisk's and other vendors' so it would be interesting to us to hear about the kinds of attacks you've seen and what kinds of measures you put into place to combat those attacks.
My apologies for Diego. While we appreciate his enthusiasm we (the FreeSWITCH community) abhor his behavior online. It is not condoned by the FS devs who've had to chastise him multiple times. Please ignore him when he goes off like that.
Remember, just dropping FreeSWITCH into an insecure environment isn't a solution. As systems integrators we still have to do our due diligence for security. Locking down Asterisk installs is always a good policy.
I think the real question is why there are so many Asterisk-based systems out there with little or no security in place. My guess is that it's because a lot of people just download it and throw it onto a customer's site. Oopsie.
The advantage that FreeSWITCH gives is that it makes security easier. Note that I said "easier" and not "automatic." If you don't think about security then you will hear about your FreeSWITCH system getting hacked, or vished, or whatever.
Like I said in a previous post: lock it down, people! I also agree that people shouldn't be entering their PIN codes on any incoming call, EVER. However, that doesn't absolve all of these foolish PBX installers (Asterisk or other) from their sin of failing to lock things down.
Kasparov,
I am in total agreement with you. Putting FreeSWITCH into an insecure environment isn't a "complete solution" by any stretch, and that certainly wasn't my point. Like mishehu mentioned in his post, I believe in using the best tools available and using them properly with good security best practices. FreeSWITCH is simply a better tool in many cases. (Note that I said "in many cases" and not "in ALL cases")
VoIP is an enabling technology, and like all enabling technology both consumers and criminals get "enabled." The technologist has the fun job of balancing security with functionality. I prefer to make that job a little bit easier by utilizing the best tools for the job at hand.
Actually, it's lock down your phones, your VM systems, your IVRs, etc. etc. Many years ago I had someone guess a password on a VM system and I had forgotten to disable "external transfers"... oops. Toll fraud. Now I use safe telecom practices. Practice number 1: Use FreeSWITCH instead of anything else. While any system can be configured unsafely and insecurely, at least the initial FreeSWITCH config is "paranoid by default."
-MC
There are times when OSS is the best choice and there are times when it is not. And be sure to let the powers-that-be know that FOSS software is almost never "free as in beer" - there are costs associated with it in all situations. Sometimes it's money, sometimes it's time, sometimes it's the learning curve, etc. Be ready to handle the pros and cons of OSS.
Actually, I'd call Diego's personal experiences quite biased. His intro into the FreeSWITCH community was rather rough, but because FS did a better job in his scenario than Asterisk he scored points at his job and has been quite the cheerleader ever since.
(BTW, when he suggested that we all thought he was nuts... in fact, we occasionally still think he's nuts but then again most of us in #freeswitch @ irc.freenode.net are a bit crazy.)
I can attest to Diego doing a good job of helping new ones get up and running, especially when they speak Portugese as a first language.
Yep, closed-source has issues with security. That's why we run everything open-source. While we generally have to fix all the bugs, we definitely don't have to find them all, and users gladly submit bug reports and occasionally THEY supply a fix. You gotta love open-source!
BTW, if you like using Skype and like open-source software then check this out: http://digg.com/d1rc3e
In any case, all you Skype users please practice safe telephony habits.:)
-MC
Skype via SIP is a nice idea, but it isn't exactly earth-shattering. The Skype guys were both smart and lucky. Having millions of users worldwide with the double-whammy of proprietary protocol and codec is not at all a bad place to be. The proprietary lock-in was good for hoarding the users, but now they are opening things up a bit to leverage that advantage.
FWIW, FreeSWITCH has had two different Skype interfaces for the past few months. When the new SILK codec specs come out tomorrow they will no doubt be implemented into FreeSWITCH immediately. In any case, you can do Skype + SIP right now if you have a Skype account and a FreeSWITCH server.
You make some good points. This is one important reason why the FreeSWITCH developers chose the MPL instead of the GPL. Sometimes the GPL is SO free that it creates unusual limitations. The freedoms given to the end user supersedes that of the developers and distributors of the software. Some would argue that's the way it should be - and in many cases it is. But is it true in ALL cases? Doubtful. I think the fact that about 75% of all projects on Sourceforge are GPL is noteworthy. That seems right - about three in four projects fit nicely with the GPL.
I suppose the bottom line for me is this: do I want Stallman's definition of freedom FORCED upon me? It's a classic paradox - one man's freedom is another man's prison. In any case, I think there is always a choice. Example: if you truly must have a GPL'd telephony app, use Asterisk. If you want an awesome telephony app that is OSS - but not GPL - then use FreeSWITCH.
I may not agree with RMS too frequently but I like having the "extreme" viewpoint articulated if for no other reason than to have a frame of reference...
I suppose it depends on how "stronger" and "higher quality" are defined. If "higher quality" means much narrower claims, fewer or no patents on mathematics and algorithms, or the holy grail of no software patents at all, then I'm all for it. A "stronger" patent may actually be "weaker" in that it is so narrow and focused that it loses value for the patent troll, who by definition wants broad and vague patents so that he can "sue everyone" in hopes of a settlement.
Yes, I'm sorry, you are right. I meant that I hope that SCOTUS smacks down the Bilski patent app, which would have been better communicated by saying that I hope they agree with the FCAC's decision.
-MC
I'm not holding my breath but I'm hopeful that the Supreme Court will take this opportunity to sound the death knell for silly patent applications (and granted patents) like Bilski. As a bonus I hope they put the kibosh on software patents. I know it would make the lives of many software engineers much better and it would definitely kickstart innovation in the software industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Free will is indeed at the core of the issue. If we're uncreated - simply a wonderful cosmic accident in a small corner of the universe - then we are just fancy robots. If we were created with some sort of predetermined outcome then we are just fancy robots. However, if we were created AND we have free will then the issue is a lot more interesting. Life would definitely have more meaning if we were more than the product of mere chance.
The question I recommend we all consider is why. If we're just the fancy robots, why do we react with such revulsion to things like the Holocaust or the recent tsunami in Japan? Why do we hate to see other people suffer and die? In short, why do we have a conscience? Does it serve an evolutionary purpose, and if so, from what is it and from what did it evolve?
I'm open to reasonable answers to these questions from all sides of the debate...
Agreed. The patents that i4i has are dangerous. They never should have been granted and certainly should have been revoked based on obviousness alone. It's easy to root against Microsoft's bad corporate behavior and also against just about anything Ballmer says. However, this is one of those rare instances where MS is actually on the right side and if they win then we all benefit.
That all being said, I have no confidence in the SCOTUS or the USPTO. The former is full of smart people who don't have even a rudimentary grasp of technology issues and the latter is full of total retards.
-MC
The FreeSWITCH developers are on an audio conference call all day long. Most of us use G.722 at 16k or G.722.1 at 32k. When someone calls in on a cell phone (GSM) or land line (PCMU, aka G.711u) the difference is more than remarkable. When you are on a nice headset in 16k (or higher) all day long then you begin to appreciate how horrible the legacy stuff really is. The sad part is that G.711 takes 64kbps for an audio signal at 8kHz. We do lots of codecs that are higher quality and use much less bandwidth. For example, we can get a single channel of 48kHz CELT audio in 64kbps. (If you have a nice headset and your partner does as well then you will find it almost eerie how crisp and clear the sound is!)
:) Interestingly, you can't hear the crickets on an 8k connection! Just thought I'd share that tidbit.
People who are content with G.711 and GSM need to ask themselves why. Is "good enough" really good enough? I've heard this from the Asterisk camp on more than one occasion: "You'll never need more than 8kHz audio!" I strongly disagree with that assertion. After using FreeSWITCH for the past few years I really appreciate the value of HD VoIP. I could not imagine telecommuting and being stuck on a crappy 8kHz connection all day, listening to other people on a crappy 8kHz connection.
If you haven't checked out HD VoIP then you owe it to yourself to see what's out there.
-MC
Just an interesting side note: in our conference we often play sound bites. We have a sound bite of crickets chirping - the sound that gets played when someone asks a question and no one answers.
Not sure I grok this... what license would be better than AGPL for this particular software?
FYI,
Some have inquired as to using OpenBTS with FreeSWITCH as well as Asterisk. Alberto Escudero (aka AEP) wrote this wiki page nearly a year ago:
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/OpenBTS
It's slightly dated but the information is accurate.
-MC
How apropos! My all-time favorite language is Perl. :D
Haha, you're right. I used "unless". I suck.
DarkKnightRadick is correct: there's nothing "fundamental" that can be "owned" (as in property) in all this. You can't patent abstract concepts. Unless the patent describes a very specific process that is both non-obvious to someone skilled in the art and is not already revealed in other prior art/pre-existing technologies then this is totally bogus. I know I used the word "if" in the previous sentence, but I think we all know that there's no if about it: NTP are patent-trolling douchebags.
I recommend not posting anonymously when making such strong assertions. While I may share some of your feelings on the matter I don't believe that an anonymous post is a very effective means of communicating a message like this. If you aren't willing to sign your name to your post then how much weight can we really give it?
As to Asterisk fans "flaming people who offer an alternative" - I disagree with this statement. (Remember, I'm a FreeSWITCH fan here.) I've only seen some Asterisk guys react strongly to what I can only describe as obnoxious posts by Diego (and a few others). It's one thing to say, "I think FreeSWITCH suits my needs better than Asterisk because X, Y, Z..." but it is quite another thing to say, "Asterisk sucks! I don't know why people even use it any more..." I've seen strong reactions to the latter statements but not the former. The latter statements are pointless and take away valuable time and energy from the real issues at hand, namely making OSS telephony take over the world.
I appreciate everyone's passion for this subject. I only ask that you channel that energy into more positive discussions.
-MC
John,
Thanks for chiming in. You are correct that attacks are not discriminating against only Asterisk or only OSS. Also, thanks for telling us what you actually said as opposed to what was reported. Maybe at next year's ClueCon you can give a talk on this subject? The FreeSWITCH footprint is much smaller than Asterisk's and other vendors' so it would be interesting to us to hear about the kinds of attacks you've seen and what kinds of measures you put into place to combat those attacks.
-MC
Kasparov,
My apologies for Diego. While we appreciate his enthusiasm we (the FreeSWITCH community) abhor his behavior online. It is not condoned by the FS devs who've had to chastise him multiple times. Please ignore him when he goes off like that.
-MC
Remember, just dropping FreeSWITCH into an insecure environment isn't a solution. As systems integrators we still have to do our due diligence for security. Locking down Asterisk installs is always a good policy.
I think the real question is why there are so many Asterisk-based systems out there with little or no security in place. My guess is that it's because a lot of people just download it and throw it onto a customer's site. Oopsie.
The advantage that FreeSWITCH gives is that it makes security easier. Note that I said "easier" and not "automatic." If you don't think about security then you will hear about your FreeSWITCH system getting hacked, or vished, or whatever.
Like I said in a previous post: lock it down, people! I also agree that people shouldn't be entering their PIN codes on any incoming call, EVER. However, that doesn't absolve all of these foolish PBX installers (Asterisk or other) from their sin of failing to lock things down.
-MC
Kasparov, I am in total agreement with you. Putting FreeSWITCH into an insecure environment isn't a "complete solution" by any stretch, and that certainly wasn't my point. Like mishehu mentioned in his post, I believe in using the best tools available and using them properly with good security best practices. FreeSWITCH is simply a better tool in many cases. (Note that I said "in many cases" and not "in ALL cases")
VoIP is an enabling technology, and like all enabling technology both consumers and criminals get "enabled." The technologist has the fun job of balancing security with functionality. I prefer to make that job a little bit easier by utilizing the best tools for the job at hand.
-MC
Actually, it's lock down your phones, your VM systems, your IVRs, etc. etc. Many years ago I had someone guess a password on a VM system and I had forgotten to disable "external transfers"... oops. Toll fraud. Now I use safe telecom practices. Practice number 1: Use FreeSWITCH instead of anything else. While any system can be configured unsafely and insecurely, at least the initial FreeSWITCH config is "paranoid by default." -MC
There are times when OSS is the best choice and there are times when it is not. And be sure to let the powers-that-be know that FOSS software is almost never "free as in beer" - there are costs associated with it in all situations. Sometimes it's money, sometimes it's time, sometimes it's the learning curve, etc. Be ready to handle the pros and cons of OSS.
Actually, I'd call Diego's personal experiences quite biased. His intro into the FreeSWITCH community was rather rough, but because FS did a better job in his scenario than Asterisk he scored points at his job and has been quite the cheerleader ever since.
For posterity's sake here's an interesting email thread from a suggestion Diego made, namely that YAML might be a better solution than XML for FS configs: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/2008-June/004019.html
(BTW, when he suggested that we all thought he was nuts... in fact, we occasionally still think he's nuts but then again most of us in #freeswitch @ irc.freenode.net are a bit crazy.)
I can attest to Diego doing a good job of helping new ones get up and running, especially when they speak Portugese as a first language.
Just my $0.02 - do with it as you will.
-MC
Yep, closed-source has issues with security. That's why we run everything open-source. While we generally have to fix all the bugs, we definitely don't have to find them all, and users gladly submit bug reports and occasionally THEY supply a fix. You gotta love open-source!
:)
BTW, if you like using Skype and like open-source software then check this out:
http://digg.com/d1rc3e
In any case, all you Skype users please practice safe telephony habits.
-MC
http://www.cluecon.com/
The Jajah devs made this point just yesterday: http://digg.com/software/FreeSWITCH_Skypiax_Skype_For_All
I highly recommend you check it out. We can use OSS software to force the *opolies to get with the times.
www.freeswitch.com -MC -- See you at ClueCon! www.cluecon.com
Install FreeSWITCH and you'll have the manliest OSS telecom app around! :P
-MC
Skype via SIP is a nice idea, but it isn't exactly earth-shattering. The Skype guys were both smart and lucky. Having millions of users worldwide with the double-whammy of proprietary protocol and codec is not at all a bad place to be. The proprietary lock-in was good for hoarding the users, but now they are opening things up a bit to leverage that advantage.
FWIW, FreeSWITCH has had two different Skype interfaces for the past few months. When the new SILK codec specs come out tomorrow they will no doubt be implemented into FreeSWITCH immediately. In any case, you can do Skype + SIP right now if you have a Skype account and a FreeSWITCH server.
-MC
You make some good points. This is one important reason why the FreeSWITCH developers chose the MPL instead of the GPL. Sometimes the GPL is SO free that it creates unusual limitations. The freedoms given to the end user supersedes that of the developers and distributors of the software. Some would argue that's the way it should be - and in many cases it is. But is it true in ALL cases? Doubtful. I think the fact that about 75% of all projects on Sourceforge are GPL is noteworthy. That seems right - about three in four projects fit nicely with the GPL.
I suppose the bottom line for me is this: do I want Stallman's definition of freedom FORCED upon me? It's a classic paradox - one man's freedom is another man's prison. In any case, I think there is always a choice. Example: if you truly must have a GPL'd telephony app, use Asterisk. If you want an awesome telephony app that is OSS - but not GPL - then use FreeSWITCH.
I may not agree with RMS too frequently but I like having the "extreme" viewpoint articulated if for no other reason than to have a frame of reference...
-MC
Amen brothah!
I suppose it depends on how "stronger" and "higher quality" are defined. If "higher quality" means much narrower claims, fewer or no patents on mathematics and algorithms, or the holy grail of no software patents at all, then I'm all for it. A "stronger" patent may actually be "weaker" in that it is so narrow and focused that it loses value for the patent troll, who by definition wants broad and vague patents so that he can "sue everyone" in hopes of a settlement.
Yes, I'm sorry, you are right. I meant that I hope that SCOTUS smacks down the Bilski patent app, which would have been better communicated by saying that I hope they agree with the FCAC's decision. -MC
I'm not holding my breath but I'm hopeful that the Supreme Court will take this opportunity to sound the death knell for silly patent applications (and granted patents) like Bilski. As a bonus I hope they put the kibosh on software patents. I know it would make the lives of many software engineers much better and it would definitely kickstart innovation in the software industry.