I Work for a Phone company here in Argentina, we work on Public Telephony (Phone Boots, Calling Cards, etc.) We are 50% VoIP, 50% FWTs (Cellphone adapters). I Build our PBX and our Billing plataform. Our Software PBX is based on Slackware + Asterisk + GnuGK + MySQL. Our Billing plataform is MySQL + Perl.
We are currently managing arround 1.750.000 minutes per month.
My Idealism is not just idealism, i put it in practice, and it works.
Oracle is Proprietary. Period. MySQL is functional enough. You think Oracle is better?, improve MySQL. My Freedom is more valuable than some technical benefits.
Parent is joking, but actually, no fancy config tools is a greate feature of Slackware. It let's you do the job without getting in the middle. If you know what you are doing, dependency checking and clicky clicky interfaces are a waste of time and resources, plus, they are not as flexible as the old good shell. BTW: Slackware has a package management system, and it rocks. What it lacks is dependency management, and that's not a lack of a feature, it's a design choice, and it's a greate decition.
I also found the geek code to be pretty incomplete, us-centric, and non-extensible. The hacker key is better but still far from perfect. I'm pretty interested in your idea, please e-mail me a link when you have something uploaded, also, if you would like colaboration or need anything (hosting/coding) feel free to email me, i would be glad to help.
Yup, the bigger problem won't be technicall, it'll be people fighting over domains. Actually, the DNS system is somehow obsolete (It still works, but it could have way more functions if we designed a new system taking into account what the web is now, rather than what the web was when DNS was created, also, the DNS system is a very good starting point for fighting SPAM).
"Only drawback is that nobody's browser actually supports these new names."
That's incorrect. First of all, the browser is not responsible for name resolution, that's the operating system duttie, So, go and put whatever domain you want into your browser, and as long as it's in a valid charset and with no spaces, it will just ask the OS if it knows that domain. The DNS servers are ready to handle domains with no TLDs (technically, with your system, all domains will have TLDs). The problem is that, while this could be done without changing anything technically, to do it the wright way, we would need a new DNS system, since right now we have different authorities (for the different TLDs), all this organization would be lost if all domains would be top level. It's more of an administrative problem than a technicall one. The other problem would be that it would conflict with local domains, for example, my machine is called ALMAFUERTE, and all the other machines in the office has also names, and are resolved in a local DNS server, we would need to stablish a local reserved domain, just like we now have reserved IP ranges. So, for example, my machine would be ALMAFUERTE.localdomain. In Unix, you can configure named.conf so it allways looks up on a first dns server, and then on others, so i could tell my machine to first check the hosts file, then a dns server at 192.168.0.254 that would resolve local domains, and then a public nameserver, but this can't be done in windows, i think.
There is a standard way to name software: Versions.
I Don't work with windows, but if i did, i would like to just know what version i have, and what version i an upgrade to. In any OS on earth, besides windorze, you can just look up your version, and check on the web if there is a newer version, if $web_version > $machine_version, you can just upgrade. 99.99% of software uses this standard, but m$ (the remaining 0.01%) decide to call their systems with stupid, meaningless names... They produce software for the iliterate masses, shouldn't they try to simplify it's product?
Well, it's funny when someone argues with FACTS. I'm not telling you that NOBODY needs "spirituality", i'm telling you that i DON'T. Who are you to know more about myself than me? So, you need spirituality, i don't. Some people needs a weelchair, some people need glasses, i don't, Guess who's stronger, and who is weaker and needs from external accesories? (Disclaimer: It's just an example, i'm not discriminating anyone or saying that people with protesis is inferior, please don't be a dick, if you think i'm nazi, just save your opinions for yourself.)
Not everyone needs religion, and not everyone needs to identify with nonexistant creatures, some people just learns to live with the fact that you can't know or explain everything, and that not everything has a purpose, in the human explanation of "purpose". Once you learn to live with this two facts, you don't need this kind of stuff, and you can be a happy atheist, and identify yourself with more meaningfull mirrors that are real and live nextdoor.
hehe, yes, people tends to use their office suite for eerything. For me, text formatting is useless, so i don't use an office suite, GNU Emacs is everything i could ever need. But people tends to embed everthing into their office suite, i have had people emailing me word documents with allmost any kind of file attached to it, from executable files to videos, i tend to targzip everything i email, reducing the size of the email. People tends to.doc everything they send, increasing the size of the email, and loosing quality in images...
Further, he added, "this proposal acknowledges that Open Document does not address pictures, audio, video, charts, maps, voice, voice-over-IP, and other kinds of data our customers are increasingly putting in documents and archiving."
What the fuck was this guy thinking?, how could you embedd VoIP on a document?, it doesn't make any sense.
Let me guess, you record your question in mp3, you put it inside a.doc, e-mail it, and wait for the answer in the same format?
I Smoke. I Woudln't teach or introduce someone into smoking, it would be unethical to teach my childs to smoke.
The same happends with Religion, But religion is more than a bad habit, it's a stone hanged from this society, that keeps us from finally evolving in certain areas.... they were alive and did the work of their day, Admitting they bore mites as for unfledged birds who have now to rise and fly and sing for themselves...
Walt Whitman, The Song of Myself
Just don't pass it while they are 3. If you teach your children to THINK, and teach him your specific beleives when he is old enough to decide for himself, it's ok. If you tell your child about your political/religious ideas when s/he's 15, you are leting him choose, but if you put that shit in his head since the day s/he was born... Also, the way religion is teached is not actual teaching, but brainwashing. When you learn algebra, you are told how it works, and that's it. When you are teached religion, they tell you how it works, and then they tell you that if you don't beleive in it and follow it exactly, you will go to hell, to be punished forever, when this is told to a 5 years old child, what do you think will happen?
I Can't prove that a "God" Does not exist, but i can prove that the gods that religions has said to exist doesn't, in the form that they have gived specifics about this supposed gods, and those specs has been proved wrong. Also, it's a false true, since it can't be proved. Let me make an stupid analogy: I Just farted, but my fart didn't produce any odor, sound, didn't release any kind of gases in the environment, and nobody has seen me fart, so, it would be a falacy if i tried to prove you that i farted, since it's impossible to prove that i did it, and it's also impossible to prove that i didn't. Then, i start giving you specifics about my fart, and those specifics are proved WRONG. I give you over the years many specific information about my fart, and you prove most of those specific informations wrong, so i just tell you that my fart works in misterious ways, just ignore your proves, and eventually say "ok, i was wrong about those specific informations about my gas, but that doesn't change the existant of my fart, since my fart is something way to complex for you to understand, and stop questioning the existance of my fart or a big fart from outer space will come and punish you (but before, i will create a huge institution to defend my fart, and i will burn you and anyone else that refuses the existance of the fart, in the name of the fart, of course). Come on, it's 2005 allready.
"is probably a form of idolatry.;-)" I Absolutely agree, the problem is that religion is a CRIME. A Crime against human mind and human knowledge, which is the most precious thing we have. If people belevied certain ridicoulous things, and they kept that for themselves, i would agree, it's people's right to think, smoke, drink, or whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes. The problem are institutions that hold an amazing power, and acts against science. I'm pro drugs, but against narcotrafic, pro drinking but against alcapone, pro cigars but against Marlboro, pro politics but against state, pro science but against NASA, pro communications but against AT&T. Think whatever you want, but kill the fucking church, and stop going against the people that wants to discover the true. And, also, don't try to impose your stupid beleives on new generations, Certain things are a personal decition, and they are ok, but they stop being right if you impose them to the young, Consume drugs, drink, smoke, beleive in religions, be gay, whatever, but please don't publish this things as if they were ok, and don't teach them to your childs, let them choose by themselves, I take drugs, I smoke, I drink, but i don't tell my sister to do those things, and i don't tell her that they are ok.
Theorys can't be proved right, they can be proved either wrong, or probably true. Nothing can be proved completely true, since it's based on previous conceptions and knowledges that might change, so, there is a little bit of faith in it.
I touched the meaning of faith a little to make it suitable for a comparission, trust is a form of faith, in this context.
About the slaves comment, we are talking about science, not ethics. Also, christians change their ethics in two ocasions: a) When a powerfull country/organization tells them to (The church changed it's mind on slavery when certain countrys abolished slavery, and not he other way arround) b) when it's convenient for political/military/economical reasons. About the "try to find a Christian who thinks that", 99.99% of christians are capitalists, and 99.99% of capitalists aproves some forms of slavery (working 9 hours for a minimal wage, not being able to find another job, and so not being able to afford loosing the job, is slavery)
But the other issues present in the interview are really way more interesting than SPAM (Religion and pronunciation os bizarre names:) ).
I Agree with Zdziarski in that both science and religion need a bit of faith from their believers. The difference, is that science logically analizes our environment, and bases it's conclusion on that analisis. Religion, on the other hand, is arbitrary, it just states that certain things are so 'just because'; so, reading different theorys, and then i see which seems more plausible, is better documented, etc, and, off course, depending on my personality, i will find some of them more credible, and so i will put a little faith in them. Religious persons acts differently, they beleive in a certain religion because their parents did. I Don't beleive the same things that my parents did about science, i read my own books, make my own conclussions, etc. Also, science is more unified than religion, that is, for a certain topic, there might be a few scientific explanations, that may vary slightly, but they all have a common base, share certain ideas, etc., and usually there is a reasonable number of different theorys (two?, three?), but, in religion, there are hundreds of different religions and they all state things that are VERY different from what other religions explain, absolutely contradicting each other. Also, religion doesn't evolve, science does. The catholic church once stated how man was created, and that explanation is still the same than it was 1.7k years ago, science changes daily, improving, finding new ways and explanations, because the human being is constantly evolving, and so, we prove ourselves wrong constantly (may be not plain wrong, we just elaborate on what we thought previously), religion doesn't change, and doesn't add new knowledge. One of the weaker points of religions, is that they base all their facts in one initial fact: God exists, and so, from that all the other knowledge is generated. We don't know if god exists, it's just a theory, so all the theorys in religion are based on one single theory, that is impossible to prove, and that is the single more discussed and opossed theory in history, with lots of proves that it's false, being it's only argument to be true, faith. Science, on the other hand, bases all it's theorys on a fact: Man can learn, so, many specific theorys might be wrong, but they can't be all wrong, and they won't be all proved wrong in a day, in change, if i could prove you that god doesn't exists, i would be proving all your other theorys wrong at the same time. Obviously, you have the right to beleive, and i respect that.
I have met RMS, he's amazingly smart and clever, with very clear and well defined ideas about many subjects, and specially, someone that will defend his ideas in any situation and at any cost, and that doesn't exchange his moral for money, power or comodities, a lifestyle that most people have forgotten, and, specially, one that is now seen as something bad, since north america will label you as a if your ideas doesn't help their interests. He's the most attacked figure of the Free Software movement, and people is easily brainwashed. He started a revolution that hacked the stablished powers that controle the amazingly big bussines of selling ideas, and restricting what you can think and what you can't. What he started in software later extended to many other areas. Off course, since the big guys found out that they couldn't just fight against this, they tried to eat the whole thing, and transform it into a similar model that they can actually gather money from. The USA is expert in this field, They had the problem of niggers, and they knew they woudln't be able to just make them dissapear, and they needed them to work, so they found a way, "integrated" them, created a fake stereotype for the nigger, and made them consume like everybody else. You like basketball, big clothes, and trash tv?, buy, buy and buy, you are a good citizen. If you can't fight them, join them. This is what has been done to Free Software, they can't just make it dissapear, so Open Source was created, we still make money, we still control what you use, and you even think you are part of a revolution!, win-win situation for the same big guys... Before talking against RMS, read some real stuff about his life, instead of what the fucking CNN told you to think if you didn't wanted to be called a commie. You all oww RMS a lot, you shoudl at least be respectfull of his achievements.
Ok, now enjoy how a troll named repruhsent posts some weird, false, but actually kind of fun shit as a reply to this post (it has been week since i haven't had a post without replys, all of them have response from this guy, they get modded as -1 troll, but i would mod them as +1 funny, if i could use my modpoints in historys i have posted, off course.)
Slashdot Mirror
I Work for a Phone company here in Argentina, we work on Public Telephony (Phone Boots, Calling Cards, etc.)
We are 50% VoIP, 50% FWTs (Cellphone adapters). I Build our PBX and our Billing plataform.
Our Software PBX is based on Slackware + Asterisk + GnuGK + MySQL. Our Billing plataform is MySQL + Perl.
We are currently managing arround 1.750.000 minutes per month.
My Idealism is not just idealism, i put it in practice, and it works.
1 - It's NOT.
2 - My Freedom is more important than anything else. Argue with that.
Oracle is Proprietary. Period.
MySQL is functional enough. You think Oracle is better?, improve MySQL. My Freedom is more valuable than some technical benefits.
Oracle is Proprietary. Period.
Is MySQL.
And it's the best place to stay.
Parent is joking, but actually, no fancy config tools is a greate feature of Slackware. It let's you do the job without getting in the middle. If you know what you are doing, dependency checking and clicky clicky interfaces are a waste of time and resources, plus, they are not as flexible as the old good shell.
BTW: Slackware has a package management system, and it rocks. What it lacks is dependency management, and that's not a lack of a feature, it's a design choice, and it's a greate decition.
I also found the geek code to be pretty incomplete, us-centric, and non-extensible. The hacker key is better but still far from perfect. I'm pretty interested in your idea, please e-mail me a link when you have something uploaded, also, if you would like colaboration or need anything (hosting/coding) feel free to email me, i would be glad to help.
Yup, the bigger problem won't be technicall, it'll be people fighting over domains. Actually, the DNS system is somehow obsolete (It still works, but it could have way more functions if we designed a new system taking into account what the web is now, rather than what the web was when DNS was created, also, the DNS system is a very good starting point for fighting SPAM).
BTW: Rammstein Rules!.
"Only drawback is that nobody's browser actually supports these new names."
That's incorrect. First of all, the browser is not responsible for name resolution, that's the operating system duttie, So, go and put whatever domain you want into your browser, and as long as it's in a valid charset and with no spaces, it will just ask the OS if it knows that domain. The DNS servers are ready to handle domains with no TLDs (technically, with your system, all domains will have TLDs). The problem is that, while this could be done without changing anything technically, to do it the wright way, we would need a new DNS system, since right now we have different authorities (for the different TLDs), all this organization would be lost if all domains would be top level. It's more of an administrative problem than a technicall one.
The other problem would be that it would conflict with local domains, for example, my machine is called ALMAFUERTE, and all the other machines in the office has also names, and are resolved in a local DNS server, we would need to stablish a local reserved domain, just like we now have reserved IP ranges. So, for example, my machine would be ALMAFUERTE.localdomain. In Unix, you can configure named.conf so it allways looks up on a first dns server, and then on others, so i could tell my machine to first check the hosts file, then a dns server at 192.168.0.254 that would resolve local domains, and then a public nameserver, but this can't be done in windows, i think.
There is a law for hardrives, the Murphy's law :)
There is a standard way to name software: Versions.
... They produce software for the iliterate masses, shouldn't they try to simplify it's product?
I Don't work with windows, but if i did, i would like to just know what version i have, and what version i an upgrade to. In any OS on earth, besides windorze, you can just look up your version, and check on the web if there is a newer version, if $web_version > $machine_version, you can just upgrade. 99.99% of software uses this standard, but m$ (the remaining 0.01%) decide to call their systems with stupid, meaningless names
Capitalism isn't the answer, Capitalism is the question.
No, or Comunism is the answer.
Well, it's funny when someone argues with FACTS.
I'm not telling you that NOBODY needs "spirituality", i'm telling you that i DON'T. Who are you to know more about myself than me?
So, you need spirituality, i don't. Some people needs a weelchair, some people need glasses, i don't, Guess who's stronger, and who is weaker and
needs from external accesories?
(Disclaimer: It's just an example, i'm not discriminating anyone or saying that people with protesis is inferior, please don't be a dick, if you think i'm nazi, just save your opinions for yourself.)
Not everyone needs religion, and not everyone needs to identify with nonexistant creatures, some people just learns to live with the fact that you can't know or explain everything, and that not everything has a purpose, in the human explanation of "purpose". Once you learn to live with this two facts, you don't need this kind of stuff, and you can be a happy atheist, and identify yourself with more meaningfull mirrors that are real and live nextdoor.
That SCO does this kind of joins .. ...
:)
They seem to roll up a joint each time their CEO talks to the press
Also, will it be a left or a right kind of join?
hehe, yes, people tends to use their office suite for eerything. For me, text formatting is useless, so i don't use an office suite, GNU Emacs is everything i could ever need. But people tends to embed everthing into their office suite, i have had people emailing me word documents with allmost any kind of file attached to it, from executable files to videos, i tend to targzip everything i email, reducing the size of the email. People tends to .doc everything they send, increasing the size of the email, and loosing quality in images ...
Further, he added, "this proposal acknowledges that Open Document does not address pictures, audio, video, charts, maps, voice, voice-over-IP, and other kinds of data our customers are increasingly putting in documents and archiving."
.doc, e-mail it, and wait for the answer in the same format?
What the fuck was this guy thinking?, how could you embedd VoIP on a document?, it doesn't make any sense.
Let me guess, you record your question in mp3, you put it inside a
I Smoke. I Woudln't teach or introduce someone into smoking, it would be unethical to teach my childs to smoke.
... they were alive and did the work of their day, Admitting they bore mites as for unfledged birds who have now to rise and fly and sing for themselves ...
The same happends with Religion, But religion is more than a bad habit, it's a stone hanged from this society, that keeps us from finally evolving in certain areas.
Walt Whitman, The Song of Myself
Just don't pass it while they are 3. If you teach your children to THINK, and teach him your specific beleives when he is old enough to decide for himself, it's ok. If you tell your child about your political/religious ideas when s/he's 15, you are leting him choose, but if you put that shit in his head since the day s/he was born ...
Also, the way religion is teached is not actual teaching, but brainwashing. When you learn algebra, you are told how it works, and that's it. When you are teached religion, they tell you how it works, and then they tell you that if you don't beleive in it and follow it exactly, you will go to hell, to be punished forever, when this is told to a 5 years old child, what do you think will happen?
I Can't prove that a "God" Does not exist, but i can prove that the gods that religions has said to exist doesn't, in the form that they have gived specifics about this supposed gods, and those specs has been proved wrong. Also, it's a false true, since it can't be proved. Let me make an stupid analogy: I Just farted, but my fart didn't produce any odor, sound, didn't release any kind of gases in the environment, and nobody has seen me fart, so, it would be a falacy if i tried to prove you that i farted, since it's impossible to prove that i did it, and it's also impossible to prove that i didn't. Then, i start giving you specifics about my fart, and those specifics are proved WRONG. I give you over the years many specific information about my fart, and you prove most of those specific informations wrong, so i just tell you that my fart works in misterious ways, just ignore your proves, and eventually say "ok, i was wrong about those specific informations about my gas, but that doesn't change the existant of my fart, since my fart is something way to complex for you to understand, and stop questioning the existance of my fart or a big fart from outer space will come and punish you (but before, i will create a huge institution to defend my fart, and i will burn you and anyone else that refuses the existance of the fart, in the name of the fart, of course).
Come on, it's 2005 allready.
"is probably a form of idolatry. ;-)"
I Absolutely agree, the problem is that religion is a CRIME. A Crime against human mind and human knowledge, which is the most precious thing we have. If people belevied certain ridicoulous things, and they kept that for themselves, i would agree, it's people's right to think, smoke, drink, or whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes. The problem are institutions that hold an amazing power, and acts against science. I'm pro drugs, but against narcotrafic, pro drinking but against alcapone, pro cigars but against Marlboro, pro politics but against state, pro science but against NASA, pro communications but against AT&T. Think whatever you want, but kill the fucking church, and stop going against the people that wants to discover the true.
And, also, don't try to impose your stupid beleives on new generations, Certain things are a personal decition, and they are ok, but they stop being right if you impose them to the young, Consume drugs, drink, smoke, beleive in religions, be gay, whatever, but please don't publish this things as if they were ok, and don't teach them to your childs, let them choose by themselves, I take drugs, I smoke, I drink, but i don't tell my sister to do those things, and i don't tell her that they are ok.
Theorys can't be proved right, they can be proved either wrong, or probably true. Nothing can be proved completely true, since it's based on previous conceptions and knowledges that might change, so, there is a little bit of faith in it.
I touched the meaning of faith a little to make it suitable for a comparission, trust is a form of faith, in this context.
About the slaves comment, we are talking about science, not ethics. Also, christians change their ethics in two ocasions: a) When a powerfull country/organization tells them to (The church changed it's mind on slavery when certain countrys abolished slavery, and not he other way arround) b) when it's convenient for political/military/economical reasons.
About the "try to find a Christian who thinks that", 99.99% of christians are capitalists, and 99.99% of capitalists aproves some forms of slavery (working 9 hours for a minimal wage, not being able to find another job, and so not being able to afford loosing the job, is slavery)
But the other issues present in the interview are really way more interesting than SPAM (Religion and pronunciation os bizarre names :) ).
I Agree with Zdziarski in that both science and religion need a bit of faith from their believers. The difference, is that science logically analizes our environment, and bases it's conclusion on that analisis. Religion, on the other hand, is arbitrary, it just states that certain things are so 'just because'; so, reading different theorys, and then i see which seems more plausible, is better documented, etc, and, off course, depending on my personality, i will find some of them more credible, and so i will put a little faith in them. Religious persons acts differently, they beleive in a certain religion because their parents did. I Don't beleive the same things that my parents did about science, i read my own books, make my own conclussions, etc. Also, science is more unified than religion, that is, for a certain topic, there might be a few scientific explanations, that may vary slightly, but they all have a common base, share certain ideas, etc., and usually there is a reasonable number of different theorys (two?, three?), but, in religion, there are hundreds of different religions and they all state things that are VERY different from what other religions explain, absolutely contradicting each other.
Also, religion doesn't evolve, science does. The catholic church once stated how man was created, and that explanation is still the same than it was 1.7k years ago, science changes daily, improving, finding new ways and explanations, because the human being is constantly evolving, and so, we prove ourselves wrong constantly (may be not plain wrong, we just elaborate on what we thought previously), religion doesn't change, and doesn't add new knowledge.
One of the weaker points of religions, is that they base all their facts in one initial fact: God exists, and so, from that all the other knowledge is generated. We don't know if god exists, it's just a theory, so all the theorys in religion are based on one single theory, that is impossible to prove, and that is the single more discussed and opossed theory in history, with lots of proves that it's false, being it's only argument to be true, faith. Science, on the other hand, bases all it's theorys on a fact: Man can learn, so, many specific theorys might be wrong, but they can't be all wrong, and they won't be all proved wrong in a day, in change, if i could prove you that god doesn't exists, i would be proving all your other theorys wrong at the same time.
Obviously, you have the right to beleive, and i respect that.
I have met RMS, he's amazingly smart and clever, with very clear and well defined ideas about many subjects, and specially, someone that will defend his ideas in any situation and at any cost, and that doesn't exchange his moral for money, power or comodities, a lifestyle that most people have forgotten, and, specially, one that is now seen as something bad, since north america will label you as a if your ideas doesn't help their interests. ...
He's the most attacked figure of the Free Software movement, and people is easily brainwashed.
He started a revolution that hacked the stablished powers that controle the amazingly big bussines of selling ideas, and restricting what you can think and what you can't. What he started in software later extended to many other areas. Off course, since the big guys found out that they couldn't just fight against this, they tried to eat the whole thing, and transform it into a similar model that they can actually gather money from. The USA is expert in this field, They had the problem of niggers, and they knew they woudln't be able to just make them dissapear, and they needed them to work, so they found a way, "integrated" them, created a fake stereotype for the nigger, and made them consume like everybody else. You like basketball, big clothes, and trash tv?, buy, buy and buy, you are a good citizen.
If you can't fight them, join them.
This is what has been done to Free Software, they can't just make it dissapear, so Open Source was created, we still make money, we still control what you use, and you even think you are part of a revolution!, win-win situation for the same big guys
Before talking against RMS, read some real stuff about his life, instead of what the fucking CNN told you to think if you didn't wanted to be called a commie.
You all oww RMS a lot, you shoudl at least be respectfull of his achievements.
Ok, now enjoy how a troll named repruhsent posts some weird, false, but actually kind of fun shit as a reply to this post (it has been week since i haven't had a post without replys, all of them have response from this guy, they get modded as -1 troll, but i would mod them as +1 funny, if i could use my modpoints in historys i have posted, off course.)