lunedì 28 settembre 2015

Eston Kohver e le veritate non dicite

Alicun dies retro, le 26 septembre, se scribeva le ultime capitulo de un grave question international: le arresto de Eston Kohver.
Eston Kohver arrestate per le FSB
Eston Kohver es un officiero del servicio de securitate del Estonia qui esseva arrestate per le FSB (le servicio de securitate federal de Russia) le 5 septembre del 2014, in un foreste al confin inter Estonia e Russia. Le arresto esseva multo criticate per Estonia e per le medios de information occidental, perque illo ha evenite in circumstantias controversial: durante que Russia declara que le arresto eveniva in territorio russe, Estonia affirma que Kohver esseva arrestate illegalmente, in territorio estonian.
Le nova esseva reportate per plure medios de information, como le BBC, Reuters, le New York Times, e multe alteres. Plure voces se ha levate in le mundo occidental pro demandar a Russia le liberation de Kohver ma, nonobstante alicun signal positive, Kohver ha remanite in detention pro plus que un anno.
Le cosa curiose de iste episodio es que le officieros estonian e russe ha signate duo differente reportos super le arresto, que concorda in tote le detalios, excepto le plus importante: le precise location ubi Kohver se trovava quando ille esseva fermate.
Le version estonian del reporto
Le version russe del reporto
Le picturas in le reporto monstra le linea de confin marcate per tractos breve, que divide Estonia (in le parte superior del pictura) a Russia (inferior). Le tres puncto que es evidentiate in le designos es crateres de circa 40 centimetros de diametro, que esseva causate per le explosion de granatas confundente.
Le 19 de augusto 2015 le tribunal russe de Pskov condemnava Kohver a 15 annos de prison, in un mossa que esseva de retorno condemnate per plure institutiones occidental. Totevia, on non perdeva le sperantia de un liberation anticipate, como parte de un excambio de prisoneros inter Russia e Estonia. De facto, isto es exactemente lo que eveniva le 26 septembre 2015, quando Kohver esseva retornate a Estonia in cambio de Alexei Dressen, un altere officiero del servicio de securitate estonian que esseva arrestate in 2012 con le accusation de esser un spion pagate de Russia. Le excambio esseva le resultato de activitates diplomatic inter politicos del duo paises, que portava al pardono de Kohver — per parte de Putin — e de Dressen — per parte del presidente estonian Ilves. Iste pardonos ha rendite possibile le excambio.

Lo que io trova curiose in tote iste adventura es le commento de Mark Feygin, le advocato de Kohver, que ha affirmate que le pardono offerite per Putin ha le sol scopo de lustrar le imagine de Russia in occasion del participation de Putin al consilio general del Nationes Unite.
Pro summarisar le eventos in maniera extrememente synthetic (si nos assume le version estonian como le bon):

  1. Kohver es un investigator, capturate illegalmente per le FSB in territorio estonian (ma le granatas confundente esseva usate in territorio russe)
  2. Dressen es un spion, un traitor estonian qui debeva passar multe annos in le prisones de Estonia
  3. Kohver esseva condemnate per Russia a 15 annos de prison, con le accusation de contrabando (o supporto a contrabandistas)
  4. Effortios diplomatic portava al pardono de ambe agentes
  5. Kohver esseva restituite a Estonia
  6. Dressen esseva conseniate a Russia, pais al qual ille cercava de scappar jam in 2012 justo quando ille esseva arrestate
  7. Le pardono de Kohver es un expediente mediatic, propagandistic, de Putin
Esque isto face senso? In mi opinion, non del toto. Estonia libera un proprie citatano (non un russo!), culpabile de gravissime operationes de espionage e sabotage, e permitte que ille va a Russia, ubi ille es glorificate (ma supertoto, totalmente libere), in excambio de un investigator qui esseva abducte illegalmente e sin motivation — e que, de consequentia, deberea haber essite liberate inconditionatemente! — e affirma que iste operation es un victoria, rendite possibile solmente gratias al vanitate de Putin in un tentativa de lustrar le imagine de Russia ante le Nationes Unite. Pro paraphrasar isto ancora, on poterea dicer que Estonia demonstra que un qualcunque spion o sabotator pote ager contra Estonia e esser impunite, si al mesme tempore Russia captura un honeste citatano estonian, in Estonia, e lo excambia pro le traitor. De plus, si Russia face isto, isto es un concession extraordinari de Russia.
Excusa me, ma io lo trova completemente ridicule e incredibile.

Etichette: , , ,

lunedì 28 aprile 2014

Competition de equitation

Dominica in le parco il habeva un evento particular: un gruppo de infantes e juvene pueras (io estima que le etate vadeva de 6 a 15 annos) esseva reunite pro un competition de equitation... sin cavallos!
Tote participantes cavalcava un baston con un capite de cavallo, e apparentemente esseva divertitissime. Un cosa singular que io notava, es que nulle altere personas reguardava le evento: il habeva nulle persona in ultra al participantes, non mesmo le parentes. De facto, io pote comprender le motivo. :-)

Etichette: , ,

lunedì 21 aprile 2014

Le bicycletta le plus estranie?

Le parcos de joco pro infantes es un ressource illimitate pro le apprendimento. Ma non solmente pro infantes, mesmo pro adultos!
Hodie io videva iste bycicletta:
Un bicycletta pro tote le familia
Io numquam videva un bicycletta simile; io ha vidite plure bicyclettas con duo sedias, e illos es si longe, que io non poteva imaginar que il existeva mesmo modellos con tres sedias! E nota que le sedia central es dedicate a un infante, perque le pedales es in alto, multo proxime al sedia.
E vos, qual es le bicycletta le plus original que vos videva (realmente, non in catalogos o in internet!)?

Etichette: , , ,

domenica 17 novembre 2013

It's just an init system

The recent debate for the choice of the default init system in Debian has tickled my curiosity to know more about the current situation of init systems and at the same time has led me to form a certain opinion on this matter, which I'm going to share here. It should be noted that I'm currently employed by Canonical (I take the opportunity to underline that the opinions expressed here are just my personal ones), and while this might have had some influence on the forming of my opinion, in all honesty I claim to not have noticed any of that — though indeed I'll leave the verdict to you, if you'll be patient enough to read the whole post.

From the little knowledge I have of these init systems, I'll start by saying that I like Upstart (and I'm a satisfied user of it), as well as systemd and OpenRC. I find the design of Upstart to be elegant, modular, and the implementation could be set as an example for students of what good code is. On the other hand, when in 2010 I first read about systemd from Lennart's blog, I was almost blown away: it seemed to me that every detail had been considered to make the booting phase as efficient as possible, and I was looking forward to its development. And I should state very clearly that — despite not having yet tried it — I now believe that all promises were met, and that systemd is an excellent init system. As for OpenRC, I know really little about it, other than it's out there, it works, it's maintained and is in progress of being ported to FreeBSD.

That said, my wish is that Debian goes with anything but systemd. And that of course is not limited to Debian, but I wish the same for any distribution which is pondering a choice for the init system. Why so? As I said, systemd is an excellent init system, it's used in several distributions, and I would be very happy if other init systems took inspiration from it for all the good stuff it has to offer. My concern is better expressed by quoting Lennart himself:
I believe ultimately this really boils down to this: the Linux userspace plumbing layer is nowadays developed to a big part in the systemd source tree. Ignoring this means you constantly have to work with half-baked systems, where you combine outdated components which do not belong to together into something that in many facets might work but is hardly integrated or consistent. Or to put this another way: you are at a road fork: either you take the path where you use the stuff that the folks doing most of the Linux  core OS development work on (regardless if they work at Red Hat, Intel, Suse, Samsung or wherever else) or you use the stuff Canonical is working on (which in case it isn't obvious is well... "limited").
This text, turned into the opposite perspective, excellently summarizes the danger that comes with going with systemd: entering a road which hopefully continues in green and flowery fields, but from which it will be very very difficult to escape, should you want to. The more distributions go with systemd, the more the Linux world will be tied to it. The code of udev was merged into the systemd project last year, and Kay Sievers (the udev maintainer) assured that "the udev built from the systemd source tree will stay compatible with non-systemd init systems for a long time". How long? It seems just logical that the more distributions use systemd, the less effort will be spent to make udev usable outside on non-systemd systems. And, as Lennart wrote, it's not just udev. Already now logind requires systemd, and tomorrow it could be cgroups, kdbus, Wayland and what not. But if it's true that I like systemd, why am I complaining? How could this be a bad thing? We should simply all switch to the solution that currently is the best one, which in the opinion of many is systemd, and forget worrying, fighting and (more concretely) spending time in maintaining other init systems (and related plumbing stuff).

Well, the reason is that we don't know where the currently flowery road will lead us to. Could it lead to some bad place? If you think of a future where nearly everyone will be walking on this road, well, the bad case is really unlikely: there is a solid company behind the project (Red Hat), and possibly the greatest developers that have been worked on Linux. The fact that almost everyone will be using systemd should simply make it stronger and better. Just look at the Linux kernel.
However... we would still be locked on a road. This is what the text I quoted above says, after all: if you get out of the road, you lose logind (with GNOME as of now, and possible other DEs will follow), kdbus, udev, maybe even Wayland. More precisely, you don't lose them, but you'll have to come up with a system which offers all the equivalent required functionality. It's not impossible, but it would demand a great amount of work. And here I guess that even the most patient of my readers will have asked this question for the third time: "but why the hell would I want to jump off this road?".
Because you still can, as of now. You can write a better udev. You can write a better logind. You can write a better init system, a new one, you can even start from scratch, as a hobby project. You can write it in Go. You can innovate, you can come up with some revolutionary idea (as in some ways was systemd when it was conceived). Once all the Linux plumbing layer is tied together, changing stuff will be much more difficult — especially if you are a single individual with great ideas but limited time to implement them. Contributing changes upstream is not always easy, and it becomes more difficult as the complexity of the project grows. Not anyone can afford develop a new feature in a branch, and keep it in there until it's ready to be merged, rebasing it and solving merge conflicts every other day, for months. And it's likely that the more revolutionary your idea is, the deeper and more disruptive your changes will be, to the point that keeping them in a branch would be impractical. This is why I wish that the components which form the software stack remain separate: because you might want (or need) to replace them. You don't like Upstart? Fine, use OpenRC. OpenRC sucks? Fine, use something else. But in the future you won't have this choice with systemd, and probably with any other component of the Linux plumbing layer, once it's become part of a single entity.

I liked it when systemd came out. And I want such a change to be able to happen again.

Etichette: ,