blog/index.html

   1 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
   2         "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
   3 <html>
   4  <head>
   5   <title>Petter Reinholdtsen</title>
   6   <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/style.css">
   7   <link rel="alternate" title="RSS Feed" href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/index.rss" type="application/rss+xml">
   8
   9  </head>
  10  <body>
  11
  12  <div class="title">
  13   <h1>
  14        <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/">Petter Reinholdtsen</a>
  15
  16   </h1>
  17
  18  </div>
  19
  20
  21
  22  <div class="entry">
  23   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/What_standards_are_Free_and_Open_as_defined_by_Digistan_.html">What standards are Free and Open as defined by Digistan?</a></div>
  24   <div class="date">2010-12-30 23:15</div>
  25   <div class="body">
  26 <p>After trying to
  27 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Is_Ogg_Theora_a_free_and_open_standard_.html">compare
  28 Ogg Theora</a> to
  29 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">the Digistan
  30 definition</a> of a free and open standard, I concluded that this need
  31 to be done for more standards and started on a framework for doing
  32 this.  As a start, I want to get the status for all the standards in
  33 the Norwegian reference directory, which include UTF-8, HTML, PDF, ODF,
  34 JPEG, PNG, SVG and others.  But to be able to complete this in a
  35 reasonable time frame, I will need help.</p>
  36
  37 <p>If you want to help out with this work, please visit
  38 <a href="http://wiki.nuug.no/grupper/standard/digistan-analyse">the
  39 wiki pages I have set up for this</a>, and let me know that you want
  40 to help out.  The IRC channel #nuug on irc.freenode.net is a good
  41 place to coordinate this for now, as it is the IRC channel for the
  42 NUUG association where I have created the framework (I am the leader
  43 of the Norwegian Unix User Group).</p>
  44
  45 <p>The framework is still forming, and a lot is left to do.  Do not be
  46 scared by the sketchy form of the current pages. :)</p>
  47 </div>
  48   <div class="tags">
  49
  50
  51
  52    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
  53
  54   </div>
  55  </div>
  56  <div class="padding"></div>
  57
  58  <div class="entry">
  59   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_many_definitions_of_a_open_standard.html">The many definitions of a open standard</a></div>
  60   <div class="date">2010-12-27 14:45</div>
  61   <div class="body">
  62 <p>One of the reasons I like the Digistan definition of
  63 "<a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">Free and
  64 Open Standard</a>" is that this is a new term, and thus the meaning of
  65 the term has been decided by Digistan.  The term "Open Standard" has
  66 become so misunderstood that it is no longer very useful when talking
  67 about standards.  One end up discussing which definition is the best
  68 one and with such frame the only one gaining are the proponents of
  69 de-facto standards and proprietary solutions.</p>
  70
  71 <p>But to give us an idea about the diversity of definitions of open
  72 standards, here are a few that I know about.  This list is not
  73 complete, but can be a starting point for those that want to do a
  74 complete survey.  More definitions are available on the
  75 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_standard">wikipedia
  76 page</a>.</p>
  77
  78 <p>First off is my favourite, the definition from the European
  79 Interoperability Framework version 1.0.  Really sad to notice that BSA
  80 and others has succeeded in getting it removed from version 2.0 of the
  81 framework by stacking the committee drafting the new version with
  82 their own people.  Anyway, the definition is still available and it
  83 include the key properties needed to make sure everyone can use a
  84 specification on equal terms.</p>
  85
  86 <blockquote>
  87
  88 <p>The following are the minimal characteristics that a specification
  89 and its attendant documents must have in order to be considered an
  90 open standard:</p>
  91
  92 <ul>
  93
  94 <li>The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit
  95 organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an
  96 open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties
  97 (consensus or majority decision etc.).</li>
  98
  99 <li>The standard has been published and the standard specification
 100 document is available either freely or at a nominal charge. It must be
 101 permissible to all to copy, distribute and use it for no fee or at a
 102 nominal fee.</li>
 103
 104 <li>The intellectual property - i.e. patents possibly present - of
 105 (parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty-
 106 free basis.</li>
 107
 108 <li>There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.</li>
 109
 110 </ul>
 111 </blockquote>
 112
 113 <p>Another one originates from my friends over at
 114 <a href="http://www.dkuug.dk/">DKUUG</a>, who coined and gathered
 115 support for <a href="http://www.aaben-standard.dk/">this
 116 definition</a> in 2004.  It even made it into the Danish parlament as
 117 <a href="http://www.ft.dk/dokumenter/tingdok.aspx?/samling/20051/beslutningsforslag/B103/som_fremsat.htm">their
 118 definition of a open standard</a>.  Another from a different part of
 119 the Danish government is available from the wikipedia page.</p>
 120
 121 <blockquote>
 122
 123 <p>En åben standard opfylder følgende krav:</p>
 124
 125 <ol>
 126
 127 <li>Veldokumenteret med den fuldstændige specifikation offentligt
 128 tilgængelig.</li>
 129
 130 <li>Frit implementerbar uden økonomiske, politiske eller juridiske
 131 begrænsninger på implementation og anvendelse.</li>
 132
 133 <li>Standardiseret og vedligeholdt i et åbent forum (en såkaldt
 134 "standardiseringsorganisation") via en åben proces.</li>
 135
 136 </ol>
 137
 138 </blockquote>
 139
 140 <p>Then there is <a href="http://www.fsfe.org/projects/os/def.html">the
 141 definition</a> from Free Software Foundation Europe.</p>
 142
 143 <blockquote>
 144
 145 <p>An Open Standard refers to a format or protocol that is</p>
 146
 147 <ol>
 148
 149 <li>subject to full public assessment and use without constraints in a
 150 manner equally available to all parties;</li>
 151
 152 <li>without any components or extensions that have dependencies on
 153 formats or protocols that do not meet the definition of an Open
 154 Standard themselves;</li>
 155
 156 <li>free from legal or technical clauses that limit its utilisation by
 157 any party or in any business model;</li>
 158
 159 <li>managed and further developed independently of any single vendor
 160 in a process open to the equal participation of competitors and third
 161 parties;</li>
 162
 163 <li>available in multiple complete implementations by competing
 164 vendors, or as a complete implementation equally available to all
 165 parties.</li>
 166
 167 </ol>
 168
 169 </blockquote>
 170
 171 <p>A long time ago, SUN Microsystems, now bought by Oracle, created
 172 its
 173 <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/dennisding/resource/Open%20Standard%20Definition.pdf">Open
 174 Standards Checklist</a> with a fairly detailed description.</p>
 175
 176 <blockquote>
 177 <p>Creation and Management of an Open Standard
 178
 179 <ul>
 180
 181 <li>Its development and management process must be collaborative and
 182   democratic:
 183
 184          <ul>
 185
 186          <li>Participation must be accessible to all those who wish to
 187             participate and can meet fair and reasonable criteria
 188             imposed by the organization under which it is developed
 189             and managed.</li>
 190
 191          <li>The processes must be documented and, through a known
 192             method, can be changed through input from all
 193             participants.</li>
 194
 195          <li>The process must be based on formal and binding commitments for
 196             the disclosure and licensing of intellectual property rights.</li>
 197
 198          <li>Development and management should strive for consensus,
 199             and an appeals process must be clearly outlined.</li>
 200
 201          <li>The standard specification must be open to extensive
 202             public review at least once in its life-cycle, with
 203             comments duly discussed and acted upon, if required.</li>
 204
 205          </ul>
 206
 207 </li>
 208
 209 </ul>
 210
 211 <p>Use and Licensing of an Open Standard</p>
 212 <ul>
 213
 214 <li>The standard must describe an interface, not an implementation,
 215   and the industry must be capable of creating multiple, competing
 216   implementations to the interface described in the standard without
 217   undue or restrictive constraints.  Interfaces include APIs,
 218   protocols, schemas, data formats and their encoding.</li>
 219
 220 <li> The standard must not contain any proprietary "hooks" that create
 221   a technical or economic barriers</li>
 222
 223 <li>Faithful implementations of the standard must
 224   interoperate. Interoperability means the ability of a computer
 225   program to communicate and exchange information with other computer
 226   programs and mutually to use the information which has been
 227   exchanged. This includes the ability to use, convert, or exchange
 228   file formats, protocols, schemas, interface information or
 229   conventions, so as to permit the computer program to work with other
 230   computer programs and users in all the ways in which they are
 231   intended to function.</li>
 232
 233 <li>It must be permissible for anyone to copy, distribute and read the
 234   standard for a nominal fee, or even no fee. If there is a fee, it
 235   must be low enough to not preclude widespread use.</li>
 236
 237 <li>It must be possible for anyone to obtain free (no royalties or
 238   fees; also known as "royalty free"), worldwide, non-exclusive and
 239   perpetual licenses to all essential patent claims to make, use and
 240   sell products based on the standard.  The only exceptions are
 241   terminations per the reciprocity and defensive suspension terms
 242   outlined below. Essential patent claims include pending, unpublished
 243   patents, published patents, and patent applications. The license is
 244   only for the exact scope of the standard in question.
 245
 246       <ul>
 247
 248       <li> May be conditioned only on reciprocal licenses to any of
 249         licensees' patent claims essential to practice that standard
 250         (also known as a reciprocity clause)</li>
 251
 252       <li> May be terminated as to any licensee who sues the licensor
 253         or any other licensee for infringement of patent claims
 254         essential to practice that standard (also known as a
 255         "defensive suspension" clause)</li>
 256
 257       <li> The same licensing terms are available to every potential
 258         licensor</li>
 259
 260       </ul>
 261 </li>
 262
 263 <li>The licensing terms of an open standards must not preclude
 264   implementations of that standard under open source licensing terms
 265   or restricted licensing terms</li>
 266
 267 </ul>
 268
 269 </blockquote>
 270
 271 <p>It is said that one of the nice things about standards is that
 272 there are so many of them.  As you can see, the same holds true for
 273 open standard definitions.  Most of the definitions have a lot in
 274 common, and it is not really controversial what properties a open
 275 standard should have, but the diversity of definitions have made it
 276 possible for those that want to avoid a level marked field and real
 277 competition to downplay the significance of open standards.  I hope we
 278 can turn this tide by focusing on the advantages of Free and Open
 279 Standards.</p>
 280 </div>
 281   <div class="tags">
 282
 283
 284
 285    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 286
 287   </div>
 288  </div>
 289  <div class="padding"></div>
 290
 291  <div class="entry">
 292   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Is_Ogg_Theora_a_free_and_open_standard_.html">Is Ogg Theora a free and open standard?</a></div>
 293   <div class="date">2010-12-25 20:25</div>
 294   <div class="body">
 295 <p><a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">The
 296 Digistan definition</a> of a free and open standard reads like this:</p>
 297
 298 <blockquote>
 299
 300 <p>The Digital Standards Organization defines free and open standard
 301 as follows:</p>
 302
 303 <ol>
 304
 305 <li>A free and open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages
 306 in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to
 307 freely use, improve upon, trust, and extend a standard over time.</li>
 308
 309 <li>The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit
 310 organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an
 311 open decision-making procedure available to all interested
 312 parties.</li>
 313
 314 <li>The standard has been published and the standard specification
 315 document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy,
 316 distribute, and use it freely.</li>
 317
 318 <li>The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made
 319 irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.</li>
 320
 321 <li>There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.</li>
 322
 323 </ol>
 324
 325 <p>The economic outcome of a free and open standard, which can be
 326 measured, is that it enables perfect competition between suppliers of
 327 products based on the standard.</p>
 328 </blockquote>
 329
 330 <p>For a while now I have tried to figure out of Ogg Theora is a free
 331 and open standard according to this definition.  Here is a short
 332 writeup of what I have been able to gather so far.  I brought up the
 333 topic on the Xiph advocacy mailing list
 334 <a href="http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/advocacy/2009-July/001632.html">in
 335 July 2009</a>, for those that want to see some background information.
 336 According to Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves and Monty Montgomery on that list
 337 the Ogg Theora specification fulfils the Digistan definition.</p>
 338
 339 <p><strong>Free from vendor capture?</strong></p>
 340
 341 <p>As far as I can see, there is no single vendor that can control the
 342 Ogg Theora specification.  It can be argued that the
 343 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/">Xiph foundation</A> is such vendor, but
 344 given that it is a non-profit foundation with the expressed goal
 345 making free and open protocols and standards available, it is not
 346 obvious that this is a real risk.  One issue with the Xiph
 347 foundation is that its inner working (as in board member list, or who
 348 control the foundation) are not easily available on the web.  I've
 349 been unable to find out who is in the foundation board, and have not
 350 seen any accounting information documenting how money is handled nor
 351 where is is spent in the foundation.  It is thus not obvious for an
 352 external observer who control The Xiph foundation, and for all I know
 353 it is possible for a single vendor to take control over the
 354 specification.  But it seem unlikely.</p>
 355
 356 <p><strong>Maintained by open not-for-profit organisation?</strong></p>
 357
 358 <p>Assuming that the Xiph foundation is the organisation its web pages
 359 claim it to be, this point is fulfilled.  If Xiph foundation is
 360 controlled by a single vendor, it isn't, but I have not found any
 361 documentation indicating this.</p>
 362
 363 <p>According to
 364 <a href="http://media.hiof.no/diverse/fad/rapport_4.pdf">a report</a>
 365 prepared by Audun Vaaler og Børre Ludvigsen for the Norwegian
 366 government, the Xiph foundation is a non-commercial organisation and
 367 the development process is open, transparent and non-Discrimatory.
 368 Until proven otherwise, I believe it make most sense to believe the
 369 report is correct.</p>
 370
 371 <p><strong>Specification freely available?</strong></p>
 372
 373 <p>The specification for the <a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/">Ogg
 374 container format</a> and both the
 375 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/">Vorbis</a> and
 376 <a href="http://theora.org/doc/">Theora</a> codeces are available on
 377 the web.  This are the terms in the Vorbis and Theora specification:
 378
 379 <blockquote>
 380
 381 Anyone may freely use and distribute the Ogg and [Vorbis/Theora]
 382 specifications, whether in private, public, or corporate
 383 capacity. However, the Xiph.Org Foundation and the Ogg project reserve
 384 the right to set the Ogg [Vorbis/Theora] specification and certify
 385 specification compliance.
 386
 387 </blockquote>
 388
 389 <p>The Ogg container format is specified in IETF
 390 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/rfc3533.txt">RFC 3533</a>, and
 391 this is the term:<p>
 392
 393 <blockquote>
 394
 395 <p>This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
 396 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
 397 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and
 398 distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
 399 provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
 400 included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
 401 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
 402 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
 403 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing
 404 Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined
 405 in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to
 406 translate it into languages other than English.</p>
 407
 408 <p>The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
 409 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.</p>
 410 </blockquote>
 411
 412 <p>All these terms seem to allow unlimited distribution and use, an
 413 this term seem to be fulfilled.  There might be a problem with the
 414 missing permission to distribute modified versions of the text, and
 415 thus reuse it in other specifications.  Not quite sure if that is a
 416 requirement for the Digistan definition.</p>
 417
 418 <p><strong>Royalty-free?</strong></p>
 419
 420 <p>There are no known patent claims requiring royalties for the Ogg
 421 Theora format.
 422 <a href="http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=65782">MPEG-LA</a>
 423 and
 424 <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/30/237238/Steve-Jobs-Hints-At-Theora-Lawsuit">Steve
 425 Jobs</a> in Apple claim to know about some patent claims (submarine
 426 patents) against the Theora format, but no-one else seem to believe
 427 them.  Both Opera Software and the Mozilla Foundation have looked into
 428 this and decided to implement Ogg Theora support in their browsers
 429 without paying any royalties.  For now the claims from MPEG-LA and
 430 Steve Jobs seem more like FUD to scare people to use the H.264 codec
 431 than any real problem with Ogg Theora.</p>
 432
 433 <p><strong>No constraints on re-use?</strong></p>
 434
 435 <p>I am not aware of any constraints on re-use.</p>
 436
 437 <p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
 438
 439 <p>3 of 5 requirements seem obviously fulfilled, and the remaining 2
 440 depend on the governing structure of the Xiph foundation.  Given the
 441 background report used by the Norwegian government, I believe it is
 442 safe to assume the last two requirements are fulfilled too, but it
 443 would be nice if the Xiph foundation web site made it easier to verify
 444 this.</p>
 445
 446 <p>It would be nice to see other analysis of other specifications to
 447 see if they are free and open standards.</p>
 448 </div>
 449   <div class="tags">
 450
 451
 452
 453    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
 454
 455   </div>
 456  </div>
 457  <div class="padding"></div>
 458
 459  <div class="entry">
 460   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_reply_from_Edgar_Villanueva_to_Microsoft_in_Peru.html">The reply from Edgar Villanueva to Microsoft in Peru</a></div>
 461   <div class="date">2010-12-25 10:50</div>
 462   <div class="body">
 463 <p>A few days ago
 464 <a href="http://www.idg.no/computerworld/article189879.ece">an
 465 article</a> in the Norwegian Computerworld magazine about how version
 466 2.0 of
 467 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Interoperability_Framework">European
 468 Interoperability Framework</a> has been successfully lobbied by the
 469 proprietary software industry to remove the focus on free software.
 470 Nothing very surprising there, given
 471 <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/29/2115235/Open-Source-Open-Standards-Under-Attack-In-Europe">earlier
 472 reports</a> on how Microsoft and others have stacked the committees in
 473 this work.  But I find this very sad.   The definition of
 474 <a href="http://www.nuug.no/dokumenter/standard-presse-def-200506.txt">an
 475 open standard from version 1</a> was very good, and something I
 476 believe should be used also in the future, alongside
 477 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">the
 478 definition from Digistan</A>.  Version 2 have removed the open
 479 standard definition from its content.</p>
 480
 481 <p>Anyway, the news reminded me of the great reply sent by Dr. Edgar
 482 Villanueva, congressman in Peru at the time, to Microsoft as a reply
 483 to Microsofts attack on his proposal regarding the use of free software
 484 in the public sector in Peru.  As the text was not available from a
 485 few of the URLs where it used to be available, I copy it here from
 486 <a href="http://gnuwin.epfl.ch/articles/en/reponseperou/villanueva_to_ms.html">my
 487 source</a> to ensure it is available also in the future.  Some
 488 background information about that story is available in
 489 <a href="http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6099">an article</a> from
 490 Linux Journal in 2002.</p>
 491
 492 <blockquote>
 493 <p>Lima, 8th of April, 2002<br>
 494 To: Señor JUAN ALBERTO GONZÁLEZ<br>
 495 General Manager of Microsoft Perú</p>
 496
 497 <p>Dear Sir:</p>
 498
 499 <p>First of all, I thank you for your letter of March 25, 2002 in which you state the official position of Microsoft relative to Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration, which is indubitably inspired by the desire for Peru to find a suitable place in the global technological context. In the same spirit, and convinced that we will find the best solutions through an exchange of clear and open ideas, I will take this opportunity to reply to the commentaries included in your letter.</p>
 500
 501 <p>While acknowledging that opinions such as yours constitute a significant contribution, it would have been even more worthwhile for me if, rather than formulating objections of a general nature (which we will analyze in detail later) you had gathered solid arguments for the advantages that proprietary software could bring to the Peruvian State, and to its citizens in general, since this would have allowed a more enlightening exchange in respect of each of our positions.</p>
 502
 503 <p>With the aim of creating an orderly debate, we will assume that what you call "open source software" is what the Bill defines as "free software", since there exists software for which the source code is distributed together with the program, but which does not fall within the definition established by the Bill; and that what you call "commercial software" is what the Bill defines as "proprietary" or "unfree", given that there exists free software which is sold in the market for a price like any other good or service.</p>
 504
 505 <p>It is also necessary to make it clear that the aim of the Bill we are discussing is not directly related to the amount of direct savings that can by made by using free software in state institutions. That is in any case a marginal aggregate value, but in no way is it the chief focus of the Bill. The basic principles which inspire the Bill are linked to the basic guarantees of a state of law, such as:</p>
 506
 507 <p>
 508 <ul>
 509 <li>Free access to public information by the citizen. </li>
 510 <li>Permanence of public data. </li>
 511 <li>Security of the State and citizens.</li>
 512 </ul>
 513 </p>
 514
 515 <p>To guarantee the free access of citizens to public information, it is indispensable that the encoding of data is not tied to a single provider. The use of standard and open formats gives a guarantee of this free access, if necessary through the creation of compatible free software.</p>
 516
 517 <p>To guarantee the permanence of public data, it is necessary that the usability and maintenance of the software does not depend on the goodwill of the suppliers, or on the monopoly conditions imposed by them. For this reason the State needs systems the development of which can be guaranteed due to the availability of the source code.</p>
 518
 519 <p>To guarantee national security or the security of the State, it is indispensable to be able to rely on systems without elements which allow control from a distance or the undesired transmission of information to third parties. Systems with source code freely accessible to the public are required to allow their inspection by the State itself, by the citizens, and by a large number of independent experts throughout the world. Our proposal brings further security, since the knowledge of the source code will eliminate the growing number of programs with *spy code*. </p>
 520
 521 <p>In the same way, our proposal strengthens the security of the citizens, both in their role as legitimate owners of information managed by the state, and in their role as consumers. In this second case, by allowing the growth of a widespread availability of free software not containing *spy code* able to put at risk privacy and individual freedoms.</p>
 522
 523 <p>In this sense, the Bill is limited to establishing the conditions under which the state bodies will obtain software in the future, that is, in a way compatible with these basic principles.</p>
 524
 525
 526 <p>From reading the Bill it will be clear that once passed:<br>
 527 <li>the law does not forbid the production of proprietary software</li>
 528 <li>the law does not forbid the sale of proprietary software</li>
 529 <li>the law does not specify which concrete software to use</li>
 530 <li>the law does not dictate the supplier from whom software will be bought</li>
 531 <li>the law does not limit the terms under which a software product can be licensed.</li>
 532
 533 </p>
 534
 535 <p>What the Bill does express clearly, is that, for software to be acceptable for the state it is not enough that it is technically capable of fulfilling a task, but that further the contractual conditions must satisfy a series of requirements regarding the license, without which the State cannot guarantee the citizen adequate processing of his data, watching over its integrity, confidentiality, and accessibility throughout time, as these are very critical aspects for its normal functioning.</p>
 536
 537 <p>We agree, Mr. Gonzalez, that information and communication technology have a significant impact on the quality of life of the citizens (whether it be positive or negative). We surely also agree that the basic values I have pointed out above are fundamental in a democratic state like Peru. So we are very interested to know of any other way of guaranteeing these principles, other than through the use of free software in the terms defined by the Bill.</p>
 538
 539 <p>As for the observations you have made, we will now go on to analyze them in detail:</p>
 540
 541 <p>Firstly, you point out that: "1. The bill makes it compulsory for all public bodies to use only free software, that is to say open source software, which breaches the principles of equality before the law, that of non-discrimination and the right of free private enterprise, freedom of industry and of contract, protected by the constitution."</p>
 542
 543 <p>This understanding is in error. The Bill in no way affects the rights you list; it limits itself entirely to establishing conditions for the use of software on the part of state institutions, without in any way meddling in private sector transactions. It is a well established principle that the State does not enjoy the wide spectrum of contractual freedom of the private sector, as it is limited in its actions precisely by the requirement for transparency of public acts; and in this sense, the preservation of the greater common interest must prevail when legislating on the matter.</p>
 544
 545 <p>The Bill protects equality under the law, since no natural or legal person is excluded from the right of offering these goods to the State under the conditions defined in the Bill and without more limitations than those established by the Law of State Contracts and Purchasing (T.U.O. by Supreme Decree No. 012-2001-PCM).</p>
 546
 547 <p>The Bill does not introduce any discrimination whatever, since it only establishes *how* the goods have to be provided (which is a state power) and not *who* has to provide them (which would effectively be discriminatory, if restrictions based on national origin, race religion, ideology, sexual preference etc. were imposed). On the contrary, the Bill is decidedly antidiscriminatory. This is so because by defining with no room for doubt the conditions for the provision of software, it prevents state bodies from using software which has a license including discriminatory conditions.</p>
 548
 549 <p>It should be obvious from the preceding two paragraphs that the Bill does not harm free private enterprise, since the latter can always choose under what conditions it will produce software; some of these will be acceptable to the State, and others will not be since they contradict the guarantee of the basic principles listed above. This free initiative is of course compatible with the freedom of industry and freedom of contract (in the limited form in which the State can exercise the latter). Any private subject can produce software under the conditions which the State requires, or can refrain from doing so. Nobody is forced to adopt a model of production, but if they wish to provide software to the State, they must provide the mechanisms which guarantee the basic principles, and which are those described in the Bill.</p>
 550
 551 <p>By way of an example: nothing in the text of the Bill would prevent your company offering the State bodies an office "suite", under the conditions defined in the Bill and setting the price that you consider satisfactory. If you did not, it would not be due to restrictions imposed by the law, but to business decisions relative to the method of commercializing your products, decisions with which the State is not involved.</p>
 552
 553 <p>To continue; you note that:" 2. The bill, by making the use of open source software compulsory, would establish discriminatory and non competitive practices in the contracting and purchasing by public bodies..."</p>
 554
 555 <p>This statement is just a reiteration of the previous one, and so the response can be found above. However, let us concern ourselves for a moment with your comment regarding "non-competitive ... practices."</p>
 556
 557 <p>Of course, in defining any kind of purchase, the buyer sets conditions which relate to the proposed use of the good or service. From the start, this excludes certain manufacturers from the possibility of competing, but does not exclude them "a priori", but rather based on a series of principles determined by the autonomous will of the purchaser, and so the process takes place in conformance with the law. And in the Bill it is established that *no one* is excluded from competing as far as he guarantees the fulfillment of the basic principles.</p>
 558
 559 <p>Furthermore, the Bill *stimulates* competition, since it tends to generate a supply of software with better conditions of usability, and to better existing work, in a model of continuous improvement.</p>
 560
 561 <p>On the other hand, the central aspect of competivity is the chance to provide better choices to the consumer. Now, it is impossible to ignore the fact that marketing does not play a neutral role when the product is offered on the market (since accepting the opposite would lead one to suppose that firms' expenses in marketing lack any sense), and that therefore a significant expense under this heading can influence the decisions of the purchaser. This influence of marketing is in large measure reduced by the bill that we are backing, since the choice within the framework proposed is based on the *technical merits* of the product and not on the effort put into commercialization by the producer; in this sense, competitiveness is increased, since the smallest software producer can compete on equal terms with the most powerful corporations.</p>
 562
 563 <p>It is necessary to stress that there is no position more anti-competitive than that of the big software producers, which frequently abuse their dominant position, since in innumerable cases they propose as a solution to problems raised by users: "update your software to the new version" (at the user's expense, naturally); furthermore, it is common to find arbitrary cessation of technical help for products, which, in the provider's judgment alone, are "old"; and so, to receive any kind of technical assistance, the user finds himself forced to migrate to new versions (with non-trivial costs, especially as changes in hardware platform are often involved). And as the whole infrastructure is based on proprietary data formats, the user stays "trapped" in the need to continue using products from the same supplier, or to make the huge effort to change to another environment (probably also proprietary).</p>
 564
 565 <p>You add: "3. So, by compelling the State to favor a business model based entirely on open source, the bill would only discourage the local and international manufacturing companies, which are the ones which really undertake important expenditures, create a significant number of direct and indirect jobs, as well as contributing to the GNP, as opposed to a model of open source software which tends to have an ever weaker economic impact, since it mainly creates jobs in the service sector."</p>
 566
 567 <p>I do not agree with your statement. Partly because of what you yourself point out in paragraph 6 of your letter, regarding the relative weight of services in the context of software use. This contradiction alone would invalidate your position. The service model, adopted by a large number of companies in the software industry, is much larger in economic terms, and with a tendency to increase, than the licensing of programs.</p>
 568
 569 <p>On the other hand, the private sector of the economy has the widest possible freedom to choose the economic model which best suits its interests, even if this freedom of choice is often obscured subliminally by the disproportionate expenditure on marketing by the producers of proprietary software.</p>
 570
 571 <p>In addition, a reading of your opinion would lead to the conclusion that the State market is crucial and essential for the proprietary software industry, to such a point that the choice made by the State in this bill would completely eliminate the market for these firms. If that is true, we can deduce that the State must be subsidizing the proprietary software industry. In the unlikely event that this were true, the State would have the right to apply the subsidies in the area it considered of greatest social value; it is undeniable, in this improbable hypothesis, that if the State decided to subsidize software, it would have to do so choosing the free over the proprietary, considering its social effect and the rational use of taxpayers money.</p>
 572
 573 <p>In respect of the jobs generated by proprietary software in countries like ours, these mainly concern technical tasks of little aggregate value; at the local level, the technicians who provide support for proprietary software produced by transnational companies do not have the possibility of fixing bugs, not necessarily for lack of technical capability or of talent, but because they do not have access to the source code to fix it. With free software one creates more technically qualified employment and a framework of free competence where success is only tied to the ability to offer good technical support and quality of service, one stimulates the market, and one increases the shared fund of knowledge, opening up alternatives to generate services of greater total value and a higher quality level, to the benefit of all involved: producers, service organizations, and consumers.</p>
 574
 575 <p>It is a common phenomenon in developing countries that local software industries obtain the majority of their takings in the service sector, or in the creation of "ad hoc" software. Therefore, any negative impact that the application of the Bill might have in this sector will be more than compensated by a growth in demand for services (as long as these are carried out to high quality standards). If the transnational software companies decide not to compete under these new rules of the game, it is likely that they will undergo some decrease in takings in terms of payment for licenses; however, considering that these firms continue to allege that much of the software used by the State has been illegally copied, one can see that the impact will not be very serious. Certainly, in any case their fortune will be determined by market laws, changes in which cannot be avoided; many firms traditionally associated with proprietary software have already set out on the road (supported by copious expense) of providing services associated with free software, which shows that the models are not mutually exclusive.</p>
 576
 577 <p>With this bill the State is deciding that it needs to preserve certain fundamental values. And it is deciding this based on its sovereign power, without affecting any of the constitutional guarantees. If these values could be guaranteed without having to choose a particular economic model, the effects of the law would be even more beneficial. In any case, it should be clear that the State does not choose an economic model; if it happens that there only exists one economic model capable of providing software which provides the basic guarantee of these principles, this is because of historical circumstances, not because of an arbitrary choice of a given model.</p>
 578
 579 <p>Your letter continues: "4. The bill imposes the use of open source software without considering the dangers that this can bring from the point of view of security, guarantee, and possible violation of the intellectual property rights of third parties."</p>
 580
 581 <p>Alluding in an abstract way to "the dangers this can bring", without specifically mentioning a single one of these supposed dangers, shows at the least some lack of knowledge of the topic. So, allow me to enlighten you on these points.</p>
 582
 583 <p>On security:</p>
 584
 585 <p>National security has already been mentioned in general terms in the initial discussion of the basic principles of the bill. In more specific terms, relative to the security of the software itself, it is well known that all software (whether proprietary or free) contains errors or "bugs" (in programmers' slang). But it is also well known that the bugs in free software are fewer, and are fixed much more quickly, than in proprietary software. It is not in vain that numerous public bodies responsible for the IT security of state systems in developed countries require the use of free software for the same conditions of security and efficiency.</p>
 586
 587 <p>What is impossible to prove is that proprietary software is more secure than free, without the public and open inspection of the scientific community and users in general. This demonstration is impossible because the model of proprietary software itself prevents this analysis, so that any guarantee of security is based only on promises of good intentions (biased, by any reckoning) made by the producer itself, or its contractors.</p>
 588
 589 <p>It should be remembered that in many cases, the licensing conditions include Non-Disclosure clauses which prevent the user from publicly revealing security flaws found in the licensed proprietary product.</p>
 590
 591 <p>In respect of the guarantee:</p>
 592
 593 A<p>s you know perfectly well, or could find out by reading the "End User License Agreement" of the products you license, in the great majority of cases the guarantees are limited to replacement of the storage medium in case of defects, but in no case is compensation given for direct or indirect damages, loss of profits, etc... If as a result of a security bug in one of your products, not fixed in time by yourselves, an attacker managed to compromise crucial State systems, what guarantees, reparations and compensation would your company make in accordance with your licensing conditions? The guarantees of proprietary software, inasmuch as programs are delivered ``AS IS'', that is, in the state in which they are, with no additional responsibility of the provider in respect of function, in no way differ from those normal with free software.</p>
 594
 595 <p>On Intellectual Property:</p>
 596
 597 <p>Questions of intellectual property fall outside the scope of this bill, since they are covered by specific other laws. The model of free software in no way implies ignorance of these laws, and in fact the great majority of free software is covered by copyright. In reality, the inclusion of this question in your observations shows your confusion in respect of the legal framework in which free software is developed. The inclusion of the intellectual property of others in works claimed as one's own is not a practice that has been noted in the free software community; whereas, unfortunately, it has been in the area of proprietary software. As an example, the condemnation by the Commercial Court of Nanterre, France, on 27th September 2001 of Microsoft Corp. to a penalty of 3 million francs in damages and interest, for violation of intellectual property (piracy, to use the unfortunate term that your firm commonly uses in its publicity).</p>
 598
 599 <p>You go on to say that: "The bill uses the concept of open source software incorrectly, since it does not necessarily imply that the software is free or of zero cost, and so arrives at mistaken conclusions regarding State savings, with no cost-benefit analysis to validate its position."</p>
 600
 601 <p>This observation is wrong; in principle, freedom and lack of cost are orthogonal concepts: there is software which is proprietary and charged for (for example, MS Office), software which is proprietary and free of charge (MS Internet Explorer), software which is free and charged for (Red Hat, SuSE etc GNU/Linux distributions), software which is free and not charged for (Apache, Open Office, Mozilla), and even software which can be licensed in a range of combinations (MySQL).</p>
 602
 603 <p>Certainly free software is not necessarily free of charge. And the text of the bill does not state that it has to be so, as you will have noted after reading it. The definitions included in the Bill state clearly *what* should be considered free software, at no point referring to freedom from charges. Although the possibility of savings in payments for proprietary software licenses are mentioned, the foundations of the bill clearly refer to the fundamental guarantees to be preserved and to the stimulus to local technological development. Given that a democratic State must support these principles, it has no other choice than to use software with publicly available source code, and to exchange information only in standard formats.</p>
 604
 605 <p>If the State does not use software with these characteristics, it will be weakening basic republican principles. Luckily, free software also implies lower total costs; however, even given the hypothesis (easily disproved) that it was more expensive than proprietary software, the simple existence of an effective free software tool for a particular IT function would oblige the State to use it; not by command of this Bill, but because of the basic principles we enumerated at the start, and which arise from the very essence of the lawful democratic State.</p>
 606
 607 <p>You continue: "6. It is wrong to think that Open Source Software is free of charge. Research by the Gartner Group (an important investigator of the technological market recognized at world level) has shown that the cost of purchase of software (operating system and applications) is only 8% of the total cost which firms and institutions take on for a rational and truly beneficial use of the technology. The other 92% consists of: installation costs, enabling, support, maintenance, administration, and down-time."</p>
 608
 609 <p>This argument repeats that already given in paragraph 5 and partly contradicts paragraph 3. For the sake of brevity we refer to the comments on those paragraphs. However, allow me to point out that your conclusion is logically false: even if according to Gartner Group the cost of software is on average only 8% of the total cost of use, this does not in any way deny the existence of software which is free of charge, that is, with a licensing cost of zero.</p>
 610
 611 <p>In addition, in this paragraph you correctly point out that the service components and losses due to down-time make up the largest part of the total cost of software use, which, as you will note, contradicts your statement regarding the small value of services suggested in paragraph 3. Now the use of free software contributes significantly to reduce the remaining life-cycle costs. This reduction in the costs of installation, support etc. can be noted in several areas: in the first place, the competitive service model of free software, support and maintenance for which can be freely contracted out to a range of suppliers competing on the grounds of quality and low cost. This is true for installation, enabling, and support, and in large part for maintenance. In the second place, due to the reproductive characteristics of the model, maintenance carried out for an application is easily replicable, without incurring large costs (that is, without paying more than once for the same thing) since modifications, if one wishes, can be incorporated in the common fund of knowledge. Thirdly, the huge costs caused by non-functioning software ("blue screens of death", malicious code such as virus, worms, and trojans, exceptions, general protection faults and other well-known problems) are reduced considerably by using more stable software; and it is well known that one of the most notable virtues of free software is its stability.</p>
 612
 613 <p>You further state that: "7. One of the arguments behind the bill is the supposed freedom from costs of open-source software, compared with the costs of commercial software, without taking into account the fact that there exist types of volume licensing which can be highly advantageous for the State, as has happened in other countries."</p>
 614
 615 <p>I have already pointed out that what is in question is not the cost of the software but the principles of freedom of information, accessibility, and security. These arguments have been covered extensively in the preceding paragraphs to which I would refer you.</p>
 616
 617 <p>On the other hand, there certainly exist types of volume licensing (although unfortunately proprietary software does not satisfy the basic principles). But as you correctly pointed out in the immediately preceding paragraph of your letter, they only manage to reduce the impact of a component which makes up no more than 8% of the total.</p>
 618
 619 <p>You continue: "8. In addition, the alternative adopted by the bill (I) is clearly more expensive, due to the high costs of software migration, and (II) puts at risk compatibility and interoperability of the IT platforms within the State, and between the State and the private sector, given the hundreds of versions of open source software on the market."</p>
 620
 621 <p>Let us analyze your statement in two parts. Your first argument, that migration implies high costs, is in reality an argument in favor of the Bill. Because the more time goes by, the more difficult migration to another technology will become; and at the same time, the security risks associated with proprietary software will continue to increase. In this way, the use of proprietary systems and formats will make the State ever more dependent on specific suppliers. Once a policy of using free software has been established (which certainly, does imply some cost) then on the contrary migration from one system to another becomes very simple, since all data is stored in open formats. On the other hand, migration to an open software context implies no more costs than migration between two different proprietary software contexts, which invalidates your argument completely.</p>
 622
 623 <p>The second argument refers to "problems in interoperability of the IT platforms within the State, and between the State and the private sector" This statement implies a certain lack of knowledge of the way in which free software is built, which does not maximize the dependence of the user on a particular platform, as normally happens in the realm of proprietary software. Even when there are multiple free software distributions, and numerous programs which can be used for the same function, interoperability is guaranteed as much by the use of standard formats, as required by the bill, as by the possibility of creating interoperable software given the availability of the source code.</p>
 624
 625 <p>You then say that: "9. The majority of open source code does not offer adequate levels of service nor the guarantee from recognized manufacturers of high productivity on the part of the users, which has led various public organizations to retract their decision to go with an open source software solution and to use commercial software in its place."</p>
 626
 627 <p>This observation is without foundation. In respect of the guarantee, your argument was rebutted in the response to paragraph 4. In respect of support services, it is possible to use free software without them (just as also happens with proprietary software), but anyone who does need them can obtain support separately, whether from local firms or from international corporations, again just as in the case of proprietary software.</p>
 628
 629 <p>On the other hand, it would contribute greatly to our analysis if you could inform us about free software projects *established* in public bodies which have already been abandoned in favor of proprietary software. We know of a good number of cases where the opposite has taken place, but not know of any where what you describe has taken place.</p>
 630
 631 <p>You continue by observing that: "10. The bill discourages the creativity of the Peruvian software industry, which invoices 40 million US$/year, exports 4 million US$ (10th in ranking among non-traditional exports, more than handicrafts) and is a source of highly qualified employment. With a law that encourages the use of open source, software programmers lose their intellectual property rights and their main source of payment."</p>
 632
 633 <p>It is clear enough that nobody is forced to commercialize their code as free software. The only thing to take into account is that if it is not free software, it cannot be sold to the public sector. This is not in any case the main market for the national software industry. We covered some questions referring to the influence of the Bill on the generation of employment which would be both highly technically qualified and in better conditions for competition above, so it seems unnecessary to insist on this point.</p>
 634
 635 <p>What follows in your statement is incorrect. On the one hand, no author of free software loses his intellectual property rights, unless he expressly wishes to place his work in the public domain. The free software movement has always been very respectful of intellectual property, and has generated widespread public recognition of its authors. Names like those of Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds, Guido van Rossum, Larry Wall, Miguel de Icaza, Andrew Tridgell, Theo de Raadt, Andrea Arcangeli, Bruce Perens, Darren Reed, Alan Cox, Eric Raymond, and many others, are recognized world-wide for their contributions to the development of software that is used today by millions of people throughout the world. On the other hand, to say that the rewards for authors rights make up the main source of payment of Peruvian programmers is in any case a guess, in particular since there is no proof to this effect, nor a demonstration of how the use of free software by the State would influence these payments.</p>
 636
 637 <p>You go on to say that: "11. Open source software, since it can be distributed without charge, does not allow the generation of income for its developers through exports. In this way, the multiplier effect of the sale of software to other countries is weakened, and so in turn is the growth of the industry, while Government rules ought on the contrary to stimulate local industry."</p>
 638
 639 <p>This statement shows once again complete ignorance of the mechanisms of and market for free software. It tries to claim that the market of sale of non- exclusive rights for use (sale of licenses) is the only possible one for the software industry, when you yourself pointed out several paragraphs above that it is not even the most important one. The incentives that the bill offers for the growth of a supply of better qualified professionals, together with the increase in experience that working on a large scale with free software within the State will bring for Peruvian technicians, will place them in a highly competitive position to offer their services abroad.</p>
 640
 641 <p>You then state that: "12. In the Forum, the use of open source software in education was discussed, without mentioning the complete collapse of this initiative in a country like Mexico, where precisely the State employees who founded the project now state that open source software did not make it possible to offer a learning experience to pupils in the schools, did not take into account the capability at a national level to give adequate support to the platform, and that the software did not and does not allow for the levels of platform integration that now exist in schools."</p>
 642
 643 <p>In fact Mexico has gone into reverse with the Red Escolar (Schools Network) project. This is due precisely to the fact that the driving forces behind the Mexican project used license costs as their main argument, instead of the other reasons specified in our project, which are far more essential. Because of this conceptual mistake, and as a result of the lack of effective support from the SEP (Secretary of State for Public Education), the assumption was made that to implant free software in schools it would be enough to drop their software budget and send them a CD ROM with Gnu/Linux instead. Of course this failed, and it couldn't have been otherwise, just as school laboratories fail when they use proprietary software and have no budget for implementation and maintenance. That's exactly why our bill is not limited to making the use of free software mandatory, but recognizes the need to create a viable migration plan, in which the State undertakes the technical transition in an orderly way in order to then enjoy the advantages of free software.</p>
 644
 645 <p>You end with a rhetorical question: "13. If open source software satisfies all the requirements of State bodies, why do you need a law to adopt it? Shouldn't it be the market which decides freely which products give most benefits or value?"</p>
 646
 647 <p>We agree that in the private sector of the economy, it must be the market that decides which products to use, and no state interference is permissible there. However, in the case of the public sector, the reasoning is not the same: as we have already established, the state archives, handles, and transmits information which does not belong to it, but which is entrusted to it by citizens, who have no alternative under the rule of law. As a counterpart to this legal requirement, the State must take extreme measures to safeguard the integrity, confidentiality, and accessibility of this information. The use of proprietary software raises serious doubts as to whether these requirements can be fulfilled, lacks conclusive evidence in this respect, and so is not suitable for use in the public sector.</p>
 648
 649 <p>The need for a law is based, firstly, on the realization of the fundamental principles listed above in the specific area of software; secondly, on the fact that the State is not an ideal homogeneous entity, but made up of multiple bodies with varying degrees of autonomy in decision making. Given that it is inappropriate to use proprietary software, the fact of establishing these rules in law will prevent the personal discretion of any state employee from putting at risk the information which belongs to citizens. And above all, because it constitutes an up-to-date reaffirmation in relation to the means of management and communication of information used today, it is based on the republican principle of openness to the public.</p>
 650
 651 <p>In conformance with this universally accepted principle, the citizen has the right to know all information held by the State and not covered by well- founded declarations of secrecy based on law. Now, software deals with information and is itself information. Information in a special form, capable of being interpreted by a machine in order to execute actions, but crucial information all the same because the citizen has a legitimate right to know, for example, how his vote is computed or his taxes calculated. And for that he must have free access to the source code and be able to prove to his satisfaction the programs used for electoral computations or calculation of his taxes.</p>
 652
 653 <p>I wish you the greatest respect, and would like to repeat that my office will always be open for you to expound your point of view to whatever level of detail you consider suitable.</p>
 654
 655 <p>Cordially,<br>
 656 DR. EDGAR DAVID VILLANUEVA NUÑEZ<br>
 657 Congressman of the Republic of Perú.</p>
 658 </blockquote>
 659 </div>
 660   <div class="tags">
 661
 662
 663
 664    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 665
 666   </div>
 667  </div>
 668  <div class="padding"></div>
 669
 670  <div class="entry">
 671   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_still_going_strong.html">Officeshots still going strong</a></div>
 672   <div class="date">2010-12-25 09:40</div>
 673   <div class="body">
 674 <p>Half a year ago I
 675 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_taking_shape.html">wrote
 676 a bit</a> about <a href="http://www.officeshots.org/">OfficeShots</a>,
 677 a web service to allow anyone to test how ODF documents are handled by
 678 the different programs reading and writing the ODF format.</p>
 679
 680 <p>I just had a look at the service, and it seem to be going strong.
 681 Very interesting to see the results reported in the gallery, how
 682 different Office implementations handle different ODF features.  Sad
 683 to see that KOffice was not doing it very well, and happy to see that
 684 LibreOffice has been tested already (but sadly not listed as a option
 685 for OfficeShots users yet).  I am glad to see that the ODF community
 686 got such a great test tool available.</p>
 687 </div>
 688   <div class="tags">
 689
 690
 691
 692    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 693
 694   </div>
 695  </div>
 696  <div class="padding"></div>
 697
 698  <div class="entry">
 699   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/165_norske_overv__kningskamera_registert_s___langt_i_OpenStreetmap_org.html">165 norske overvåkningskamera registert så langt i OpenStreetmap.org</a></div>
 700   <div class="date">2010-12-24 11:20</div>
 701   <div class="body">
 702 <p>Jeg flikket litt på OpenStreetmap.org i går, og oppdaget ved en
 703 tilfeldighet at det er en rekke noder som representerer
 704 overvåkningskamera som ikke blir med på kartet med overvåkningskamera
 705 i Norge som
 706 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Kart_over_overv__kningskamera_i_Norge.html">jeg
 707 laget</a> for snart to år siden.  Fra før tok jeg med noder merket med
 708 man_made=surveillance, mens det er en rekke noder som kun er merket
 709 med highway=speed_camera.  Endret på koden som henter ut kameralisten
 710 fra OSM, og vips er antall kamera økt til 165.</p>
 711
 712 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.no/pere/surveillance-norway/">Kartet</a>
 713 er fortsatt ikke komplett, så hvis du ser noen kamera som mangler,
 714 legg inn ved å følge instruksene fra
 715 <a href="http://personvern.no/wiki/index.php/Kameraovervåkning">prosjektsiden</a>.
 716 Hvis du vet om noen flere måter å merke overvåkningskamera i OSM, ta
 717 kontakt slik at jeg kan få med også disse.</p>
 718 </div>
 719   <div class="tags">
 720
 721
 722
 723    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern</a>.
 724
 725   </div>
 726  </div>
 727  <div class="padding"></div>
 728
 729  <div class="entry">
 730   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/How_to_test_if_a_laptop_is_working_with_Linux.html">How to test if a laptop is working with Linux</a></div>
 731   <div class="date">2010-12-22 14:55</div>
 732   <div class="body">
 733 <p>The last few days I have spent at work here at the <a
 734 href="http://www.uio.no/">University of oslo</a> testing if the new
 735 batch of computers will work with Linux.  Every year for the last few
 736 years the university have organized shared bid of a few thousand
 737 computers, and this year HP won the bid.  Two different desktops and
 738 five different laptops are on the list this year.  We in the UNIX
 739 group want to know which one of these computers work well with RHEL
 740 and Ubuntu, the two Linux distributions we currently handle at the
 741 university.</p>
 742
 743 <p>My test method is simple, and I share it here to get feedback and
 744 perhaps inspire others to test hardware as well.  To test, I PXE
 745 install the OS version of choice, and log in as my normal user and run
 746 a few applications and plug in selected pieces of hardware.  When
 747 something fail, I make a note about this in the test matrix and move
 748 on.  If I have some spare time I try to report the bug to the OS
 749 vendor, but as I only have the machines for a short time, I rarely
 750 have the time to do this for all the problems I find.</p>
 751
 752 <p>Anyway, to get to the point of this post.  Here is the simple tests
 753 I perform on a new model.</p>
 754
 755 <ul>
 756
 757 <li>Is PXE installation working?  I'm testing with RHEL6, Ubuntu Lucid
 758 and Ubuntu Maverik at the moment.  If I feel like it, I also test with
 759 RHEL5 and Debian Edu/Squeeze.</li>
 760
 761 <li>Is X.org working?  If the graphical login screen show up after
 762 installation, X.org is working.</li>
 763
 764 <li>Is hardware accelerated OpenGL working?  Running glxgears (in
 765 package mesa-utils on Ubuntu) and writing down the frames per second
 766 reported by the program.</li>
 767
 768 <li>Is sound working?  With Gnome and KDE, a sound is played when
 769 logging in, and if I can hear this the test is successful.  If there
 770 are several audio exits on the machine, I try them all and check if
 771 the Gnome/KDE audio mixer can control where to send the sound.  I
 772 normally test this by playing
 773 <a href="http://www.nuug.no/aktiviteter/20101012-chef/ ">a HTML5
 774 video</a> in Firefox/Iceweasel.</li>
 775
 776 <li>Is the USB subsystem working?  I test this by plugging in a USB
 777 memory stick and see if Gnome/KDE notices this.</li>
 778
 779 <li>Is the CD/DVD player working?  I test this by inserting any CD/DVD
 780 I have lying around, and see if Gnome/KDE notices this.</li>
 781
 782 <li>Is any built in camera working?  Test using cheese, and see if a
 783 picture from the v4l device show up.</li>
 784
 785 <li>Is bluetooth working?  Use the Gnome/KDE browsing tool to see if
 786 any bluetooth devices are discovered.  In my office, I normally see a
 787 few.</li>
 788
 789 <li>For laptops, is the SD or Compaq Flash reader working.  I have
 790 memory modules lying around, and stick them in and see if Gnome/KDE
 791 notice this.</li>
 792
 793 <li>For laptops, is suspecd/hibernate working?  I'm testing if the
 794 special button work, and if the laptop continue to work after
 795 resume.</li>
 796
 797 <li>For laptops, is the extra buttons working, like audio level,
 798 adjusting background light, switching on/off external video output,
 799 switching on/off wifi, bluetooth, etc?  The set of buttons differ from
 800 laptop to laptop, so I just write down which are working and which are
 801 not.</li>
 802
 803 <li>Some laptops have smart card readers, finger print readers,
 804 acceleration sensors etc.  I rarely test these, as I do not know how
 805 to quickly test if they are working or not, so I only document their
 806 existence.</li>
 807
 808 </ul>
 809
 810 <p>By now I suspect you are really curious what the test results are
 811 for the HP machines I am testing.  I'm not done yet, so I will report
 812 the test results later.  For now I can report that HP 8100 Elite work
 813 fine, and hibernation fail with HP EliteBook 8440p on Ubuntu Lucid,
 814 and audio fail on RHEL6.  Ubuntu Maverik worked with 8440p.  As you
 815 can see, I have most machines left to test.  One interesting
 816 observation is that Ubuntu Lucid has almost twice the framerate than
 817 RHEL6 with glxgears.  No idea why.</p>
 818 </div>
 819   <div class="tags">
 820
 821
 822
 823    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian edu">debian edu</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>.
 824
 825   </div>
 826  </div>
 827  <div class="padding"></div>
 828
 829  <div class="entry">
 830   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Some_thoughts_on_BitCoins.html">Some thoughts on BitCoins</a></div>
 831   <div class="date">2010-12-11 15:10</div>
 832   <div class="body">
 833 <p>As I continue to explore
 834 <a href="http://www.bitcoin.org/">BitCoin</a>, I've starting to wonder
 835 what properties the system have, and how it will be affected by laws
 836 and regulations here in Norway.  Here are some random notes.</p>
 837
 838 <p>One interesting thing to note is that since the transactions are
 839 verified using a peer to peer network, all details about a transaction
 840 is known to everyone.  This means that if a BitCoin address has been
 841 published like I did with mine in my initial post about BitCoin, it is
 842 possible for everyone to see how many BitCoins have been transfered to
 843 that address.  There is even a web service to look at the details for
 844 all transactions.  There I can see that my address
 845 <a href="http://blockexplorer.com/address/15oWEoG9dUPovwmUL9KWAnYRtNJEkP1u1b">15oWEoG9dUPovwmUL9KWAnYRtNJEkP1u1b</a>
 846 have received 16.06 Bitcoin, the
 847 <a href="http://blockexplorer.com/address/1LfdGnGuWkpSJgbQySxxCWhv8MHqvwst3">1LfdGnGuWkpSJgbQySxxCWhv8MHqvwst3</a>
 848 address of Simon Phipps have received 181.97 BitCoin and the address
 849 <a href="http://blockexplorer.com/address/1MCwBbhNGp5hRm5rC1Aims2YFRe2SXPYKt">1MCwBbhNGp5hRm5rC1Aims2YFRe2SXPYKt</A>
 850 of EFF have received 2447.38 BitCoins so far.  Thank you to each and
 851 every one of you that donated bitcoins to support my activity. The
 852 fact that anyone can see how much money was transfered to a given
 853 address make it more obvious why the BitCoin community recommend to
 854 generate and hand out a new address for each transaction.  I'm told
 855 there is no way to track which addresses belong to a given person or
 856 organisation without the person or organisation revealing it
 857 themselves, as Simon, EFF and I have done.</p>
 858
 859 <p>In Norway, and in most other countries, there are laws and
 860 regulations limiting how much money one can transfer across the border
 861 without declaring it.  There are money laundering, tax and accounting
 862 laws and regulations I would expect to apply to the use of BitCoin.
 863 If the Skolelinux foundation
 864 (<a href="http://linuxiskolen.no/slxdebianlabs/donations.html">SLX
 865 Debian Labs</a>) were to accept donations in BitCoin in addition to
 866 normal bank transfers like EFF is doing, how should this be accounted?
 867 Given that it is impossible to know if money can across the border or
 868 not, should everything or nothing be declared?  What exchange rate
 869 should be used when calculating taxes?  Would receivers have to pay
 870 income tax if the foundation were to pay Skolelinux contributors in
 871 BitCoin?  I have no idea, but it would be interesting to know.</p>
 872
 873 <p>For a currency to be useful and successful, it must be trusted and
 874 accepted by a lot of users.  It must be possible to get easy access to
 875 the currency (as a wage or using currency exchanges), and it must be
 876 easy to spend it.  At the moment BitCoin seem fairly easy to get
 877 access to, but there are very few places to spend it.  I am not really
 878 a regular user of any of the vendor types currently accepting BitCoin,
 879 so I wonder when my kind of shop would start accepting BitCoins.  I
 880 would like to buy electronics, travels and subway tickets, not herbs
 881 and books. :) The currency is young, and this will improve over time
 882 if it become popular, but I suspect regular banks will start to lobby
 883 to get BitCoin declared illegal if it become popular.  I'm sure they
 884 will claim it is helping fund terrorism and money laundering (which
 885 probably would be true, as is any currency in existence), but I
 886 believe the problems should be solved elsewhere and not by blaming
 887 currencies.</p>
 888
 889 <p>The process of creating new BitCoins is called mining, and it is
 890 CPU intensive process that depend on a bit of luck as well (as one is
 891 competing against all the other miners currently spending CPU cycles
 892 to see which one get the next lump of cash).  The "winner" get 50
 893 BitCoin when this happen.  Yesterday I came across the obvious way to
 894 join forces to increase ones changes of getting at least some coins,
 895 by coordinating the work on mining BitCoins across several machines
 896 and people, and sharing the result if one is lucky and get the 50
 897 BitCoins.  Check out
 898 <a href="http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/">BitCoin Pool</a>
 899 if this sounds interesting.  I have not had time to try to set up a
 900 machine to participate there yet, but have seen that running on ones
 901 own for a few days have not yield any BitCoins througth mining
 902 yet.</p>
 903
 904 <p>Update 2010-12-15: Found an <a
 905 href="http://inertia.posterous.com/reply-to-the-underground-economist-why-bitcoi">interesting
 906 criticism</a> of bitcoin.  Not quite sure how valid it is, but thought
 907 it was interesting to read.  The arguments presented seem to be
 908 equally valid for gold, which was used as a currency for many years.</p>
 909 </div>
 910   <div class="tags">
 911
 912
 913
 914    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bitcoin">bitcoin</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sikkerhet">sikkerhet</a>.
 915
 916   </div>
 917  </div>
 918  <div class="padding"></div>
 919
 920  <div class="entry">
 921   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Pornoskannerne_p___flyplassene_bedrer_visst_ikke_sikkerheten.html">Pornoskannerne på flyplassene bedrer visst ikke sikkerheten</a></div>
 922   <div class="date">2010-12-11 10:45</div>
 923   <div class="body">
 924 <p>Via <a href="http://webmink.com/2010/12/10/links-for-2010-12-10/">en
 925 blogpost fra Simon Phipps i går</a>, fant jeg en referanse til
 926 <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/9/exposed-tsas-x-rated-scanner-fraud/">en
 927 artikkel i Washington Times</a> som igjen refererer til en artikkel i
 928 det fagfellevurderte tidsskriftet Journal of Transportation Security
 929 med tittelen
 930 "<a href="http://springerlink.com/content/g6620thk08679160/fulltext.html">An
 931 evaluation of airport x-ray backscatter units based on image
 932 characteristics</a>" som enkelt konstaterer at
 933 <a href="http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/?a=2389&c=124">pornoscannerne</a>
 934 som kler av reisende på flyplasser ikke er i stand til å avsløre det
 935 produsenten og amerikanske myndigheter sier de skal avsløre.  Kort
 936 sagt, de bedrer ikke sikkerheten.  Reisende må altså la ansatte på
 937 flyplasser <a href="http://www.thousandsstandingaround.org/">se dem
 938 nakne eller la seg beføle i skrittet</a> uten grunn.  Jeg vil
 939 fortsette å nekte å bruke disse pornoskannerne, unngå flyplasser der
 940 de er tatt i bruk, og reise med andre transportmidler enn fly hvis jeg
 941 kan.</p>
 942 </div>
 943   <div class="tags">
 944
 945
 946
 947    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sikkerhet">sikkerhet</a>.
 948
 949   </div>
 950  </div>
 951  <div class="padding"></div>
 952
 953  <div class="entry">
 954   <div class="title"><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Now_accepting_bitcoins___anonymous_and_distributed_p2p_crypto_money.html">Now accepting bitcoins - anonymous and distributed p2p crypto-money</a></div>
 955   <div class="date">2010-12-10 08:20</div>
 956   <div class="body">
 957 <p>With this weeks lawless
 958 <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/06/wikileaks/index.html">governmental
 959 attacks</a> on Wikileak and
 960 <a href="http://www.salon.com/technology/dan_gillmor/2010/12/06/war_on_speech">free
 961 speech</a>, it has become obvious that PayPal, visa and mastercard can
 962 not be trusted to handle money transactions.
 963 A blog post from
 964 <a href="http://webmink.com/2010/12/06/now-accepting-bitcoin/">Simon
 965 Phipps on bitcoin</a> reminded me about a project that a friend of
 966 mine mentioned earlier.  I decided to follow Simon's example, and get
 967 involved with <a href="http://www.bitcoin.org/">BitCoin</a>.  I got
 968 some help from my friend to get it all running, and he even handed me
 969 some bitcoins to get started.  I even donated a few bitcoins to Simon
 970 for helping me remember BitCoin.</p>
 971
 972 <p>So, what is bitcoins, you probably wonder?  It is a digital
 973 crypto-currency, decentralised and handled using peer-to-peer
 974 networks.  It allows anonymous transactions and prohibits central
 975 control over the transactions, making it impossible for governments
 976 and companies alike to block donations and other transactions.  The
 977 source is free software, and while the key dependency wxWidgets 2.9
 978 for the graphical user interface is missing in Debian, the command
 979 line client builds just fine.  Hopefully Jonas
 980 <a href="http://bugs.debian.org/578157">will get the package into
 981 Debian</a> soon.</p>
 982
 983 <p>Bitcoins can be converted to other currencies, like USD and EUR.
 984 There are <a href="http://www.bitcoin.org/trade">companies accepting
 985 bitcoins</a> when selling services and goods, and there are even
 986 currency "stock" markets where the exchange rate is decided.  There
 987 are not many users so far, but the concept seems promising.  If you
 988 want to get started and lack a friend with any bitcoins to spare,
 989 you can even get
 990 <a href="https://freebitcoins.appspot.com/">some for free</a> (0.05
 991 bitcoin at the time of writing).  Use
 992 <a href="http://www.bitcoinwatch.com/">BitcoinWatch</a> to keep an eye
 993 on the current exchange rates.</p>
 994
 995 <p>As an experiment, I have decided to set up bitcoind on one of my
 996 machines.  If you want to support my activity, please send Bitcoin
 997 donations to the address
 998 <b>15oWEoG9dUPovwmUL9KWAnYRtNJEkP1u1b</b>.  Thank you!</p>
 999 </div>
1000   <div class="tags">
1001
1002
1003
1004    Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bitcoin">bitcoin</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sikkerhet">sikkerhet</a>.
1005
1006   </div>
1007  </div>
1008  <div class="padding"></div>
1009
1010  <p style="text-align: right;"><a href="index.rss"><img src="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/xml.gif" alt="RSS feed" width="36" height="14"></a></p>
1011
1012 <div id="sidebar">
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018 <h2>Archive</h2>
1019 <ul>
1020
1021 <li>2010
1022 <ul>
1023
1024 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/01/">January (2)</a></li>
1025
1026 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/02/">February (1)</a></li>
1027
1028 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/03/">March (3)</a></li>
1029
1030 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/04/">April (3)</a></li>
1031
1032 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/05/">May (9)</a></li>
1033
1034 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/06/">June (14)</a></li>
1035
1036 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/07/">July (12)</a></li>
1037
1038 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/08/">August (13)</a></li>
1039
1040 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/09/">September (7)</a></li>
1041
1042 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/10/">October (9)</a></li>
1043
1044 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/11/">November (13)</a></li>
1045
1046 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/12/">December (12)</a></li>
1047
1048 </ul></li>
1049
1050 <li>2009
1051 <ul>
1052
1053 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/01/">January (8)</a></li>
1054
1055 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/02/">February (8)</a></li>
1056
1057 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/03/">March (12)</a></li>
1058
1059 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/04/">April (10)</a></li>
1060
1061 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/05/">May (9)</a></li>
1062
1063 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/06/">June (3)</a></li>
1064
1065 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/07/">July (4)</a></li>
1066
1067 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/08/">August (3)</a></li>
1068
1069 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/09/">September (1)</a></li>
1070
1071 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/10/">October (2)</a></li>
1072
1073 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/11/">November (3)</a></li>
1074
1075 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/12/">December (3)</a></li>
1076
1077 </ul></li>
1078
1079 <li>2008
1080 <ul>
1081
1082 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2008/11/">November (5)</a></li>
1083
1084 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2008/12/">December (7)</a></li>
1085
1086 </ul></li>
1087
1088 </ul>
1089
1090
1091
1092 <h2>Tags</h2>
1093 <ul>
1094
1095  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/3d-printer">3d-printer (13)</a></li>
1096
1097  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/amiga">amiga (1)</a></li>
1098
1099  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/aros">aros (1)</a></li>
1100
1101  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bitcoin">bitcoin (2)</a></li>
1102
1103  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bootsystem">bootsystem (10)</a></li>
1104
1105  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian (46)</a></li>
1106
1107  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian edu">debian edu (53)</a></li>
1108
1109  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english (82)</a></li>
1110
1111  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fiksgatami">fiksgatami (1)</a></li>
1112
1113  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fildeling">fildeling (11)</a></li>
1114
1115  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/kart">kart (5)</a></li>
1116
1117  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/ldap">ldap (8)</a></li>
1118
1119  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/lenker">lenker (4)</a></li>
1120
1121  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/ltsp">ltsp (1)</a></li>
1122
1123  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia (11)</a></li>
1124
1125  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk (94)</a></li>
1126
1127  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug (114)</a></li>
1128
1129  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett (18)</a></li>
1130
1131  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern (31)</a></li>
1132
1133  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/reprap">reprap (11)</a></li>
1134
1135  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/robot">robot (4)</a></li>
1136
1137  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/rss">rss (1)</a></li>
1138
1139  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sikkerhet">sikkerhet (22)</a></li>
1140
1141  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sitesummary">sitesummary (3)</a></li>
1142
1143  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard (21)</a></li>
1144
1145  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/stavekontroll">stavekontroll (1)</a></li>
1146
1147  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video (17)</a></li>
1148
1149  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/vitenskap">vitenskap (1)</a></li>
1150
1151  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web (14)</a></li>
1152
1153 </ul>
1154
1155 </div>
1156
1157 <p style="text-align: right">
1158 Created by <a href="http://steve.org.uk/Software/chronicle">Chronicle v3.7</a>
1159 </p>
1160 </body>
1161 </html>