Wednesday, October 31, 2007
its been 1 week now
Friday, October 05, 2007
increasing swap space on system
By Urbana Der Ga'had
Sometimes in the course of a system's existence you find that the swap partition you set up at install-time just isn't enough anymore. Maybe you're upgrading your system to RedHat 7.1 from a version of RedHat that used less swap in relation to physical RAM. Perhaps you're running Oracle. Or maybe you're adding more memory and would like to increase swap space accordingly.
Our machine srv-2 is swapping like mad and we just can't take it down right now to add more RAM. So to keep the machine from running out of memory entirely and freezing, we'll add 128 MB more swap space by creating a swap file.
First we check out the memory usage:[root@srv-2 /root]# free -m |
Make sure we have 128 MB laying around somewhere:
[root@srv-2 /root]# df |
OK, we're going to make a swap file in /opt by using dd to create a file 128 MB in size.
[root@srv-2 /opt]# dd if=/dev/zero of=swapfile bs=1024 count=132207 |
Hey, I know, let's not make it world-readable...
[root@srv-2 /opt]# chmod 600 swapfile |
Now we set up the swap area and enable it.
[root@srv-2 /opt]# mkswap swapfile |
And viola! Twice as much swap as before.
[root@srv-2 /opt]# free |
You can edit /etc/fstab to enable your swap file automatically at boot time.
By adding an entry like this:
/opt/swapfile swap swap defaults 0 0 |
Sure, swapping's ugly, slow and will grind your hard drives to dust. But even modern systems which have been tuned for performance require a generous oodle of swap space.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Best Online Book Ever
Best Chapter: Performance Tuning
However, this chapter is not really about how to improve performance. It does tell few things related to a simple program, but if someone is really worried about performance, this chapter is a misnomer.
I liked this chapter, because it pervasivly depicts the idea of avoiding performance tuning while development. While it is a known advise, "first working code, then performance"; this chapter can teach the software development in a very interactive way, the same lesson.
On a footnote, this is very well written online book. The layout of book ideally matches an online experience. I read this book back to back in 10 days. I wish there were more chapters I could read (a feeling I used to get, when I used to finish reading comics book as a kid and wished the comic was longer).
Anyway, if you want to explore a different language and python is your choice, Please, do start with this book.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Operator Parsing: Nice Hack
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){
int i;
printf("((((");
for(i=1;i!=argc;i++){
if( strcmp(argv[i], "^")==0) printf(")^(");
else if(strcmp(argv[i], "*")==0) printf("))*((");
else if(strcmp(argv[i], "/")==0) printf("))/((");
else if(strcmp(argv[i], "+")==0) printf(")))+(((");
else if(strcmp(argv[i], "-")==0) printf(")))-(((");
else printf("%s", argv[i]);
}
printf("))))\n");
return 0;
}
Friday, July 13, 2007
Steve Jobs
'You've got to find what you love,' Jobs says
This is the text of the Commencement address by Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computer and of Pixar Animation Studios, delivered on June 12, 2005.
I am honored to be with you today at your commencement from one of the finest universities in the world. I never graduated from college. Truth be told, this is the closest I've ever gotten to a college graduation. Today I want to tell you three stories from my life. That's it. No big deal. Just three stories.
The first story is about connecting the dots.
I dropped out of Reed College after the first 6 months, but then stayed around as a drop-in for another 18 months or so before I really quit. So why did I drop out?
It started before I was born. My biological mother was a young, unwed college graduate student, and she decided to put me up for adoption. She felt very strongly that I should be adopted by college graduates, so everything was all set for me to be adopted at birth by a lawyer and his wife. Except that when I popped out they decided at the last minute that they really wanted a girl. So my parents, who were on a waiting list, got a call in the middle of the night asking: "We have an unexpected baby boy; do you want him?" They said: "Of course." My biological mother later found out that my mother had never graduated from college and that my father had never graduated from high school. She refused to sign the final adoption papers. She only relented a few months later when my parents promised that I would someday go to college.
And 17 years later I did go to college. But I naively chose a college that was almost as expensive as Stanford, and all of my working-class parents' savings were being spent on my college tuition. After six months, I couldn't see the value in it. I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life and no idea how college was going to help me figure it out. And here I was spending all of the money my parents had saved their entire life. So I decided to drop out and trust that it would all work out OK. It was pretty scary at the time, but looking back it was one of the best decisions I ever made. The minute I dropped out I could stop taking the required classes that didn't interest me, and begin dropping in on the ones that looked interesting.
It wasn't all romantic. I didn't have a dorm room, so I slept on the floor in friends' rooms, I returned coke bottles for the 5¢ deposits to buy food with, and I would walk the 7 miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it. And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on. Let me give you one example:
Reed College at that time offered perhaps the best calligraphy instruction in the country. Throughout the campus every poster, every label on every drawer, was beautifully hand calligraphed. Because I had dropped out and didn't have to take the normal classes, I decided to take a calligraphy class to learn how to do this. I learned about serif and san serif typefaces, about varying the amount of space between different letter combinations, about what makes great typography great. It was beautiful, historical, artistically subtle in a way that science can't capture, and I found it fascinating.
None of this had even a hope of any practical application in my life. But ten years later, when we were designing the first Macintosh computer, it all came back to me. And we designed it all into the Mac. It was the first computer with beautiful typography. If I had never dropped in on that single course in college, the Mac would have never had multiple typefaces or proportionally spaced fonts. And since Windows just copied the Mac, its likely that no personal computer would have them. If I had never dropped out, I would have never dropped in on this calligraphy class, and personal computers might not have the wonderful typography that they do. Of course it was impossible to connect the dots looking forward when I was in college. But it was very, very clear looking backwards ten years later.
Again, you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.
My second story is about love and loss.
I was lucky — I found what I loved to do early in life. Woz and I started Apple in my parents garage when I was 20. We worked hard, and in 10 years Apple had grown from just the two of us in a garage into a $2 billion company with over 4000 employees. We had just released our finest creation — the Macintosh — a year earlier, and I had just turned 30. And then I got fired. How can you get fired from a company you started? Well, as Apple grew we hired someone who I thought was very talented to run the company with me, and for the first year or so things went well. But then our visions of the future began to diverge and eventually we had a falling out. When we did, our Board of Directors sided with him. So at 30 I was out. And very publicly out. What had been the focus of my entire adult life was gone, and it was devastating.
I really didn't know what to do for a few months. I felt that I had let the previous generation of entrepreneurs down - that I had dropped the baton as it was being passed to me. I met with David Packard and Bob Noyce and tried to apologize for screwing up so badly. I was a very public failure, and I even thought about running away from the valley. But something slowly began to dawn on me — I still loved what I did. The turn of events at Apple had not changed that one bit. I had been rejected, but I was still in love. And so I decided to start over.
I didn't see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me. The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life.
During the next five years, I started a company named NeXT, another company named Pixar, and fell in love with an amazing woman who would become my wife. Pixar went on to create the worlds first computer animated feature film, Toy Story, and is now the most successful animation studio in the world. In a remarkable turn of events, Apple bought NeXT, I returned to Apple, and the technology we developed at NeXT is at the heart of Apple's current renaissance. And Laurene and I have a wonderful family together.
I'm pretty sure none of this would have happened if I hadn't been fired from Apple. It was awful tasting medicine, but I guess the patient needed it. Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don't lose faith. I'm convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did. You've got to find what you love. And that is as true for your work as it is for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle. As with all matters of the heart, you'll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don't settle.
My third story is about death.
When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.
Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure - these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.
About a year ago I was diagnosed with cancer. I had a scan at 7:30 in the morning, and it clearly showed a tumor on my pancreas. I didn't even know what a pancreas was. The doctors told me this was almost certainly a type of cancer that is incurable, and that I should expect to live no longer than three to six months. My doctor advised me to go home and get my affairs in order, which is doctor's code for prepare to die. It means to try to tell your kids everything you thought you'd have the next 10 years to tell them in just a few months. It means to make sure everything is buttoned up so that it will be as easy as possible for your family. It means to say your goodbyes.
I lived with that diagnosis all day. Later that evening I had a biopsy, where they stuck an endoscope down my throat, through my stomach and into my intestines, put a needle into my pancreas and got a few cells from the tumor. I was sedated, but my wife, who was there, told me that when they viewed the cells under a microscope the doctors started crying because it turned out to be a very rare form of pancreatic cancer that is curable with surgery. I had the surgery and I'm fine now.
This was the closest I've been to facing death, and I hope its the closest I get for a few more decades. Having lived through it, I can now say this to you with a bit more certainty than when death was a useful but purely intellectual concept:
No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don't want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life's change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now the new is you, but someday not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it is quite true.
Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.
When I was young, there was an amazing publication called The Whole Earth Catalog, which was one of the bibles of my generation. It was created by a fellow named Stewart Brand not far from here in Menlo Park, and he brought it to life with his poetic touch. This was in the late 1960's, before personal computers and desktop publishing, so it was all made with typewriters, scissors, and polaroid cameras. It was sort of like Google in paperback form, 35 years before Google came along: it was idealistic, and overflowing with neat tools and great notions.
Stewart and his team put out several issues of The Whole Earth Catalog, and then when it had run its course, they put out a final issue. It was the mid-1970s, and I was your age. On the back cover of their final issue was a photograph of an early morning country road, the kind you might find yourself hitchhiking on if you were so adventurous. Beneath it were the words: "Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish." It was their farewell message as they signed off. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish. And I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you.
Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.
Thank you all very much.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live like this is your last day, This is the second time I came across this line.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Copyright and everything owned by Tribune-India (www.tribuneindia.com)
If you want me to remove this article, let me know. I am just logging it here for my records.
Chandigarh, July 2
The horrors of undignified living come alive in each of the 86 faces one encounters in the women’s cell of Jalandhar Central Jail. Piled up like refuse in two small, dingy rooms, these prisoners scramble for space. But there’s none.
“The mice are better off than us,” says Dhyan Kaur, 60, pointing towards four door-less structures. These are the toilets and baths inmates share, 40 awaiting their turn at a time. In all the jails where women live, the situation is bad. There’s no privacy; no one demands it either.
So long as they are inside, they must make do with what they have - two cells in the name of living space, 50 hard beds to share and open baths. The floor under their feet is rutted; the ceiling is giving way; the walls are dangerously perched and devoid of plaster.
This is the women’s barrack at Punjab’s oldest central jail, which has stood for 150 years. Now unsafe, it was originally meant for 25 women. Today there are 86, 71 of them undertrials. Together, the women undertrials at the central jails in Jalandhar, Patiala, Ferozepur, Gurdaspur (each is 100 years old), Bathinda, Amritsar and district jails at Sangrur and Hoshiarpur account for maximum overcrowding. Of the 800 prisoners, only 231 are convicts; the rest are facing trial, some in heartrending cases, like Surinder Kaur, 45, lodged at Jalandhar.
She has been here since the past 11 months for attempting to kill her minor daughter. Strangely, her daughter comes to see her in jail during visits (mulakats), allowed from 9 a.m. to 12 noon and 3 p.m. to 5 p.m., daily. She also brings her raw vegetables, allowed to all inmates, though few can afford the luxury. More often, they sustain with the diet prescribed by the jail manual, written in 1896 and partially revised by the Punjab government in 1996 — after 100 years!
The manual requires lunch to be served at 8 a.m., and dinner at 6 p.m., each comprising six huge unbaked chapattis and dal. “Only 3 gm dry tea leaves are allowed to each inmate, a day. The quantity earlier was 2.5 gm. The diet needs to be balanced to prevent gross deficiencies, which go unreported in the absence of in-house lady doctors. Not a single jail has a permanent lady doctor. Inmates have high uric acid levels, caused by huge pulse intake,” observes Jyoti Seth, who studied Punjab jails for the National Commission for Women.
Back in their cells, women wear pale looks, deprived even of a glass of milk, reserved only for lactating and pregnant mothers. All they can have between the two main meals is a few grams of “chhole” and tea. Superintendents agree the provisions need urgent revision. This is further compounded by lack of proper sanitary facilities. Shockingly, there’s no provision of sanitary napkins and underclothes for women.
All they get is a soap per month and two pairs of clothing if they are convicts. Undertrials wear their own clothes. They need not engage in work programmes either, says Dilraj Singh, superintendent at Jalandhar jail. And why should they? The jail manual prescribes dismal wages - Rs 8, 10 and 12, respectively, for normal, skilled, and highly-skilled workers.
Work programmes, naturally, are a rarity expect at the Ludhiana all-women’s jail, Amritsar’s high-security jail and Bathinda. Elsewhere, women lead lonely lives, counting days to the next court hearing. Darsho, 50, an undertrial since two years in a narcotics case, shows her diary in which she keeps account of dates. “There’s nothing else to do. There’s no regular teacher, no good programme, no motivation. Above all, there’s no sunshine.” The verandahs in women’s enclosures are so small; inmates can’t have enough of sunshine. They fight for their share nevertheless.
But some can’t even do that. At the Patiala jail, the only jail with provisions to segregate women on death row, Sonia Walia, sentenced to death for the murder of Abhi Verma, is in solitary confinement. Unlike those on life sentences, who can move around enclosures expect during “bandi” (lock up), Sonia leaves her cell only twice a day - for half-an-hour each.
In the central and district jails, women prisoners are not allowed to leave the enclosures even to visit on-campus gurdwaras. Within the enclosure, too, they are locked from 12 noon to 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. onwards. These are times for lock-up (bandi), says Roop Kumar, superintendent, Amritsar jail, where women are slightly better off due to the involvement of Kiran Bedi’s India Vision Foundation.
At most other places, they remain marooned in thoughts, unable to engage in unconstructive programmes or uninventive adult literacy sessions. Expect in Ludhiana and Amritsar, there’s no permanent teacher anywhere. Also, Ludhiana is the only jail where inmates can cook their own food. Elsewhere, they must eat what the men give them. They can’t enter the kitchen located close to men’s barracks.
And they better not. In a 100-year-old manually run kitchen, it takes 35 men 10 hours to prepare one meal. For the morning meal, they are awake all night. In Punjab jails, gases replaced firewood only one year ago. No wonder the authorities are lenient to men who cook, for no one wants to.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
subscript and postscript in MS Word
Creating Subscript and Superscript in Microsoft Word
by Grif Thomas
- 7/29/04 6:22 PMIn reply to: A Few 'Tips' For Computer Newbies by Grif Thomas
This should work in most versions of Word, although I don't have the newest 2003 version to test it on. Although you can use the Character Map to perform some Superscript and Subscript chores, the procedures below will help when you need something extra.
Superscript (Letters/numbers typed above the line of text):
After typing CO (or whatever text you want), immediately press the Ctrl key, the Shift key, and the equals (=) key at the same time. Release the keys then type your number 2. It will become a superscript and look something like this: CO². To get back to the main text line, press the Ctrl key, the Shift key, and the = key at the same time, then release.
Subscript (Letters/numbers typed below the line of text):
After typing CO (or whatever text you want), immediately press the Ctrl key and the equals (=) key at the same time, release the keys then type your number 2. It will become subscript with the number two lower than the preceeding letters. To get back to the main text line, press the Ctrl key plus the = key again.
Hope this helps.
Grif
-------Copied from Another Blog-----
Friday, March 23, 2007
Adode Flash plugin on AMD64
Here is what you can do (essentially use a wrapper, to enable 32bit plugins) to make it work.
Download the rpm mentioned below, install it and chill!!!
Download nspluginwrapper 0.9.91.3 (04.Mar.2007)
Monday, February 26, 2007
Why IOs in Haskell are so complex?
-------------------------------------------
using namespace std;
#include
main()
{
int idx = 0;
while(idx != -1) {
cin >> idx;
cout << idx << "\n";
}
}
---------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, February 25, 2007
IRAN: and everything else
Wrong: They are not building Nukes, they are building nuclear reactors for peaceful purposes
Then what is the problem!! The problem is, the whole world does not trust IRAN. IRAN is a reckless, irresponsible country, who should not be allowed to get nukes.
That sounds harsh. Maybe that is not the real problem. The problem is, countries who already have WMD, want to control the oil resources of IRAN. They just need a reason to attack IRAN and gain control of the black gold.
So did IRAN give them a politically sound reason by working on nukes (I just like the term nukes, thanks George!!)? Perhaps not..the evil powers of democratic messahiah would have found some other reasons to attack IRAN anyway. Now perhaps they are concerned that if IRAN does have Nukes, it would be slightly difficult to attack the country.
OK.. Now it all makes sense.
Friday, February 16, 2007
One Day Cricket and Software Project
1. 5 Overs: 47/0 (47 Runs, 0 Wicket)
2. 12 Overs: 61/4
3. 43 Overs: 244/7
Pretty good score at the end and the fielding team is a real loser. They had no idea what happened for the first 5 overs. They eventually put their best guys in front for next 5 overs, and got to a winning position. Once they realized they are having a lead in the game, they slacked off and the batting team got it all the way to 244 in 43 overs.
Looking at final score, I almost forget the score at 12 overs.
Many software projects end up failing like this. First few months, not much progress. Put best people on the job, some reshuffling and next few months are the most productive. Once the productivity is at its peak, the best performer are overloaded with new project, multiple meetings, astronaut's architecture (Joel on Software) and finally the software is a failure.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Putin's Sppech (Source: http://www.securityconference.de/konferenzen/rede.php?sprache=en&id=179&)
(The speech was held in Russian. Find the English translation below.)
Thank you very much dear Madam Federal Chancellor, Mr Teltschik, ladies and gentlemen!
I am truly grateful to be invited to such a representative conference that has assembled politicians, military officials, entrepreneurs and experts from more than 40 nations.
This conference’s structure allows me to avoid excessive politeness and the need to speak in roundabout, pleasant but empty diplomatic terms. This conference’s format will allow me to say what I really think about international security problems. And if my comments seem unduly polemical, pointed or inexact to our colleagues, then I would ask you not to get angry with me. After all, this is only a conference. And I hope that after the first two or three minutes of my speech Mr Teltschik will not turn on the red light over there.
Therefore. It is well known that international security comprises much more than issues relating to military and political stability. It involves the stability of the global economy, overcoming poverty, economic security and developing a dialogue between civilisations.
This universal, indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that “security for one is security for all”. As Franklin D. Roosevelt said during the first few days that the Second World War was breaking out: “When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.”
These words remain topical today. Incidentally, the theme of our conference – global crises, global responsibility – exemplifies this.
Only two decades ago the world was ideologically and economically divided and it was the huge strategic potential of two superpowers that ensured global security.
This global stand-off pushed the sharpest economic and social problems to the margins of the international community’s and the world’s agenda. And, just like any war, the Cold War left us with live ammunition, figuratively speaking. I am referring to ideological stereotypes, double standards and other typical aspects of Cold War bloc thinking.
The unipolar world that had been proposed after the Cold War did not take place either.
The history of humanity certainly has gone through unipolar periods and seen aspirations to world supremacy. And what hasn’t happened in world history?
However, what is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making.
It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.
And this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. Because, as you know, democracy is the power of the majority in light of the interests and opinions of the minority.
Incidentally, Russia – we – are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.
I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today’s – and precisely in today’s – world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.
Along with this, what is happening in today’s world – and we just started to discuss this – is a tentative to introduce precisely this concept into international affairs, the concept of a unipolar world.
And with which results?
Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. Mr Teltschik mentioned this very gently. And no less people perish in these conflicts – even more are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!
Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible.
We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?
In international relations we increasingly see the desire to resolve a given question according to so-called issues of political expediency, based on the current political climate.
And of course this is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasise this – no one feels safe! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race.
The force’s dominance inevitably encourages a number of countries to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, significantly new threats – though they were also well-known before – have appeared, and today threats such as terrorism have taken on a global character.
I am convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we must seriously think about the architecture of global security.
And we must proceed by searching for a reasonable balance between the interests of all participants in the international dialogue. Especially since the international landscape is so varied and changes so quickly – changes in light of the dynamic development in a whole number of countries and regions.
Madam Federal Chancellor already mentioned this. The combined GDP measured in purchasing power parity of countries such as India and China is already greater than that of the United States. And a similar calculation with the GDP of the BRIC countries – Brazil, Russia, India and China – surpasses the cumulative GDP of the EU. And according to experts this gap will only increase in the future.
There is no reason to doubt that the economic potential of the new centres of global economic growth will inevitably be converted into political influence and will strengthen multipolarity.
In connection with this the role of multilateral diplomacy is significantly increasing. The need for principles such as openness, transparency and predictability in politics is uncontested and the use of force should be a really exceptional measure, comparable to using the death penalty in the judicial systems of certain states.
However, today we are witnessing the opposite tendency, namely a situation in which countries that forbid the death penalty even for murderers and other, dangerous criminals are airily participating in military operations that are difficult to consider legitimate. And as a matter of fact, these conflicts are killing people – hundreds and thousands of civilians!
But at the same time the question arises of whether we should be indifferent and aloof to various internal conflicts inside countries, to authoritarian regimes, to tyrants, and to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction? As a matter of fact, this was also at the centre of the question that our dear colleague Mr Lieberman asked the Federal Chancellor. If I correctly understood your question (addressing Mr Lieberman), then of course it is a serious one! Can we be indifferent observers in view of what is happening? I will try to answer your question as well: of course not.
But do we have the means to counter these threats? Certainly we do. It is sufficient to look at recent history. Did not our country have a peaceful transition to democracy? Indeed, we witnessed a peaceful transformation of the Soviet regime – a peaceful transformation! And what a regime! With what a number of weapons, including nuclear weapons! Why should we start bombing and shooting now at every available opportunity? Is it the case when without the threat of mutual destruction we do not have enough political culture, respect for democratic values and for the law?
I am convinced that the only mechanism that can make decisions about using military force as a last resort is the Charter of the United Nations. And in connection with this, either I did not understand what our colleague, the Italian Defence Minister, just said or what he said was inexact. In any case, I understood that the use of force can only be legitimate when the decision is taken by NATO, the EU, or the UN. If he really does think so, then we have different points of view. Or I didn’t hear correctly. The use of force can only be considered legitimate if the decision is sanctioned by the UN. And we do not need to substitute NATO or the EU for the UN. When the UN will truly unite the forces of the international community and can really react to events in various countries, when we will leave behind this disdain for international law, then the situation will be able to change. Otherwise the situation will simply result in a dead end, and the number of serious mistakes will be multiplied. Along with this, it is necessary to make sure that international law have a universal character both in the conception and application of its norms.
And one must not forget that democratic political actions necessarily go along with discussion and a laborious decision-making process.
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
The potential danger of the destabilisation of international relations is connected with obvious stagnation in the disarmament issue.
Russia supports the renewal of dialogue on this important question.
It is important to conserve the international legal framework relating to weapons destruction and therefore ensure continuity in the process of reducing nuclear weapons.
Together with the United States of America we agreed to reduce our nuclear strategic missile capabilities to up to 1700-2000 nuclear warheads by 31 December 2012. Russia intends to strictly fulfil the obligations it has taken on. We hope that our partners will also act in a transparent way and will refrain from laying aside a couple of hundred superfluous nuclear warheads for a rainy day. And if today the new American Defence Minister declares that the United States will not hide these superfluous weapons in warehouse or, as one might say, under a pillow or under the blanket, then I suggest that we all rise and greet this declaration standing. It would be a very important declaration.
Russia strictly adheres to and intends to further adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as well as the multilateral supervision regime for missile technologies. The principles incorporated in these documents are universal ones.
In connection with this I would like to recall that in the 1980s the USSR and the United States signed an agreement on destroying a whole range of small- and medium-range missiles but these documents do not have a universal character.
Today many other countries have these missiles, including the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea, India, Iran, Pakistan and Israel. Many countries are working on these systems and plan to incorporate them as part of their weapons arsenals. And only the United States and Russia bear the responsibility to not create such weapons systems.
It is obvious that in these conditions we must think about ensuring our own security.
At the same time, it is impossible to sanction the appearance of new, destabilising high-tech weapons. Needless to say it refers to measures to prevent a new area of confrontation, especially in outer space. Star wars is no longer a fantasy – it is a reality. In the middle of the 1980s our American partners were already able to intercept their own satellite.
In Russia’s opinion, the militarisation of outer space could have unpredictable consequences for the international community, and provoke nothing less than the beginning of a nuclear era. And we have come forward more than once with initiatives designed to prevent the use of weapons in outer space.
Today I would like to tell you that we have prepared a project for an agreement on the prevention of deploying weapons in outer space. And in the near future it will be sent to our partners as an official proposal. Let’s work on this together.
Plans to expand certain elements of the anti-missile defence system to Europe cannot help but disturb us. Who needs the next step of what would be, in this case, an inevitable arms race? I deeply doubt that Europeans themselves do.
Missile weapons with a range of about five to eight thousand kilometres that really pose a threat to Europe do not exist in any of the so-called problem countries. And in the near future and prospects, this will not happen and is not even foreseeable. And any hypothetical launch of, for example, a North Korean rocket to American territory through western Europe obviously contradicts the laws of ballistics. As we say in Russia, it would be like using the right hand to reach the left ear.
And here in Germany I cannot help but mention the pitiable condition of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe.
The Adapted Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe was signed in 1999. It took into account a new geopolitical reality, namely the elimination of the Warsaw bloc. Seven years have passed and only four states have ratified this document, including the Russian Federation.
NATO countries openly declared that they will not ratify this treaty, including the provisions on flank restrictions (on deploying a certain number of armed forces in the flank zones), until Russia removed its military bases from Georgia and Moldova. Our army is leaving Georgia, even according to an accelerated schedule. We resolved the problems we had with our Georgian colleagues, as everybody knows. There are still 1,500 servicemen in Moldova that are carrying out peacekeeping operations and protecting warehouses with ammunition left over from Soviet times. We constantly discuss this issue with Mr Solana and he knows our position. We are ready to further work in this direction.
But what is happening at the same time? Simultaneously the so-called flexible frontline American bases with up to five thousand men in each. It turns out that NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders, and we continue to strictly fulfil the treaty obligations and do not react to these actions at all.
I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them. But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: “the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee”. Where are these guarantees?
The stones and concrete blocks of the Berlin Wall have long been distributed as souvenirs. But we should not forget that the fall of the Berlin Wall was possible thanks to a historic choice – one that was also made by our people, the people of Russia – a choice in favour of democracy, freedom, openness and a sincere partnership with all the members of the big European family.
And now they are trying to impose new dividing lines and walls on us – these walls may be virtual but they are nevertheless dividing, ones that cut through our continent. And is it possible that we will once again require many years and decades, as well as several generations of politicians, to dissemble and dismantle these new walls?
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
We are unequivocally in favour of strengthening the regime of non-proliferation. The present international legal principles allow us to develop technologies to manufacture nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And many countries with all good reasons want to create their own nuclear energy as a basis for their energy independence. But we also understand that these technologies can be quickly transformed into nuclear weapons.
This creates serious international tensions. The situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme acts as a clear example. And if the international community does not find a reasonable solution for resolving this conflict of interests, the world will continue to suffer similar, destabilising crises because there are more threshold countries than simply Iran. We both know this. We are going to constantly fight against the threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Last year Russia put forward the initiative to establish international centres for the enrichment of uranium. We are open to the possibility that such centres not only be created in Russia, but also in other countries where there is a legitimate basis for using civil nuclear energy. Countries that want to develop their nuclear energy could guarantee that they will receive fuel through direct participation in these centres. And the centres would, of course, operate under strict IAEA supervision.
The latest initiatives put forward by American President George W. Bush are in conformity with the Russian proposals. I consider that Russia and the USA are objectively and equally interested in strengthening the regime of the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their deployment. It is precisely our countries, with leading nuclear and missile capabilities, that must act as leaders in developing new, stricter non-proliferation measures. Russia is ready for such work. We are engaged in consultations with our American friends.
In general, we should talk about establishing a whole system of political incentives and economic stimuli whereby it would not be in states’ interests to establish their own capabilities in the nuclear fuel cycle but they would still have the opportunity to develop nuclear energy and strengthen their energy capabilities.
In connection with this I shall talk about international energy cooperation in more detail. Madam Federal Chancellor also spoke about this briefly – she mentioned, touched on this theme. In the energy sector Russia intends to create uniform market principles and transparent conditions for all. It is obvious that energy prices must be determined by the market instead of being the subject of political speculation, economic pressure or blackmail.
We are open to cooperation. Foreign companies participate in all our major energy projects. According to different estimates, up to 26 percent of the oil extraction in Russia – and please think about this figure – up to 26 percent of the oil extraction in Russia is done by foreign capital. Try, try to find me a similar example where Russian business participates extensively in key economic sectors in western countries. Such examples do not exist! There are no such examples.
I would also recall the parity of foreign investments in Russia and those Russia makes abroad. The parity is about fifteen to one. And here you have an obvious example of the openness and stability of the Russian economy.
Economic security is the sector in which all must adhere to uniform principles. We are ready to compete fairly.
For that reason more and more opportunities are appearing in the Russian economy. Experts and our western partners are objectively evaluating these changes. As such, Russia’s OECD sovereign credit rating improved and Russia passed from the fourth to the third group. And today in Munich I would like to use this occasion to thank our German colleagues for their help in the above decision.
Furthermore. As you know, the process of Russia joining the WTO has reached its final stages. I would point out that during long, difficult talks we heard words about freedom of speech, free trade, and equal possibilities more than once but, for some reason, exclusively in reference to the Russian market.
And there is still one more important theme that directly affects global security. Today many talk about the struggle against poverty. What is actually happening in this sphere? On the one hand, financial resources are allocated for programmes to help the world’s poorest countries – and at times substantial financial resources. But to be honest -- and many here also know this – linked with the development of that same donor country’s companies. And on the other hand, developed countries simultaneously keep their agricultural subsidies and limit some countries’ access to high-tech products.
And let’s say things as they are – one hand distributes charitable help and the other hand not only preserves economic backwardness but also reaps the profits thereof. The increasing social tension in depressed regions inevitably results in the growth of radicalism, extremism, feeds terrorism and local conflicts. And if all this happens in, shall we say, a region such as the Middle East where there is increasingly the sense that the world at large is unfair, then there is the risk of global destabilisation.
It is obvious that the world’s leading countries should see this threat. And that they should therefore build a more democratic, fairer system of global economic relations, a system that would give everyone the chance and the possibility to develop.
Dear ladies and gentlemen, speaking at the Conference on Security Policy, it is impossible not to mention the activities of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). As is well-known, this organisation was created to examine all – I shall emphasise this – all aspects of security: military, political, economic, humanitarian and, especially, the relations between these spheres.
What do we see happening today? We see that this balance is clearly destroyed. People are trying to transform the OSCE into a vulgar instrument designed to promote the foreign policy interests of one or a group of countries. And this task is also being accomplished by the OSCE’s bureaucratic apparatus which is absolutely not connected with the state founders in any way. Decision-making procedures and the involvement of so-called non-governmental organisations are tailored for this task. These organisations are formally independent but they are purposefully financed and therefore under control.
According to the founding documents, in the humanitarian sphere the OSCE is designed to assist country members in observing international human rights norms at their request. This is an important task. We support this. But this does not mean interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, and especially not imposing a regime that determines how these states should live and develop.
It is obvious that such interference does not promote the development of democratic states at all. On the contrary, it makes them dependent and, as a consequence, politically and economically unstable.
We expect that the OSCE be guided by its primary tasks and build relations with sovereign states based on respect, trust and transparency.
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
In conclusion I would like to note the following. We very often – and personally, I very often – hear appeals by our partners, including our European partners, to the effect that Russia should play an increasingly active role in world affairs.
In connection with this I would allow myself to make one small remark. It is hardly necessary to incite us to do so. Russia is a country with a history that spans more than a thousand years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy.
We are not going to change this tradition today. At the same time, we are well aware of how the world has changed and we have a realistic sense of our own opportunities and potential. And of course we would like to interact with responsible and independent partners with whom we could work together in constructing a fair and democratic world order that would ensure security and prosperity not only for a select few, but for all.
Thank you for your attention.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Trends with homegrown EDA tools....
I was surprised to see this chart. Even though the chart is for year 2003-2004, I was holding the view that home-grown eda tools usage in design houses is declining. Apparently not.
A sad news for eda companies or a great news for potential growth coming in next few years...
It's painful to write one from scratch everytime... will update it later
'(load-home-init-file t t))
(custom-set-faces)
(global-set-key '[f12] 'other-window)
(global-set-key '[f1] 'other-window)
(global-set-key '[f2] 'undo)
(global-set-key '[f3] 'compile)
(global-set-key '[f4] 'gdb)
(global-set-key '[f9] 'shell)
(setq c-mode-hook
(function (lambda ()
(setq indent-tabs-mode nil)
(setq c-indent-level 2))))
(setq objc-mode-hook
(function (lambda ()
(setq indent-tabs-mode nil)
(setq c-indent-level 2))))
(setq c++-mode-hook
(function (lambda ()
(setq indent-tabs-mode nil)
(setq c-indent-level 2))))
(setq inhibit-startup-message t)
(setq require-final-newline t)
(setq display-time-day-and-date t)
(auto-show-make-point-visible)
(setq search-highlight t)
(setq next-line-add-newlines nil)
(setq indent-tabs-mode nil)
(setq default-tab-width 2)
(setq bell-volume 0)
Saturday, December 30, 2006
How do you want to live?
There is a misintrepretation of Ghandi's principles. It does not mean non violence, neither does it mean, show your right cheek when someone slaps left.
It means, live sincerely.
It means; Don't lie and don't manipulate. And I wonder, how many times I have seen a letter signed off "yours sincerely" :-)
When you talk about this principle, the answer you hear is: In this world that we live in, it is not really possible to live with those principles. But the question is not whether you can live sincerely in this world? The question is:
"How do YOU want to live?"
I know a person who does live her life sincerely.
And I am married to her.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Arithmetic on Fpgas
Although, I was searching for something else....
Friday, December 22, 2006
IEEE computers
Twisting the facts to match your plan of action used to be a bet tool for politicians. Well, now it also seem to work for technologist to publish articles in magzines as well.
Quoting a line from one of the article "In a retail survey, the number of digital cameras sold as part of mobile phones exceeded the sale of stand alone digital cameras sale"
Talk about apple to apple comparison!!!
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Haggis - Source: Wikipedia.com
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Everything Rambaldi
"Everything Rambaldi" implies all the artifacts and the decryption of the machine design. If everything is put together as described in the original design, the machine can make this world a very happy, although rathar dull place to live. On the other hand, this machine in the hands of a maniac, can make this world rathar over-stimulating, and will make it trip over the edge of chaos. The assumption here is, we are already on the edge.
A very interesting tale of love,betrayal, dedication and of course, fascination. Check it out.
Saturday, December 02, 2006
Stretch of Imagination; source: An Indian Newspaper
"The actor—one of the international brand ambassadors of Omega—shared a cosy corner with Nicole Kidman."
Oh yeah ...
Posts
