Russian Debian-derivative Linux slinger plans IPO Russian Linux distributor НПО РусБИТех – aka RPA RusBITech – is thriving and plans to IPO. A few months ago, The Reg FOSS desk took a quick look at Russian distro ROSA Linux, which is derived from Mandriva. It's not the only distribution from the land of Putin. Another, Astra Linux, is one of Debian's recognized derivatives. …
There is a very low-tech baseline in the Russian mindset. Why use a million pound radio set in a tank that can fail when you can just get someone to poke their fellow soldier in the back.
Why have a multi million pound camera system for docking (that can fail) when a mirror on a stick will do the job ?
And so on.
We're living the other side of that - the military-industrial complex. We *need* to have expensive weapons, or our economies stop working. And when you have expensive weapons you eventually need someone to use them on. And with the rise of global media and a shift in political thinking, it's not really possible to pretend there's a threat from the poorer countries anymore. And we're "friends" with the Saudis and not stupid enough to take on China .....
This post has been deleted by its author
Like the "Maginot Line". What's really innovative isn't always apparent at first.
Arguably, the decisive factor for US victory in WWII was simply long term ability for volume production of good enough basic tech, combined with good strategy and perseverance.
Nowadays the US manufacturing base is anemic compared to that of China.
Even after a couple of years of being impacted by China import shortages, the needle has barely moved.
While the high tech weapon systems are all US made - and expensive - underlying it all are the nuts and bolts and equivalent basics made in China.
"U.S. Companies Face Hurdles in Moving Production Closer to Home" WSJ, 4/18/22.
It may take years to duplicate the supplier networks and availability of raw materials on a scale found in Asian manufacturing hubs, experts say.
That may be just too long in a war-like situation.
The second world war was defined by technological innovation. Think through the following:
ASDIC/Sonar
Radar
Aircraft performance (compare the Spitfire 1B with the versions that were flying later in the war)
Guided munitions (V1, V2 etc.)
Bomb technology (Tallboy, Grandslam) with the associated advances in the aircraft to carry them
Precision bombing aids
and, as the final clincher
The atomic bombs.
Modern warfare is defined by technology. The recent surprise has been that Ukraine has been able to stand toe-to-toe with what was thought to be one of the most advanced military machines in the world. Either the Russians have been holding back, or opinion of their forces was hugely over estimated, by everyone including themselves.
Of course, there is much to be said for too much complexity in weapons. There are many stories of advanced systems that just do not work in the field, so it is a balance between cost and complexity and effectiveness.
This post has been deleted by its author
Neither. The Americans are currently playing catch-up with advanced military technology like hypersonic missiles. Both the Chinese and the Russians have deployed them (and the Russians appear to be using them) but the US can't get off the ground (somewhat literally). A Chinese spokesman articulated the problem which is that the products of our MIC tend to be too complex (and explained why....so much for security) -- our hypersonic missile will be a world beater, assuming we ever get it to work.
A DoD official recently remarked that the problem with China is that they're producing their military kit for literally a twentyth that it costs us. Our weapons systems might have fantastic capabilities but we can't produce them fast or cheap enough to fight a real war. The latest systems also tend to be more like beta units -- full of bugs, of dubious operational value, often just a pile of trouble. We might not notice this when we're deployed against irregulars, armed tribesmen and the like, in an irregular police action but they come up short when used in a real theater.
This post has been deleted by its author
We do not *need* things to use them [afvanced weapon systems] on.
Many governments choose war to manipulate their economies, because in war, things are destroyed, and must be replaced -- your tax dollars pay for those replacements. War places many tax dollars into the pockets of military equipment-makers and their cronies. One of the problems with using war to stimulate an economy is that profiteering reduces the country's economic benefit from what their government spends on that war.
The biggest system-wide economic stimulation for a pound spent by the government comes from spending that pound on a small-business loan. But, small-businesses typically don't have large wads of cash to spend on lobbying/bribes, whereas military contractors do.
>so something positive could come out of this unjustified invasion of Ukraine
The Minsk 2 accords, which was agreed by both Kiev and Russia and would pave the way for peace, was not implement by Kiev. Kiev chose war instead of peace.
The "unjustified invasion narrative" seems a bit off.
Complete bollocks. The Russian backed separatists ignored the first Minsk agreement, launching an offensive before it was even implemented. They then did the same after the second agreement, deciding arbitrarily that it didn't apply to territory they saw as easy to occupy.
That fits the pattern of Moscow's behaviour - stall for time, then disregard any agreement. Don't forget that this whole thing stretches back to the treaty that Russia would honour Ukraine's borders in return for the Soviet era nuclear weapons stationed on Ukrainian territory being given to Russia.
That was the West's first big mistake, seeing the Russian Federation as the sole successor to the USSR and legitimate inheritor of the Soviet nuclear arsenal. The second mistake was not fast tracking Ukrainian membership of NATO back when the Chechen wars, aggression against Georgia and obstructive behaviour during the Yugoslav wars made it clear Russia could not be trusted.
More bollocks. Ukraine sought NATO membership as early as 2005, but at the time the West was split on whether they could trust Russia. There's this historically loaded word "appeasement", and it looks an awful lot like the recent Western governments didn't learn from history that there's no point trying to accommodate a nationalist with an expansionist ideology.
>That fits the pattern of Moscow's behaviour - stall for time, then disregard any agreement.
That's exactly what the post-Maidan president of Ukraine said (recently) they were doing -- stalling for time so they could build up their military.
NATO is not a defensive alliance. The US has had a policy of containing and surrounding Russia since the end of WW2 and you may recall that certainly up to the late 1980s the strategy was to install increasing amounts of offensive weaponry in Europe. You might recall the situation in the 1970s and earlier part of the 1980s where the UK was literally covered in US bases. This was toned down by Gorbachev with his attempt to dial back the nuclear rhetoric but we instead took this as 'winning' the Cold War and simply moved the bases forward to the new frontiers. There was going to be a time when Russia would react and we appear to have reached it.
If you're a little older then you'll recall the Cuban missile crisis. The Russians started assembling missile bases right next to the US and the US went ape. Apparently its OK for us to do this to others, though.
QUOTE: Complete bollocks. The Russian backed separatists ignored the first Minsk agreement, launching an offensive before it was even implemented
When your neighbors are being killed (ethnic Russians in Ukraine) for 8 years in your country (Ukraine), you tend to strike back.
QUOTE: Don't forget that this whole thing stretches back to the treaty that Russia would honour Ukraine's borders in return for the Soviet era nuclear weapons stationed on Ukrainian territory being given to Russia.
Let's stretch a bit more, to the point NATO said it wouldn't expand an inch more. NATO did expand. A lot more.
QUOTE: The second mistake was not fast tracking Ukrainian membership of NATO
Ukraine was good dealing both with USA and Russia pre-2013. But USA was not happy with this situation. It was a win-win for Ukraine.
Then, NATO decide Ukraine should be west-only backing the 2014 Ukraine maidan coup - part of the not-expand-an-inch-more NATO broken promise.
"When your neighbors are being killed (ethnic Russians in Ukraine) for 8 years in your country (Ukraine), you tend to strike back."
Repeated surveys showed that most ethnic Russians that made up a minority in Eastern Ukraine favoured staying in Ukraine and an accession to the EU in the years up until 2014. They had no interest in joining the economic failure that is Putin's Russia. Then a small minority of ethnic Russians, backed by Russian regular forces "on holiday" and mercenaries from shady organisations like the Wagner Group launched an uprising. That's when the killing and ethnic cleansing started - directed at Ukrainians and those ethnic Russians who opposed the uprising.
The Minsk 2 accords, which was agreed by both Kiev and Russia ...
you forgot France and Germany, they were co-signatories of the Minsk accords: what did these 2 countries do to enforce the Minsk accords ? For what I know, they were sitting idle watching events unfold. Everybody could see the storm coming, the UN reported 13000 deaths from the war in Donbass, yet neither the French nor German government moved a little finger.
France is even worse than anything, because in January 2022 they took over the turning presidency of the European Union, making president Macron the most powerful man on Earth: he was the president of an atomic power, perpetual member of the UNO with veto power, member of NATO, president of the biggest economic zone of this planet .... and what did he do ? Talk with Putin over a huge table.
Germany, meanwhile, refused to open the North Stream 2 pipeline on orders of Biden, the same Biden who blackmailed a past Ukranian government to stop investigating for corruption in an Ukrainian company where his son was employed paid 50 000$. And now North Stream 1 has been cut off for "maintenance" and Germany is running out of gaz.
Ridiculous. Icon, obviously
Actually the alleged corruption was before Hunter Biden was there, and it isn't clear that he was involved in anything much other than an Internship set up by his daddy.
It is amusing that this is the only dirt that the Trumpists could find on Biden, though. I mean, even if his son was a criminal, what does that matter?
It is amusing that this is the only dirt that the Trumpists could find on Biden, though. I mean, even if his son was a criminal, what does that matter?
Well, on the one hand, you're telling the world to punish the corrupt dicatorship in Russia, and sanctioning Russian oligarchs. On the other, you're tapping the US Strategic Petroleum Reserves and flogging oil to a Chinese company your family did business with. And previously there was the sale of Uranium 1...
But such is politics. Germany decides to cancel NordStream 2, Russia decides to cancel Germany. This just demonstrates how shockingly evil Russia is. Or does that just demonstrate Germany's incompetence? Stuff like this is just a normal response to sanctions though, ie developing domestic alternatives to unreliable/untrusted spyware like MS or Google. Plus a lightweight OS reduces the dependency on the minimum hardware requirements imposed by Win11.
There is no defence or excuse for the atrocities being committed by Russia. Coming up with fantasy scenarios defending Russia's actions is just another tool for the regime to appease its population. Russians are currently complicit and guilty of every single CoW in Ukraine.
It's funny but ever since this stupid war was started by that "balding bawbag" I've felt like I'm livinf in 1984. That every mention of Russia needs to be followed by heading down to the cinema to sit and yell abuse at the screen simply because I should.
I really don't know how I feel about this. Sure it's great to see Linux being used and used well but by Putin's mob? I know they've probably done nothing to hurt Ukrainians directly but the propaganda, as it's designed to, starts to get into your head and make you feel like your living Orwell's dystopia.
A lot of open source development is done in Russia. That includes academic institutions (quite a bit of PostgreSQL development for example), Russian companies or the subsidiaries of Western ones, and self motivated individuals working in their spare time.
I love Russia - both the people and the culture - so it pains me to watch the war in Ukraine. I've visited Russia and Ukraine for work or simply as a tourist on a number of occasions, and been deeply impressed by the generosity and warmth of ordinary people.
They are distinct cultures, but definitely have more in common than they do differences. The sad legacy of Putin and his henchman will be that this war will most likely be the end of any possible fraternity between these two nations.
The past record of Ukrainian-Russian relations has been a pretty bitter one for Ukrainians. Attempts at Russification under the Tsars, crushed independence in the Russian civil war, Stalin's forced collectivisation that resulted in a famine, massacres in Ukrainian populated areas of Poland during the Nazi/Soviet partition of 1939, and then more Russification under Stalin and his successors after WWII.
That last stage also included the deliberate settling of ethnic Russians in Ukraine, part of a policy across the USSR to try and fragment minority ethnic groups. We're seeing the fruit of that last policy now, since it's the more recent settlers who have provided the nucleus for Putin's uprising in Eastern Ukraine, similar to what happened in Moldova starting as long ago as 1992. The Baltic States have also had issues with their Russian minorities, many of whom refused to become citizens - something that has suddenly changed now these groups have seen that they could be Putin's pawns in his expansionist games.
Open source software is very helpful for totalitarian countries to oppress both their own citizens and to wage war against others. All systems for spying on Russian citizens are built on Linux. The PostgreSQL database has been chosen as the target to replace Oracle and MS SQL. nDPI helps block VPN.
So the joke that "Open source = communism" turned out to be very close to the truth. Open source is the best friend of totalitarian regimes.
Total nonsense. Nothing is stopping Russia pirating Windows and other closed source software.
If you really think it makes any difference, they can add "not to be used in Russia" to the GPL licence. That hasn't stopped proprietary software being pirated used in Iran, North Korean, Cuba and other sanctioned countries.
Can you explain why that might be? Should one impossible, shouldn't it? I mean it says in the Windows EULA "not for use in Iran, North Korea, Cuba" Yet people are using it there? What is your insight? I can't see how that could possibly have happened. I could understand it if it was open source software that wasn't allowed to be used in those countries - but closed source software. Impossible!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
