¿Y si hubiera existido el Facebook en 1936?

el ayuno

me disculpan si alguno de ustedes no comulga con la fé católica, en caso que se sienta ofendido, haga caso omiso de este mensaje.

en realidad que es el ayuno?

Isaías 58: 5 a 12:
"Es tal el ayuno que yo escogí . . . que partas tu pan con el hambriento y a los pobres albergues en casa; que cuando veas al desnudo lo cubras, y no te escondas de tu hermano.?
. . . y si dieres tu pan al hambriento y saciares el alma afligida, en las tinieblas nacerá tu lúz, y tu oscuridad será como mediodía.
Dios te pastoreará siempre, y en las sequías saciará tu alma. . ."

Carta de San Pablo a los Colosenses cap. 2 versos 16 a 23:
"Nadie os juzgue, por tanto en comida o en bebida, o en cuanto a días de fiesta, luna nueva ó días de reposo, todo lo cual es sombra de lo que ha de venir; pero el cuerpo es de Cristo.
Nadie les prive del premio eterno,afectando humildad y culto a los ángeles . . . "

Ayunar de juzgar a otros
descubriendo que Dios vive en ellos.

Ayunar de palabras hirientes
llenándonos de frases amorosas.

Ayunar de descontento
llenándonos de gratitud.

Ayunar de enojos
llenándonos de paciencia.

Ayunar de pesimismo
llenándonos de esperanza.

Ayunar de preocupaciones
llenándonos de confianza en Dios.

Ayunar de quejarse
llenándonos de aprecio por la maravilla que es la vida.

Ayunar de las presiones que no cesan
llenándonos de una oración que no cesa.

Ayunar de amargura
llenándonos de perdón.

Ayunar de darnos importancia a nosotros mismos
llenándonos de compasión por los demás.

Ayunar de ansiedad sobre nuestras cosas
comprometiéndonos a la propagación de la Conciencia de Dios.

Ayunar de pensamientos mundanos
llenándonos de las verdades que fundamentan la santidad.

Ayunar del odio y el rencor
llenándonos de amor.

Ayunar de todo lo que nos separe de Dios
llenándonos de todo lo que nos acerque a Él.

AYUNA Y LLÉNATE
Ayuna de juzgar a otros:
descubre a Cristo que vive en ellos.

Ayuna de palabras hirientes:
llénate de frases sanadoras.

Ayuna de descontento:
llénate de gratitud.

Ayuna de enojos:
llénate de paciencia.

Ayuna de pesimismo:
llénate de esperanza cristiana.

Ayuna de preocupaciones:
llénate de confianza en Dios.

Ayuna de quejarte:
llénate de aprecio por la maravilla
que es la vida.

Ayuna de las presiones que no cesan:
llénate de una oración que no cesa.

Ayuna de amargura:
llénate de perdón.

Ayuna de darte importancia a ti mismo:
llénate de compasión por los demás.

Ayuna de ansiedad sobre tus cosas:
comprométete en la propagación del Reino.

Ayuna de desaliento:
llénate del entusiasmo de la fe.

Ayuna de pensamientos mundanos:
llénate de las verdades que fundamentan la santidad.

Ayuna de todo lo que te separe de Jesús:
llénate de todo lo que a Él te acerque.

What's really at stake in Google vs. China

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Fareed Zakaria says Google's dispute with China isn't just a business matter
• He says it raises the question of China's strong constraints on flow of information
• Zakaria says China is showing signs of turning inward
• He says it would be a negative if fastest-growing economy became more insular

Editor's note: Fareed Zakaria is an author and foreign affairs analyst who hosts "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on CNN U.S. on Sundays at 1 and 5 p.m. ET and CNN International 2 p.m. and 10 p.m. CET / 5 p.m. Abu Dhabi / 9 p.m. HK

New York (CNN) -- Google's threat to shut down its operations in China might seem like just a dispute between a private company and a government, but the implications are huge for the world's fastest-growing economy, for the United States and for global relations, says analyst Fareed Zakaria.

With the dispute in the background, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Thursday the U.S. is committed to freedom of speech online and to freedom from the fear of cyber-attacks.

The Google-China dispute surfaced January 12 when the search engine company said it and other companies were the target of cyber-attacks originating in China aimed at gaining access to the e-mail of Chinese advocates for human rights.

Google announced that it is no longer willing to comply with China's requirements that it censor the results of searches in that country. The State Department has told China it is concerned about the issue.

Zakaria, author and host of CNN's "Fareed Zakaria: GPS" spoke to CNN Wednesday.

CNN: What's the dispute between Google and China all about?

Fareed Zakaria: At one level, the dispute is about one company and the difficulty it's having doing business in China, but it's really a much broader issue. It's about two things really. The first is the tension between China's drive for modernity and its attempt to control information.

China has very successfully modernized over the last few decades, but it places unique limits on information. Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, told me that China is the only country in the world where they had to basically sign up for a censorship regime.

The second issue: Is China turning inward? Is it beginning to believe it needs the world less than it has in the past few decades? That would have very profound consequences both for China-US relations and for the world.

CNN: What gives you the feeling that China might be turning inward?

Zakaria: It's not just the problems they've had with Google. Over the last few years, there's been the rise in China of what the Chinese call "The new right," a group of people, fairly influential in the establishment, who argue that China should be more aggressive toward the West, more aggressive toward America, that it doesn't need the U.S. as much as it did. There is also the reality that China's economy, as it has grown, is becoming large enough that China doesn't depend as much on the rest of the world for exports. It has accumulated huge surpluses of capital.

All of this is producing a China that is more parochial, more inward-looking and potentially more adversarial in its relationships with the West. If you look at the way it handled the Copenhagen summit, it's really quite striking.

The Chinese are usually protocol-obsessed. And here they had a situation where Obama wanted to meet with Wen Jiabao, the Chinese leader who was there. Now Obama technically outranks Wen Jiabao because he is a head of state. Wen Jiabao is the premier, the prime minister. Ordinarily that would mean that Wen Jiabao would go to see Obama. The reverse happened and Obama attended the meetings. Chinese officials scolded him. All of this is very unusual.

CNN: In a sense Google is raising a broader issue than the immediate issue they uncovered. They uncovered evidence that there was hacking of their sites and those of other American companies. But rather than deal with the hacking issue, they brought up the whole issue of having to have a filtered search engine in China. They're saying they're no longer willing to do that. So what's their real motivation?

Zakaria: Having spoken to Eric Schmidt for years about this, they were always uncomfortable with the system of censorship they had to sign up to in China. But they believed at the end of the day that it was a huge market, and they could do well and it could help open up information in China.

I think they came to the conclusion that China has such an elaborate apparatus of censorship but also an elaborate apparatus of cyber-warfare or cyberattack. They were really not able to have that broader beneficial effect.

Let's remember that China doesn't only have what's called the great firewall of China, the filtering and censoring system. They also have a very aggressive system of cyber-spying and cyberattack, probably the most sophisticated in the world. I should point out there are people who say Google did this because they weren't doing well in China, that they had lost market share to Baidu, a local Web search engine.

Baidu is definitely the leader, but it doesn't make any sense to quit a market because you're not the market leader. By the way, Google is not dominant in other countries and they still participate. I take them at face value, that this was a decision prompted by values. You wouldn't give up whatever percent of the world's fastest-growing market for no rhyme or reason.

They clearly were uncomfortable with this tension between their mission -- which they see as widening access to information everywhere all the time -- and China's very elaborate set of constraints on information.

By the way there's a national security component for this for the United States and other countries. Cyber-spying is clearly an effort by the Chinese to move into the information age and adopt a kind of asymmetrical warfare. China is not matching the U.S. military, ship for ship, but if it develops a very sophisticated capability to destroy command and control systems, computer systems, that's a very potent weapon in any kind of conflict, military or otherwise.

CNN: Getting back to Google's motivation, you do take their "Don't be evil" motto at face value?

Zakaria: I don't know if I take it in all places and at all times, but I do believe in this case they were motivated largely by the sense that they were undermining their values and their mission. I recognize that were this to have been churning out billions of dollars in revenue, they might not have done it. But I don't think you can make the case that there was a business motivation for this. This will clearly cost them revenue, it may not cost them a huge amount of revenue, but it will cost them.

CNN: How do we know that the hacking is being done by the Chinese government rather than by individual hackers on their own?

Zakaria: We don't know that for sure. In fact, Eric Schmidt was clear to me about that. The nature of the hacking, the coordinated elements of it, the targets, all suggest that it is something that is being done at the very least with the acquiescence or encouragement of the state. There are very few experts I've talked to who doubt that much of this has the backing of the Chinese government, but to be clear it's very difficult to tell, and there's no conclusive proof.

CNN: All of this suggests that the U.S. government has a lot at stake, and yet they don't seem to have been on the frontlines of this issue. It's a private company dealing with the Chinese government, not a government-to-government issue.

Zakaria: That's right. Washington is treading very cautiously into this, and I think correctly because this is really a dispute between China and a private company in America. The U.S. government should watch it with great interest and concern, and they should come out in favor of certain broad principles, but I don't think the U.S. government should be out there trying to open up the market for Google.

CNN: On the national security side, should the government be more active?

Zakaria: It's trying to figure out how to respond to this kind of attack, but I gather there is a fairly sustained effort now in the government. Obama has made this a top priority.

CNN: What's at stake for other American businesses that want to serve the Chinese market?

Zakaria: I think a lot is at stake, because what we're basically talking about is China's orientation, China's belief that it has to accept a global system and an open global economy, that it benefits from having foreign companies participate on an equal footing.

The more China turns inward, the more difficult it will be for American companies to find equal footing in China. The Chinese are making it increasingly clear they want to have national champions. Avatar opened in China to great success and two weeks later they basically shut it down [except for 3-D showings] and said that the movie theaters had to make way for a biopic about Confucius, and more importantly keep theaters free for Chinese-made movies.

CNN: So what can the United States do about it?

Zakaria: Washington should try to have a really sustained strategic dialogue with China, but also with our other allies, with the European countries, with Japan, and create a kind of common front for openness and greater engagement with the global system.

One of the things that has helped the global system enormously is that it had two hegemons, two global superpowers -- first Britain and then the United States -- that were very outward-oriented and shared universal values and similar conceptions of a global system, open liberal values, an open economy, a common understanding of what would make for a good global system.

If China as the great rising power turns out to be much more insular, parochial in its orientation, that would mean a much less stable, much less open world order. Think about the period of American isolationism when the United States was the rising power and it turned inward in the 1920s and 1930s. It was not good for the world.

CNN: Can the Chinese government continue to limit expression of political views as its economy grows and the Web becomes an ever more important medium of communication worldwide?

Zakaria: That's the trillion-dollar question. So far China has been remarkably successful at maintaining a system that has embraced markets, but also maintained a very controlled political system.

My own view is that that cannot last forever, but that China is still in the early stages of modernization, and it is quite possible that it will be able to continue doing this for several decades. But I think it's very difficult to imagine China being a truly innovative country at the cutting edge of the information age, of global economics, if it has all these constraints on information, all this political control on human-to-human contact, which is what the next wave of the information age is all about.

Ultimately the question is: Can China be a world leader that is admired, imitated and that shapes the global system and global values? There I have my doubts that an insular, inward-looking China that maintains tight political control over information and human contact will end up being the country that becomes the model for the world.

Haiti's Agony: What It Will Take to Rebuild

A woman stands atop what may have been a grocery store. Haiti now faces food and water shortages

Tragedy has a way of visiting those who can bear it least. Haiti is the poorest nation in the western hemisphere, a place where malnutrition is widespread and less than half the population has access to clean drinking water. At 4:53:09 p.m. on Jan. 12, at a point 15 miles southwest of the capital, Port-au-Prince, the Caribbean tectonic plate pushed against the neighboring North American plate along a line known as the Enriquillo-Plantain Garden Fault system. On the earth's surface, the enormous energy created by that tremor — an earthquake measuring 7.0 on the Richter scale — tossed the car that Bob Poff, the Salvation Army's director of disaster services in Haiti, was driving down the hill from the suburb of Pétionville to Port-au-Prince "to and fro like a toy." When the shaking stopped, Poff wrote on a Salvation Army blog, "I looked out of the windows to see buildings 'pancaking' down ... Thousands of people poured into the streets, crying, carrying bloody bodies, looking for anyone who could help them."

Within the next few hours, the scale of the worst earthquake to hit Haiti in more than 200 years became apparent. Just as cell-phone video cameras brought the horrors of the Indian Ocean tsunami to the world in real time five years ago, so Twitter feeds and blog posts did the same for the Haiti earthquake, reporting on what had happened, asking if anyone had heard from loved ones, calling for medical supplies and Creole speakers. Louise Ivers, clinical director for Haiti for the NGO Partners in Health, wrote, "Port-au-Prince is devastated, lot of deaths. SOS. SOS ... Please help us." Ian Rodgers of Save the Children posted, "We could hear buildings still crumbling down five hours after the earthquake." (See pictures of the Haiti quake's aftermath.)

A day later, the death toll was unknown and — as is always the case with earthquakes, which bury their victims — unknowable. But more than one Haitian official told news organizations that they thought the final count of the dead would be more than 100,000. The next day, Vincenzo Pugliese, a spokesman for the U.N. mission in Haiti, summed up what was known thus far. The earthquake, he said, had caused major damage, destroying the National Palace, the main cathedral and many government offices. Hotels, hospitals, schools and the capital's main prison had all been wrecked. "Casualties, which are vast," Pugliese said, "can only be estimated. Tens if not hundreds of thousands have suffered varying degrees of destruction to their homes." A nation that was already on its knees had been knocked to the ground.

Making a Tough Place Worse
The quake was not unexpected — but then, the tragedy of earthquakes is that none of them are. The world's fault lines, those dangerous boundaries between the slabs that make up the earth's crust, are well mapped. Haiti, a nation of 9 million people, sits atop the junction of the Caribbean and North American plates, which "are shearing the island, crushing it, grinding it," says Michael Blanpied, an associate coordinator for the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) earthquake-hazards program. "And as that occurs, earthquakes pop off." (See where the next five big earthquakes will be.)

That they do. Historians reckon that there have been about a dozen massive earthquakes in the Caribbean over the past 500 years. The damage they can do is well understood; in 1692, a quake caused Port Royal, Jamaica, to disappear under the Caribbean Sea, where it lies to this day. But knowing that a quake will happen one day is of little use to those who want to know if it will happen tomorrow or next week or next year. An intense, high-tech exercise in the 1980s by the USGS and the state of California to study a particularly unstable stretch of the San Andreas Fault provided absolutely no telltale signs of a quake that hit in 2004. "Earthquake prediction," says Blanpied, "if it can be done at all, is very difficult."

The Haiti earthquake was not just unusually powerful for the region; it was also shallow — a fact that, combined with the soft ground and corrugated, muddy hills around Port-au-Prince, made its impact even worse. In the city itself, sturdy buildings like the cathedral and the National Palace could not withstand the tremor, which meant that many hastily constructed concrete structures collapsed like houses of cards, killing many — the Archbishop of Port-au-Prince, for one. (Read "Seismologist Roger Musson: Haiti Quake Was the 'Big One'.")

Many of the city's finest buildings helped give Haitians their sense of identity and history — now the country must not only figure out how to recover but also try to rebuild its sense of self. Just as what happened on Jan. 12 was shaped by Haiti's unique topography and geology, so the final toll, too, will be determined by the nation's very special conditions. Haiti is an unlucky, star-crossed country. Once a slave colony of France, the world's first free black modern nation was born in blood more than 200 years ago, in a long and bitter war of independence. In the years since then, Haiti has suffered almost constantly from local misrule, foreign intervention and economic exploitation. Haiti was occupied by U.S. forces from 1915 to '34, and then from 1957 to '86 it was ruled by François Duvalier and his son Jean-Claude — Papa Doc and Baby Doc — whose corruption and repression crippled the nation and led to wide-scale emigration among its educated classes.

In 1994 the U.S. intervened to force out a military regime that had ousted the government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a charismatic priest who had been elected President in 1990. After a decade of political disorder, Aristide, by then in his second term as President, was forced into exile in 2004; since then, Minustah, a U.N. peacekeeping mission, has been in place — the latest in a long series of outside forces that have attempted to help Haitians establish peace and a measure of security.

What makes the earthquake especially "cruel and incomprehensible," as U.S. President Barack Obama put it, was that it struck at a rare moment of optimism. After decades of natural and political catastrophes, the U.N. peacekeeping force and an international investment campaign headed by former President Bill Clinton, the U.N.'s special envoy to Haiti, had recently begun to calm and rebuild the nation. But the mood of cautious optimism had not yet begun to improve the basic living conditions of ordinary Haitians. For even on its best day, Haiti is a public-health disaster. No Haitian city has a public sewage system; nearly 200,000 people live with HIV or AIDS, and just half of Haitian children are vaccinated against basic diseases like diphtheria and measles.

The quake will make things unimaginably worse. While emergency-response teams have already begun combing through the wreckage, searching for injured who might still be saved, there are ominous longer-term health risks that threaten the island. "In the weeks to come, we may have huge issues with public health," says Pino Annunziata, who is coordinating the emergency response for the World Health Organization in Geneva. Less than a day after the disaster, U.S. Navy and Coast Guard vessels were swarming toward Haiti, ready to spearhead disaster-relief efforts. Up to 2,000 Marines were told to be ready to head there. They will all be needed. In the first confused day after the quake, reports stressed the absence of heavy machinery to shift rubble and shore up buildings; people were scrabbling with their bare hands in the rubble for their loved ones. The U.S. military will aim to make sure airports and seaports are primed to receive the flood of aid that will soon flow in.

As always in the developing world, the first priority will be clean water. With drinking-water distribution systems destroyed — and survivors crammed into camps without sanitation — water supplies could quickly become contaminated. That could lead to rapidly spreading waterborne diseases like cholera and dysentery that can sweep through refugee camps.

With adequate aid, however, the worst might be averted. The world now rarely sees major outbreaks of infectious disease in the wake of disasters. Even in the case of the 2004 tsunami, which killed more than 200,000 people, a rapid and thorough response headed off what could have been a huge postdisaster death toll. Indeed, the sheer amount of international attention on Haiti might ultimately improve its public-health system — as occurred in the Indonesian province of Aceh after the tsunami.

All who wish Haiti well will hope for such a benign dispensation. Many will do more than hope. In a Twitter feed, Troy Livesay, one of the many missionaries who first brought word from Port-au-Prince, described the mood the night after the quake. "Church groups are singing ... in prayer," he wrote. "It is a beautiful sound in the middle of a horrible tragedy."

You don't have to be a believer to hope that the prayers of those Haitians who have long borne sorrows not of their making are answered.

— With reporting by Massimo Calabresi, Michael Scherer and Mark Thompson / Washington, Gilbert Cruz, Jeffrey Kluger, Kate Pickert and Bryan Walsh / New York and Tim Padgett / Miami

mi nena en medallo papa !!

mi nena en medallo papa !!, originally uploaded by Germán Largo Urrea.

How much longer can Ssangyong survive?

By: Martin Kahl, Friday, August 07, 2009, AutomotiveWorld.com

This week, South Korean riot police made several raids on Ssangyong’s factory in Pyeongtaek in order to quell an illegal occupation of the plant by Ssangyong workers and protestors that began on 31 May. The 77-day plant siege – the most violent industrial action in the company’s recent history – followed a bankruptcy court’s approval of a restructuring plan involving the loss of 2,600 jobs, or approximately a third of Ssangyong’s workforce. The company was granted bankruptcy protection in February 2009 after its parent company, Shanghai Automotive (SAIC) and the Korean Development Bank (KDB) refused to provide the company with further funds.

The former Daewoo subsidiary was spun off in 1999, enabling it to escape the collapse of its former parent. Having effected a remarkable turnaround, it became a profitable SUV specialist, and in 2003 was put up for sale by its creditors. Chaotic negotiations ensued, with seven companies in the running, including Chinese state-run chemical company Blue Star Group, GM, Renault, a US pension fund and a Saudi prince. In January 2005, SAIC completed its acquisition of Ssangyong with a payment of Won 590bn (US$573.5m at the time) for a 48.9% stake, which it later increased to 50.91%.

The acquisition was part of SAIC’s plan to become the world's sixth-largest vehicle manufacturer by 2020; it provided SAIC a presence in the SUV segment and looked good for Ssangyong too, giving it access to the Chinese market and apparent financial stability.

However, for years, the Ssangyong numbers have failed to add up: one main plant with an annual capacity of around 220,000 units employing over 7,100 workers making just over 100,000 units of the entire Ssangyong range (Actyon Sports SUT pick-up; Actyon, Kyron and Rexton SUVs; Chairman and Chairman W luxury sedans; and Stavic/Rodius minivan) - less than 5% of which was sold outside the domestic market.

These inconsistencies were reflected in the company’s financials. Ssangyong reported a loss in 2005 of Won 103.4bn (US$110.7m), and a loss in 2006 of Won 195.9bn (US$209.74m). By 2008, losses stood at Won 709.7bn (US$530.3m), and in early 2009, the company faced liquidation. On 6 February, SAIC relinquished management control of Ssangyong (it retained its 51% stake, although this will now be reduced) and the company was granted bankruptcy protection.

From the outset, Ssangyong’s highly unionised workforce was suspicious of SAIC’s intentions, fearing it would drain off Ssangyong’s intellectual property rights and transfer manufacturing to China. Relations became further strained when it became clear that SAIC was unlikely to fulfil investment commitments, and worsened when the Chinese parent company sacked Ssangyong executives and replaced them with SAIC executives. The workforce has been in a seemingly constant battle with management, and strikes have become commonplace.

Frequent announcements of production cuts and plant idling at Ssangyong became confused with proposals to build two new production lines. Ssangyong even claimed it had five new engines and around 30 new vehicles in development, for launch by fiscal 2011. Although the company has displayed concept vehicles at recent motor shows, such as the near production-ready C200 crossover, and the Wz, said to be the replacement for the elderly Mercedes-Benz W124-based Chairman sedan, it has, in reality, an ageing model line-up of unattractive vehicles, with no near-term product launches planned.

The recent occupation ended with an agreement to reclassify a proportion of the redundancies as long-term unpaid leave of absence. The plant’s interior was relatively unaffected by the occupation, and Ssangyong management plans to restart production at the earliest opportunity. But such a move would completely ignore the stark realities facing Ssangyong: the company reportedly owes Won 300bn (US$244m) to around 600 suppliers and creditors, and a further Won 240bn (US$195m) to the KDB; the factory siege left a 15,000-unit sized hole in the company’s already dwindling output, costing it a further Won 316bn (US$258.3m); and if it does build more vehicles, Ssangyong has to sell them. Even before it went into court receivership in February 2009 it had a domestic market share of no more than 5%, and the 73.9% year-on-year decline in the company’s first half sales results does little to boost optimism.

If, or indeed when, the company is declared bankrupt, the chances of finding a buyer would be slim at best. Attractive in 2003 for its SUV specialisation, the company’s technology is now irrelevant, its increasingly unpopular product range is outdated, and there is no new model launch programme in place to attract even the most optimistic bidder. Under the terms of its bankruptcy protection, Ssangyong has until 15 September to come up with a reorganisation plan. The company’s management must now decide whether there is a business case for carrying on – perhaps only for a few weeks or months longer – or whether it would be better to simply throw in the towel now.

Published on Friday, August 07, 2009

Oracle-Sun Deal Signals a Major Shift for IT Industry

By Jennifer LeClaire
April 21, 2009 8:44AM

Oracle's $7.4 billion acquisition of Sun Microsystems has major implications for the high-tech world that will unfold in the months ahead. There is already plenty of speculation about how the merger will position Oracle to compete and plenty of optimism about what this megamerger means for the high-tech industry in the midst of a global crisis.

A couple of things are certain:

Innovation is a likely fruit of the acquisition. By acquiring Java's programming language, Oracle can explore continued innovation and investment in Java technology that will benefit its customers and the industry.

And with the acquisition of the Sun Solaris operating system, Oracle can optimize its database Relevant Products/Services with new features.

"Sun is a pioneer in enterprise Relevant Products/Services computing, and this combination recognizes the innovation and customer success the company has achieved. Our largest customers have been asking us to step up to a broader role to reduce complexity, risk and cost by delivering a highly optimized stack based on standards," said Oracle President Charles Phillips. "This transaction will preserve and enhance investments made by our customers, while we continue to work with our partners to provide customers with choice."

Oracle's End-to-End Strategy

The merger represents a bold strategic vision and will be truly transformative for Oracle, according to Murray Beach, managing director of TM Capital, a leading investment bank. By acquiring Sun, Beach said, Oracle is evolving from a leading provider of enterprise applications to a full-service provider of IT systems on par with IBM Relevant Products/Services.

Beach said Oracle and Sun have been strong strategic partners for years, and there are many reasons the combination makes sense. He said the merged company will be able to pitch customers with the software, the operating system, the middleware, the database, and the servers necessary to roll out new system deployments.

By centralizing the development of Oracle's software with Sun's Solaris, Java and other products, the combined company should be able to produce cohesive systems with superior performance Relevant Products/Services and lower implementation and integration costs, Beach said. He noted that while acquisition rumors focused on hardware Relevant Products/Services suitors such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard Relevant Products/Services or Dell, Oracle is the lone software vendor with which a deal truly makes sense because of the Java and Solaris connections.

How Will Microsoft Relevant Products/Services Cope?

"Neither Red Hat nor Microsoft should be happy about these developments. Red Hat, which has been a rumored acquisition target for Oracle for quite some time, must now be a lower priority within Oracle's strategic vision," Beach said. "Microsoft, which has been slow to gain traction with large customers, may have been elbowed out of the enterprise market by this move. With both IBM and Oracle now offering end-to-end IT systems, Microsoft may find it challenging to climb the ladder from its traditional SMB Relevant Products/Services focus to larger enterprise sales in which it can only offer the software component of a broader system deployment."

From a financial perspective, Beach said the announced purchase price implies an attractive premium. The $9.50 per share offer is 42 percent more than the previous day's closing price and a 91 percent premium over the company's value before the IBM acquisition rumors began.

"This deal proves that despite current economic conditions, acquirers are still willing to pay significant premiums for strategic assets. Also, despite the size of the premium paid, this deal is expected to be highly accretive to Oracle," Beach said. "The fact that Oracle paid a sizable premium but can also project significant earnings accretion shows that there are real bargains are out there for buyers who want to take advantage of the depressed valuations in today's equity markets."

El mayor problema de Linux

Hace ya 10 años que uso Linux. Empece con una Red Hat, luego emigre a SuSE, estuve con un par de versiones de Mandrake, probe Debian (no mucho la verdad), y hace tres versiones que estoy con Ubuntu. A estas alturas de mi vida linuxera, en terminos generales estoy muy satisfecho, sin embargo, comparando mi vida anterior con Windows y sus versiones, y despues de años de leer testimonios a favor y en contra de Windows-Linux, observo un problema mayusculo con Linux:

El Sindrome de Negacion Auto Defensiva o SNAD como lo he bautizado.

Que es el SNAD ? Es simplemente el hábito de negar o disculpar cualquier defecto del software libre solo porque se trata de software libre. Esto es MALISIMO, especialmente para el software libre !. El SNAD nos acostumbra a usar miles de aplicaciones medio o mal desarrolladas para sustituir productos comerciales de años de desarrollo. El SNAD nos lleva a decir cosas como “a mi me encanta navegar en modo texto en una consola, por qué usar Flash…o imagenes ?”, o “ehh pero estos programas para windows son para idiotas, hacen todo por uno ! a mi me gusta PENSAR”. Y lo peor es que el SNAD nos lleva a justificar la pobre o mediocre programacion de aplicaciones. (Y NO ESTOY DICIENDO QUE TODAS LAS APLICACIONES LIBRES ESTEN MAL DESARROLLADAS, OK ?)

Si, ya me imagino la horda furiosa. Calma, esperen a leer todo…

Dejenme explicar mis sagaces descubrimientos antes de bombardearme con SPAM (el lector sagaz habra comprendido que tirarme con viruses no servira de nada).

El novel usuario linuxero (incluido quien escribe), pasa por una pubertad, una era de descubrimiento similar a cuando uno descubre el socialismo. Supongo que esto se deberá a que ya a nadie le interesa la política y canaliza los instintos revolucionarios en algo mas pragmatico como el software, no lo se. Así , convertidos en una especie de Cyber Che Guevara, enarbolamos la bandera de la Justicia Social Cibernetica y nos convertimos en paladines del software libre. Primeros sintomas del SNAD. El paciente en esta etapa de SNAD suele burlarse de sus compañeros de trabajo apegados aun a aplicaciones burguesas con brillantes planteos marxistas intelectualisimos.

Aprendemos a “conocer el sistema”, a “intimar con el codigo”, a “ver la matrix” etc etc… y pasamos de lo que eramos, cerdos burgueses instalando paquetes y actualizaciones como automatas, a idealistas revolucionarios compilando paquetes y actualizaciones como automatas. Nos sentimos los nuevos caballeros hackers del Rey Arturo lidiando con configures, Makefiles, y una tonelada de includes.h. Pero claro, nada es perfecto en este mundo (salvo quizas Andrea Frigerio o Angelina Jolie) y los programas lo son mucho menos, así que pronto empiezan a fallar. A mostrar la hilachax de la matrix, por asi decir.

Ante esta desilusion las victimas del SNAD reaccionamos por una cuestion de autonegacion convirtiendonos en una especie de defensores de la incomodidad. Lo que antes nos hacia poner el grito en el cielo contra importantes corporaciones (por ejemplo una pantalla azul y un error 0E) ahora nos hace renovar nuestros votos de esperanza en que el BUG se solucionara si apoyamos al joven creador que pergueñó esta aplicación (me atreveré a decirlo) “defectuosa” y atacamos furiosamente a aquellos que se atreven a señalar nuevos fallos de nuestro querido sistema. En esta etapa, el paciente suele mostrar a sus amigos su flamante linux y lo defiende con frases como “Y para que quiero Bluetooth en el escritorio ?” o “Ay si, no todo en la vida es arrastrar y soltar !”, o en los foros por ejemplo, ante la consulta “Gnome da error al hacer login” salen respuestas automaticas “A mi me anda perfectamente, algo habras borrado”. La culpa de los errores es del usuario irresponsable.

Poco despues de este estadio suele asaltarnos una repentina (y virtuosa) voluntad por ahorrar recursos. Quizas conmovidos por un especial sobre el Amazonas que vimos en NatGeo, vaya one to know. Entonces queremos un entorno que consuma menos recursos. Y de paso tenga menos bugs. Asi pasamos de Gnome y KDE a entornos mas antiguos y supuestamente mas estables como FVWM o XFCE. Al principio de esta etapa, sufrimos un choque estetico violento, (es que ambos son bastante feos) pero al mismo tiempo nos sentimos mas cercanos a los portadores de la Luz, los invisibles Hackers Originarios que crearon todo.

Ya no existen los CDs o pendrives que se automontan en el escritorio, ni las consolas transparentes con efectos 3D. Y NOS PARECE BIEN. Quien quiere todos esos efecto especiales que consumen gran cantidad de preciosos recursos ? Estamos en una fase aguda de SNAD. Dejamos de usar Thunderbird y otros “clones de Outlook”como los llamamos con gallardía e indolencia, y nos abocamos a Pine, Alpine y otros bichos en modo texto. Incomodos, arcaicos, pero que no consumen recursos !.

Pero esta etapa evoluciona tambien, quizas tras el encuentro fortuito con usuarios de Mac y luego de ver con un poco de envidia lo facil que son sus vidas. Entonces (testarudos como todo linuxero) decidimos hacerle frente y mostrar al mundo que Linux tambien puede ser comodo (y sin consumir recursos !). Entonces llegamos al extremo de recuperar funcionalidades a traves de pequeños scripts artesanales que hacemos a medida de nuestra maquina. Asi logramos que aparezca un icono de CD en el escritorio cuando se monta uno, etc, etc. Esta etapa la llamo “del usuario criptico“. Nadie es capaz de usar nuestra maquina ademas de nosotros mismos (que incluso a veces olvidamos la multitud de trucos necesarios para conectarnos a una red LAN).

Hay en la vida del paciente de SNAD sin embargo, oportunidades en las que todo se sacude, y nos lleva a una cura definitiva si tenemos suerte. Una de tales oportunidades tipicas es cuando debemos cambiar de distribucion, hecho que nos obliga a perder no menos del 60% de nuestras configuraciones personalizadas y nos hace replantearnos si tanta paja mental tiene sentido.

Mi nombre es Claudio Andaur y sufri de SNAD muchos años. Ahora estoy en proceso de curacion y con la ayuda de mi familia (que no entiende un pomo de software y me obliga a solucionar las cosas y no poner excusas) saldre adelante. Algo tengo claro, usar Linux involucra necesariamente aprender sobre Linux y hardware y un monton de cosas. En estos años y luego de pasar por muchas etapas de SNAD aprendi a tener paciencia y solucionar problemas y a no recomendar a nadie cambiarse a un sistema que no conoce. Y usted en que etapa del SNAD está ?

Hasta la victoria siempre !

'Murcia le dañó la reeleción a Alvaricoque': 'Tola y Maruja'

1. ¿Cuál es el personaje del año y por qué?

'Tola'. Uribe es el personaje del año. ¡Ese es mucho general! Acabó con los paracos, la chusma, DMG, la Constitución...

'Maruja'. No le falta sino acabar con el Congreso: se ahorraría los desayunos en Palacio. Cuentan que después de esos desayunos se enloquecen los detetores de metales por los cubiertos que se sacan los congresistas.

2. ¿Y el antipersonaje?

'Tola'. Murcia, que es el 'personaje del daño'. Le dañó la reeleción a Alvaricoque.

'Maruja'. Tan 'avispao' el Murcia hacer esa bola de nieve de DMG en esa calor del Putumayo...

3. ¿Es verdad que perdieron todo su patrimonio en las 'pirámides'?

'Tola'. Perdimos hasta las naguas. Ahí se fue lo que nos ganamos recogiendo firmas pa' la reeleción de Uribe.

'Maruja'. Antier estuvimos visitando a Murcia en la guandoca y nos propuso que nos paga en especie... Verdá Tola, ¿qué día es la visita conyugal?

4.¿Creen que un negro puede ser presidente de Colombia?

'Tola'. Piedá Córdoba, que reúne todas la minorías de Colombia: mujer, negra y honrada.

'Maruja'. Te faltó: inteligente. Cuentan que Piedá tiene una neurona la verriondera.

5. ¿Por qué se la tienen montada al ministro del Interior Fabio Valencia y a su hermano Guillermo León?

'Tola'. ¿Montada ? ¿En cuatrimoto? Nosotras conocemos a Fabio desde que vendía panelitas por las calles de Manrique, en Medellín, cuando era apenas una lagartija.

'Maruja'. Y nos tocó cuando Fabio le iba a envolatar a Uribe la Gobernación de Antioquia y Álvaro lo guindó a trompadas. Fue Uribe el que le desfiguró la cara.

6. ¿Entendieron las cuentas que presentó Luis Guillermo Giraldo sobre la recolección de firmas para el referendo?

'Tola'. ¡Avi María! Está más clara la doble contabilidá de DMG.

'Maruja'. Sobre Luisgui Giraldo lo único que podemos decir es ese dicho paisa: "Nada peor que un bobo con iniciativa".

7. ¿Creen que el referendo pasa, y si pasa creen que Uribe lo gana?

'Tola'. En el siglo pasado Antioquia tuvo la Presidencia casi 16 años. Sepan y entiendan que Uribe no piensa soltar el puesto porque sabe que los paisas no volvemos a probar Presidencia en muchos años.

'Maruja'. Uribe no deja el solio cuatro años pa' volver. El que se va pa' la villa, pierde su silla.

8. ¿Votarían por Uribe?

'Tola'. Claro que votaríamos por él pero por solidaridá con doña Lina. Pobre mujer con Uribe jubilado en la casa, sin Constituciones pa' desarmar.

'Maruja'. Y nos toca reelegirlo por negocio, no ve que todavía nos quedan como 20 docenas de muñecos de Uribe por vender.

'Tola'. Y si no, votaríamos por Fajardo... ¡Qué lapo de hombre! Está como el dotor me lo recetó.

'Maruja'. Todas las mujeres votaríamos por Fajardo. Dicen que sabe mucho de maquillaje.

'Tola'. O votamos por Carlos Gaviria. Los colombianos deberíamos votar por presidentes que no aguanten más de un periodo.

9. ¿Qué creen que es lo mejor que puede pasar en Colombia el año entrante?

'Tola'. El nombramiento de Murcia como ministro de Hacienda. ¡Qué dicha, triplicaría el mínimo!

'Maruja'. Ya es mucha gracia que la mayoría de los colombianos lleguemos al 2009.

10. ¿Y qué lo peor?

'Tola'. Dicen que la recesión va a ser tan templada, que las revistas van a contratar solamente a periodistas que vivan en el campo pa' pagarles el mínimo rural.

'Maruja'. Lo peor que nos puede pasar a los colombianos es que nos digan la verdá.

¿QUIÉNES SON 'TOLA Y MARUJA' ?

'Tola': Carlos Mario Gallego, 49 años, comunicador social de la Universidad de Antioquia.

'Maruja': Luis Alberto Rojas, 40 años, técnico de Origami del Sena.

David y Goliat

David Murcia (en adelante David) es una persona muy inteligente que pretendía montar un modelo económico que le permitiera lavar dinero producto de narcotráfico y otras actividades ilegales. En su modelo el tenía prácticamente todas las aristas o riesgos cubiertos y en realidad como estaban las cosas no había nada que pudiera detenerlo. Se ha sabido que dentro de sus planes estaba comprar una gran cadena de noticias a nivel mundial, CNN por ejemplo, y el cielo era el límite ya que con el flujo de doláres que puede ofrecer el narcotráfico podía hacer practicamente lo que quisiera.

Mientras David avanzaba con sus planes, los dueños de los Bancos en Colombia (en adelante Goliat) presionaban al Gobierno, exactamente al Presidente de la República, para que tomara medidas en el asunto. Lo que estaba en juego era la existencia de los Bancos como tal, ya que si la Fiscalía, y en general, los entes de control no encontraban nada, los colombianos acudirían en masa a los Bancos a retirar todo su dinero para llevarlo al negocio de David. El Gobierno respondía que las investigaciones se estaban adelantando pero que aún no se tenía nada contundente para intervernir el negocio de David.

Y ocurrió que David lanzó la piedra, lo traicionó tal vez su propio ego, o la certeza que tenía que su modelo estaba totalmente blindado y que era infalible, esa autoconfianza lo llevó a lanzarle la piedra a Goliat, a llamar al fiel escudero de Goliat: mal papá. El Presidente con su personalidad de patrón de finca pusó a trabajar, trabajar y trabajar a todos los organismos de control, efectivos de la policia y militares para, en el término de la distancia, intervenir el negocio de David. Y así, en tiempo récord, como si fuera el peor de los asesinos, capturaron a "David El pobre lavandero". El Presidente hizo lo que tenía que hacer, de no haberlo hecho, estaba en riesgo la estabilidad del país, ya que los Bancos, aunque le quitan mucho dinero al pueblo, tambien son grandes empleadores y grandes contribuyentes, y si el Presidente no hubiera actuado así, el país hubiera quedado, oficialmente y de una vez por todas, en manos del narcotráfico, porque así, con el modelo de David, todos los colombianos dependerían del flujo de doláres proveniente del lavado de activos. Y algunos colombianos de a pie, preferimos seguir siendo esclavos de Goliat, asi estamos hace cientos de años, entregándoles nuestro dinero y recibiendo solo un plato de lentejas, pero pues desde niños nos han vendido que esa es plata "bien habida" o plata "legal".

El colombiano de a pie que tenía su inversión en el negocio de David, con la doble moral que nos caracteriza y que viene desde el momento en que los ladrones de las cárceles españolas hace algo más de 500 años degradaron nuestra raza indígena, piensa que no importa como ni de donde estaba sacando David el dinero para garantizarles rentabilidades del 100% o hasta 300%, lo importante, y esto es cierto, es que David no los estaba estafando, estaba cumpliendoles, peso sobe peso, con las rentabilidades prometidas. Entonces, el colombiano dice: "a mi David me estaba respondiendo y los interviene el gobierno y mi inversión desaparece??" entonces, empieza el descontento generalizado y las recriminaciones hacia el gobierno porque, para el colombiano de a pie, el gobierno es el culpable y el gobierno entró a robarse el dinero de la gente, es el robo más grande que un gobierno le ha podido realizar a su pueblo.

Y Goliat? tranquilo, la crisis se conjuró, pero ahora su fiel escudero, el Presidente de la República se enfrenta a una posible Guerra civil en los departamentos más afectados por la situación, porque lo que logró ganar con su política de seguridad democrática, reducir militarmente a la guerrilla en estos departamentos, se ha perdido porque ahora el pueblo, azuzado por esa misma guerrilla que estaba destinada a desaparecer, está muy descontento, inconforme y berraco y la Guerra civil empieza a gestarse. La reelección en el 2010, así pase los obstáculos del congreso, no será una realidad porque el pueblo le va a cobrar haber tomado esa decisión.

Y David? triste, aburrido, reflexionando que no debió lanzar esa piedra, que con esas dos palabras (mal papá) tiro al traste lo que ni siquiera Al Capone pudo lograr, lo que estaba muy cerca de ser una realidad inobjetable: legalizar el lavado de activos. Ya como un preso más tratará de seguir embelezando al pueblo con su promesa, y el pueblo, como borricos, seguirán creyéndole porque alguien que empeñó la casa o le pidió prestado un préstamo a Goliat para llevar la plata al negocio de David, seguirá conservando la esperanza de que todo vuelva a ser como antes, y seguirá creyendo que David es inocente. David, actuando como un esquizofrénico, alguien que no está en sus cabales, seguirá insistiendo en que es inocente, aunque todas las pruebas demuestren lo contrario.

En este caso Goliat venció a David y el pueblo lo perdió todo.

Jerry Fletcher
Conspirador profesional

Blogged with the Flock Browser