1gor

From the website:

  Zotonic’s data model can be seen as a pragmatic 
  implementation of the Semantic Web: a mixture between
  a traditional database and a triple store.

I can imagine how to create a CRUD-like webapp with simple mapping DB tables to business objects, but have no experience with triple store.

It would be great to see more sample applications made with zotonic. Not only a cms (simple blog comes pre-installed), but something involving user interaction (an issue tracker, or a HN clone).

Also, at the moment zotonic looks a bit like Zope (everything should be created through backend web forms). I am most likely wrong, but a sample app could demonstrate a workflow that a developer should use.

It's a great framework, quite eager to learn how to use it properly.

https://github.com/seattlerb/rake-remote_task is all you need if you use ruby.

  require 'rake/remote_task'

  set :domain, 'abc.example.com'

  remote_task :foo do
    run "ls"
  end

That's British "rhyming cockney".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhyming_slang

http://www.phespirit.info/cockney/slang_to_english.htm

  If you have been living in a cave for the past few months...

I want to stop reading right here.

Webby (http://webby.rubyforge.org/)

Branch with ruby 1.9 fixes is at https://github.com/namelessjon/webby

It is not under active development, but is for me feature-complete, stable and incredibly flexible. Advantages are:

- pure ruby (no liquid templates needed)

- each page has its own subdirectory where one can put images, scripts etc; your article becomes a 'package'.

- chained templating filters; you can do erb->markdown->your custom filter with minimal effort.

- mostly implemented by extending rake tasks, no extra api to learn and if you know rake you can continue adding features forever.

Padrino (www.padrinorb.com) is a sinatra-based 'rails without the bloat' framework.

It provides generators, basic helpers (link_to etc.) and, most importantly, it gives project a sane structure. Oh, and it does not tie you to any fixed set of components. Using Padrino and Sequel is a bliss!

But your app remains a sinatra app, small and elegant. Also, the documentation is excellent.

After you have init'ed and updated your submodules, the argument holds fine.

> No one is smiling

Don't forget, this was an official photographer mission, sponsored by the Tzar.

I think most people on the photos were stressed enough to be asked to pose in front of unknown equipment, probably with some local officials present on the shoot.

EDIT: actually, there are nice smiling faces on http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/08/russia_in_color_a_c... , where people are not posing.

What goes around comes around.

What are 'blended threads'?

In case of Pussy Riot there are no human rights violations, actually. They are jailed not for singing an anti-Pitin song, but for a 'hate speech' crime. They were screaming profanities in a church which scared, offended and upset some believers.

Would you believe that Pussy Riot would be allowed to sing an anti-Putin song in the Red Square and get away with it?

In fact, that's what they did on 20th January 2012. On the Red Square in broad daylight they played a nicely rousing song about 'KGB bitches' and 'Putin who is pissing his pants', and they have a very nice photos and videos to show: http://pussy-riot.livejournal.com.nyud.net/8459.html and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqcmldeC7Ec

After that Red Square performance they were briefly detained by the police and then released. No trial, no conviction, no world outrage... nothing.

So, next time their organisers have chosen another venue to make sure they would get arrested and there would be headlines "Jailed for singing an anti-Putin song"...

Russian Constitution forbids two consecutive terms. Putin served two, then endorsed his close associate for the presidency. The associated gets elected, serves a term, then steps aside. Putin runs again, and gets elected for the third term, but not a third consecutive term.

For many this looks like twisting the law, but Putin is genuinely popular among common people so most people are kind of happy he found a legal way around the limitations.

  You are being paid by the Kremlin

Yep. I registered this HN account five years ago especially to wait for your comments. And my real name is Anna Chapman.

So, you say Russia is another North Korea? And anyone who disagrees with you is paid by Kremlin?

With opposition so bright, no wonder why Putin gets elected.

Look, my friend, you cannot deny that Russians overwhelmingly voted for Putin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_presidential_election,_...

He got 64% of the total vote (45 million people). His closest opponent was a communist with 17%.

Now, how much votes did Putin steal? 10%? That would still leave him with twice as much votes as his next opponent. He'd still have the people's mandate.

It is quite possible that you do not like the choice of the majority of Russian people. But if you cannot accept result of a democratic election then you should not be making statements about Constitution and the law.

In the UK indecent exposure 'with the intent to shock' is punishable up to 2 years imprisonment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indecent_exposure

There were no mass protests after Putin election results. You can check for yourself http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011%E2%80%932012_Russian_prote...

There were 25 thousand people protesting in Moscow Pushking square immediately after his re-election on March 5, 2012. No major regional protests reported. Moscow has 11 million inhabitants, so 0.02% of them were protesting. I would not call them 'mass protests'.

In contrast, the protests about cases of fraud during Parliament elections rally on Bolotnaya square in December 2011 brought 60 thousand protesters in one day, and many more rallies have been reported throughout Russia.

On tens of March (I quote) "Another 'For Fair Elections' protest was staged on the Novy Arbat street in Moscow. A permit was issued for 50,000,... but just 25,000 thousand came according to the organisers and 10,000 according to the police. The mood was downbeat after Putin won an absolute majority everywhere but Moscow where he garnered 46.95% of the vote. Sergei Udaltsov of Left Front, called for a massive demonstration 1 May, but no further protests are scheduled".

The text of the song is irrelevant. Pussy Riot have not been tried for political protest. They were sentenced for 'inciting hatred' against the religion. I suppose their presence in the cathedral next to altar, kicking air and shouting obscenities has offended somebody.

If they have chosen another venue for their anti-Putin song, I guess the prosecution would not have any case against them.

Besides, they did not have time to really sing anything in the cathedral. The sound was added to the YouTube video later.

I think all hate speech laws should be abolished, since there is such a thin line between 'inciting hatred' and 'offending sensitivities'.

There is quite a difference between the US and EU countries with regards to hate speech laws.

A guy in the UK was arrested and given (suspended) jail sentence, a fine and 100 hours of unpaid public labour for leading anti-religious cartoons in an airport prayer room. All because a chaplain felt offended by his cartoons... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_the_United_...

This is actually quite funny: the people behind Pussy Riot campaign now have to explain to Western liberal public why Russian hate speech laws are bad, but European laws that forbid insulting Muslims and homosexuals are good.

Because if Pussy Riot sang their anti-Putin song not in the cathedral, but, say, in the street, they won't get get the press.

  What qualifies as "hate speech"?

I'll give you a UK example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_the_United_...)

"On 4 March 2010, a jury returned a verdict of guilty against Harry Taylor, who was charged under Part 4A of the Public Order Act 1986. Taylor was charged because he left anti-religious cartoons in the prayer-room of Liverpool's John Lennon Airport on three occasions in 2008. The airport chaplain, who was insulted, offended, and alarmed by the cartoons, called the police.[11][12][13] On 23 April 2010, Judge Charles James of Liverpool Crown Court sentenced Taylor to a six-month term of imprisonment suspended for two years, made him subject to a five-year Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) (which bans him from carrying religiously offensive material in a public place), ordered him to perform 100 hours of unpaid work, and ordered him to pay £250 costs"

Not quite 2 years prison sentence, but a (suspended) jail term nevertheless. But then again, it was not a desecration of a main cathedral either, it was just a cartoon on a wall in an airport prayer room...

Maybe Pussy Riot gives us a case to abolish hate speech laws altogether? So nobody should be threatened with arrest or fine for saying bad things about Muslims, homosexuals, Christians, Jews or whoever, as it is the case now.

  "screaming profanities in the cathedral" - this is 
  factually incorrect, they did not.

BBC thinks otherwise, reporting on "Their brief, obscenity-laced performance" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19297373

Listen, I am actually against hate speech laws everywhere, including Europe, and I believe the church has no place in the modern state.

But I fail to see any Putin connection in Pussy Riot arrest and their jail time. Pussy Riot got jailed for hate speech. That's a fact. Any Putin association is a result of a well executed PR campaign. Everybody knows that... ))

  Nobody knows how many popular votes Putin got - exactly because 
  he did not allow to count the votes fairly.

Not many dispute Putin's personal election results, even the opposition. The parlamentary elections before that -- is another matter, they were substantially rigged in favour of the pro-government party.

And let me correct you -- 63% of the Russian voters who have voted for Putin believe that they live under democracy, and are very happy that their votes count and their candidate has won.

In Iceland they would get 2 years for simply insulting a religion group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech), as well as in many other EU countries (but not in the US).

That's what Pussy Riot have been jailed for - hate speech, not for singing an anti-Putin song. In fact they were screaming profanities in the cathedral, and their anti-Putin song was added later to their YouTube video.

Pussy Riot performance looks like a planned provocation.

There are many ways to get yourself arrested, if you really want to. In Europe, you can get jail for hate speech, for example, (though not in the US, where it is constitutionally protected) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

Don't forget, Pussy Riot have been jailed not for singing an anti-Putin song, but for inciting religious hatred. They were screaming profanities in the cathedral. (They didn't sing in the church, had no time, they were removed after 40s, the song about Putin was added later to their YouTube video).

One fragment from a BBC documentary by Adam Curtis explains rather well the mechanics of current Russian pro-democracy campaign in the Western media. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v...

The video deals with PR guru Edward Bernays work for his client, a United Fruit Company (UFCO). When a newly elected Guatemala president Jacobo Árbenz threatened to nationalize UFCO's plantations, Bernays engineered a campaign to turn the popularly elected president doing hugely popular things for his people, into a threat to democratic values and a communist with links to Moscow.

In reality, Arbenz was no communist and no dictator, as the documentary points out. But Bernays has set up a shell American press agency which bombarded US media with reports about alleged freedom violations in Guatemala. Bernays has also apparently organised a few violent anti-US actions in Guatemala to support his thesis.

As a result, president Arbenz was ousted in a coup and replaced with a proper dictator, which was generally viewed as a good thing by the freedom-loving public in the US. Interestingly, the whole time the United Fruit Company has been kept out of the picture, even through it was paying for the campaign.

The whole BBC documentary http://centuryself.blogspot.com/ is quite interesting.

   The organized and overblown reaction to all of this is much more about 
   ruining Russia's reputation as a democratic nation than anything else.

Because there is a political PR campaign going on aimed at shaping public opinion. Its political goals may be noble or may be not, but it feels a bit strange seeing it on HN.

One of Russian Erlang mailing lists recently banned political spam on off-topic grounds. Alas, no such luck with HN.

Kasparov is a totally manufactured 'Russian opposition' figure.

As late as 2004 he was a member of a US "Security Advisory Council" (NSAC). It was funny to see Kasparov's name on the website under the slogan: "Advisory Council members have dedicated their careers to American security", right next to assistant Secretary of Defence http://img717.imageshack.us.nyud.net/img717/1337/kasparov.jp...

I respect his anti-Putin views, and his chess achievements, but how exactly can he make a political career in Russia with such a background?

His current role is to get beaten occasionally by the police and to remind Western audience that Russian president is evil.

Hmmm, would a link to BBC, a UK propaganda TV channel, be less silly?

   There is little doubt it was the Russians

There is a lot of doubt.

The most obvious suspect is oligarch Boris Berezovsky, a London refugee from Russia, accused of embezzlement at home, who is waging a fierce propaganda war with the current Russian government.

http://www.rt.com/news/berezovsky-litvinenko-murder-allegati...

   Any _robust_ C program contains an ad-hoc, 
   informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow 
   implementation of half of Erlang...

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?GreenspunsTenthRuleOfProgramming