This is in response to the comments by Chris and Roger Rustad - in my
philosophy there are times when outsourcing certain work is perfectly
justifiable.  There is a reason why division of labor has been invented.

The Interplanetary Internationale is a non-profit organisation with a
serious mission, and all of our members are hard-working people who do
their jobs well.  Due to being a small non-profit we are already doing
too much multitasking and wear a lot of hats.  I for one wear at least
3 major hats (commander, chief engineer and researcher/analyst) and that
isn't counting the minor ones, so I really don't need to put on yet
another hat (desktop PC support) if I can avoid it.

Yes, I am perfectly capable of spending the next few years of my life
learning everything there is to know about F/OSS web/audio/video software
for the functions I'm interested in, but I have far, far more valuable
things to do with my life.  My philosophy is that if something can be
outsourced, it should be outsourced, because there are far too many
things that can't be.  Even on the computer/tech side of things there
are far too many things that only I can do (maintaining 4.3BSD-Quasijarus,
our main in-house OS, core network admin, certain in-house UNIX
applications), and the computer/tech stuff in general isn't even the
primary purpose of our organisation in the first place!  Thus when it
comes to stuff that resides on the lower rungs of my ladder of importance
(basically all desktop stuff), I certainly want to outsource it.

As for refusing to install consumer distros like Ubuntu and insisting on
Slackware, that is a simple matter of administrative policy.  We are not
talking about a home PC for a housewife, ours is a serious organisation
with a chain of command and a clear division of responsibilities, and
the matters of OS selection and overall network planning and management
are taken seriously (that's my area of responsibility).

My stance is that the distro matters only to the system administrator,
not to ordinary users, therefore, the choice of distro is the exclusive
privilege of the chief system administrator.  Users do not care about
distros, that's an admin matter, a user merely logs in with a company-
issued username and password and is presented with a set of applications
decided upon by the company.  Business environment, not home - work, not
play.

In the good old days of UNIX there was a clear division between the OS
and applications, and that's how I like to keep it.  An operating system
should only come with system software like daemons and a minimal set of
basic tools (shell, awk, C compiler, that kind of stuff); everything
else is none of the OS distribution's business.  High-level applications
like web/audio/video SW absolutely do not belong in an OS distribution
in my opinion.

I choose Slackware because it's the most UNIX-like of all Linux
distributions (it's for people like me who like UNIX better than Linux
and run Linux only out of necessity) and also because it maintains a
clear distinction between users and administrators which is essential to
my business model.  When I say that users and administrators should be
separate, I don't just mean separate accounts/passwords, I mean different
people in flesh and blood.  That's why I don't believe in the sudo bs -
if a certain function should be available to ordinary users whose jobs
aren't in IT, there should be a setuid program which they can use like
a normal command with no fuss, whereas if a certain function should not
be available to such users, it should not be available period - if you
need the services of the IT department, pick up the phone and call the
IT helpdesk.

Our organisation is seeking an IT support person who would serve as a
go-between intermediary between the core OS/network engineering (me) on
one side and the non-technical user community on the other, someone who
can effectively bridge the two worlds.

MS

P.S. In response to Roger Rustad's comment about nudity, that is
absolutely not permitted here and is not practiced by me or by anyone
else who lives or works at any of our facilities.  We generally follow
the standards of conduct which were set in the Soviet Union for
Communist Party members and for military officers.

Reply via email to