Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

What does the spellchecker know that I don’t know?

25 august 2010


Linux on the rise

25 august 2010

Joel Spolsky seems outdated. In an old article, he says there’s just a cultural difference between the windows and linux ecosystems. Windows is user-focussed, whereas linux is programmer-focussed. That’s why everything in Windows has a user interface and seldomly a command line, whereas GUIs are only driving command line programs by passing them command line arguments which would be tedious to write by hand, and often GUIs for programs are an afterthought – says he.

I wouldn’t say linux was ready for the average desktop two years ago. However, in the meantime, due to Canonical’s marvelous work, I’d say that since quite some time, maybe a year or more, linux is _the_ choice for a desktop you can brag with. You have tons of applications installable via a few clicks, don’t need to download anything manually except the initial CD/DVD image, have an update feature similar to what Windows has but smarter (it also updates all applications installed from the repository, not just the OS), have a desktop which Windows 7 tried to copy and failed (at least in some regards), have every bell and whistle there is on Macs and then some, and still have a stable  system, easy on the hardware, immune to viruses.

It may be something like the debate between Linus and Tannenbaum about linux vs minix. The essential argument for Tannenbaum was „Microkernels are better.” Hence, Tannenbaum stated that „Linux is obsolete”. The basic argument Linus threw in was „Linux is here, it’s working and it’s used, whereas Minix is shitty and not free”. And stated that Linux will prevail. As it seems, Tannenbaum was definitely wrong. Also, as it seems, the Linux philosophy, to do things for programmers, rather than for dumb users, led to something which is more pleasant and more friendly for dumb users. How come?

Re-reading many of Joel’s articles, I guess his mistake was to assume all users are extremely dumb. Indeed, half of all users are less than average, and only a small fraction are power users. But this is no different than it is in other areas. The power users are the ones leading the way and creating trends. Most of the dumb users listen to what smarter users say. If enough many smarter users start using Linux on the desktop, and tell and demonstrate everybody willing to listen and look at how easy and nice linux is on the desktop, this sets a trend that no marketing campaign can reverse, in the long run. Maybe it will take another ten or fifteen years (but I seriously doubt it – I think something like 5 years is closer to real), but IMO the trend is set.

You have ubuntu derivatives for media centers, language-/country-specific distros, different desktop/window managers, various specialized uses. That’s IMO not something MS can beat. For one, Windows doesn’t come prepackaged with thousands, or probably tens of thousands of free applications. Another issue is that MS would probably shoot itself in the foot and damage its relations with many of its customers who use embedded versions of Windows to create specialized products, if it would suddenly start putting tens of customized versions of Windows on the market. Besides, MS already has a nightmarishly complicated licensing system, and adding a few tens of specialized distributions wouldn’t help. And even if MS did this, it would still publish closed, unextensible versions of Windows, rather than an open, freely extensible OS.

Then there’s the handheld and gadget factor. Right now, there are already more smartphones, PDAs, tablets, game consoles and the like out there than PCs. Only a fraction of them runs Windows. As it seems, Android, which is essentially a Linux distro, is on the rise in this market. Apple devices are also highly successful. In a few years from now, if the trend goes on, there will be several times more non-PC devices which run a non-MS OS which is likely to be a derivative of Linux. Whaddya think, what the preferred desktop system will be for users running Linux on their tablet/phone/music player/video player super-device? Provided they will use a desktop system anymore.

Than there’s HTML5. That’s not such a big issue for home users, but it is a big issue for businesses. In a few years, only quite old legacy apps will still use rich clients, bound to one particular desktop OS or another. Most apps will move to the web. HTML5 has mechanisms which increase the capabilities of web apps to a level where there isn’t any motivation for rich clients anymore. Which essentially means that as enterprises get rid of costly to maintain legacy applications, their business moves to the web. It doesn’t really matter whether it is Amazon’s or Google’s cloud or a custom in-house cloud solution, or it’s a server farm in Singapore, London or LA. What’s important is that whatever the solution, the client for most applications will simply be a browser. Which makes switching the OS on the desktop a breeze, and eliminates much of the worries sysadmins currently have with maintaining workstations. Essentially, the workstation will need just an OS, a browser and a VPN client. Anything else is just distraction. Any decent OS, Linux included, can support a VPN client and a browser as well as Windows. Which means that the cost of migration tends to become zero. Which more than offsets the cost of Windows, Office and whatnot.

Personally, I can’t wait. And I had to get this out of my head.

O parere neavizata despre invatamantul romanesc actual

14 noiembrie 2009

Ma consider deja cam mos, si am terminat liceul inainte de ’89. Din 97 insa lucrez cam exclusiv pt. firme straine care au afaceri in Romania. Asa ca am dupa parerea mea ocazii bune sa ma compar cu profesionisti de aceeasi categorie din strainatate.

Concluziia mea e categorica: scoala ce am facut-o eu m-a pregatit in mod cert mai bine pt. tipul de munca pe care-l fac, m-a pregatit mai bine pt. viata in general, si mi-a furnizat cel putin in ceea ce priveste literatura o cultura generala mai ampla decat cea pe care o au majoritatea colegilor sau colaboratorilor din strainatate.

La vremea cand am facut eu scoala generala si liceul, scolii romanesti i se reprosau (in anumite cercuri, discutia libera era mai dificila la vremea aia) exact aceleasi pacate. Dar judecand dupa rezultate, probabil ca era totusi ceva bun si in sistemul respectiv de invatamant – sistem care a decazut permanent de la vremea aia.

Ma uit acum la nepotul meu de 10 ani, si la ce trebuie el sa faca pt. scoala. Sincer, nu mi se pare nici mai incarcat nici mai lejer programul lui decat cel pe care-l aveam eu. Cantitatea mare de munca exista, intr-adevar, dar ia foarte mult timp doar daca abordarea elevului e ineficienta, si concentrarea elevului scazuta. Cu alte cuvinte, efortul pe care-l ai de facut acasa te motiveaza sa lucrezi concentrat, organizat si eficient – chestie dupa parerea mea foarte importanta dpv educational.

Diferenta esentiala, cred, dintre scoala romaneasca de acum si cea de acum 20 – 25 de ani, este calitatea dascalilor. Prin grija parintilor si dat fiind ca am crescut intr-un oras nu foarte mare, dar cu cateva scoli si licee foarte aambitioase, eu am avut parte de dascali excelenti. Care bineinteles ca te puneau sa memorezi formule de fizica si sa inveti poezii pe de rost, dar nu se limitau doar la atat. In plus, memoria ce mi-am format-o prin exercitiile respective din vremea liceului mai ales m-au ajutat in foarte multe situatii. Cred insa ca pe ansamblu provocarea mai mare care ti-era adresata la vremea respectiva, de a invata bine dar in acelasi timp de a avea suficient timp liber pt. alte chestii, specifice varstei, a fost pe undeva ca un antrenament la sala pt. dezvoltarea abilitatilor intelectuale, si in nici un caz nu ne-a daunat.

Diferenta esentiala intre elevii de atunci si elevii de acum cred ca e nivelul diferit al asteptarilor. Imi aduc aminte ca la vremea facultatii, in anii de imediat dupa ’89, student fiind, faceam greve frecvent, pt. schimbarea dascalilor care nu ne conveneau. Interesant e, cred eu, si faptul ca desi insistam pe eliminarea obligativitatii participarii la cursuri, erau zile in care nu ieseam zece ore din biblioteca. Elevii de azi, dar si studentii (daca judec dupa colegi mai tineri), din cate-mi dau eu seama, vor dascali care sa le predea in mod intersant o cantitate suficienta de materie incat sa nu aibe prea mare bataie de cap la examene, teze, examinari de orice fel, si sa nu aibe prea mult de lucru acasa, pe cand ceea ce ne doream noi era o provocare, aceea de a se cere de la noi tot ceea ce puteam da. Evident, existau suficienti studenti tocilari si la vremea aia, care treceau prin facultate mai ales memorand zeci de pagini de curs. Dar respectivii erau totusi o cantitate mica din total.

Uitandu-ma la ambele orare date ca exemplu in articol, nu pot sa nu remarc cantitatea mica de ore de matematica si fizica. Nu sunt de parere ca orice om trebuie sa fie inginer, dar matematica si fizica au o calitate deosebita dpv formativ, nu informativ: te invata sa judeci riguros si precis. Ori un asemenea mod de judecata e util indiferent de modul in care iti vei umple ulterior viata. Spre exemplificare, am lucrat cativa ani dupa facultate cu o colega designer, extrem de talentata si foarte buna in meseria ei (si care din nefericire nu mai lucreaza in Romania). Chiar daca meseria ei pare mai mult de domeniul artistic, cunostiintele ei de geometrie erau extrem de vaste, iar modul in care isi facea munca era extrem de sistematic, as putea spune chiar stiintific. O alta colega, tot designer, facuse inainte o facultate de mecanica. Alti designeri pe care i-am cunoscut aveau performante mult mai slabe, in mod tipic corelate cu o pregatire teoretica mult mai redusa.

De-aia, recomandarea me pt. elevii de azi: legati-va de ce va face viata usoara, nu de ce va face viata grea in scoala. Mai tarziu le veti multumi dascalilor care v-au chinuit, nu celor generosi la note. Nimeni nu se va uita la cinci sau la zece ani de la terminarea scolii sau a liceului la notele pe care le-ati avut. Se va uita insa la capacitatea de munca pe care o aveti, la cat de organizati sunteti, la cantitatea de cultura profesionala pe care ati acumulat-o. Ori capacitatea de munca si de organizare se formeaza in scoala, sub stress, si nu se mai schimba ulterior decat extrem de greu.

Chestii utile de stiut in bucatarie

10 august 2009

Vad la teveu bucatari „de renume mondial” care fac prostii – cel putin in opinia mea de Stan Patitu’. Asa ca m-am gandit ca ce-ar fi sa zic eu aici ce si cum se face in bucatarie, si mai ales ce nu se face, din propria exprienta. Evident ca nu-mi vine tot in minte ce tre’ scris aici  deodata, asa ca probabil (in masura in care ma lasa lenea) o sa mai adaug cand si cand cate ceva.

Nu se baga cutitele in apa fiarta, si in nici un caz in foc, sau in chestii scoase fierbinti din cuptor. Se inmoaie otelul si  in timp cutitele nu mai tin ascutisul. Is unii care zic ca asta-i basm, da’de fapt e pe bune. Temperaturile la care se petrec modificari de faza in otel sunt unele dintre ele de sub 300 de grade Celsius, adica in Kelvin sub 600, ori daca bagam cutitul in apa fiarta il ducem pana la aproape 400 K, deci o temperatura relativ aproape de temperaturile de schimbare de faza. (Bineinteles, totul e relativ, ca temperaturile astea variaza in functie de compozitia otelului, da’  ideea e ca si incalzirea pana la 100 de grade Celsius e periculoasa pt. cutite.)

Nu se toaca vinetele cu metal. Se amarasc daca stau suficient de mult timp in contact cu metalul. La fel si ceapa: chiar daca o taiati cu cutitul, n-o lasati sa stea in vase de inox dupa ce e tocata. Inclusiv inoxul e suficient de reactiv incat daca ceapa sau vinetele sunt suficient de mult timp in contact cu el sa le amarasca.

Nu se sareaza carnea de la inceput cand se pune la fiert sau la prajit. Ramane mai frageda daca se pune sarea catre sfarsit. La inceput tre’ puse condimentele ale caror arome tre’ sa patrunda adanc in carne.

Nu se pun legumele la fiert o data cu carnea, daca mai vreti sa folositi si zeama. Din carne iese sangele, care se face spuma la suprafata lichidului. Abia dupa spumuiala se adauga legumele.

Nu se tin rosiile in frigider. Ce face rosiile bune si dulci e o substanta care se formeaza la cald si se descompune la rece. La fel si usturoiul: mai degraba seaca sau mucegaieste sau se strica in frigider decat afara.

Nu se umbla cu instrumente metalice in cratite teflonate, chiar daca-s de otel. Doar cu lemn, sau, cui nu-i face greata, plastic termorezistent.  „Teflonul” e un strat de plastic termorezistent in care-s prinse particule de teflon cam ca pestii in plasa (teflonul nu se lipeste de nimic, asa ca nu poate fi el de el aplicat pe suprafata vasului), si o paleta sau lingura metalica chiar daca nu de la prima utilizare pana la urma tot desprinde bucatele din stratul ala de teflon.

Nu se pune zahar (sau nu in exces) la pornit drojdia. Zaharul in exces omoara drojdia. Drojdia se porneste cu faina.  In aluaturi cu drojdie daca puneti sare multa obtineti acelasi efect: drojdia moare si aluatul nu creste (sau creste foarte greu si foarte lent).

Legumele pe cat posibil se spala inainte de a fi taiate sau curatate. Daca le speli dupa, se pierde o gramada din aroma si din ce-i bun in ele.

UPC Romania sucks

23 aprilie 2009

Am abonament din ala cu trei servicii la pachet abia de doua luni la UPC. Primele doua saptamani n-a mers ba telefonul ba teveul. Ca sa ii conving sa-mi dea pt. ce platesc a trebuit sa-i sun zilnic. Inainte de Pasti imi trimit o scrisorica care-mi ajunge in cutia postala abia sambata cum ca am intarziat la plata si daca nu platesc ma taie. Cumsecade, nu m-au taiat decat dupa Pasti. Am platit first thing in the morning imediat ce si-au deschis casieria. De atunci au trecut doua zile, pas teveu. Noroc ca telefonul si internetul merg, si pot sa-i sun – iar zilnic, asta e modelul la ei.

Is curios in cat timp le ia de data asta sa rezolve. Ce e cel mai enervant e ca-ti zic de fiecare data ca se rezolva in 15 minute, max. 24h etc., si de fapt dureaza o saptamana.

Update: acu’ cateva luni ma gandesc ca ce-ar fi sa ma uit mai atent la factura, si constat ca ei ma facturasera si eu platisem prea mult vreme de aproape un an. Sun la suport, zice o cucoana OK, va recalcula, da’ mereti Dvs. si platiti ultima factura emisa, ca altfel va taie. Adica am platite in avans vreo 6 luni, mi-au trimis o factura gresita, da’ tre sa merg s-o platesc! N-am platit-o, evident. Tot atat de evident m-au taiat. Noroc ca aproape tot timpul pana au recalculat ei factura si au rebransat io am fost in delegatie.

Acu’ nu merge de cateva saptamani telefonul. Da’ nu mai am nervi sa-i sun. Cat de repede ajung ma duc, lichidez la ei si ma mut la alt furnizor. Ma indoiesc ca e altu’ la fel de prost.

Agile development is mostly just hype (IMO)

12 noiembrie 2008

Although there’s value in many of the techniques it employs.

For anybody not familiar with the topic: the root of all evil regarding agile development.

As a software developer, what I usually have to fight for is getting customers to pay for what they want (well, my boss does most of the fighting, but my support role is of such nature that I get to observe most of what happens in the process). With very few exceptions, customers prefer to be told the world can be programmed in two weeks and get a shabby and useless application when delivery is nigh, rather than be told it will take somewhat longer, and get a proper application upon delivery. And they never learn. You judge which is the more honest approach. IMO, agile development doesn’t support what I think is right (i.e. telling the customer right from the beginning what to expect). I’ll try to explain why I think this.

What the agile manifesto says:

1. Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
2. Working software over comprehensive documentation
3. Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
4. Responding to change over following a plan

While I have no problem with the first statement,  I cannot wholeheartedly agree to statements 2 and 3. And I cannot accept that the only way to act according to statement 4 is by using agile methods.

Working software has a problem: unless there’s a reference to compare it against, the customer (well, most of them, at least) constantly changes his mind. Which is OK as long as you work with an unlimited budget and with no fixed deadline. Which is utopic in most cases in real life.

The same obstacle stands in the way of customer collaboration over contract negotiation. Of course you  can start collaborating with the customer, but if you’re an entity working for money, not for charity, somebody needs to pay for this collaboration. Due to a very broadly spread misconception, the customer usually is only willing to pay for the product, and often considers all the communication overhead you need to invest in getting a product right just some minor overhead you have to pay for yourself. Which is stupid: he wouldn’t treat a lawyer or an architect this way, he wouldn’t treat his own engineers this way, but it’s OK to handles software engineers this way. In my experience, customer collaboration works smoothly only after a negotiated process is set in stone by a contract. Just to make sure you get it: not the requirements for the software to be developed, just the processes to govern the collaboration.

Responding to change and incorporate change into the plan is what civil engineers (or airplane manufacturers, or ship builders, for that matter) do already for a long time. Their projects are even worse off than software projects. They last inherently longer, are usually a lot bigger from the point of view of invested resources, and as such on one hand changes are more likely to happen and on the other hand more likely to be a lot more expensive. Yet, they don’t rely on anything even remotely resembling agile methods in their processes. I surely wouldn’t want to fly in an airplane where some structural engineer patched the design and „implementation” just a day before the airplane got shipped, rather than going through an expensive and slow redesign process, followed by a thoroughly checked manufacturing and testing process. Surely I must be an exception – it is often the same civil engineers that are OK with a software built from patches all the way from requirements gathering to deployment, which crashes on them all the time (well, it’s more often their bosses, engineers tend to have a preference and a better understanding for the need of a more organized approach to developing something than management usually has).

Further, there are quite a few principles of agile development I also don’t agree with – I’ll pick only the ones I don’t like. (After all, there must be something good in agile methods if so many bright people buy into it, it just seems I don’t grok it, so at least some of the principles must be right.)

Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software.

Chances are, you just manage to bore him to death, if increments are delivered too often and without much visible progress. Or you get a rude reaction: nothing works, nothing of what we discussed is there (in spite of agreeing with the customer about the stories to be implemented before each iteration). I have seen both situations. Rather, I’d agree on some essential milestones right from the start, with clearly verifiable goals to attain at each milestone. It’s the way customers are used to do projects in other areas, it will be the most familiar way for them to work with you in a software development project.

Welcome changing requirements, even late in development. Agile processes harness change for the customer’s competitive advantage.

It all depends. If the customer is willing to pay for it, sure. Otherwise it simply doesn’t work, no matter how nice it sounds. And of course, no matter when changes get into the project, you need a proper way to assess cost overhead. Or you’ll be bankrupt soon (either you ask too much, so customers will stop doing business with you, or you ask too little to cover your costs, if you don’t have a proper cost assessment method – I have seen very few customers willing to pay on a time and material basis).

Build projects around motivated individuals. Give them the environment and support they need,
and trust them to get the job done.

Sure. As long as you can afford this. In real life, however, you more often than not get management, labor market, company regulations, non-functional, non-negotiable customer requirements acting in the opposite direction.

The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development
team is face-to-face conversation.

And also the  most likely way to ensure that two days after a discussion each part remembers a different conclusion. Which is important when the two parts sit on different sides of the table. Written communication, i.e. documentation, doesn’t have this problem. Not writing anything down in a maintainable way is the most successful method of quickly aggravating the customer, in my experience. However, agile developers argue against documentation, towards code without documentation. Do you know of any other engineering process working without documentation? I don’t.

Working software is the primary measure of progress.

Bullshit. It’s software that does what it needs to do is, software that just works isn’t. In fact, building a perfectly working system that does what the customer asked for but doesn’t do what the customer needs is one of the glorious ways in which quite many software projects fail. Close to zero bugs, only you got the requirements wrong. Tough luck. Of course, the next iteration will fix it. If there’s any budget left, that is.

Agile processes promote sustainable development. The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely.

Why would it be needed to keep up the pace indefinitely?  Software development is clearly an activity organized by projects – every customer expects you to eventually finish working on his app, and also expects you to make a prediction about that finish before you actually start working, or he won’t give you money. You just have to plan to keep the pace up until the project finishes. Event this is not needed, because work on a project is almost never paralelizable in such a way that the workload is constant from start to finish. But how can you name a deadline if you can’t even say how many iterations you’ll need, because you shun documentation and as such don’t have a scope definition to share with the customer?

Simplicity–the art of maximizing the amount of work not done–is essential.

Again, bullshit. I have seen this work in several organizations. They were maximizing the work not done at the expense of testing (did you notice the principles say nothing about testing, although techniques employed by agile development emphasize unit testing as one of the most valuable agile tools?), or by simply not getting parts they deemed unimportant done. Because they knew very well how the end-users used to use applications, this was not regarded as a problem by regular users, since the bugs or missing parts were getting discovered at a very slow pace, allowing them to fix them in due time, without aggravating the end users. But this approach still costs. Only the programmers managed to hide the cost of their sloppy work. This is no real economy. I’d rather stick to what Einstein said: things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler than that.

The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.

If only bad software could tell stories! Think spaghetti code – it’s often done by self-organizing teams with a more than lean attitude towards codee quality. A nice architecture emerges from a programmer or a group of programmers who are able to do architecture properly. These guys are usually smart enough that management or whoever from outside has no chance to interfere with their architecture. The rest of the team doesn’t matter for architecture. It matters just for transforming this architecture into source code. If the rest of the team is so much less bright than the architects are, they will have difficulties understanding the design, and implement anything but the original design. Yielding a bad product, usually. One of the most important (IMO) aspects required for agile development is a homogenous and above average skilled team, which is seldomly the case in real life.

At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts  its behavior accordingly.

I don’t dislike this one, actually.  I just don’t like that agile developers make it _their_ principle. Also, I think it should rather be a permenent process, instead of something you only do at regular intervals.

My conclusion is that agile development was set up by highly successful IT consultants who owe their success to good marketing more than to skills useful to their customers. Sun Tzu said it quite some time ago: a good general is likely to go unnoticed, since it is highly unspectacular how he wins his battles – a good general usually only fights battles he has already won. A bad general, on the other hand, will take part in many spectacular and risky battles, and have only costly successes to show. The same with software: anybody is more likely to remember a project which got through ten successive iterations before it was barely usable, and call it a great and spectacular success, and not remember a project similar in all aspects, only that got it right right from the first delivery. Even worse: for the project getting it right right away, they’ll remember that it took a looooong time to develop, as opposed to the other one, which took three or five times longer to complete, but provided ten or twenty (unusable or incomplete) deliveries during that much longer period.

(Now ain’t I good at throwing stones?)

Pisicile, cainii, alte animale mici si eu

19 mai 2008

Cumva, nu stiu de unde, unii au dedus ca pt. ca nu cred ca locul animalelor de orice fel e in bucatarie, nu iubesc animalele. Sa ma exprim …

Adevarul e ca nu prea imi plac pisicile. Imi plac in schimb cainii. Un caine te simte, stie cand esti trist, cand esti vesel, poate fi el la randul lui vesel, trist, agitat, nelinistit, protectiv, retinut, si cate si mai cate. Pe cand o pisica … poate fi cel mult nedumerita, nerabdatoare sau nervoasa, sau, singura emotie pozitiva ce o remarc eu la o pisica, satisfacuta.

Daca o pisica vrea sa fie rasfatata, si stapanul/stapana nu-s disponibili, la fel de bun e si piciorul mesei. Ideea ca o pisica are personalitate mi se pare o idiotenie – ce-are a face personalitatea cu lipsa de atasament? Nu-ti pica bine cand un prieten care vine, te vede trist si abatut, si merge la un film cu altii. De ce-ai accepta asa o atitudine din partea unei pisici? Doar pt. valoarea estetica?

In alta ordine de idei, mi se pare idiot da’ n-am ce face: multa lume chinuie involuntar si inconstient animalele.

De ex., ce-mi povestea un prieten: un cuplu cu un simt al umorulu mai aaparte detinea un motan pe nume Grivei si locuia la etaj superior in bloc inalt. Pisicul a sarit la un moment dat de pe balcon dupa pasari, si-a rupt ceva oase la labele din fata, plus falca de jos. A stat dupa aia o gramada cu tot felul de tije si stifturi pana sa i se vindece oasele. Dupa faza asta, eu nu mai pot pricepe cum de zic unii ca iubesc pisicile dar le tin in apartamente de bloc. Ce hal de dragoste e aia?

La fel, vedeam chiar ieri pe strada o cucoana, tinand de sub coaste cu o mana puiul ei de caine. Care caine se uita chinuit la lumea din jur – cea mai nasoala modalitate de a tine un caine in brate e sa-l tii de coaste, cu burta si fundul atarnandu-i de coloana. Scheletul cainelui nu-i gandit pt. a fi tinut in felul ala.

Evident, exista si exceptii. Chiar daca la modul general sa imbraci animale e o idiotenie (v-ati uitat la o pisica careia i se leaga pentru prima data o funda la gat?), cand duci iarna la plimbare un tekel (dackel, dachshund, soricar), tre’ sa pui ceva pe el, ca soiul asta de caine e foarte friguros. La asa un caine, sa-l scoti iarna afara neimbracat e bataie de joc de caine. Totusi, sunt destui stapani de soricari care nu stiu asta, bag de seama.

Asa ca … pe post de concluzie, cre’ ca sunt la modul cel mai propriu zis de condamnat cei care tin animale fara sa-si dea seama ce fac. Chiar daca nu-mi plac pisicile, ca membru al rasei presupus cea mai inteligenta de pe planeta (desi eu am indoieli serioase), ma simt dator de oaresce grija fata de toate animalele, chiar si salbatice. Dar cred ca e nevoie de ceva maim mult decat dragoste neconditionata ca sa tratezi corect un animal, si in primul rand si de ceva gandeala – si asta se pare ca multora le pica greu