Slashdot Mirror
Interviews: James Randi Answers Your Questions
A while ago you had the chance to ask James Randi, the founder of The James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF), about exposing hucksters, frauds, and fakers. Below you'll find his answers to your questions. In addition to his writings below, Randi was nice enough to sit down and talk to us about his life and his foundation. Keep an eye out for those videos coming soon.
Human Progress?
by eldavojohn
Sometimes when I see tabloids and crap at grocery stores I wonder if humanity is really making progress in the skepticism department. I think there are more people today that are skeptical of all things paranormal than there were years ago but I believe that only because the population has been increasing. Percentage-wise, I fear we may still be at the level humanity has been at throughout history. You can find writings dating way back of people who were "in the know" about what was fake and what was real. As science has increased our realm of knowledge, it seems that paranormal seekers have just found it in other mediums. So what is your opinion on humanity's track record for belief in the paranormal versus skepticism? Have we made progress? Are we forever doomed to deal with a percentage of the population who want to believe?
Randi: It's hard to say, but I think that yes, we're always going to have irrational attitudes to deal with. It is what I’ve called the whack-a-mole problem of skepticism. You have to keep fighting back the nonsense every time it pokes its head out. Judging by the mail and email we receive, I believe we're making substantial progress, however.
query
by LokiSteve
What's the most dangerous lie perpetuated by the people you bust?
Randi: Spurious claims of healing, which directly misdirect and misinform those who are most vulnerable. This is why we support the important work of the Science Based Medicine project and Dr. Steve Novella and the rest of the doctors. The JREF just came out with books on pseudoscientific medical claims, so-called “complementary and alternative medicine,” or CAM, in coordination with them. These are topics like homeopathy and naturopothy. Many other titles on other CAM topics are forthcoming in the months ahead.
Best fraud?
by TrumpetPower!
Mr. Amazing, Of the various people who've tried for the prize, which one do you think would have made the best entertainer / carnie / whatever had he or she not been so serious about the reality of the trick?
Randi: None of them have been very entertaining except Uri Geller, who has gone a long way on a 4-trick repertoire...
risks of cash rewards?
by Jodka
When offering a $1 million reward to anyone who successfully demonstrates proof of the paranormal you risk failing to debunk some paranormal claims, not because paranormal activity actually exists, but because the ruse is either so technologically advanced or clever that investigators fail to identify the means of deception. How concerned were you about this possibility and have you ever had any "close calls" where you almost failed to discover the trick?
Randi: I have never been very concerned about that. The "means of deception" have never been especially difficult to solve, though I rather wish that a really clever operator would come my way just to provide a bit of a challenge.
Placebo Effectiveness of faith healing
by Bananatree3
Through your years of research on faith healing, homeopathy and other "magical" cures...have you found some of them more "effective" than others due to the Placebo Effect? Many people have superstitions, charms and other things they personally believe bring them good luck...and I wonder how much of this magical healing and luck bringing is real due to the Placebo Effect. Of course it is not "magic", but the power of a Placebo is still statistically valid in certain cases it seems.
Randi: Re the placebo effect, it only makes you feel better momentarily. The question I ask: "do you want to actually BE better, or only FEEL better?"
Can a Christian or theist be a skeptic?
by irenaeous
I ask this because I used to regard myself as a Christian skeptic. While I support what you do and much of the work of the skeptical movement, I now no longer make that claim because current skepticism seems joined at the hip with atheism. I am sure you know, one of the early leaders of the skeptic movement, Martin Gardner, was a theist and a self professed liberal Christian. Are people like Martin Gardner welcome in the movement today. And, as a Christian I thank you for exposing the televangelist faith healing frauds.
Randi: First, I never knew of Martin as a Christian, though he was a theist. He told me that he had no evidence at all for his theism, but it simply made him feel better - which I granted him, easily. You certainly do not need to be an atheist to be a good skeptic, as JREF president D.J. Grothe has argued before on randi.org.
Is it true
by Intrepid imaginaut
Is it true that your organisation is a front to attract the mystically endowed and drain them of their powers to feed the unholy appetites of a cabal of dark theurgists and further their quest to challenge the illuminati for control of the mortal world, leading ultimately to human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, and mass hysteria?
Randi: How did you ever figure that out? I thought we were doing such an effective job at the cover-up.
repercussions?
by poetmatt
Have you ever had significant repercussions from debunking what is essentially garbage? Have people ever actually threatened you for supposedly crushing any livelihoods, which were then based on fraud?
Randi: No, and yes. Lots of threats over the years, but no action...
Is it possible to eliminate magical thinking?
by iris-n
Have you ever succeeded in changing someone's beliefs in pseudoscience? Do you think that it is possible to do so in a large scale, to move humanity towards a more rational way of thinking? Sorry for the down tone, but I have plenty of experience in failing to convince people of the falsehood in astrology, homeopathy, acupunture, etc., and very little in succeeding.
Randi: 3 questions... #1, no, it will always be with us to a greater or lesser extent. But so will many other problems, and that doesn’t mean we just give up and ignore them. Firefighters never give up because there will always be a new fire to put out. #2, yes, frequently, judging from the responses we receive. #3, eventually, and that is why I started The James Randi Educational Foundation, in order to continue and expand on the work I have been doing for decades...
I've always wondered
by mog007
What's your favorite magic trick?
Randi: This is one of those "what's your favorite color" questions... Or "favorite movie, favorite country, favorite song..." If I answered it, would you know what I was talking about? I guess my answer would be “the next trick that would work!” Seriously though, it is probably a mindreading trick I invented involving any book randomly chosen from a bookshelf, and that could be at a bookstore, a library or someone’s home. I have been performing it for many decades.
Your best performance?
by TrumpetPower!
Most people know you for your work laying bare the schemes of fraudsters, and not enough people realize that you really are as good as your stage name. What's the best show you've ever performed that's been recorded and how can we see it?
Randi: I've no idea, really. I've been performing for more than 75 years, and I've done thousands of performances, of which only a very small fraction were recorded. I guess that favorites would include my appearance on Happy Days, or performing the first card trick from outer space with astronaut Ed Lu. But again, there were so many that it is hard to say.
Tell a good anecdote
by vlm
I ask all the "computer programmer" interview types for their proudest chunk of code, in your case I'm just asking for the coolest anecdote / story / bust / event. Not a one liner and not a novel, just a paragraph or so about the coolest most interesting single incident / anecdote you were involved in. Here's one paragraph on your coolest/favorite single incident.
Randi: I am happy to say that I share a number of such anecdotes in the new feature length documentary being made about me called An Honest Liar. Take a look!
Legacy
by abies
While we all hope you will live as long as possible and continue your work, do you think that somebody will pick up your legacy and continue to debunk the fraudsters when you are not longer able to? Do you have trusted people to whom you are willing to hand over the responsibility, both financially and skill-wise?
Randi: I'll depend on my team at the JREF continuing after I'm no longer here, and I trust that it will. (It needs your support to do so, and I’m unapologetic saying so.) The JREF is a great group of people who are in line with my way of thinking, and care about continuing the unique work, including JREF president D.J. Grothe who is helping take the organization to new heights; my longtime friend the magician and skeptic Jamy Ian Swiss, who is a JREF Senior Fellow; Banachek who runs our Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge (video), and the rest of our wonderful staff, volunteers and supporters. And there are many others, like the great Penn and Teller, skeptic Michael Shermer, and the people who come to The Amaz!ng Meeting each year.
by eldavojohn
Sometimes when I see tabloids and crap at grocery stores I wonder if humanity is really making progress in the skepticism department. I think there are more people today that are skeptical of all things paranormal than there were years ago but I believe that only because the population has been increasing. Percentage-wise, I fear we may still be at the level humanity has been at throughout history. You can find writings dating way back of people who were "in the know" about what was fake and what was real. As science has increased our realm of knowledge, it seems that paranormal seekers have just found it in other mediums. So what is your opinion on humanity's track record for belief in the paranormal versus skepticism? Have we made progress? Are we forever doomed to deal with a percentage of the population who want to believe?
Randi: It's hard to say, but I think that yes, we're always going to have irrational attitudes to deal with. It is what I’ve called the whack-a-mole problem of skepticism. You have to keep fighting back the nonsense every time it pokes its head out. Judging by the mail and email we receive, I believe we're making substantial progress, however.
query
by LokiSteve
What's the most dangerous lie perpetuated by the people you bust?
Randi: Spurious claims of healing, which directly misdirect and misinform those who are most vulnerable. This is why we support the important work of the Science Based Medicine project and Dr. Steve Novella and the rest of the doctors. The JREF just came out with books on pseudoscientific medical claims, so-called “complementary and alternative medicine,” or CAM, in coordination with them. These are topics like homeopathy and naturopothy. Many other titles on other CAM topics are forthcoming in the months ahead.
Best fraud?
by TrumpetPower!
Mr. Amazing, Of the various people who've tried for the prize, which one do you think would have made the best entertainer / carnie / whatever had he or she not been so serious about the reality of the trick?
Randi: None of them have been very entertaining except Uri Geller, who has gone a long way on a 4-trick repertoire...
risks of cash rewards?
by Jodka
When offering a $1 million reward to anyone who successfully demonstrates proof of the paranormal you risk failing to debunk some paranormal claims, not because paranormal activity actually exists, but because the ruse is either so technologically advanced or clever that investigators fail to identify the means of deception. How concerned were you about this possibility and have you ever had any "close calls" where you almost failed to discover the trick?
Randi: I have never been very concerned about that. The "means of deception" have never been especially difficult to solve, though I rather wish that a really clever operator would come my way just to provide a bit of a challenge.
Placebo Effectiveness of faith healing
by Bananatree3
Through your years of research on faith healing, homeopathy and other "magical" cures...have you found some of them more "effective" than others due to the Placebo Effect? Many people have superstitions, charms and other things they personally believe bring them good luck...and I wonder how much of this magical healing and luck bringing is real due to the Placebo Effect. Of course it is not "magic", but the power of a Placebo is still statistically valid in certain cases it seems.
Randi: Re the placebo effect, it only makes you feel better momentarily. The question I ask: "do you want to actually BE better, or only FEEL better?"
Can a Christian or theist be a skeptic?
by irenaeous
I ask this because I used to regard myself as a Christian skeptic. While I support what you do and much of the work of the skeptical movement, I now no longer make that claim because current skepticism seems joined at the hip with atheism. I am sure you know, one of the early leaders of the skeptic movement, Martin Gardner, was a theist and a self professed liberal Christian. Are people like Martin Gardner welcome in the movement today. And, as a Christian I thank you for exposing the televangelist faith healing frauds.
Randi: First, I never knew of Martin as a Christian, though he was a theist. He told me that he had no evidence at all for his theism, but it simply made him feel better - which I granted him, easily. You certainly do not need to be an atheist to be a good skeptic, as JREF president D.J. Grothe has argued before on randi.org.
Is it true
by Intrepid imaginaut
Is it true that your organisation is a front to attract the mystically endowed and drain them of their powers to feed the unholy appetites of a cabal of dark theurgists and further their quest to challenge the illuminati for control of the mortal world, leading ultimately to human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, and mass hysteria?
Randi: How did you ever figure that out? I thought we were doing such an effective job at the cover-up.
repercussions?
by poetmatt
Have you ever had significant repercussions from debunking what is essentially garbage? Have people ever actually threatened you for supposedly crushing any livelihoods, which were then based on fraud?
Randi: No, and yes. Lots of threats over the years, but no action...
Is it possible to eliminate magical thinking?
by iris-n
Have you ever succeeded in changing someone's beliefs in pseudoscience? Do you think that it is possible to do so in a large scale, to move humanity towards a more rational way of thinking? Sorry for the down tone, but I have plenty of experience in failing to convince people of the falsehood in astrology, homeopathy, acupunture, etc., and very little in succeeding.
Randi: 3 questions... #1, no, it will always be with us to a greater or lesser extent. But so will many other problems, and that doesn’t mean we just give up and ignore them. Firefighters never give up because there will always be a new fire to put out. #2, yes, frequently, judging from the responses we receive. #3, eventually, and that is why I started The James Randi Educational Foundation, in order to continue and expand on the work I have been doing for decades...
I've always wondered
by mog007
What's your favorite magic trick?
Randi: This is one of those "what's your favorite color" questions... Or "favorite movie, favorite country, favorite song..." If I answered it, would you know what I was talking about? I guess my answer would be “the next trick that would work!” Seriously though, it is probably a mindreading trick I invented involving any book randomly chosen from a bookshelf, and that could be at a bookstore, a library or someone’s home. I have been performing it for many decades.
Your best performance?
by TrumpetPower!
Most people know you for your work laying bare the schemes of fraudsters, and not enough people realize that you really are as good as your stage name. What's the best show you've ever performed that's been recorded and how can we see it?
Randi: I've no idea, really. I've been performing for more than 75 years, and I've done thousands of performances, of which only a very small fraction were recorded. I guess that favorites would include my appearance on Happy Days, or performing the first card trick from outer space with astronaut Ed Lu. But again, there were so many that it is hard to say.
Tell a good anecdote
by vlm
I ask all the "computer programmer" interview types for their proudest chunk of code, in your case I'm just asking for the coolest anecdote / story / bust / event. Not a one liner and not a novel, just a paragraph or so about the coolest most interesting single incident / anecdote you were involved in. Here's one paragraph on your coolest/favorite single incident.
Randi: I am happy to say that I share a number of such anecdotes in the new feature length documentary being made about me called An Honest Liar. Take a look!
Legacy
by abies
While we all hope you will live as long as possible and continue your work, do you think that somebody will pick up your legacy and continue to debunk the fraudsters when you are not longer able to? Do you have trusted people to whom you are willing to hand over the responsibility, both financially and skill-wise?
Randi: I'll depend on my team at the JREF continuing after I'm no longer here, and I trust that it will. (It needs your support to do so, and I’m unapologetic saying so.) The JREF is a great group of people who are in line with my way of thinking, and care about continuing the unique work, including JREF president D.J. Grothe who is helping take the organization to new heights; my longtime friend the magician and skeptic Jamy Ian Swiss, who is a JREF Senior Fellow; Banachek who runs our Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge (video), and the rest of our wonderful staff, volunteers and supporters. And there are many others, like the great Penn and Teller, skeptic Michael Shermer, and the people who come to The Amaz!ng Meeting each year.
I've seen many people fall for this trap, and some have lost their lives too. There are some who're even propagating that just thinking that you will be healed will absolve you of the disease, and you will be leading a happy life all again. But what irks me the most is that most of these people I know are Engineers and Doctors, people who've studied Science and know how it works.
Re the placebo effect, it only makes you feel better momentarily. The question I ask: "do you want to actually BE better, or only FEEL better?"
This is the one place I disagree with Randi in this interview. The placebo effect has been repeatedly scientifically proven to be pretty amazingly effective at making people better, by objective measures of health/recovery. It's the gold standard against which "real" medicine is compared (and sometimes fails to do much better, while adding more side effects). Of course, when there is a real treatment that performs better than placebo in blind trials, people should be getting that. Using placebos dishonestly --- raking in tons of money while keeping people from known effective cures --- is the problem. But it's a worthwhile area of study to learn (possibly by observing the quacks) how *real* doctors can best harness the power of placebo effects in their patient care procedures, bolstering the effectiveness and reducing side effects of actual medications.
Shit, I am surprised Zues really does exist.
You die, and it turns out your were wrong there is a god other than the one you pray to. What do you say?
So, this is what Valhalla looks like. Impressive.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
What proof do we have that this was really James Randi answering the questions, and not just somebody (say, someone else at JREF) claiming to be Randi?
I am officially gone from
That's pretty easy, you say:
"Well, fuck..."
Assuming that you have the chance to actually comment before you end up as the main course in a supernatural luau, that is.
Needless to say, I'm hoping that if the answer to the multiple choice question is "D. None of the Above", that they at least let me show my work and give me partial credit for trying.
I am surprised Zeus really does exist.
I wouldn't be: A few years ago there was a large statue of Jesus near Monroe, OH struck down by a bolt of lightning, so clearly Zeus exists and decided to smite that statue.
I am officially gone from
I asked the question regarding whether a Christian could be a skeptic. I called Martin Gardner a "self-described liberal Christian" which I tried to correct in a comment to my original post. He was a theist and was raised as a Christian, but my thinking of him as a liberal Christian was based on a misreading of one of his books where he appealed to "Liberal Christians" or "Philosophical Theists" using both terms. So I confounded them. On further reading it seems clear to me that he rejected religious traditions including Christianity while retaining as stance as a philosophical theist. Randi's answer was both accurate and charitable. He is a great man.
They wouldn't say anything, because the existence of something we'd call a god doesn't necessitate an afterlife, and he'd still be dead? What you're really trying to say is "What if a particular sect of a particular branch of a particular religion has exactly the correct interpretation of the nature of the universe, and you were faced with the consequences thereof?" To which the inevitable question is "Which one?" That would dramatically influence my perspective.
"You did a pretty shitty job with all the diseases and psyche-destroying pain levels. And what the fuck with the high gravity so we break falling just a few feet?"
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/03/27/we-were-all-wrong-the-true-god-is-polynesian/
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
That's right. Not one person has been able to pass the preliminary testing, which is designed to see if there's enough of an effect to warrant full-scale testing. So?
How many have taken the preliminary test? JREF doesn't know -- they're that badly organized.
Why should they keep track of every idiot with ridiculous claims who can't even show plausible evidence that there's something possibly worth investigation?
There have been a few cases reported where JREF has killed applications by requesting changes to the protocol that effectively changing the nature of the claim made by the challenger.
Citation, please? This claim has been making the rounds, and it seems to be based on one case where the applicant violated the agreed-upon protocol by using her cell-phone during the testing. She claimed she was just answering a text, but refused to continue testing without the cell phone. Yes, her preliminary results would have warranted further investigation if she had followed protocol, but the fact that she refused to continue without her phone is quite suspicious (and cannot be blamed on JREF).
If you've got something more substantial than that, please present it.
No one has ever taken the formal test. Not one person.
That's because nobody has passed preliminary testing.
How many have taken the preliminary test? JREF doesn't know -- they're that badly organized.
Check their web site - they have dozens of writeups on preliminary tests.
There have been a few cases reported where JREF has killed applications by requesting changes to the protocol that effectively changing the nature of the claim made by the challenger.
Reported by whom? I've seen examples where they ask for changes to the claim because the claim was untestable. For example, there was a guy who said he could talk telepathically to aliens. He could describe their homeworld and technology and everything. Of course, he could be making it all up, so they asked him if he could provide anything that could be testable.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
God is cholesterol? Good to know. "Diets high in soluble fiber shown to reduce God".
You should know that false certainty doesn't actually make your beliefs accurate.
You'd think an omnipotent being could get around such little issues... or is he not "all powerful" after all?
That would be interesting... except that the exact same thing happens to athiests too. Medical misdiagnosis are unfortunately common, and along with the body's own natural healing ability, account for every one of these cases. When it comes to minor aches and pains, mental condition and the body's own healing ability can handle a lot. When it comes to the larger issues, ones that would require surgery to solve, in every one of these cases that has ever been investigated and the claims are properly analyzed, it turns out the initial diagnosis was wrong.
Randi is a good-egg and we need more people like him who are alert to frauds. I'm also appalled at irrational rejection of medical treatment on the basis of quackery. But there's one little bit of good that can come from an, ahem, 'healer' if they have confidence that the patient can catch onto. To go with many medical conditions is a load of mental baggage and even legit pills that fuzz thinking. It helps enormously if the patient leaves their complex regrets, hang-ups and attention to trivial detail behind to focus instead on getting better. This applies to school kids worried about exams, artists losing their muse and general depression, de-motivation and relationship problems. Often a ludicrously unqualified but persuasive person can achieve that. Unfortunately letting such 'enthusiasts' near vulnerable people can be bad news as altruism turns to exploitation. Ughh! Here's hoping someone can square that circle.
Or it might've been Thor. ;)
Asatru and Odinism are gaining adherents in the US (and abroad)
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
You die, and it turns out you were wrong and there is a God. What do you say?
I punch God in the face.
Why should they keep track of every idiot with ridiculous claims who can't even show plausible evidence that there's something possibly worth investigation?
Because that's what Legitimate organizations do! Don't you think that their donors would be interested in seeing how their money is being put to good use?
What about marketing? "We tested n applicants in 2012 and found them to be frauds! Help us keep up the good work."
What about managing applications? "We've tested similar claims n times over the past 5 years and need to focus on other areas"
I called Randi and his JREF organization a fraud because they act like frauds. It's obvious to everyone that Randi has no problem misrepresenting the truth whenever it suits him. (To his credit, he usually admits to his "exagerations" when challenged. Example: Randi's outright lie in Dog World Magazine about testing Sheldrakes claims.)
Apply just a little bit of reason and critical thinking here.
If you want to make a real difference, and KNOW where your money goes, find a classroom in need on donors choice. A $100 for a microscope for a science class will go a lot farther than $10,000 for JREF to ... do what, exaclty? Hold an annual meeting? Publish an electronic newsletter?
Anything's better than supporting a fraudulent enterprise like JREF.
Required reading for internet skeptics
Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions.
You probably knew going into this that /. is much like an asylum full of raving lunatics hell bent on arguing over the minutiae of each and every point just for the hell of it.
I found your responses to be an interesting read, and I'm glad you're still fighting the good fight.
What work?
Hard to believe that the US military in Iraq was trying to detect IDE's with dowsing sticks, but it happened and Randi was instrumental in exposing the scam.
I also credit the man with teaching me the difference between science and woo by explaining the proper role of skepticism in science. You see, I was a teenage fan (18-20) of Uri Geller back in the late seventies, he "fixed" my broken watch by starting at the TV, pretty strong proof, huh. Thing is, Randi's book did in one night what years of HS science could not, taught me the meaning of scientific skepticism and it's role in assessing ANY claim. For this I am eternally grateful to the man and a great admirer of his lifetime of work that not only exposes dangerous scams, but has also given countless people a basic "bullshit detection kit" that can dramatically alter the course of people lives.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
At one time there was a forum on the JREF web site where they created a new thread for every applicant and documented what progress had been made. Although they communicated with these people through the mail or on telephone, they posted updates in the thread to show what was going on in each case.
I spent a few hours reading through the threads. They were basically all from people who were clearly delusional. The few who went as far as the first test always failed miserably. Indeed, in one thread, the person documenting the case said something to the effect of "I can no longer in clear conscious continue pretending as if there is a potential supernatural claim to be tested here. You clearly need to seek psychiatric help." This at the end of a series of letters attempting to pin down exactly how they were to test whether this guy could sit in the corner of a dark room for about 20 minutes and see various colorful things floating around.
That's essentially the only thing the prize attracts. Those perpetuating real scams, like those pretending to be psychics, aren't interested in the million dollar prize because they know there's no way they could possibly win it (and that isn't because they're psychic and they know James Randi will cheat, though I'm surprised no one has attempted to use that excuse yet). The only people who attempt to claim the prize have some real issues.
This also led to a lot of problems with getting anyone to test these people. The organization would have to contact some scientists well-educated in skepticism somewhere in the country near the prize applicant, and get them to agree to volunteer their time to set up some carefully prescribed agreed-upon test environment only to test someone who is clearly delusional and had no chance whatsoever of ever passing the test. They were having a lot of difficulty with this, as apparently once someone tested a few of these people, they no longer wanted anything to do with the process as it was just too dumb and pointless.
I believe this is what led to the change to the rules some years ago that, in order to be eligible, you must first get a news article written and published about your ability in a local newspaper. Thus, they no longer have to deal with the delusional because the local newspapers will never publish an article about them, yet the prize remains open to any daytime talk show psychic who wants it. Thus, it's quite possible that they don't test anyone anymore, as these people aren't interested in having their abilities being demonstrated to be false.
So you're argument is that science has made modern translations more accurate and suddenly changed centuries of dogma? Not thinking properly are you? Stop being an idiot and realize that what I am saying is the science. Modern understanding of language usage at the time of writing the documents shows that they are all talking about the same things. Choosing a first edition is not arbitrary, it is the most logical starting point. Spend more time learning to think than spewing out canned dogmatic insults. The dogma makes them different. Anyone who continuously talks about an anthropomorfic god when disparaging christianity is responding only to dogma and not the what the documents actually say.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.