Here's the problem - everyone wants unlimited data at an unbelievably fast speed, for free. It's the same mentality that allows people to pirate movies, music, and software. Entitlement. I want it, why can't I have it? The law? Ha! I'll take as much as I can get and complain when it doesn't live up to my expectations.
Get ready for the long list of justifications like, 'It *should* be free and unlimited' or 'It doesn't cost them hardly anything!' or 'My phone has their stupid logo on it, that's free advertising, I shouldn't have to pay' or 'Paying more because I use more is *unfair* to me, because I want a lower price'.
I think the most fair analogy would be a drunken husband who gets into an argument with his wife at a bar and *would* have beat the crap out of her; if not for the gang of friendly local bikers that said, 'You'd better not do that....'
Blizzard had every intention of tying your real name to the forums as part of it's RealID implementation. They announced that they were GOING to do it. They even had a go-live date. They never asked permission or for user input.
A mob of angry customers intervened and convinced them to change their mind. Begrudgingly.
I don't mean any offense; but this a huge, huge, huge pet peeve of mine.
He's not saying that RealID is *like* spousal abuse. What he said is that the relationship between the RealID idea being presented and the retraction is similar to the relationship between a domestic abuser beating and then apologizing to their abusee.
At no point does he make light of domestic abuse or say (or even imply) that it's 'the same' or 'as bad' as domestic abuse.
He's just saying that doing something bad (like the original RealID proposal or beating your wife) isn't immediately fixed by a meaningless gesture (backing out at the last minute, apologizing after you beat your wife).
I'm not saying I agree with his argument or not; but I am saying - why the hell do people get their panties in a wad over this?
The problem is that a lot of business aren't ethical, or will become unethical or will go bankrupt or will be bought out.
When you are all 'I'm not giving you my real name!' people look at you like you are crazy; they say you are being extreme. But then, when a company goes bankrupt and their old laptops get auctioned off on e-bay and all your personal information gets stolen *then* people are like, 'Gee, why'd ya give them that info!?!'
It's still really, really, really easy to make an anonymous RealID. All you need to do is buy a new Blizzard game. There is nothing to keep it 'real'.
The data they collected pre-dated people having a reason to lie. Nothing stops trolls and jerks from getting a new RealID. There is nothing 'real' about it.
I think people are suffering from a 'false dilemma' mentality.
"I want some features this thing would give me, so I have to support the whole thing. Because that's the only way I could get those features."
All of the social aspects you are describing could be achieved *without* it ever being tied to your actual identity.
You need (or at least used to need) a Battlenet account. All of your characters are associated with that account. Adding the ability to be 'account friends' or 'account guilds' that would let all of your alts on all of your servers make your Bnet account appear online to your Bnet friends - can all be done, without tying anything to your real name.
Eh - the funny thing is that it's unbelievably easy to make a fake RealID - it just requires that you do it 'from the beginning'. Since most people created their WoW accounts in a time when companies respected your privacy, they gave real information.
Blizz has made it an insane amount of work to change the information associated with your account, after the fact. But if you are willing to buy a new game; you can, once again, use fake names and be anonymous.
I know this because my girlfriend's "RealID" has my name on it. So much for 'real', eh? When we tried to correct the issue, we found we'd have to call, sit on hold, talk to someone, fax legal documents *to a f***ing Video Game Company* and wait and see if it was 'approved'.
Any new-comer to Blizzards new social network of gamers (IE - you buy a new game) you are free to fake whatever info you want. Now that people know RealID is a strong identifier to themselves, people who are so inclined are going to use fake info.
Given that the vast majority of their users will spends hours and hours using the fruits of their labor; they'll refuse to support it with funds. No matter how great they think it is.
That sense of entitlement pushes software devs to come up with creative ways to make money. Advertising is the go-to and if they can get more money using the GPS to make it targeted ads, of course they are going to try.
I'm sure nobody at Pandora is going to lose sleep because someone won't install their free app and use it, for free, because they access the GPS.
Eh - malicious devs aren't retarded. If you are going to write code that does something bad, you'll hide it in an app that would also need that level of access.
For example - if I want to write an app that will secretly send text messages from your own to a premium text service that will cost you $9.99 per text - I wouldn't stick it into a card game app. I'd stick it into an app that claims to do something novel or useful with text messages. Like an app that takes your boring text message and translates it into ebonics, or leet speak or whatever.
If you code it in such a way that, it won't send out the premium texts until after a particular date - say 3 months after you write it; if it's a half-way decent app, you'd have plenty of time to build a user base with decent ratings.
Correct me if I'm wrong; but isn't that true of EVERYTHING?
Let's say we manage to get a bunch of humans living on Mars. Just hypothetically speaking. Well, everyone is still going to die. Right? I mean, maybe an asteroid hits Earth and kills everyone and the people on Mars live longer. But doesn't the sun eventually expand/burn out? Then everyone is dead?
I mean, at some point, using our best scientific models, isn't the entirety of everything scheduled to end?
The android phones you buy from a specific carrier aren't running the android OS. They are running a bastardization they pass off as Android.
If you buy an Android phone from any of the major carriers, you aren't getting an open phone. The only way to open it requires voiding the warranty and potentially harmful actions.
You clam I can still anything I want on my Android phone. But you are completely wrong. And I don't mean any offense when I say that, I'm just saying, you are wrong.
It took Sprint months (nearly a year) to release a Sprint-Approved Android 2.1. So, you could go online and see the source code/download Android 2.1 - but you couldn't put it on your HTC Hero, because Sprint didn't release their version of it. Again, you could 'hack' the phone/void your warranty...but that was your only choice.
If you wanted to run an app or game that required Android 2.1 - you couldn't. The Sprint forums were loaded with upset customers begging for information about it (and then other users telling them just to void their warranty and do it now).
The net effect is essentially the same; if you buy a phone from Carrier XYZ - you aren't getting an Android phone. You are getting their version of an Android phone. They can put in ALL SORTS OF LIMITATIONS - like the inability to delete a file; and there is nothing you can do (that doesn't risk bricking the phone).
For the end-user; it's not much different than an iPhone.
Gotcha. So it's "open" in some predefined, limited way.
And getting it 'more open' requires either being a Computer Programmer with a lot of free time or visiting a bunch of shady websites, following cryptic instructions, and installing stuff you don't understand.
Which is pretty much the same story as with the iPhone or anything else.
Maybe the Android phones are 'more open', but they are still very closed in a practical sense.
I had an LG Musiq (I know, I know....) but I could get free ringtones with it. But it was hardly an open phone.
I now have an HTC Hero. And I can't remove the Sprint Nascar application from my phone without voiding the warranty, visiting shady websites, and following cryptic instructions that could be potentially harmful. That's not exactly 'open'.
I don't know what android phones you've got; but the ones I've seen aren't really that much better than an iPhone when it comes to being 'open'.
If you buy a phone directly, without a carrier, sure, it's "open". But then you are spending several hundred dollars extra. If you buy it through a carrier, it's going to have limits and restrictions imposed by the carrier. Truthfully, even if you buy it yourself, you'll still have restrictions, just fewer of them.
The source is available for android phones; but that means nothing. The carriers are free to branch the code and use their own and 99.99999% of people can't do anything with the source anyway. 'Rooting' your android isn't any easier than doing something unsupported - like installing the Homebrew channel on a wii. It's not encouraged. And doing it causes all sorts of potential problems like voiding your warranty.
So, in theory, an Android phone is great. In practice, I can't delete the Sprint TV/Sprint Nascar apps from my HTC Hero without voiding my warranty.
I don't know why this is; but a lot of people like to take a word that means X and then use it as if it means Y and then just wait for someone to say, 'Umm, don't you mean Y?' and then launch into a rant about how X is this and that.
That's what you are doing.
'Boss' and 'Work For' are words that have a meaning already. You are using the same words, but in a way that (while true) doesn't fit the words you are using.
If I buy stock in Walmart; does that really make me 'the boss' of Walmart's CEO? Does it really capture the meaning of what people think of when they hear 'boss'. Do I set the CEOs hours, or tell him what to do, or determine his salary, or have the final say in what gets done at Walmart? No.
Am I *really* the boss of Walmart's CEO? No.
The same is true of all government workers. As a tax-payer, do I have type of relationship to the workers? Yes. Am I their boss? No. They pay taxes too, does that make them their own boss? No.
Boss / 'working for' are not the right words.
Likewise, if you sell a product, it would be inappropriate to say that your customers are your 'bosses'. Your customers are your 'customers' and the relationship between them paying you money and you needing money to stay in business is a much better way to convey the relationship
It would be more accurate to say you are a 'customer' of the services provided by the government employees. A captive customer who is forced to be a customer; your taxes do fund the government....but that hardly makes you their boss. No more than shopping at Best Buy makes you the boss of an employee working at Nintendo.
I really think most computer users (at least, novice level users) would totally disagree with you.
The problem with command lines is that you need to know what commands you can enter. There is absolutely nothing intuitive about knowing names of commands or what the various/a/b/c flags are going to do. It's not easily discoverable, in it's own right.
With a GUI, it's much easier to see what the designers/developers have expected you to do in the given context.
Here's an example....someone gives you a CD with a bunch of pictures from their vacation. You insert it into the CD-ROM drive.
In the GUI - you see a window pop-up with a bunch of suggestions for what you might want to do. One of those options says, 'View Pictures as Slideshow' and you think, 'Hey - that sounds good!' so you click it. A few seconds later, a window pops up with the first picture and some buttons down at the bottom. You recognize many of the buttons from your VCR and know that the 'next' button will take you to the next picture. There are some funky buttons you don't recognize, but if you mouse over them, it tells you what they do. 'Rotate image' - as an example. Now you know how to rotate the image.
In the command line, you insert a CD-ROM and nothing happens.
You know you have to 'tell the computer' what to do; but you don't know how to do that. You can use the 'help' tool or whatever, but then you are searching by keywords and without knowing what the important keywords are, you might not find it.
General discussion is supposed to be for 'General *WoW* discussion'; so religion hardly fits, unless it's an in-game religion. But, when Blizz owns the forums, Blizz makes the rules. If they don't want religion in their forums, they can enforce that, easily.
Bottom line is, people who *aren't* complete trolls and are just expressing their opinions would do so regardless of their name showing up. People who *are* complete trolls can be dealt with using the existing/standard system of banning users (either temporarily or permanently) from the forums.
Delete the thread as off topic. Give the thread creator a 2 hour ban as a warning (unless the user has already received a warning for the same thing in the recent future; escalate ban to 48 hours. If the user is a problem user - permaban then).
Bam. Problem solved.
WoW forums are not anonymous. You need an account to post. It's easy to moderate. The trolling and arguing and hatred that goes on is all within the rules Blizzard has set as acceptable.
I'm just saying that, in my limited experience, the people who seem the most excited about travel to other worlds are the least likely to travel around *this* world. Even though the effort required is significantly less.
Likewise, people who seem the most excited about talking to aliens seem to be the most likely to avoid contact with people here.
I'm not against space travel or anything. I just think the dynamics of it all is very interesting.
"I want to explore, but only in the most extreme of all possible ways. Anything less than that, and I'm more content to stay at home and do nothing".
It's like a car enthusiast who refuses to drive ANYTHING other than some prototype that isn't even available yet. But he talks about it a lot, and says how great it is; but if you say, 'Hey - let's get some really awesome go-karts and tear it up!' he's all, 'Nah, I'd rather just stay here and play on my computer'.
Except (at least in the example of Mars) we do already know a lot about the conditions on the surface. We also know a lot about the local cultures (none).
He was a real-estate agent in Fl....so I mean, not exactly a big loss there.
My brother in-law was a real-estate agent who didn't make a sale for a solid 18 months before he quit. Can you really call it 'quitting' if you haven't received a check in 18 months?
I dunno if this guy was in a similar situation, but the market in FL is supposed to suck pretty bad from what I hear.
But they use a super-edition of WinZip (apparently, if you actually pay for it, it becomes about a million times better at compressing things - but only the US government bothered to find out).
So the billion megapixels take up, roughly, the same size as a crappy cell phone pic.
The people that seem most interested in the possibility of communicating with extraterrestrial life also seem the least interested in the possibility of communicating with people right here.
And I mean, really, if you are considering travel to see exotic new worlds and cultures - there really are a lot of options right here, on Earth.
Most of the people I know that are most excited about talk of space travel and who claim they'd be willing to take a one-way ticket to Mars; haven't managed to do any sort of exploration on Earth.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the problem - everyone wants unlimited data at an unbelievably fast speed, for free. It's the same mentality that allows people to pirate movies, music, and software. Entitlement. I want it, why can't I have it? The law? Ha! I'll take as much as I can get and complain when it doesn't live up to my expectations.
Get ready for the long list of justifications like, 'It *should* be free and unlimited' or 'It doesn't cost them hardly anything!' or 'My phone has their stupid logo on it, that's free advertising, I shouldn't have to pay' or 'Paying more because I use more is *unfair* to me, because I want a lower price'.
It's basically just the old 'I want someone to power level me'
I think the most fair analogy would be a drunken husband who gets into an argument with his wife at a bar and *would* have beat the crap out of her; if not for the gang of friendly local bikers that said, 'You'd better not do that....'
Blizzard had every intention of tying your real name to the forums as part of it's RealID implementation. They announced that they were GOING to do it. They even had a go-live date. They never asked permission or for user input.
A mob of angry customers intervened and convinced them to change their mind. Begrudgingly.
I don't mean any offense; but this a huge, huge, huge pet peeve of mine.
He's not saying that RealID is *like* spousal abuse. What he said is that the relationship between the RealID idea being presented and the retraction is similar to the relationship between a domestic abuser beating and then apologizing to their abusee.
At no point does he make light of domestic abuse or say (or even imply) that it's 'the same' or 'as bad' as domestic abuse.
He's just saying that doing something bad (like the original RealID proposal or beating your wife) isn't immediately fixed by a meaningless gesture (backing out at the last minute, apologizing after you beat your wife).
I'm not saying I agree with his argument or not; but I am saying - why the hell do people get their panties in a wad over this?
Sadly, a lot of people really do expect that.
In theory - sure.
The problem is that a lot of business aren't ethical, or will become unethical or will go bankrupt or will be bought out.
When you are all 'I'm not giving you my real name!' people look at you like you are crazy; they say you are being extreme. But then, when a company goes bankrupt and their old laptops get auctioned off on e-bay and all your personal information gets stolen *then* people are like, 'Gee, why'd ya give them that info!?!'
It's still really, really, really easy to make an anonymous RealID. All you need to do is buy a new Blizzard game. There is nothing to keep it 'real'.
The data they collected pre-dated people having a reason to lie. Nothing stops trolls and jerks from getting a new RealID. There is nothing 'real' about it.
I think people are suffering from a 'false dilemma' mentality.
"I want some features this thing would give me, so I have to support the whole thing. Because that's the only way I could get those features."
All of the social aspects you are describing could be achieved *without* it ever being tied to your actual identity.
You need (or at least used to need) a Battlenet account. All of your characters are associated with that account. Adding the ability to be 'account friends' or 'account guilds' that would let all of your alts on all of your servers make your Bnet account appear online to your Bnet friends - can all be done, without tying anything to your real name.
Eh - the funny thing is that it's unbelievably easy to make a fake RealID - it just requires that you do it 'from the beginning'. Since most people created their WoW accounts in a time when companies respected your privacy, they gave real information.
Blizz has made it an insane amount of work to change the information associated with your account, after the fact. But if you are willing to buy a new game; you can, once again, use fake names and be anonymous.
I know this because my girlfriend's "RealID" has my name on it. So much for 'real', eh? When we tried to correct the issue, we found we'd have to call, sit on hold, talk to someone, fax legal documents *to a f***ing Video Game Company* and wait and see if it was 'approved'.
Any new-comer to Blizzards new social network of gamers (IE - you buy a new game) you are free to fake whatever info you want. Now that people know RealID is a strong identifier to themselves, people who are so inclined are going to use fake info.
Given that the vast majority of their users will spends hours and hours using the fruits of their labor; they'll refuse to support it with funds. No matter how great they think it is.
That sense of entitlement pushes software devs to come up with creative ways to make money. Advertising is the go-to and if they can get more money using the GPS to make it targeted ads, of course they are going to try.
I'm sure nobody at Pandora is going to lose sleep because someone won't install their free app and use it, for free, because they access the GPS.
Eh - malicious devs aren't retarded. If you are going to write code that does something bad, you'll hide it in an app that would also need that level of access.
For example - if I want to write an app that will secretly send text messages from your own to a premium text service that will cost you $9.99 per text - I wouldn't stick it into a card game app. I'd stick it into an app that claims to do something novel or useful with text messages. Like an app that takes your boring text message and translates it into ebonics, or leet speak or whatever.
If you code it in such a way that, it won't send out the premium texts until after a particular date - say 3 months after you write it; if it's a half-way decent app, you'd have plenty of time to build a user base with decent ratings.
Correct me if I'm wrong; but isn't that true of EVERYTHING?
Let's say we manage to get a bunch of humans living on Mars. Just hypothetically speaking. Well, everyone is still going to die. Right? I mean, maybe an asteroid hits Earth and kills everyone and the people on Mars live longer. But doesn't the sun eventually expand/burn out? Then everyone is dead?
I mean, at some point, using our best scientific models, isn't the entirety of everything scheduled to end?
It's not an issue that is specific to Sprint.
The android phones you buy from a specific carrier aren't running the android OS. They are running a bastardization they pass off as Android.
If you buy an Android phone from any of the major carriers, you aren't getting an open phone. The only way to open it requires voiding the warranty and potentially harmful actions.
You clam I can still anything I want on my Android phone. But you are completely wrong. And I don't mean any offense when I say that, I'm just saying, you are wrong.
It took Sprint months (nearly a year) to release a Sprint-Approved Android 2.1. So, you could go online and see the source code/download Android 2.1 - but you couldn't put it on your HTC Hero, because Sprint didn't release their version of it. Again, you could 'hack' the phone/void your warranty...but that was your only choice.
If you wanted to run an app or game that required Android 2.1 - you couldn't. The Sprint forums were loaded with upset customers begging for information about it (and then other users telling them just to void their warranty and do it now).
The net effect is essentially the same; if you buy a phone from Carrier XYZ - you aren't getting an Android phone. You are getting their version of an Android phone. They can put in ALL SORTS OF LIMITATIONS - like the inability to delete a file; and there is nothing you can do (that doesn't risk bricking the phone).
For the end-user; it's not much different than an iPhone.
Gotcha. So it's "open" in some predefined, limited way.
And getting it 'more open' requires either being a Computer Programmer with a lot of free time or visiting a bunch of shady websites, following cryptic instructions, and installing stuff you don't understand.
Which is pretty much the same story as with the iPhone or anything else.
Maybe the Android phones are 'more open', but they are still very closed in a practical sense.
I had an LG Musiq (I know, I know....) but I could get free ringtones with it. But it was hardly an open phone.
I now have an HTC Hero. And I can't remove the Sprint Nascar application from my phone without voiding the warranty, visiting shady websites, and following cryptic instructions that could be potentially harmful. That's not exactly 'open'.
I don't know what android phones you've got; but the ones I've seen aren't really that much better than an iPhone when it comes to being 'open'.
If you buy a phone directly, without a carrier, sure, it's "open". But then you are spending several hundred dollars extra. If you buy it through a carrier, it's going to have limits and restrictions imposed by the carrier. Truthfully, even if you buy it yourself, you'll still have restrictions, just fewer of them.
The source is available for android phones; but that means nothing. The carriers are free to branch the code and use their own and 99.99999% of people can't do anything with the source anyway. 'Rooting' your android isn't any easier than doing something unsupported - like installing the Homebrew channel on a wii. It's not encouraged. And doing it causes all sorts of potential problems like voiding your warranty.
So, in theory, an Android phone is great.
In practice, I can't delete the Sprint TV/Sprint Nascar apps from my HTC Hero without voiding my warranty.
I don't know why this is; but a lot of people like to take a word that means X and then use it as if it means Y and then just wait for someone to say, 'Umm, don't you mean Y?' and then launch into a rant about how X is this and that.
That's what you are doing.
'Boss' and 'Work For' are words that have a meaning already. You are using the same words, but in a way that (while true) doesn't fit the words you are using.
If I buy stock in Walmart; does that really make me 'the boss' of Walmart's CEO? Does it really capture the meaning of what people think of when they hear 'boss'. Do I set the CEOs hours, or tell him what to do, or determine his salary, or have the final say in what gets done at Walmart? No.
Am I *really* the boss of Walmart's CEO? No.
The same is true of all government workers. As a tax-payer, do I have type of relationship to the workers? Yes. Am I their boss? No. They pay taxes too, does that make them their own boss? No.
Boss / 'working for' are not the right words.
Likewise, if you sell a product, it would be inappropriate to say that your customers are your 'bosses'. Your customers are your 'customers' and the relationship between them paying you money and you needing money to stay in business is a much better way to convey the relationship
It would be more accurate to say you are a 'customer' of the services provided by the government employees. A captive customer who is forced to be a customer; your taxes do fund the government....but that hardly makes you their boss. No more than shopping at Best Buy makes you the boss of an employee working at Nintendo.
I really think most computer users (at least, novice level users) would totally disagree with you.
The problem with command lines is that you need to know what commands you can enter. There is absolutely nothing intuitive about knowing names of commands or what the various /a /b /c flags are going to do. It's not easily discoverable, in it's own right.
With a GUI, it's much easier to see what the designers/developers have expected you to do in the given context.
Here's an example....someone gives you a CD with a bunch of pictures from their vacation. You insert it into the CD-ROM drive.
In the GUI - you see a window pop-up with a bunch of suggestions for what you might want to do. One of those options says, 'View Pictures as Slideshow' and you think, 'Hey - that sounds good!' so you click it. A few seconds later, a window pops up with the first picture and some buttons down at the bottom. You recognize many of the buttons from your VCR and know that the 'next' button will take you to the next picture. There are some funky buttons you don't recognize, but if you mouse over them, it tells you what they do. 'Rotate image' - as an example. Now you know how to rotate the image.
In the command line, you insert a CD-ROM and nothing happens.
You know you have to 'tell the computer' what to do; but you don't know how to do that. You can use the 'help' tool or whatever, but then you are searching by keywords and without knowing what the important keywords are, you might not find it.
General discussion is supposed to be for 'General *WoW* discussion'; so religion hardly fits, unless it's an in-game religion. But, when Blizz owns the forums, Blizz makes the rules. If they don't want religion in their forums, they can enforce that, easily.
Bottom line is, people who *aren't* complete trolls and are just expressing their opinions would do so regardless of their name showing up. People who *are* complete trolls can be dealt with using the existing/standard system of banning users (either temporarily or permanently) from the forums.
Delete the thread as off topic.
Give the thread creator a 2 hour ban as a warning (unless the user has already received a warning for the same thing in the recent future; escalate ban to 48 hours. If the user is a problem user - permaban then).
Bam. Problem solved.
WoW forums are not anonymous. You need an account to post. It's easy to moderate. The trolling and arguing and hatred that goes on is all within the rules Blizzard has set as acceptable.
I'm not disagreeing with that.
I'm just saying that, in my limited experience, the people who seem the most excited about travel to other worlds are the least likely to travel around *this* world. Even though the effort required is significantly less.
Likewise, people who seem the most excited about talking to aliens seem to be the most likely to avoid contact with people here.
I'm not against space travel or anything. I just think the dynamics of it all is very interesting.
"I want to explore, but only in the most extreme of all possible ways. Anything less than that, and I'm more content to stay at home and do nothing".
It's like a car enthusiast who refuses to drive ANYTHING other than some prototype that isn't even available yet. But he talks about it a lot, and says how great it is; but if you say, 'Hey - let's get some really awesome go-karts and tear it up!' he's all, 'Nah, I'd rather just stay here and play on my computer'.
Except (at least in the example of Mars) we do already know a lot about the conditions on the surface. We also know a lot about the local cultures (none).
He was a real-estate agent in Fl....so I mean, not exactly a big loss there.
My brother in-law was a real-estate agent who didn't make a sale for a solid 18 months before he quit. Can you really call it 'quitting' if you haven't received a check in 18 months?
I dunno if this guy was in a similar situation, but the market in FL is supposed to suck pretty bad from what I hear.
But they use a super-edition of WinZip (apparently, if you actually pay for it, it becomes about a million times better at compressing things - but only the US government bothered to find out).
So the billion megapixels take up, roughly, the same size as a crappy cell phone pic.
It's amazing.
I've noticed this as well.
The people that seem most interested in the possibility of communicating with extraterrestrial life also seem the least interested in the possibility of communicating with people right here.
And I mean, really, if you are considering travel to see exotic new worlds and cultures - there really are a lot of options right here, on Earth.
Most of the people I know that are most excited about talk of space travel and who claim they'd be willing to take a one-way ticket to Mars; haven't managed to do any sort of exploration on Earth.
Sure - provided THEY can actually PAY for the treatment; then yes. By all means.