I, for one, am happy to welcome our space mouse overlords.
I at no point fed you guys a bunch of sacharine, aspartame, or anything else. The one thing "determined to cause cancer in laboratory rats" is... lab researchers.
The shareholders of Polycom will get cash AND end up with 60% of the combined entity. That is a lot more of "Polycom bought Mitel" than "Mitel bought Polycom."
Add the "keeping the name", "keeping the products", and escaping US legal and tax for better environment in Canada, and it all makes the same amount of sense as any other international merger (now limited by US tax laws to 60%/40%, conveniently the same as this one...)
...is not this one. This one seeks to curtail privacy, remove encryption, punish whistleblowers, and use the Espionage Act and Treason against any and all (except their own David Petraeous and Hillary Clinton).
This administration and our government in general have NO CLUE how to protect systems, and the word 'cyber' isn't used by anyone who isn't ripping off the government for money. The word used to mean 'sex'. http://io9.gizmodo.com/today-c...
I have great faith that if the Obama Administration wanted to do something useful that they would have come out AGAINST the Feinstein draft bill, that they would have come out against forced decryption of iPhones; that they would not charge Edward Snowded with treason, or in the alternative charge Hillary Clinton with treason.
Absent all those, this is hardly more than pissing in the wind.
Anonymous Coward that should NEVER EVER pretend to practice law said: "If they mention the patents in question and you ignore the letter, you get to pay for "willful" infringement instead of just infringement, which is much worse."
No.
Using imprecise words and just spreading misinformation and fearmongering. Better you would have just kept quiet. Didn't even have the decency to sign your name.
A "mention" in a "letter" is nothing.
If they serve you legal notice as per Rule 4.1 (US Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) then you can respond as appropriate. If they send you a letter and "mention" things (whatever the hell that means) you can safely use it as kindling for your weekend campfire.
There are a lot of lawyers. Some actors play them on TV and in the movies. If you want to be one, just go do the whole law-school, bar-exam thing.
Don't make up shit on slashdot. It's something people like to do... but it's not good to spread FUD and misinformation.
There's no doubt that Toyota is partnering with a world leader.
Microsoft has shown its ability to provide the lowest common denominator in secure operating systems since 1993. That's 23 years of being #1 at the most easily-hacked awful excuse for shitty software engineering.
Mac people love macs. Good on them. Linux people love linux. Good on them. There's nobody who's a "windows person and loves windows", just people forced to support poor choices made by upper management that doesn't know tech but mandated "we will buy THIS and not THAT."
Toyota appears to have joined the crowd. - I don't intend to have my car sit for an hour every "patch Tuesday" getting updated - I don't intend to have my car randomly stop working and reboot - Microsoft has a 20+ year track record of NOT DOING ANYTHING RIGHT. All their "advances" come from stealing from the MacOS/Linux crowd.
I think I'll keep driving my Hyundai. Sorry, Toyota, you bet on the loser horse.
Thank you for once again rehashing FB's data sharing policy. I'm sorry when the rest of the world found out that FB shares data and uses it for marketing, and how's how they fund the free web services you choose to use, you were on the toilet or picking your nose or something.
Nothing to see here.
E P.S. "It turns out" is how you start a surprising conclusion to a story, not a an entire paragraph.
Interesting! I did not know that... thank you for the refresher.
having looked it up now, this provides a plethora of information on supersonic flight, sonic booms, overland flight, and reminds me that not only do military aircraft exceed the speed of sound... but so did the Space Shuttle each and every launch:
TL;DR - US airlines lobbied against supersonic travel over the continental US. Congress got the FAA to ban it. End of story. The rest is wishful thinking while ignoring the regulatory situation on the ground. (The original article has many inaccuracies and made up stuff... but hey, ads.)
Long Version When British Airways and Air France pooled their resources to finance the entire Concorde project it was designed not only for UK/FR to US flights, but also NYC to SFO, and SFO/LAX to Asia and Oceania flights. Their projections were for seat prices about 1.5x regular first-class fares and travel 2-3x faster.
Fearing competition from these faster planes, US carriers lobbied the US Congress to forbid these aircraft, claiming that the sonic booms would be devastating to the people below, that air traffic control could not handle such fast aircraft, and that it would be unsafe. In reality, air traffic controllers handle supersonic (military) aircraft all the time, as they are allowed (with authorization) to exceed the speed of sound. As the majority of travel would be intercontinental even the sonic booms could occur over the ocean prior to turning inland to make the Mach-2 flight to the other coast. Finally, there were no safety issues with the Concorde, as it had yet to enter service in the US. Until its one fatal accident of ingesting FOD into its engine the Concorde had the unenviable perfect safety record -- unmatched by the conventional US air carrier services.
Concorde seats did not cost $20,000 (you *did* read the original article, right) they cost $5,000 to go JFK-CDG. Boom wants to compete with that with $5,000 seats. That price was keeping the Concorde full and this would too... but they'd need to do overland CONUS travel to make a profit. Those routes would require a change in FAA rulings. Also there was *NOTHING* about September 2011 that stopped the Concorde. It had long been shelved after the 2000 crash in France. (Seriously, the original article just wasn't paying attention...)
To start a supersonic program today is in some ways different than in the 1970s. Our technological advances are great; our computers and modeling and simulation are awesome. However, our litigious culture has become much worse. Our astroturf-root organizations and sock-puppet lobbyists have gone from mere industry mouthpieces to an entire industry of opposing anything "revolutionary" or "disruptive." Other than cute little ads that tell you a dollar razor is "disrupting the shaving industry", that the Segway is "disrupting the bicycle industry", or that the Occulus VR is disrupting the video game industry, you can rest assured that in modern over-regulatory-happy America it's easier to legislate against change now than have to explain why you didn't prevent it later.
Do these guys have a plan? Yes. Do they have a product idea? Yes. However, until they address the regulatory issues that led to the demise of the Concorde, there will be no market success.
Please note: If you like getting your facts from Wikipedia, please remember that it's a compromise of facts from everyone who chooses to edit it. That means that you're not going to find "The US airlines acted like spoiled children and pissed all over Concorde and bought Federal Legislators until Concorde left for Europe." It's still the way things happened. You're also not going to find "military flights can go supersonic any time they want" in there because there's a desire on the industry's part to leave us thinking that supersonic is just plain loud and dangerous. It's still the way things happen.
To get a better perspective (at least with only its one author's bias) I recommend these two books: 1. Concorde: The Rise and Fall of the Supersonic Airliner 2. The Concorde Story
Enjoy.
Ehud P.S. I would love to see supersonic passenger travel back. It may start at $5,000 a head, but soon there will be deadhead flights, specials, two-fers, red-eyes, and we can fly from LAX to JFK in two hours (30 to get to the coast and transition to supersonic, 1hr flight, 30 to subsonic and approach).
Originally "ThickNET" and then "ThinNet" (10Base5, 10Base2) used coaxial cable. Then came twisted pair (10Base-T) followed by its variants to go to 100 (100Base-TX) and 1000 (1000Base-T). All of those twisted-pair connectors would be easily converted to a smaller form factor connector provided it still kept the pairs separated, properly twisted, and maintained it's Category rating (e.g. Cat-5, Cat-6).
However, the addition of power over Ethernet (PoE) requirement makes the problem tougher. There are various standards; they use all four pairs in some cases; the cables have to be separated by a certain distance so that the electricity provision doesn't impact the data transmission.
Given that, it's unlikely that Ethernet cables or connectors are going to be changing any time soon.
HOWEVER, the Ethernet connector is only the largest connection on the rPi because it offloads the power connector to somewhere else and takes it in as a micro-USB. Similarly, Ethernet could have a "data only" sub-micro connector (like an adapter between the wall socket and the rPi) that converts from RJ-45/RJ-45X with possible PoE to 4 leads and a micro connector for data.
I don't see millions of people rushing to buy those adapters, but then my lack of vision doesn't mean it can't happen.
> I can remember when internetworking computers was a radical concept until DARPA came up with some serious sci-fi style communications protocols
No, son, you don't. And no, they didn't.
E P.S. To add finer detail, the IMPs used the 1822 protocol developed by Bolt, Beranek, and Newman (BBN) in 1969. You were not around to "remember when... this was a radical concept". Four years later the protocol was improved to add sequence numbers, acks, send windows, and TCP was born. While ARPA (now DARPA) financed some of this work, it wasn't anything DARPA[sic] came up with nor was there any "serious sci-fi style" whatever to it. From the IMPs of 1969 to the NSF core routers (Cisco AGS+) of the 1980s to the networks we have today, The US DoD ARPA had a hand in funding it, but it didn't "come up" with any of it (that's not what they do) and none of it is sci-fi, and you don't remember any of that personally. Here's a shout out to the many people who were around that day.
Yes. I have backups. You have backups. You're modded down to 0 for a perfectly reasonable question. I'm sure I'll soon join you.
Meanwhile the dipshits that run public hospitals DON'T have a usable backup strategy, pay trolls ransom, and the new slasdhdot posts it as if it's big news.
Big news would be if someone actually had a backup and DIDN'T pay the ransom... or if they got LEOs to actually FIND the bad guys. Paying ransom... heck, even the LEOs pay ransom. https://www.google.com/search?...
1. Maintain integrity of confidential US Federal Government
2. Ensure no publicity exists for anything that violates #1
a. Snowen
b. Hillary's top-secret emails on a private server box in somebody's back room
c. General Petraeus [oh wait, that's been pled, spanked, and done]
d. DHS employee data release in the wild because Palestine (?!?)
e. FBI employee data release in the wild because Palestine (?!?)
3. Give speeches
a. Going dark
b. Silicon valley is unreasonable -- encryption can be made to only be used by "good guys"
c. The NSA are good guys. Come on. Don't we all love the NSA?
d. Palestinian hackers who release DHS and FBI employee lists are bad
e. But the other Palestinian hackers, they must be good because #antiIsrael #antiJewish #proTerrorism #islamForPeace
and finally 4. Go into the private sector
a. Sell underwear
c. Profit
The first response in this thread is "So it begins..." but no, so it does not begin.
The UK wants this (and that part is true) and USATODAY ("TV in print") is happy to tell us. It's not a proposal. It's not a treaty. It's not a draft-anything. It's as much of a NON-STARTER as you can get. It's USATODAY Friday Filler.
However, this is not something Congress can allow, the President can sign, and the law be born. It is against the sovereign principles of a free nation, against international law, and against the DoI and the COTUS.
It won't happen. Continuing to cry about it maybe happening is making more noise than the deaf "oof" the nonstory would have made.
Thanks, Timothy! Slashdot's new regime continues to show its stellar qualities of approving utter crapola for the front page!
Seriously, since the buyout almost all slashdot postings are by timothy who might as well be the "I APPROVE ALL STUPID STORIES ROBOT."
Timothy - I have a captcha for you.
This story is just in line with the rest of the toilet-bowl material - hack proof RFID because... um... MIT? - Assange passport because UN committee? - Vendors have firewalls with holes?
Next up something about the superbowl?
Please. Spare. Us. You can't resurrect good slashdot editors. Obviously you've killed them. The honorable thing is to complete the job. Mirror... mirror.
Because it didn't. Read the article. Don't add extra words you think are missing from her sentences YOU SAID she confessed. She did not.
YOU SAID she admitted to riding it She did not.
Seriously, go detach from reality on your own now. I CAN'T QUOTE A NEGATIVE but you have not at all quoted her agreeing with any of the stuff you made up.
As per the citation you gave (her chain broke) and the original article (mechanical problem before the race) she wasn't riding it. She also didn't admit to riding it.
Slashdot Mirror
I, for one, am happy to welcome our space mouse overlords.
I at no point fed you guys a bunch of sacharine, aspartame, or anything else.
The one thing "determined to cause cancer in laboratory rats" is... lab researchers.
My best and mousiest wishes.
Ehud Gavron
Mouseville Tx
The shareholders of Polycom will get cash AND end up with 60% of the combined entity.
That is a lot more of "Polycom bought Mitel" than "Mitel bought Polycom."
Add the "keeping the name", "keeping the products", and escaping US legal and tax for better environment in Canada, and it all makes the same amount of sense as any other international merger (now limited by US tax laws to 60%/40%, conveniently the same as this one...)
I guess nobody crafted a special law to prevent Polycom from doing it like they did to Pfizer. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04...
E
...is not this one. This one seeks to curtail privacy, remove encryption, punish whistleblowers, and use the Espionage Act and Treason against any and all (except their own David Petraeous and Hillary Clinton).
Their own OPM was the subject of the worst hack of its time. http://www.computerworld.com/a...
This administration and our government in general have NO CLUE how to protect systems, and the word 'cyber' isn't used by anyone who isn't ripping off the government for money. The word used to mean 'sex'. http://io9.gizmodo.com/today-c...
I have great faith that if the Obama Administration wanted to do something useful that they would have come out AGAINST the Feinstein draft bill, that they would have come out against forced decryption of iPhones; that they would not charge Edward Snowded with treason, or in the alternative charge Hillary Clinton with treason.
Absent all those, this is hardly more than pissing in the wind.
E
Anonymous Coward that should NEVER EVER pretend to practice law said:
"If they mention the patents in question and you ignore the letter, you get to pay for "willful" infringement instead of just infringement, which is much worse."
No.
Using imprecise words and just spreading misinformation and fearmongering. Better you would have just kept quiet. Didn't even have the decency to sign your name.
A "mention" in a "letter" is nothing.
If they serve you legal notice as per Rule 4.1 (US Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) then you can respond as appropriate.
If they send you a letter and "mention" things (whatever the hell that means) you can safely use it as kindling for your weekend campfire.
There are a lot of lawyers. Some actors play them on TV and in the movies. If you want to be one, just go do the whole law-school,
bar-exam thing.
Don't make up shit on slashdot. It's something people like to do... but it's not good to spread FUD and misinformation.
Ehud
Tucson AZ US
There's no doubt that Toyota is partnering with a world leader.
Microsoft has shown its ability to provide the lowest common denominator in secure operating systems since 1993.
That's 23 years of being #1 at the most easily-hacked awful excuse for shitty software engineering.
Mac people love macs. Good on them.
Linux people love linux. Good on them.
There's nobody who's a "windows person and loves windows", just people forced to support poor choices made by upper management that doesn't know tech but mandated "we will buy THIS and not THAT."
Toyota appears to have joined the crowd.
- I don't intend to have my car sit for an hour every "patch Tuesday" getting updated
- I don't intend to have my car randomly stop working and reboot
- Microsoft has a 20+ year track record of NOT DOING ANYTHING RIGHT. All their "advances" come from stealing from the MacOS/Linux crowd.
I think I'll keep driving my Hyundai. Sorry, Toyota, you bet on the loser horse.
E
Thank you for once again rehashing FB's data sharing policy.
I'm sorry when the rest of the world found out that FB shares data and uses it for marketing, and how's how they fund the free web services you choose to use, you were on the toilet or picking your nose or something.
Nothing to see here.
E
P.S. "It turns out" is how you start a surprising conclusion to a story, not a an entire paragraph.
> Never trust people whose identity is caught up in appearing good.
I always thought Father Maxie was up to no good.
E
Interesting! I did not know that... thank you for the refresher.
having looked it up now, this provides a plethora of information on supersonic flight, sonic booms, overland flight, and reminds me that not only do military aircraft exceed the speed of sound... but so did the Space Shuttle each and every launch:
http://www.sky-flash.com/boom....
E
TL;DR - US airlines lobbied against supersonic travel over the continental US. Congress got the FAA to ban it. End of story. The rest is wishful thinking while ignoring the regulatory situation on the ground. (The original article has many inaccuracies and made up stuff... but hey, ads.)
Long Version
When British Airways and Air France pooled their resources to finance the entire Concorde project it was designed not only for UK/FR to US flights, but also NYC to SFO, and SFO/LAX to Asia and Oceania flights. Their projections were for seat prices about 1.5x regular first-class fares and travel 2-3x faster.
Fearing competition from these faster planes, US carriers lobbied the US Congress to forbid these aircraft, claiming that the sonic booms would be devastating to the people below, that air traffic control could not handle such fast aircraft, and that it would be unsafe. In reality, air traffic controllers handle supersonic (military) aircraft all the time, as they are allowed (with authorization) to exceed the speed of sound. As the majority of travel would be intercontinental even the sonic booms could occur over the ocean prior to turning inland to make the Mach-2 flight to the other coast. Finally, there were no safety issues with the Concorde, as it had yet to enter service in the US. Until its one fatal accident of ingesting FOD into its engine the Concorde had the unenviable perfect safety record -- unmatched by the conventional US air carrier services.
Concorde seats did not cost $20,000 (you *did* read the original article, right) they cost $5,000 to go JFK-CDG. Boom wants to compete with that with $5,000 seats. That price was keeping the Concorde full and this would too... but they'd need to do overland CONUS travel to make a profit. Those routes would require a change in FAA rulings. Also there was *NOTHING* about September 2011 that stopped the Concorde. It had long been shelved after the 2000 crash in France. (Seriously, the original article just wasn't paying attention...)
To start a supersonic program today is in some ways different than in the 1970s. Our technological advances are great; our computers and modeling and simulation are awesome. However, our litigious culture has become much worse. Our astroturf-root organizations and sock-puppet lobbyists have gone from mere industry mouthpieces to an entire industry of opposing anything "revolutionary" or "disruptive." Other than cute little ads that tell you a dollar razor is "disrupting the shaving industry", that the Segway is "disrupting the bicycle industry", or that the Occulus VR is disrupting the video game industry, you can rest assured that in modern over-regulatory-happy America it's easier to legislate against change now than have to explain why you didn't prevent it later.
Do these guys have a plan? Yes. Do they have a product idea? Yes. However, until they address the regulatory issues that led to the demise of the Concorde, there will be no market success.
Please note: If you like getting your facts from Wikipedia, please remember that it's a compromise of facts from everyone who chooses to edit it. That means that you're not going to find "The US airlines acted like spoiled children and pissed all over Concorde and bought Federal Legislators until Concorde left for Europe." It's still the way things happened. You're also not going to find "military flights can go supersonic any time they want" in there because there's a desire on the industry's part to leave us thinking that supersonic is just plain loud and dangerous. It's still the way things happen.
To get a better perspective (at least with only its one author's bias) I recommend these two books:
1. Concorde: The Rise and Fall of the Supersonic Airliner
2. The Concorde Story
Enjoy.
Ehud
P.S. I would love to see supersonic passenger travel back. It may start at $5,000 a head, but soon there will be deadhead flights, specials, two-fers, red-eyes, and we can fly from LAX to JFK in two hours (30 to get to the coast and transition to supersonic, 1hr flight, 30 to subsonic and approach).
Originally "ThickNET" and then "ThinNet" (10Base5, 10Base2) used coaxial cable. Then came twisted pair (10Base-T) followed by its variants to go to 100 (100Base-TX) and 1000 (1000Base-T). All of those twisted-pair connectors would be easily converted to a smaller form factor connector provided it still kept the pairs separated, properly twisted, and maintained it's Category rating (e.g. Cat-5, Cat-6).
However, the addition of power over Ethernet (PoE) requirement makes the problem tougher. There are various standards; they use all four pairs in some cases; the cables have to be separated by a certain distance so that the electricity provision doesn't impact the data transmission.
Given that, it's unlikely that Ethernet cables or connectors are going to be changing any time soon.
HOWEVER, the Ethernet connector is only the largest connection on the rPi because it offloads the power connector to somewhere else and takes it in as a micro-USB. Similarly, Ethernet could have a "data only" sub-micro connector (like an adapter between the wall socket and the rPi) that converts from RJ-45/RJ-45X with possible PoE to 4 leads and a micro connector for data.
I don't see millions of people rushing to buy those adapters, but then my lack of vision doesn't mean it can't happen.
Don't count on it.
E
I'm going to get me one of those and put flight plans on those.
It looks a lot more comfortable than a kneeboard!
thanks, Slashdot!
> I can remember when internetworking computers was a radical concept until DARPA came up with some serious sci-fi style communications protocols
No, son, you don't. And no, they didn't.
E ... this was a radical concept". Four years later the protocol was improved to add sequence numbers, acks, send windows, and TCP was born. While ARPA (now DARPA) financed some of this work, it wasn't anything DARPA[sic] came up with nor was there any "serious sci-fi style" whatever to it. From the IMPs of 1969 to the NSF core routers (Cisco AGS+) of the 1980s to the networks we have today, The US DoD ARPA had a hand in funding it, but it didn't "come up" with any of it (that's not what they do) and none of it is sci-fi, and you don't remember any of that personally. Here's a shout out to the many people who were around that day.
P.S. To add finer detail, the IMPs used the 1822 protocol developed by Bolt, Beranek, and Newman (BBN) in 1969. You were not around to "remember when
They'll be too busy doing math to help.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yes. I have backups. You have backups. You're modded down to 0 for a perfectly reasonable question.
I'm sure I'll soon join you.
Meanwhile the dipshits that run public hospitals DON'T have a usable backup strategy, pay trolls ransom,
and the new slasdhdot posts it as if it's big news.
Big news would be if someone actually had a backup and DIDN'T pay the ransom... or if they got LEOs
to actually FIND the bad guys. Paying ransom... heck, even the LEOs pay ransom. https://www.google.com/search?...
E
1. Maintain integrity of confidential US Federal Government
2. Ensure no publicity exists for anything that violates #1
a. Snowen
b. Hillary's top-secret emails on a private server box in somebody's back room
c. General Petraeus [oh wait, that's been pled, spanked, and done]
d. DHS employee data release in the wild because Palestine (?!?)
e. FBI employee data release in the wild because Palestine (?!?)
3. Give speeches
a. Going dark
b. Silicon valley is unreasonable -- encryption can be made to only be used by "good guys"
c. The NSA are good guys. Come on. Don't we all love the NSA?
d. Palestinian hackers who release DHS and FBI employee lists are bad
e. But the other Palestinian hackers, they must be good because #antiIsrael #antiJewish #proTerrorism #islamForPeace
and finally
4. Go into the private sector
a. Sell underwear
c. Profit
Timothy you illiterate whore of the new slashdot.
Pirate Bay Now Let[sic] you stream...
Go kill yourself, dude.
E
The first response in this thread is "So it begins..." but no, so it does not begin.
The UK wants this (and that part is true) and USATODAY ("TV in print") is happy
to tell us. It's not a proposal. It's not a treaty. It's not a draft-anything. It's as much
of a NON-STARTER as you can get. It's USATODAY Friday Filler.
However, this is not something Congress can allow, the President can sign, and
the law be born. It is against the sovereign principles of a free nation, against
international law, and against the DoI and the COTUS.
It won't happen. Continuing to cry about it maybe happening is making more
noise than the deaf "oof" the nonstory would have made.
Thanks, Timothy! Slashdot's new regime continues to show its stellar qualities
of approving utter crapola for the front page!
Ehud
Seriously, since the buyout almost all slashdot postings are by timothy who might as well be the "I APPROVE ALL STUPID STORIES ROBOT."
Timothy - I have a captcha for you.
This story is just in line with the rest of the toilet-bowl material
- hack proof RFID because... um... MIT?
- Assange passport because UN committee?
- Vendors have firewalls with holes?
Next up something about the superbowl?
Please. Spare. Us. You can't resurrect good slashdot editors. Obviously you've killed them.
The honorable thing is to complete the job. Mirror... mirror.
E
Don't expect the authorities to give him back his passport any time ever.
http://www.reuters.com/article...
E
Because it didn't. Read the article. Don't add extra words you think are missing from her sentences
YOU SAID she confessed.
She did not.
YOU SAID she admitted to riding it
She did not.
Seriously, go detach from reality on your own now. I CAN'T QUOTE A NEGATIVE but you have not at all quoted her agreeing with any of the stuff you made up.
E
Right. She didn't read it.
Keep on trying to ask me to read the article you insist on not reading...
SHE DIDN'T RIDE IT.
SHE DIDN'T APOLOGIZE FOR RIDING IT.
SHE DIDN'T CONFESS.
IT'S NOT CONFIRMED
You made that stuff up in your post. And then you said you believe it.
Good for you.
Sucks, donut?
E
> She admits riding the illegal bike
As per the citation you gave (her chain broke) and the original article (mechanical problem before the race) she wasn't riding it.
She also didn't admit to riding it.
Seriously. Read the article.
E
>I read one of the reports where the rider confessed.
No. You didn't.
>I consider that confirmed.
You're the only one.
E
I can't quite find her resumé.
Is she qualified to teach science and math?
Even to schoolchildren?
E
Actually you're frothing at the mouth in your hatred and it's none too appealing, sir.
Try to keep a civil tongue in your head and go back to high school.
And sorry your taxi medallion isn't worth more than your chest hair.
Uber and Lyft are great (this stupid "Uber chopper" thing notwithstanding)
People who hate Uber and can't articulate without frothing at the mouth aren't great at all.
Best regards, and go off yourself to feel better.
E