The remaining places (ACT, NT, Tasmania and Western Australia) do not have any vehicle power restrictions.
Note also that in most States, provisional drivers are also restricted as to the number and age of passengers they can carry. In many States they are also limited to a 100 km/h speed limit, even when driving on roads with higher posted limits.
It's not just those on a well who aren't metered. Depends on the area you're in, but there are plenty of places in the Midwest that have unmetered city/municipal water.
Er? This is not hard to envision and is already kinda the reality in drier parts of the world.
Firstly, usage in most places is charged per litre. I have relatives in the Midwest of the US that apparently don't pay per litre, but in every other country I've ever been, water usage is metered just like electricity or any other utility.
Here in Australia during drought periods we have water restrictions that essentially limit you to a certain number of litres per day (they don't cut you off, but the tariff scheme is designed so that the rate per litre starts skyrocketing beyond a certain point). There are various stages of water restrictions (Stage 1 through to Stage 5) that are implemented automatically as water storage levels in the dams reach certain levels (e.g. 40%, 25%, 20%, 15% etc.) Certain activities (e.g. washing cars, watering lawns, filling swimming pools) are banned at certain stages - and yes you can and will be fined for breaching the restrictions.
I don't think that's really the reason. I live in Australia which is closer to European car buying habits than American (small cars are fairly popular, and even our light trucks, or utility vehicles, are way smaller than F-150s and their ilk). We do have more SUVs and large vehicles than Europe, sure, but it's not even in the same order of magnitude as the US.
Yet Australia is the same size as the lower 48 with a much lower population density than the US (23M people vs over 300M in the US). We drive thousands of km here, like in the US, but a lot of us do it in small(ish) cars.
I'd say it's simply tradition - old habits (and preconceptions of what small cars are like to drive) die hard, I guess.
Local distribution from the train station across the surrounding city is fine. It's long-haul interstate trucking that I believe GP is referring to.
I live in Australia and it's the same deal here. I do long-haul road trips quite frequently (just did a 1700km/1100 mile one last weekend) and it seems like 30-40% of the vehicles on the roads are huge big rigs. We USED to have a decent rail freight infrastructure in this country but it has been neglected in favour of ever-increasing roads in the last few decades.
Don't get me wrong - most truck drivers are indeed well trained and safe. But they are an intimidating presence on the road (I hate being 'trapped' between multiple semitrailers), clog up traffic due to their lower speed (trucks are limited to 100 km/h in Australia, which causes issues since most cars are doing 110-120 km/h on highways - keeping in mind that most Australian highways are undivided one-lane-each-way roads, due to our immense distances but low population), and some companies push unreasonable deadlines on the drivers leading to horror crashes more regularly than one might expect from such well-trained drivers.
So yeah, I do agree that more freight needs to be put back on rail. Obviously some degree of road freight will always be needed, but it seems to be increasingly becoming the default/only option.
Kinda works this way in some Australian states. Provisional license holders are restricted to lower power (although not necessarily smaller) vehicles for the first x years.
I have no idea whether or not this has made any difference to road accidents among young drivers or changes to peoples' car buying habits, but there you go.
Oh yeah, I'd forgotten about that, but noticed it when I went to America for the first time. What is with that? American cars seemingly just use 'flashing brake lights' (red) instead of dedicated turn signals (amber/orange). Confused the hell out of me at first driving and constantly thinking the car in front was randomly flashing his brakes at me!
I have not seen that anywhere except North America (and I've spent a reasonable amount of time on all continents except South America) - everywhere else uses separate lights for turn signals (always amber/orange).
I have an iPhone and it has my music library on it. I use it regularly - on the bus, on the train, in the car etc. However my iPod Nano still gets pulled out every time I go running because:
a) it is much smaller and lighter than an iPhone; and b) if it falls out of my pocket and smashes into a million pieces on the pavement, I've lost a $99 device rather than a $899 device.
Agreed - inaccurate generalisation. Cycling is very popular here in Australia as well (there's dedicated bike lanes on most major roads in my city and they're packed with bikes during peak hour, and an independent network of cycle paths that'll get you most places as well). And we've had compulsory helmet laws since the get-go.
While I am a bit ambivalent about the need for compulsory helmet laws if you're just riding around in a park or something, as soon as you put one tyre on a public road, you should be wearing a helmet, and I'm glad you are required by law to do so. I have personally seen several accidents that would probably have been fatal without a helmet. There was also a guy just this week on the news that died from a relatively low speed fall from a bike that the investigators said would have been nothing more than a minor injury if he was wearing a helmet. It's insanity not to wear one.
Yeah it's kinda sad that TLDs haven't been properly managed. In my mind it would have been ideal if.com was kept only for companies (and global/international companies at that - if you just have a local company you should be in.com.cctld or.co.cctld etc.). And if.net,.org etc. were similarly managed. Seems like the only one that have been properly managed are.edu,.mil,.gov.
Having said that it depends on the country. Australia for instance has administered the domains under its.au ccTLD quite well. Getting a.com.au does require you to be a registered Australian business, and.org.au,.asn.au,.edu.au,.gov.au etc. are all properly restricted too. I think.net.au is about the only one that's fairly open. It also helps that Australia has a TLD for individuals (.id.au), which is sorely lacking in most places and led to people's random personal sites and blogs etc. ending up on.coms and.nets in the first place.
Funny how Australia gets the rap as being a prison colony, when in fact one of the key reasons for it being so was because, post-1776, they couldn't send prisoners to the American colonies anymore. The two countries have a more similar early history than most people know. Australia seems to have ended up with the convict stereotype though.
Not really... thats hyperbole. There's a big difference between ASIC wanting these powers and it actually getting them. A lot of crap like this has been tossed around by various government departments and MPs and senators over the last few years (e.g. Internet filter proposal from a few years ago, which never even made it to the Bill stage), but not much of it ever sees light of day as enacted law.
This is in the context of wider discussions at the moment in Australia about introducing data retention laws that would bring us into lime with the EU data retention Directives that already apply in much of the EU (including Britain). I doubt ASIC will get their particular wishes as it is impractical technologically and would be opposed by a fair proportion of the Parliament. Not to mention legal challenges etc. It's still very much just a fantasy in some ASIC director's head at the moment. The problem is Slashdot always reports on every random idea that someone in government has as if it were a done deal. If it gets to the stage of actually being introduced into Parliament then we can start to get more concerned about it.
Overall the UK has significantly more of these Orwellian laws actually enacted than AU does at the moment, if we're keeping score. And AU doesn't have the mass telecommunications trawling and interception that the US has had (or is rumoured to have) since 9/11 either.
Not that any of the above makes this palatable, but just taking a more realistic look at the actual situation on the ground in Australia, it's not that bad. At the moment, at least. It does threaten to get a lot worse, I agree.
Yeah uh, how is this impressive? I'd be pretty surprised if you couldn't figure out generally where someone lived in from Foursquare, considering for most people, most of their check-ins will be in the city/town in which they live. I mean seriously, 50 km accuracy? My mid-sized (400,000 population) city is around 40 km north to south, and is the only logical place where someone would live in this area (no other significant settlements for at least 100 km in any direction), so that's obvious. And in more rural areas there'd be 50km at least between towns here (Australia), so again it makes it bleedingly obvious where someone would live. In "dense rural" areas common in Europe and North America where there's lots of separate small towns close together this might be a bit more impressive, but still...
I clicked on the link expecting a method whereby they got it down to a particular neighbourhood/a couple of km accuracy.
As an example, checking my own Foursquare profile, out of my total checkins:
- 1 is in Hong Kong - 2 are in Macau - 2 are in France - 3 are in Canada - 7 are in the UK - 14 are in Singapore - 33 are in the United States - 152 are in Australia (home)
So the home country should be fairly obvious from that. And then of the 152 Australia checkins, 68 are in my home city, which is substantially more than any other single city or town. And that's only looking at checked-in places without considering how OFTEN I check into them. If you look at those figures it becomes even more apparent: the places with the most check-ins are my work and the local airport.
I'm just saying, from personal experience, if I want to maintain the same speed (or I have the cruise control set to maintain a consistent speed) and the car hits a significant hill, the pitch changes as it drops a gear and/or increases RPM to compensate. I have a general understanding of how internal combustion engines work, though I am not an enthusiast by any means.
I have a good ear for pitch though, being a musician. I used to rely on the pitch myself when I didn't have cruise control but I did find it's often a bit deceptive... sometimes you get big open areas that have a slight grade to them which isn't really obvious, but makes a significant difference to speed at a given engine RPM. You don't realise until you look down and see you're going 20 over, even though the same engine pitch was keeping you pretty steady earlier on. Cruise control is a must-have for me these days though, makes long drives a lot less stressful since you can keep your eyes on the road and not be constantly worrying about speed cameras (which are everywhere in this part of the world).
That sounds... annoying (and confusing for tourists - will keep this in mind next time I visit the US). They should just raise the limits accordingly if they aren't going to enforce the ones that exist now.
Here in Australia the nominal speed limit on major divided highways/freeways (i.e. Interstate system equivalents) is 110 km/h. Most people stick pretty close to it. I tend to stick the cruise control on 117 km/h because that's as far as I think I can push it before the average cop will pull me over for it... but that's only 6% over the limit. 10-20 MPH over a typical US limit (65 or 75 mph) represents more like 15-25% over the limit.
And where I live the median price for a home is ~$600,000 USD (which only buys you a very average 3-bedroom suburban home). $50k USD would be fairly typical for a 'medium-end' family sedan or large SUV here. So despite the fact that I'm most definitely not rich myself, the price of the Tesla doesn't seem too outrageous (though still a bit out of my price range... another few models/revisions though and we'll see).
Point is, Tesla doesn't have to come up with a good price point for every geography and every segment of the market - they just need to make it low enough so that a decent number of people in SOME markets will buy it. That should bring the prices down for future models and allow EVs to appeal to a greater number of people in the future.
Horses for courses. It may not suit your particular needs if you drive long distances all the time, but it certainly satisfies the needs of a good portion of motorists.
My personal car usage is usually no than 10-20km at a time. So electric would be fine for me. I do go on a long road trip 1-2 times a year, for a holiday, but if my electric vehicle didn't have the necessary range I might just hire a car for that time, or even keep my existing internal combustion-based car but leave it sitting around in the garage, only to be used for those couple of long trips a year.
$70k is a bit too much for a car for me, but if they start getting down into the $30-40k range I'll be sorely tempted.
Hmm interesting. Maybe the rules have changed since my wife moved here; or maybe the visa class was different (she was originally on a Prospective Spouse visa, then a temporary Spouse, then permanent Spouse - but I distinctly remember it couldn't be made permanent for the first two years).
Well the GG is appointed by the Queen but that's basically just a rubber stamp - in practice the Government 'recommends' a GG.
So in theory yes, the Queen and GG have a large amount of power. In practice though, it's not used, and it would be suicide for the monarchy to try anything outrageous, as we'd simply go and make ourselves a Republic quick smart if the monarchy started actually calling the shots.
Parliamentary tradition prevents either the Queen or GG exercising their reserve powers in anything other than an extreme circumstance. OK, not literally or legally 'prevents', but you know what I mean - tradition and protocol is exceptionally important in the Westminster system. And of course in 120 years of Federation, the Australian GG has only exercised reserve power once (the Whitlam dismissal), and even that caused significant controversy.
As far as I'm aware, no taxes flow from Australia to the royal family. Indeed, as far as I know, not even UK taxpayers' money goes to fund them. They are self-funded from what I've read (as you'd expect, being obscenely wealthy with a huge investment portfolio).
Taxpayers' money may be used to pay for some of the arrangements for a royal visit (paying security people, renting venues etc.) but that'd be the same for any foreign head of state visit. And royal visits are pretty rare - only been a handful in my lifetime.
Slashdot Mirror
Good question, so I googled it. Of Australia's 8 States/Territories, 4 have such restrictions and 4 don't:
New South Wales
Information here: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/downloads/p1p2_conditions_dl1.html
Victoria
Information here: http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/Licences/GetYourPs/RestrictionsOnPs/Pplatedriversandprobationaryprohibitedvehicles.htm
Some exceptions for certain classes of lower performance turbo/supercharged vehicles here: http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/Licences/GetYourPs/RestrictionsOnPs/Lowerperfomanceturbochargedorsuperchargedvehicles.htm
Queensland
Information here: http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Licensing/Getting-a-licence/Getting-a-car-driver-licence/P1-and-P2-restrictions/High-powered-performance-vehicles.aspx
South Australia
Information here: http://mylicence.sa.gov.au/p1_plater?fay=13&text=P-rules (you'll need to scroll down a bit and click the 'high powered vehicle restrictions' heading)
The remaining places (ACT, NT, Tasmania and Western Australia) do not have any vehicle power restrictions.
Note also that in most States, provisional drivers are also restricted as to the number and age of passengers they can carry. In many States they are also limited to a 100 km/h speed limit, even when driving on roads with higher posted limits.
It's not just those on a well who aren't metered. Depends on the area you're in, but there are plenty of places in the Midwest that have unmetered city/municipal water.
Well it's not automatic, but my shower already allows me to punch in the exact temperature I want. I like 41 C personally.
And it's not exactly new fangled - it's part of a gas hot water system that we had installed in the late 90s!
Er? This is not hard to envision and is already kinda the reality in drier parts of the world.
Firstly, usage in most places is charged per litre. I have relatives in the Midwest of the US that apparently don't pay per litre, but in every other country I've ever been, water usage is metered just like electricity or any other utility.
Here in Australia during drought periods we have water restrictions that essentially limit you to a certain number of litres per day (they don't cut you off, but the tariff scheme is designed so that the rate per litre starts skyrocketing beyond a certain point). There are various stages of water restrictions (Stage 1 through to Stage 5) that are implemented automatically as water storage levels in the dams reach certain levels (e.g. 40%, 25%, 20%, 15% etc.) Certain activities (e.g. washing cars, watering lawns, filling swimming pools) are banned at certain stages - and yes you can and will be fined for breaching the restrictions.
"the UN countries"?
Isn't that, like, almost every country? Including the US?
I don't think that's really the reason. I live in Australia which is closer to European car buying habits than American (small cars are fairly popular, and even our light trucks, or utility vehicles, are way smaller than F-150s and their ilk). We do have more SUVs and large vehicles than Europe, sure, but it's not even in the same order of magnitude as the US.
Yet Australia is the same size as the lower 48 with a much lower population density than the US (23M people vs over 300M in the US). We drive thousands of km here, like in the US, but a lot of us do it in small(ish) cars.
I'd say it's simply tradition - old habits (and preconceptions of what small cars are like to drive) die hard, I guess.
Local distribution from the train station across the surrounding city is fine. It's long-haul interstate trucking that I believe GP is referring to.
I live in Australia and it's the same deal here. I do long-haul road trips quite frequently (just did a 1700km/1100 mile one last weekend) and it seems like 30-40% of the vehicles on the roads are huge big rigs. We USED to have a decent rail freight infrastructure in this country but it has been neglected in favour of ever-increasing roads in the last few decades.
Don't get me wrong - most truck drivers are indeed well trained and safe. But they are an intimidating presence on the road (I hate being 'trapped' between multiple semitrailers), clog up traffic due to their lower speed (trucks are limited to 100 km/h in Australia, which causes issues since most cars are doing 110-120 km/h on highways - keeping in mind that most Australian highways are undivided one-lane-each-way roads, due to our immense distances but low population), and some companies push unreasonable deadlines on the drivers leading to horror crashes more regularly than one might expect from such well-trained drivers.
So yeah, I do agree that more freight needs to be put back on rail. Obviously some degree of road freight will always be needed, but it seems to be increasingly becoming the default/only option.
Kinda works this way in some Australian states. Provisional license holders are restricted to lower power (although not necessarily smaller) vehicles for the first x years.
I have no idea whether or not this has made any difference to road accidents among young drivers or changes to peoples' car buying habits, but there you go.
Oh yeah, I'd forgotten about that, but noticed it when I went to America for the first time. What is with that? American cars seemingly just use 'flashing brake lights' (red) instead of dedicated turn signals (amber/orange). Confused the hell out of me at first driving and constantly thinking the car in front was randomly flashing his brakes at me!
I have not seen that anywhere except North America (and I've spent a reasonable amount of time on all continents except South America) - everywhere else uses separate lights for turn signals (always amber/orange).
Joggers and people at the gym, my friend.
I have an iPhone and it has my music library on it. I use it regularly - on the bus, on the train, in the car etc. However my iPod Nano still gets pulled out every time I go running because:
a) it is much smaller and lighter than an iPhone; and
b) if it falls out of my pocket and smashes into a million pieces on the pavement, I've lost a $99 device rather than a $899 device.
Dress up like a quarterback? Come on, it takes about 3 seconds to attach a helmet, and the modern ones weigh almost nothing.
Agreed - inaccurate generalisation. Cycling is very popular here in Australia as well (there's dedicated bike lanes on most major roads in my city and they're packed with bikes during peak hour, and an independent network of cycle paths that'll get you most places as well). And we've had compulsory helmet laws since the get-go.
While I am a bit ambivalent about the need for compulsory helmet laws if you're just riding around in a park or something, as soon as you put one tyre on a public road, you should be wearing a helmet, and I'm glad you are required by law to do so. I have personally seen several accidents that would probably have been fatal without a helmet. There was also a guy just this week on the news that died from a relatively low speed fall from a bike that the investigators said would have been nothing more than a minor injury if he was wearing a helmet. It's insanity not to wear one.
Yeah it's kinda sad that TLDs haven't been properly managed. In my mind it would have been ideal if .com was kept only for companies (and global/international companies at that - if you just have a local company you should be in .com.cctld or .co.cctld etc.). And if .net, .org etc. were similarly managed. Seems like the only one that have been properly managed are .edu, .mil, .gov.
Having said that it depends on the country. Australia for instance has administered the domains under its .au ccTLD quite well. Getting a .com.au does require you to be a registered Australian business, and .org.au, .asn.au, .edu.au, .gov.au etc. are all properly restricted too. I think .net.au is about the only one that's fairly open. It also helps that Australia has a TLD for individuals (.id.au), which is sorely lacking in most places and led to people's random personal sites and blogs etc. ending up on .coms and .nets in the first place.
Funny how Australia gets the rap as being a prison colony, when in fact one of the key reasons for it being so was because, post-1776, they couldn't send prisoners to the American colonies anymore. The two countries have a more similar early history than most people know. Australia seems to have ended up with the convict stereotype though.
Not really ... thats hyperbole. There's a big difference between ASIC wanting these powers and it actually getting them. A lot of crap like this has been tossed around by various government departments and MPs and senators over the last few years (e.g. Internet filter proposal from a few years ago, which never even made it to the Bill stage), but not much of it ever sees light of day as enacted law.
This is in the context of wider discussions at the moment in Australia about introducing data retention laws that would bring us into lime with the EU data retention Directives that already apply in much of the EU (including Britain). I doubt ASIC will get their particular wishes as it is impractical technologically and would be opposed by a fair proportion of the Parliament. Not to mention legal challenges etc. It's still very much just a fantasy in some ASIC director's head at the moment. The problem is Slashdot always reports on every random idea that someone in government has as if it were a done deal. If it gets to the stage of actually being introduced into Parliament then we can start to get more concerned about it.
Overall the UK has significantly more of these Orwellian laws actually enacted than AU does at the moment, if we're keeping score. And AU doesn't have the mass telecommunications trawling and interception that the US has had (or is rumoured to have) since 9/11 either.
Not that any of the above makes this palatable, but just taking a more realistic look at the actual situation on the ground in Australia, it's not that bad. At the moment, at least. It does threaten to get a lot worse, I agree.
Yeah uh, how is this impressive? I'd be pretty surprised if you couldn't figure out generally where someone lived in from Foursquare, considering for most people, most of their check-ins will be in the city/town in which they live. I mean seriously, 50 km accuracy? My mid-sized (400,000 population) city is around 40 km north to south, and is the only logical place where someone would live in this area (no other significant settlements for at least 100 km in any direction), so that's obvious. And in more rural areas there'd be 50km at least between towns here (Australia), so again it makes it bleedingly obvious where someone would live. In "dense rural" areas common in Europe and North America where there's lots of separate small towns close together this might be a bit more impressive, but still...
I clicked on the link expecting a method whereby they got it down to a particular neighbourhood/a couple of km accuracy.
As an example, checking my own Foursquare profile, out of my total checkins:
- 1 is in Hong Kong
- 2 are in Macau
- 2 are in France
- 3 are in Canada
- 7 are in the UK
- 14 are in Singapore
- 33 are in the United States
- 152 are in Australia (home)
So the home country should be fairly obvious from that. And then of the 152 Australia checkins, 68 are in my home city, which is substantially more than any other single city or town. And that's only looking at checked-in places without considering how OFTEN I check into them. If you look at those figures it becomes even more apparent: the places with the most check-ins are my work and the local airport.
I'm just saying, from personal experience, if I want to maintain the same speed (or I have the cruise control set to maintain a consistent speed) and the car hits a significant hill, the pitch changes as it drops a gear and/or increases RPM to compensate. I have a general understanding of how internal combustion engines work, though I am not an enthusiast by any means.
I have a good ear for pitch though, being a musician. I used to rely on the pitch myself when I didn't have cruise control but I did find it's often a bit deceptive ... sometimes you get big open areas that have a slight grade to them which isn't really obvious, but makes a significant difference to speed at a given engine RPM. You don't realise until you look down and see you're going 20 over, even though the same engine pitch was keeping you pretty steady earlier on. Cruise control is a must-have for me these days though, makes long drives a lot less stressful since you can keep your eyes on the road and not be constantly worrying about speed cameras (which are everywhere in this part of the world).
If you live in a perfectly flat world with no terrain, yes. :)
That sounds ... annoying (and confusing for tourists - will keep this in mind next time I visit the US). They should just raise the limits accordingly if they aren't going to enforce the ones that exist now.
Here in Australia the nominal speed limit on major divided highways/freeways (i.e. Interstate system equivalents) is 110 km/h. Most people stick pretty close to it. I tend to stick the cruise control on 117 km/h because that's as far as I think I can push it before the average cop will pull me over for it ... but that's only 6% over the limit. 10-20 MPH over a typical US limit (65 or 75 mph) represents more like 15-25% over the limit.
And where I live the median price for a home is ~$600,000 USD (which only buys you a very average 3-bedroom suburban home). $50k USD would be fairly typical for a 'medium-end' family sedan or large SUV here. So despite the fact that I'm most definitely not rich myself, the price of the Tesla doesn't seem too outrageous (though still a bit out of my price range ... another few models/revisions though and we'll see).
Point is, Tesla doesn't have to come up with a good price point for every geography and every segment of the market - they just need to make it low enough so that a decent number of people in SOME markets will buy it. That should bring the prices down for future models and allow EVs to appeal to a greater number of people in the future.
The standard guidelines here in Australia, immortalised by TV ads and roadside signs, is to 'Stop, Revive, Survive' by taking a break every two hours.
Horses for courses. It may not suit your particular needs if you drive long distances all the time, but it certainly satisfies the needs of a good portion of motorists.
My personal car usage is usually no than 10-20km at a time. So electric would be fine for me. I do go on a long road trip 1-2 times a year, for a holiday, but if my electric vehicle didn't have the necessary range I might just hire a car for that time, or even keep my existing internal combustion-based car but leave it sitting around in the garage, only to be used for those couple of long trips a year.
$70k is a bit too much for a car for me, but if they start getting down into the $30-40k range I'll be sorely tempted.
Hmm interesting. Maybe the rules have changed since my wife moved here; or maybe the visa class was different (she was originally on a Prospective Spouse visa, then a temporary Spouse, then permanent Spouse - but I distinctly remember it couldn't be made permanent for the first two years).
Well the GG is appointed by the Queen but that's basically just a rubber stamp - in practice the Government 'recommends' a GG.
So in theory yes, the Queen and GG have a large amount of power. In practice though, it's not used, and it would be suicide for the monarchy to try anything outrageous, as we'd simply go and make ourselves a Republic quick smart if the monarchy started actually calling the shots.
Parliamentary tradition prevents either the Queen or GG exercising their reserve powers in anything other than an extreme circumstance. OK, not literally or legally 'prevents', but you know what I mean - tradition and protocol is exceptionally important in the Westminster system. And of course in 120 years of Federation, the Australian GG has only exercised reserve power once (the Whitlam dismissal), and even that caused significant controversy.
As far as I'm aware, no taxes flow from Australia to the royal family. Indeed, as far as I know, not even UK taxpayers' money goes to fund them. They are self-funded from what I've read (as you'd expect, being obscenely wealthy with a huge investment portfolio).
Taxpayers' money may be used to pay for some of the arrangements for a royal visit (paying security people, renting venues etc.) but that'd be the same for any foreign head of state visit. And royal visits are pretty rare - only been a handful in my lifetime.