Parents are 100% responsible for their own kids, up to and including online usage. When parents bitch and moan about their kids falling victim to lester, the neighborhood molester, they have absolutely NO ONE to blame but themselves.
I don't know about you, but I would also place some blame on Lester the Molester. There's more than enough blame to go around, you know.
Kids don't need AI or software monitoring, they need parents to pull the plug when mommy-sight is not available.
Or, we as parents can AUGMENT our presence with TOOLS, to make our parenting even more effective. Maybe you view children as property of their parents, I don't. I see no reason why a 14 year old should not be allowed to go online just because I had to run to the store for 30 minutes.
Also, car seats suck because they remove parental responsiblity -- you should duct tape your child directly to your abdomen instead of relying on these silly crutches.
Ha, and here I was thinking that the best way to protect your children online was having an honest and open relationship and giving them decent social/online education: What a fool I am.
I hate comments like this. Yes, parents are the ultimate authority and responsible party over their children. But what the hell, are you saying that we're not allowed to use TOOLS to aid in this task? Should I carry my child to school instead of driving him? As long as this sort of technology isn't used in a "fire and forget" configuration, but is accompanied by active involvement, I don't see how this is a bad thing AT ALL.
Suppose I give my kid a book about morality, a book which closely matches my own concepts. Am I copping out? Please spell out exactly what is and is not acceptable in the rearing of a child, it would be very helpful for me.
Your comment isn't insightful. More like a knee-jerk, canned response. Sounds like you're the one copping out by refusing to consider new possibilities and working only within some rigid structure that defines what is and isn't acceptable. Try thinking, it helps.
If they do it right, it won't be. A human being can't see the difference between RGB color #FFFFFF white and #FEFEFE white, but a compressor won't change that color number and neither will a translator.
Why wouldn't it? Video compression is lossy. If it saves bits by representing white by almost-white in a certain block of a certain frame, the codec is free to do it (for exactly the reason you cite -- humans can't tell the difference).
Sounds reasonable. But then how does the copyright holder distinguish between the purchaser engaging in illegal distribution vs being the victim of theft?
Since you're comparing this to theft, let's compare with what happens when it turns out some physical property you bought was actually stolen. You don't get to keep it -- you're not a "victim." You have to give it back. Translating back to this case, they'd probably ask/require you to delete your copies.
Of course, comparing copyright violation to theft isn't legally valid, so the analogy doesn't help much.
I really don't get this-- why? Why would you put your printer outside your firewall? So you can print from the internet? What's the point?
Security is the point. A printer is a firmware-driven device. I only have a limited degree of control over its security. I cannot upgrade the software if there is a bug. I'm basically at the mercy of the manufacturer. Why would I want to place such a questionable device inside my firewall? I want to PROTECT my network from it, not stick the fox in the hen house.
In my experience, most postscript printers will also print raw text (at least if you send it via LPR). If it detects headers that indicate the content encoding (and if it understands those headers), it will interpret the content as you describe.
This works because many PostScript printers are also PCL printers. Raw text is valid PCL, and the printer default language is usually PCL (although you can set it on the front panel in most cases), so it prints.
Like I said, many UNIX lpr spoolers will try to interpret and process the job according to certain rules. Raw text is usually wrapped in simple PJL and sent as-is. But I have seen at least one configuration that rendered raw text to PostScript. It can be infuriating if you don't realize what's happening.
This behavior could easily printer-specific, though, and I haven't tried raw ASCII with any recent laser printers, so maybe they don't do that anymore.
Any laser printer which can handle PCL will print raw ASCII text, since raw ASCII is valid PCL (actually, it interprets the character codes in a Roman-8 symbol set, but the bottom of Roman-8 is equivalent to ASCII, so it's basically the same thing).
Symantec is really grasping at straws here. In the age of internet security, why anyone would put a printer outside the firewall is too far beyond me to comprehend.
It is? Weird. To me, a printer is a device I cannot trust. I don't have the source code to the software, I have only limited control over what it does. Why should I put an untrusted device like that INSIDE my firewall? Are you absolutely insane?
If you put ANY device outside a firewall, you deserve to get hacked. It is very simple to secure the device and still allow remote printing - no excuses.
Yeah, exactly! Put your printer INSIDE the firewall so that when it gets hacked by one of those "safe" print jobs it'll already be inside the iron curtain with full access to your DMZ! Great!
How about we put the printer on the INSECURE side because it is an INSECURE device, eh?
In my experience, that virus - printing page after page of funny characters - is a human one, from someone trying to print a PCL formatted file to a PostScript printer or vice versa.
A pure PostScript printer will fail to print anything if given raw PCL. If the PCL is prepended with a PJL job description header and the printer comprehends PJL, it will simply stop with an "Unsupported language" error. Most printers which support both PCL and PostScript will assume PCL as the language if no PJL UEL sequence is detected.
On the other hand, raw PostScript sent to a PCL-only printer will print directly (that is, you'll see the PostScript code being printed rather than the document itself), unless the data contains escape sequences (uncommon in text-encoded PS documents) which might throw it into different modes.
Behavior is further complicated by various print spoolers which try to "help" you by autodetecting the language and inserting appropriate PJL sequences (or even worse, running an emulator to render the document to a raster, this bit me in the ass famously once when I was trying to directly print an HP/GL-2 graphics stream and the spooler tried to render it for me, quite badly). On UNIX, the "-l" flag to lpr is your friend.
If your printer is simply printing garbage, it's because the print engine has become confused by a previous job and needs to be reset. It's a sign of a low quality printer or print driver. It is more common on older printers because more of the processing is done on the PC by the driver, so there is more chance for something to go wrong in the software.
The whole blame PHP or blame the programmer argument ultimately falls onto the programmer. If you use too small of a bit and end up stripping out a screwhead, should you blame Black & Decker for it?
What if B&D claimed that the bit was one-size-fits-all and would work on any screw? Now who's fault is it?
Even if you wanted to play some trickery by moving the parameters directly to the proper stack frame locations instead of PUSHing them, you still need to load them into registers first (more instructions) because this architecture can't move directly from memory-to-memory.
Arguments based on the complexity (not efficiency) of machine code are moot, anyway. This is why we have compilers.
Can you think of a better way of enabling people to teach themselves about virtually anything than giving them access to the internet?
Teach themselves? How? The ability to learn is, itself, a learned skill. And hey, being able to read is a big help, too. I suppose the illiterate will just acquire reading skills through osmosis from the sheer volume of data on the Internet.
The Internet, by and large, is full of junk. It consists mostly of people's opinions and ramblings. Without the ability to judge information critically, this is about as useful to a 3rd world dweller as a screen door is on a submarine. Believe it or not, your own ability to use the Internet effectively stems from your 1st world education, not some innate ability you have.
I've got an idea. When you have a child, don't teach it to read, and don't send it to school. Also, starve it a little bit (just a little, you don't want Child Services on your ass). But provide it with a laptop from birth. Give no other assistance. Let's see how your kid stacks up against mine in 18 years.
Why, I bet with the ingenuity he gains from the laptop, he'll be coming up with all SORTS of neat ideas to get food. And once he gets his own farm up and running and doesn't have to worry about that anymore, by God, he'll have time to teach himself arithmetic with Google calculator! Well, once he manages to teach himself how to read, first. But that part's a cinch.
I'm not saying we shouldn't give people food - but what I am saying is that we shouldn't give people food (or anything else) without giving them education and that education is the most valuable gift we can give them.
Because a laptop is the same thing as an education. Okie dokie then.
If you put your own car out by the road with a "free car" sign on it, you can't accuse someone who takes it of GTA.
Sure you can. If somebody just takes the car and drives away, they've stolen it, regardless of whether the sign said "free car." You know why? It's a hairly little detail called "transfer of title." If someone just takes off with the car, the title has not been transferred -- they've stolen the car.
This is no different than if I hand you a dollar (or a fake dollar). I am agreeing to give it to you.
No, it's not like that at all. It's like an undercover officer giving you a bag of white powder which you think is cocaine. It turns out to be sugar. You still broke the law by attempting to buy drugs. And before you say "entrapment," it's not entrapment unless the officer coerces you into doing something you would not otherwise have done.
In this case, the MPAA is not forcing you to download the torrent, you are choosing to do so freely. You may not have infringed copyright by doing so, but you definitely flag yourself as a person who is ATTEMPTING to violate copyright.
As others have said, you really need to talk to an engineer about this. Having said that, remember the three ways that heat can be transmitted: radiation, conduction, and convection. Insulating the box takes care of conductive transfer. To prevent radiative transfer, the box should be wrapped in several layers of reflective material, with air gaps between the layers. Then, to prevent convective transfer, blow cool air through the spaces between the layers of reflective material.
Frankly I think that if someone wants to participate in a discussion in a given language, they should do all they can to master it, which is why I haven't moved someplace tropical yet...
Mastering a language requires practice. And practice means conversing with native speakers. This necessarily implies that there is always a phase where the non-native speaker is not speaking perfectly. I think you should tolerate that instead of sneering. People don't just read a book and wake up speaking another language fluently. Are you saying they shouldn't bother at all unless they're perfect? How do you ever expect them to improve?
I've always questioned the wisdom of burying this stuff, for exactly this reason. Surely in the future (maybe even the near future) we'll have much better ways of dealing with this sort of waste. For now, we should be storing it in secure facilities, in durable containers which can be replaced as they degrade. It's not zero-maintenance but it's better than having stuff buried in failing containers in a place where we can't reach it.
So instead we should have 25 versions of ls? I propose we call them: ls1, ls2, ls3, ls4... Much better!
Or are you saying that it is never useful to say, sort a list of files a certain way? Are you really saying that the user should be required to write a little shell script every time he wants more than just a list of filenames?
When you say "ls", you get an informative, simple report. This report looks practical identical on every flavor of UNIX that exists. If you want something different, you use a switch. I fail to see the problem in this.
So tell me why the wavelength of light matters: it's longitudinal, not transverse, so what limits it?
Uh, WHAT? Light is certainly transverse. The reason people get confused is when they look at a graph of an EM wave they see things WAVING up and down. Light doesn't do that. The waves drawn in diagrams only mean that the amplitude of the electric/magnetic field is increasing/decreasing as the wave travels along its path.
However, a light wave isn't (can't be) a perfect mathematical ray with changing electromagnetic field only along a mathematical LINE in space. The electromagnetic field fluctuates according to Maxwell's laws, and this leads to effects that occur away from the mathematical ray that defines where the light wave is traveling. So in some sense any light wave must have a "spatial extent." This extent is dictated by its frequency.
Are the two the same amplitude? Does it matter that it runs into things? I guess an electric field shouldn't be able to cross a conductor, but is that absolute, or is there some penetration into the conductive surface?
Yep, that's exactly the mistake you're making -- imagining the electric and magnetic fields as actually "waving" how they're drawn in books. That's a graph of the amplitude, not where the field IS. It's not like the electric field sine wave in the diagram can "bang into" the edge of the waveguide -- it's not really there at all.
To answer your other question about amplitude... It's strange to ask to compare an electric field and a magnetic field, because they are measured in different units. You can't compare a gallon to a calorie, and you can't compare an electric field to a magnetic field, so your question makes no sense. If you had asked "Is the energy stored in each field equal" then the answer would have been yes -- the electric field and magnetic field both carry equal portions of the ENERGY of the light wave.
It's funny. When I was learning C for the first time, I had been reading a lot of e.e.cummings concurrently. I remember thinking how much C looked like the poetry of e.e.cummings. He sure liked to use weird indentation, parentheses, inexplicable square brackets, etc.
I remember wondering if I could type in an e.e.cummings poem and actually get it to compile.
"dialog" is a curses-based program that throws up dialog screens based on options you give on the command line or a config file. The fact that you are considering a web-based solution with lynx makes me think that you don't need super-complex functionality -- dialog might be enough to do what you need. Essentially, the highest level of your user interface will be a shell script. The back end can be anything you want -- I would communicate with it via pipes of some kind.
That would be nice and all except that their particular terminal probably doesn't speak ANSI terminal codes. Just because it's ANSI doesn't mean it's used everywhere. In fact, I doubt ANSI is used in even a MAJORITY of the serial terminals still in use today.
The whole world is not a Linux terminal, or even anything close to it. ESPECIALLY not on AS/400.
Slashdot Mirror
Parents are 100% responsible for their own kids, up to and including online usage. When parents bitch and moan about their kids falling victim to lester, the neighborhood molester, they have absolutely NO ONE to blame but themselves.
I don't know about you, but I would also place some blame on Lester the Molester. There's more than enough blame to go around, you know.
Kids don't need AI or software monitoring, they need parents to pull the plug when mommy-sight is not available.
Or, we as parents can AUGMENT our presence with TOOLS, to make our parenting even more effective. Maybe you view children as property of their parents, I don't. I see no reason why a 14 year old should not be allowed to go online just because I had to run to the store for 30 minutes.
Also, car seats suck because they remove parental responsiblity -- you should duct tape your child directly to your abdomen instead of relying on these silly crutches.
Ha, and here I was thinking that the best way to protect your children online was having an honest and open relationship and giving them decent social/online education: What a fool I am.
I hate comments like this. Yes, parents are the ultimate authority and responsible party over their children. But what the hell, are you saying that we're not allowed to use TOOLS to aid in this task? Should I carry my child to school instead of driving him? As long as this sort of technology isn't used in a "fire and forget" configuration, but is accompanied by active involvement, I don't see how this is a bad thing AT ALL.
Suppose I give my kid a book about morality, a book which closely matches my own concepts. Am I copping out? Please spell out exactly what is and is not acceptable in the rearing of a child, it would be very helpful for me.
Your comment isn't insightful. More like a knee-jerk, canned response. Sounds like you're the one copping out by refusing to consider new possibilities and working only within some rigid structure that defines what is and isn't acceptable. Try thinking, it helps.
If they do it right, it won't be. A human being can't see the difference between RGB color #FFFFFF white and #FEFEFE white, but a compressor won't change that color number and neither will a translator.
Why wouldn't it? Video compression is lossy. If it saves bits by representing white by almost-white in a certain block of a certain frame, the codec is free to do it (for exactly the reason you cite -- humans can't tell the difference).
Sounds reasonable. But then how does the copyright holder distinguish between the purchaser engaging in illegal distribution vs being the victim of theft?
Since you're comparing this to theft, let's compare with what happens when it turns out some physical property you bought was actually stolen. You don't get to keep it -- you're not a "victim." You have to give it back. Translating back to this case, they'd probably ask/require you to delete your copies.
Of course, comparing copyright violation to theft isn't legally valid, so the analogy doesn't help much.
I really don't get this-- why? Why would you put your printer outside your firewall? So you can print from the internet? What's the point?
Security is the point. A printer is a firmware-driven device. I only have a limited degree of control over its security. I cannot upgrade the software if there is a bug. I'm basically at the mercy of the manufacturer. Why would I want to place such a questionable device inside my firewall? I want to PROTECT my network from it, not stick the fox in the hen house.
In my experience, most postscript printers will also print raw text (at least if you send it via LPR). If it detects headers that indicate the content encoding (and if it understands those headers), it will interpret the content as you describe.
This works because many PostScript printers are also PCL printers. Raw text is valid PCL, and the printer default language is usually PCL (although you can set it on the front panel in most cases), so it prints.
Like I said, many UNIX lpr spoolers will try to interpret and process the job according to certain rules. Raw text is usually wrapped in simple PJL and sent as-is. But I have seen at least one configuration that rendered raw text to PostScript. It can be infuriating if you don't realize what's happening.
This behavior could easily printer-specific, though, and I haven't tried raw ASCII with any recent laser printers, so maybe they don't do that anymore.
Any laser printer which can handle PCL will print raw ASCII text, since raw ASCII is valid PCL (actually, it interprets the character codes in a Roman-8 symbol set, but the bottom of Roman-8 is equivalent to ASCII, so it's basically the same thing).
Symantec is really grasping at straws here. In the age of internet security, why anyone would put a printer outside the firewall is too far beyond me to comprehend.
It is? Weird. To me, a printer is a device I cannot trust. I don't have the source code to the software, I have only limited control over what it does. Why should I put an untrusted device like that INSIDE my firewall? Are you absolutely insane?
If you put ANY device outside a firewall, you deserve to get hacked. It is very simple to secure the device and still allow remote printing - no excuses.
Yeah, exactly! Put your printer INSIDE the firewall so that when it gets hacked by one of those "safe" print jobs it'll already be inside the iron curtain with full access to your DMZ! Great!
How about we put the printer on the INSECURE side because it is an INSECURE device, eh?
In my experience, that virus - printing page after page of funny characters - is a human one, from someone trying to print a PCL formatted file to a PostScript printer or vice versa.
A pure PostScript printer will fail to print anything if given raw PCL. If the PCL is prepended with a PJL job description header and the printer comprehends PJL, it will simply stop with an "Unsupported language" error. Most printers which support both PCL and PostScript will assume PCL as the language if no PJL UEL sequence is detected.
On the other hand, raw PostScript sent to a PCL-only printer will print directly (that is, you'll see the PostScript code being printed rather than the document itself), unless the data contains escape sequences (uncommon in text-encoded PS documents) which might throw it into different modes.
Behavior is further complicated by various print spoolers which try to "help" you by autodetecting the language and inserting appropriate PJL sequences (or even worse, running an emulator to render the document to a raster, this bit me in the ass famously once when I was trying to directly print an HP/GL-2 graphics stream and the spooler tried to render it for me, quite badly). On UNIX, the "-l" flag to lpr is your friend.
If your printer is simply printing garbage, it's because the print engine has become confused by a previous job and needs to be reset. It's a sign of a low quality printer or print driver. It is more common on older printers because more of the processing is done on the PC by the driver, so there is more chance for something to go wrong in the software.
See my nick.
The whole blame PHP or blame the programmer argument ultimately falls onto the programmer. If you use too small of a bit and end up stripping out a screwhead, should you blame Black & Decker for it?
What if B&D claimed that the bit was one-size-fits-all and would work on any screw? Now who's fault is it?
So register-based parameter passing is now slower than stack-based? I'm not buying that.
Me neither, let's see what the stack-based sequence would actually look like:
mov eax, flags
push eax
mov eax, mode
push eax
mov eax, path
push eax
mov eax, 5
push eax
int 80h
add esp, 16 ; don't forget to adjust the stack!
Even if you wanted to play some trickery by moving the parameters directly to the proper stack frame locations instead of PUSHing them, you still need to load them into registers first (more instructions) because this architecture can't move directly from memory-to-memory.
Arguments based on the complexity (not efficiency) of machine code are moot, anyway. This is why we have compilers.
Can you think of a better way of enabling people to teach themselves about virtually anything than giving them access to the internet?
Teach themselves? How? The ability to learn is, itself, a learned skill. And hey, being able to read is a big help, too. I suppose the illiterate will just acquire reading skills through osmosis from the sheer volume of data on the Internet.
The Internet, by and large, is full of junk. It consists mostly of people's opinions and ramblings. Without the ability to judge information critically, this is about as useful to a 3rd world dweller as a screen door is on a submarine. Believe it or not, your own ability to use the Internet effectively stems from your 1st world education, not some innate ability you have.
I've got an idea. When you have a child, don't teach it to read, and don't send it to school. Also, starve it a little bit (just a little, you don't want Child Services on your ass). But provide it with a laptop from birth. Give no other assistance. Let's see how your kid stacks up against mine in 18 years.
Why, I bet with the ingenuity he gains from the laptop, he'll be coming up with all SORTS of neat ideas to get food. And once he gets his own farm up and running and doesn't have to worry about that anymore, by God, he'll have time to teach himself arithmetic with Google calculator! Well, once he manages to teach himself how to read, first. But that part's a cinch.
I'm not saying we shouldn't give people food - but what I am saying is that we shouldn't give people food (or anything else) without giving them education and that education is the most valuable gift we can give them.
Because a laptop is the same thing as an education. Okie dokie then.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of legitimate uses of P2P. So they would still need to prove that you intended to infringe on someone's copyright.
If the title of the torrent is "Lord of the Rings" I think it would be fairly hard to prove that you were not intending to violate copyright.
If you put your own car out by the road with a "free car" sign on it, you can't accuse someone who takes it of GTA.
Sure you can. If somebody just takes the car and drives away, they've stolen it, regardless of whether the sign said "free car." You know why? It's a hairly little detail called "transfer of title." If someone just takes off with the car, the title has not been transferred -- they've stolen the car.
This is no different than if I hand you a dollar (or a fake dollar). I am agreeing to give it to you.
No, it's not like that at all. It's like an undercover officer giving you a bag of white powder which you think is cocaine. It turns out to be sugar. You still broke the law by attempting to buy drugs. And before you say "entrapment," it's not entrapment unless the officer coerces you into doing something you would not otherwise have done.
In this case, the MPAA is not forcing you to download the torrent, you are choosing to do so freely. You may not have infringed copyright by doing so, but you definitely flag yourself as a person who is ATTEMPTING to violate copyright.
As others have said, you really need to talk to an engineer about this. Having said that, remember the three ways that heat can be transmitted: radiation, conduction, and convection. Insulating the box takes care of conductive transfer. To prevent radiative transfer, the box should be wrapped in several layers of reflective material, with air gaps between the layers. Then, to prevent convective transfer, blow cool air through the spaces between the layers of reflective material.
Frankly I think that if someone wants to participate in a discussion in a given language, they should do all they can to master it, which is why I haven't moved someplace tropical yet...
Mastering a language requires practice. And practice means conversing with native speakers. This necessarily implies that there is always a phase where the non-native speaker is not speaking perfectly. I think you should tolerate that instead of sneering. People don't just read a book and wake up speaking another language fluently. Are you saying they shouldn't bother at all unless they're perfect? How do you ever expect them to improve?
I've always questioned the wisdom of burying this stuff, for exactly this reason. Surely in the future (maybe even the near future) we'll have much better ways of dealing with this sort of waste. For now, we should be storing it in secure facilities, in durable containers which can be replaced as they degrade. It's not zero-maintenance but it's better than having stuff buried in failing containers in a place where we can't reach it.
So, I put together a quick routine using perl and chron
I too often find myself diving into a fat bag of chron after an unfortunate Perl hacking session...
So instead we should have 25 versions of ls? I propose we call them: ls1, ls2, ls3, ls4... Much better!
Or are you saying that it is never useful to say, sort a list of files a certain way? Are you really saying that the user should be required to write a little shell script every time he wants more than just a list of filenames?
When you say "ls", you get an informative, simple report. This report looks practical identical on every flavor of UNIX that exists. If you want something different, you use a switch. I fail to see the problem in this.
So tell me why the wavelength of light matters: it's longitudinal, not transverse, so what limits it?
Uh, WHAT? Light is certainly transverse. The reason people get confused is when they look at a graph of an EM wave they see things WAVING up and down. Light doesn't do that. The waves drawn in diagrams only mean that the amplitude of the electric/magnetic field is increasing/decreasing as the wave travels along its path.
However, a light wave isn't (can't be) a perfect mathematical ray with changing electromagnetic field only along a mathematical LINE in space. The electromagnetic field fluctuates according to Maxwell's laws, and this leads to effects that occur away from the mathematical ray that defines where the light wave is traveling. So in some sense any light wave must have a "spatial extent." This extent is dictated by its frequency.
Are the two the same amplitude? Does it matter that it runs into things? I guess an electric field shouldn't be able to cross a conductor, but is that absolute, or is there some penetration into the conductive surface?
Yep, that's exactly the mistake you're making -- imagining the electric and magnetic fields as actually "waving" how they're drawn in books. That's a graph of the amplitude, not where the field IS. It's not like the electric field sine wave in the diagram can "bang into" the edge of the waveguide -- it's not really there at all.
To answer your other question about amplitude... It's strange to ask to compare an electric field and a magnetic field, because they are measured in different units. You can't compare a gallon to a calorie, and you can't compare an electric field to a magnetic field, so your question makes no sense. If you had asked "Is the energy stored in each field equal" then the answer would have been yes -- the electric field and magnetic field both carry equal portions of the ENERGY of the light wave.
It's funny. When I was learning C for the first time, I had been reading a lot of e.e.cummings concurrently. I remember thinking how much C looked like the poetry of e.e.cummings. He sure liked to use weird indentation, parentheses, inexplicable square brackets, etc.
I remember wondering if I could type in an e.e.cummings poem and actually get it to compile.
"dialog" is a curses-based program that throws up dialog screens based on options you give on the command line or a config file. The fact that you are considering a web-based solution with lynx makes me think that you don't need super-complex functionality -- dialog might be enough to do what you need. Essentially, the highest level of your user interface will be a shell script. The back end can be anything you want -- I would communicate with it via pipes of some kind.
That would be nice and all except that their particular terminal probably doesn't speak ANSI terminal codes. Just because it's ANSI doesn't mean it's used everywhere. In fact, I doubt ANSI is used in even a MAJORITY of the serial terminals still in use today.
The whole world is not a Linux terminal, or even anything close to it. ESPECIALLY not on AS/400.