We shouldn't be subsidizing luxury vehicles for the wealthy.
Put the money into public transport and renewable energy instead.
EV's are not luxury vehicles for the wealthy, and haven't been for some time.
For example, the Nissan Leaf starts at $30K -- in a country where the average price for a new car is $33K.And no one that's driven a Leaf could confuse it with a Luxury car. Some expensive EV's do receive subsidies... which is good since it means that affluent early adopters pay a premium for new technology and then as the technology is refined, it trickles down into more affordable vehicles.
EV's are part of a renewable energy plan - not only are they more energy efficient and cleaner than gasoline powered cars, they automatically take advantage of the shift to renewable power in the energy grid.
Those who are not lazy probably realize there is no real value in it. It will not raise the value of your home, will need to be updated regularly. You would be better off getting nice floors and a fire stove.
Depending on how far you go with automaion, home automation is not in the same ballpark as nice floors (even laminate cost me $5000) or a gas stove (estimates ranged from $3000 - $5000).
I've replaced all of the light switches on the 1st and 2nd floor of my house for less than $500, so now when I go to bed on the 3rd floor, I can push a single button to turn off all of the lights in the house, have timers to turn on the outside lights at sunset, off at sunrise, I get alerted if someone opens the little used back door, as well as if there's a water leak near the dishwasher or laundry area. I can control the lights by app anywhere I go, but that seems more like a gimmick, though I'm thinking about buying a remote garage door module so I can close the garage door if I get to work and notice that I forgot to close it when I (or my wife) left the house. I have a smart door lock with a keypad that's also proven to be super convenient, once time the HOA needed to make an inspection when I wasn't home - I just gave their contractor a temporary code by phone, and then deleted it when they were done, no need to arrange with a neighbor to hold a key. The smart thermostat has also proven useful - I will get alerts if the temperature drops too low in winter, and if I leave for a trip and forget to turn down the themostat, I can do it from anywhere. I have cameras at the front/rear doors and in the garage to remotely monitor the house - I travel relatively frequently, so that gives peace of mind, when I'm out of the house I also use a couple inside cameras to help keep an eye on it.
I didn't install the system to increase the value of the house, I installed it for my own convenience - I'll probably just tear out the light switches and replace with standard light switches when I sell the house.
In summary: fuck American workers, I wanna save a couple bucks on my iCrap!
No, in summary: The globalization and automation genies are already out of the bottle, no matter how much you try to shove them back in, you can't.
So you can either realize and accept the current situation (by training well educated workers that are capable of doing more than what a simple pick and place robot can do), or you can pretend globalization doesn't exist and tell uneducated workers that you're bringing jobs "back" to them, when reality those jobs aren't coming back.
Good. Fuck Apple and their "designed in California (made with child labor in China)" bullshit.
Apple could easily manufacture their phones and laptops in the US. Their products are easily marked up at least 100%. They have a trillion dollars they're just sitting on.
They don't because they hate American blue collar workers, it's that simple.
Not that easily -- most of the components they use to make the phone are also made in China. Coordinating parts from hundreds of suppliers to all converge in the USA exactly when needed is time consuming and expensive. Even moreso since Apple would be paying for those components to sit a container for weeks on its way to the factory, and since the factory is so far away, they need to order weeks early just in case there's a transportation issue, so they end up owning components for months before they even start building the phone.
Those suppliers don't want to move here because then they become a high-cost supplier than can only sell in the USA, the rest of the world will buy from cheap chinese factories, so instead of a Chinese factory that makes 100 million resistors a year, in the USA there'd be a factory making 10M resistors a year, so they'd be much more expensive.
But even if Apple did bring the jobs on-shore, don't expect many blue-collar jobs to come, the whole factory will be automated, staffed mostly by relatively few highly skilled robotic technicians.
So, the end result is, Apple would earn less money on iPhones, consumers would pay more money for iPhones, and few jobs would result. So the increase in the cost of the phone is essentially a very expensive job-creation tax.
Just stop using Facebook garbage. Do you guys really think Zuckerberg (Mr. everybody else is an idiot) deserves to be so rich? Then stop using his bullshit.
I think that's the problem Facebook is facing -- the lucrative young market has already stopped using Facebook so now they are chasing after the less valuable older users
Since it's "national infrastructure", and the data is just sitting out there for anyone to collect for free, then let the government collect the data and give it away.
Good mapping data is expensive and labor intensive to collect, and is a huge competitive advantage to the company that invests the resources to do it well. It should remain with those that own it.
I can't make myself shorter, but you can shave a few inches off that fat ass of yours.
I don't know if you've ever seen a human body, but except in extreme obesity, a fat ass adds height while seated more than back-to-knee distance. In any case, at 160 lbs, I'm well within a healthy BMI for my height, so unless I'm willing to shave bone off my spine, weight less won't make a seat any more comfortable.
Everyone's always willing to complain, but yet they continually want cheaper and cheaper flights, while the actual costs of operating an airline just keep rising. Customers want more destinations and more airport services. Somebody's going to be paying for that, so it comes at the cost of legroom.
They can't cut legroom much more, I'm not that tall (5'10"), but sometimes find my knees touching the seatpocket in front of me.
If the airlines were required to advertise this information (seat width and pitch) along with ticket prices, then maybe consumers *could* take seat space into account, but it's very tedious and time consuming to do so now -- on any flight > 3 hours, I always try to Seat Guru and find out exactly what seat I'm buying. I started doing this after one cramped flight to Hawaii in a 777 configured with 10 seats across (3-4-3). I had upgraded to "Economy Plus", which gave a few inches of leg room but did nothing to help with the width.
Airlines should be free to cram as many people on board as they like, as long as they make it clear to consumers what they are buying.
The finding is particularly troubling because Skype relies on Sprint's wireless internet network, but the app also provides a communication tool that competes with Sprint's calling services, the researcher added.
Do cellular companies still make money off of phone calls? It seems hard to find a non-unlimited calling plan these days, and I doubt I make even 30 minutes of calls a month
In the first five weeks, the I.T. folks logged twenty-seven thousand help-desk tickets -- three for every two users
What kind of metric is "3 for ever 2 users"? Just write it in plain english, it's an average on 1.5 tickets per person. And 1.5 per person on average over 5 weeks sounds sounds like an amazingly successful rollout.
The funny thing is: just 1mm more thickness would already make a lot of difference and probably solve the problem.
I think there's also a weight problem. I didn't put my hands on new iphones yet, but the iPhone X certainly is ridiculously heavy.
Ridiculously heavy? It's people like you that are responsible for this ever decreasing trend in size/weight. It weighs 6 ounces, about an ounce more than my Pixel 2. And while I don't like to brag, I can lift 6 ounces in my bare hand without my arm getting tired.
they're actually useful when you don't want to lug even a laptop around and just need to do email/calendar or meeting notes..or read a book.
The nice thing about my tablet I bought 6 years ago is it still does the job. that's why sales are falling, a tablet good then is fine now. Come to think of it, my laptop is 6 years old and this PC I'm on is 8....
I don't find a tablet to be any easier to type on than a phone (the touchscreen is bigger but it's still a touchscreen)... unless I add a decent keyboard. And once I do that, the tablet is the same size as a laptop, so I may as well bring the laptop.
Another name for a hardware device that cuts off a device when the lid is closed is a "switch", and it's hardly innovative, even my 30 year old home furnace has a cutoff switch for when the cover is opened.
Right. Just like it wasn't innovative to have a power cord that attaches magnetically, and easily separates from the laptop when your pet/child/own clumsy ass trips over the cord without sending the computer to the floor, because rice cookers had them over a decade ago. So very obvious that it wasn't innovative - yet only one company thought to try it.
If that's such a great laptop innovation, then why isn't Apple using them anymore?
the 7.3% higher box charge in November -- more than three times the inflation rate -- represents a "modest increase" that is "comparable or even lower than our major competitors."
My Netflix "cable box" came built-in to my TV, and my Blu-ray player. And my computer. And my phone. I did buy a $59 (or $5/mo for a year) Roku for the TV that doesn't have it built-in.
It's the cost of cable that drove me away in the first place -- at one point I was paying over $100 for basic cable, 2 cable boxes, plus a couple premium channels. Now I pay $9.99/mo for Netflix and receive free over-the-air TV with an antenna. Still haven't gotten away form the cable company though, now they get $59/month from me for internet.
So which laptop that you designed has this simple feature?
Oh thatâ(TM)s right, you didnâ(TM)t think of it. Just like everyone else.
I know you assume that since I'm posting on Slashdot that I'm an expert in the field, but I not actually a laptop design engineer.
I tried to find the forum post where I suggested exactly this feature a couple years ago, but I don't remember where it was. A hardware switch to physically disable the camera and microphone sounds like such a no-brainer than I didn't think anyone would think it was innovative or hard to imagine.
Another name for a hardware device that cuts off a device when the lid is closed is a "switch", and it's hardly innovative, even my 30 year old home furnace has a cutoff switch for when the cover is opened.
Why would you assume that? They hired and promoted her as a brand ambassador -- their damages exceed just the loss of publicity from her not using the phone in public, but also the negative press from people seeing that even someone that Samsung paid to use their phone chooses to use an iPhone.
They are no less at fault for causing any damage to their own brand for hiring her in the first place. Unless they had offered her payment for her services in advance, even if as a hiring bonus (which typically requires a minimum number of months of tenure, and the duration is spelled out within the hiring contract), then the company has no remotely plausible claim to monetary damages that they did not put upon themselves by taking the risk in hiring her.
But if they mitigated that risk by spelling out damages in the contract, then they are justified in enforcing the terms of the contract. She's a public figure so she can't claim "but I didn't understand the contract", she has the experience and resources to understand what she's signing.
I don't know Russian law or the terms of the contract, so I'll defer to those that know both -- the Samsung legal team that is suing her must feel they have some sort of case.
...but also the negative press from people seeing that even someone that Samsung paid to use their phone chooses to use an iPhone.
That's a fair comment, see, but this is something that they brought upon themselves by making a fuss about it where nobody would have paid attention otherwise (q.v. Streisand Effect)
How can you know that? She's a public figure in Russia, and all it takes is some viral blog posting to take off, and Samsung has a full blown PR nightmare on their hands - probably worse than this lawsuit which will likely be forgotten in a few days, though the next person that signs a "Brand Ambassador" contract will be reminded.
It doesn't matter if it was in the contract or not. It's just outrageous to reprimand someone for the type of phone they use.
She wasn't fired just for her choice of phone, she was fired for violating the contract she signed (and was paid for). There's a word for signing a contract to do something and then not doing it, it's called fraud. If you paid someone $1000 to repaint your house, and he took your money and used it to paint someone else's house, would you be arguing "It's outrageous to reprimand someone for not painting a house, people shouldn't be forced to work"?
Sure... but ordinarily I'd expect that the consequence would be dismissal, if they found out, not actually getting *sued* over it.
Unless she had received any salary or payments in advance, in which case I could see it.
Otherwise, however... Samsung shouldn't really be able to do more than fire her ass for not promoting the company as expected.
Why would you assume that? They hired and promoted her as a brand ambassador -- their damages exceed just the loss of publicity from her not using the phone in public, but also the negative press from people seeing that even someone that Samsung paid to use their phone chooses to use an iPhone.
We've already crossed several thresholds on the climate, the damage we've done will take hundreds of years to undo, if it's undoable at all.
Humanity just better get used to a hotter world, cuz that ship sailed a long time ago. We're fucked.
I just hope that the poorer coastal countries that suffer the most damage are able to seek reparations from the wealthy countries (well, country) that knew they were contributing to climate change, but not only chose to ignore it, but flaunted it by emphasizing more carbon heavy fuels.
As someone who runs a legal dialer for an acutal purpose (debt recovery, not tele-sales). We looked into utilizing SMS as a reminder system for payment arrangements. You would be amazed the cost associated with it even on a mass scale. Phone calls are just infinitely cheaper.
I set up an alert system for a former employer Twillio has a straightforward API, and charges $0.0075 per short code SMS message. If you're sending hundreds of thousands of messages, your aggregate bill may be expensive, but it's still less than a penny per reminder.
Facebook needs to email everyone at their non-Facebook contact point that they've been hacked.
Why? What is the average person going to do with this information? Would they even care? I asked my sister and my teenage nephew about it... my sister said: "Oh well, my information is already out there, so what if it's out again?". My nephew said "Didn't you notice that I haven't logged on to facebook in like 2 years?"
I don't even know what I'd do with that information - I wouldn't do anything differently whether someone stole my Facebook data or not.
Slashdot Mirror
We shouldn't be subsidizing luxury vehicles for the wealthy.
Put the money into public transport and renewable energy instead.
EV's are not luxury vehicles for the wealthy, and haven't been for some time.
For example, the Nissan Leaf starts at $30K -- in a country where the average price for a new car is $33K.And no one that's driven a Leaf could confuse it with a Luxury car. Some expensive EV's do receive subsidies... which is good since it means that affluent early adopters pay a premium for new technology and then as the technology is refined, it trickles down into more affordable vehicles.
EV's are part of a renewable energy plan - not only are they more energy efficient and cleaner than gasoline powered cars, they automatically take advantage of the shift to renewable power in the energy grid.
Those who are not lazy probably realize there is no real value in it. It will not raise the value of your home, will need to be updated regularly. You would be better off getting nice floors and a fire stove.
Depending on how far you go with automaion, home automation is not in the same ballpark as nice floors (even laminate cost me $5000) or a gas stove (estimates ranged from $3000 - $5000).
I've replaced all of the light switches on the 1st and 2nd floor of my house for less than $500, so now when I go to bed on the 3rd floor, I can push a single button to turn off all of the lights in the house, have timers to turn on the outside lights at sunset, off at sunrise, I get alerted if someone opens the little used back door, as well as if there's a water leak near the dishwasher or laundry area. I can control the lights by app anywhere I go, but that seems more like a gimmick, though I'm thinking about buying a remote garage door module so I can close the garage door if I get to work and notice that I forgot to close it when I (or my wife) left the house. I have a smart door lock with a keypad that's also proven to be super convenient, once time the HOA needed to make an inspection when I wasn't home - I just gave their contractor a temporary code by phone, and then deleted it when they were done, no need to arrange with a neighbor to hold a key. The smart thermostat has also proven useful - I will get alerts if the temperature drops too low in winter, and if I leave for a trip and forget to turn down the themostat, I can do it from anywhere. I have cameras at the front/rear doors and in the garage to remotely monitor the house - I travel relatively frequently, so that gives peace of mind, when I'm out of the house I also use a couple inside cameras to help keep an eye on it.
I didn't install the system to increase the value of the house, I installed it for my own convenience - I'll probably just tear out the light switches and replace with standard light switches when I sell the house.
In summary: fuck American workers, I wanna save a couple bucks on my iCrap!
No, in summary: The globalization and automation genies are already out of the bottle, no matter how much you try to shove them back in, you can't.
So you can either realize and accept the current situation (by training well educated workers that are capable of doing more than what a simple pick and place robot can do), or you can pretend globalization doesn't exist and tell uneducated workers that you're bringing jobs "back" to them, when reality those jobs aren't coming back.
Good. Fuck Apple and their "designed in California (made with child labor in China)" bullshit.
Apple could easily manufacture their phones and laptops in the US. Their products are easily marked up at least 100%. They have a trillion dollars they're just sitting on.
They don't because they hate American blue collar workers, it's that simple.
Not that easily -- most of the components they use to make the phone are also made in China. Coordinating parts from hundreds of suppliers to all converge in the USA exactly when needed is time consuming and expensive. Even moreso since Apple would be paying for those components to sit a container for weeks on its way to the factory, and since the factory is so far away, they need to order weeks early just in case there's a transportation issue, so they end up owning components for months before they even start building the phone.
Those suppliers don't want to move here because then they become a high-cost supplier than can only sell in the USA, the rest of the world will buy from cheap chinese factories, so instead of a Chinese factory that makes 100 million resistors a year, in the USA there'd be a factory making 10M resistors a year, so they'd be much more expensive.
But even if Apple did bring the jobs on-shore, don't expect many blue-collar jobs to come, the whole factory will be automated, staffed mostly by relatively few highly skilled robotic technicians.
So, the end result is, Apple would earn less money on iPhones, consumers would pay more money for iPhones, and few jobs would result. So the increase in the cost of the phone is essentially a very expensive job-creation tax.
Just stop using Facebook garbage. Do you guys really think Zuckerberg (Mr. everybody else is an idiot) deserves to be so rich? Then stop using his bullshit.
I think that's the problem Facebook is facing -- the lucrative young market has already stopped using Facebook so now they are chasing after the less valuable older users
Since it's "national infrastructure", and the data is just sitting out there for anyone to collect for free, then let the government collect the data and give it away.
Good mapping data is expensive and labor intensive to collect, and is a huge competitive advantage to the company that invests the resources to do it well. It should remain with those that own it.
I can't make myself shorter, but you can shave a few inches off that fat ass of yours.
I don't know if you've ever seen a human body, but except in extreme obesity, a fat ass adds height while seated more than back-to-knee distance. In any case, at 160 lbs, I'm well within a healthy BMI for my height, so unless I'm willing to shave bone off my spine, weight less won't make a seat any more comfortable.
My thoughts exactly.
Everyone's always willing to complain, but yet they continually want cheaper and cheaper flights, while the actual costs of operating an airline just keep rising. Customers want more destinations and more airport services. Somebody's going to be paying for that, so it comes at the cost of legroom.
They can't cut legroom much more, I'm not that tall (5'10"), but sometimes find my knees touching the seatpocket in front of me.
If the airlines were required to advertise this information (seat width and pitch) along with ticket prices, then maybe consumers *could* take seat space into account, but it's very tedious and time consuming to do so now -- on any flight > 3 hours, I always try to Seat Guru and find out exactly what seat I'm buying. I started doing this after one cramped flight to Hawaii in a 777 configured with 10 seats across (3-4-3). I had upgraded to "Economy Plus", which gave a few inches of leg room but did nothing to help with the width.
Airlines should be free to cram as many people on board as they like, as long as they make it clear to consumers what they are buying.
The finding is particularly troubling because Skype relies on Sprint's wireless internet network, but the app also provides a communication tool that competes with Sprint's calling services, the researcher added.
Do cellular companies still make money off of phone calls? It seems hard to find a non-unlimited calling plan these days, and I doubt I make even 30 minutes of calls a month
In the first five weeks, the I.T. folks logged twenty-seven thousand help-desk tickets -- three for every two users
What kind of metric is "3 for ever 2 users"? Just write it in plain english, it's an average on 1.5 tickets per person. And 1.5 per person on average over 5 weeks sounds sounds like an amazingly successful rollout.
The funny thing is: just 1mm more thickness would already make a lot of difference and probably solve the problem.
I think there's also a weight problem. I didn't put my hands on new iphones yet, but the iPhone X certainly is ridiculously heavy.
Ridiculously heavy? It's people like you that are responsible for this ever decreasing trend in size/weight. It weighs 6 ounces, about an ounce more than my Pixel 2. And while I don't like to brag, I can lift 6 ounces in my bare hand without my arm getting tired.
they're actually useful when you don't want to lug even a laptop around and just need to do email/calendar or meeting notes..or read a book.
The nice thing about my tablet I bought 6 years ago is it still does the job. that's why sales are falling, a tablet good then is fine now. Come to think of it, my laptop is 6 years old and this PC I'm on is 8....
I don't find a tablet to be any easier to type on than a phone (the touchscreen is bigger but it's still a touchscreen)... unless I add a decent keyboard. And once I do that, the tablet is the same size as a laptop, so I may as well bring the laptop.
Right. Just like it wasn't innovative to have a power cord that attaches magnetically, and easily separates from the laptop when your pet/child/own clumsy ass trips over the cord without sending the computer to the floor, because rice cookers had them over a decade ago. So very obvious that it wasn't innovative - yet only one company thought to try it.
If that's such a great laptop innovation, then why isn't Apple using them anymore?
the 7.3% higher box charge in November -- more than three times the inflation rate -- represents a "modest increase" that is "comparable or even lower than our major competitors."
My Netflix "cable box" came built-in to my TV, and my Blu-ray player. And my computer. And my phone. I did buy a $59 (or $5/mo for a year) Roku for the TV that doesn't have it built-in.
It's the cost of cable that drove me away in the first place -- at one point I was paying over $100 for basic cable, 2 cable boxes, plus a couple premium channels. Now I pay $9.99/mo for Netflix and receive free over-the-air TV with an antenna. Still haven't gotten away form the cable company though, now they get $59/month from me for internet.
So which laptop that you designed has this simple feature?
Oh thatâ(TM)s right, you didnâ(TM)t think of it. Just like everyone else.
I know you assume that since I'm posting on Slashdot that I'm an expert in the field, but I not actually a laptop design engineer.
I tried to find the forum post where I suggested exactly this feature a couple years ago, but I don't remember where it was. A hardware switch to physically disable the camera and microphone sounds like such a no-brainer than I didn't think anyone would think it was innovative or hard to imagine.
Another name for a hardware device that cuts off a device when the lid is closed is a "switch", and it's hardly innovative, even my 30 year old home furnace has a cutoff switch for when the cover is opened.
They are no less at fault for causing any damage to their own brand for hiring her in the first place. Unless they had offered her payment for her services in advance, even if as a hiring bonus (which typically requires a minimum number of months of tenure, and the duration is spelled out within the hiring contract), then the company has no remotely plausible claim to monetary damages that they did not put upon themselves by taking the risk in hiring her.
But if they mitigated that risk by spelling out damages in the contract, then they are justified in enforcing the terms of the contract. She's a public figure so she can't claim "but I didn't understand the contract", she has the experience and resources to understand what she's signing.
I don't know Russian law or the terms of the contract, so I'll defer to those that know both -- the Samsung legal team that is suing her must feel they have some sort of case.
...but also the negative press from people seeing that even someone that Samsung paid to use their phone chooses to use an iPhone.
That's a fair comment, see, but this is something that they brought upon themselves by making a fuss about it where nobody would have paid attention otherwise (q.v. Streisand Effect)
How can you know that? She's a public figure in Russia, and all it takes is some viral blog posting to take off, and Samsung has a full blown PR nightmare on their hands - probably worse than this lawsuit which will likely be forgotten in a few days, though the next person that signs a "Brand Ambassador" contract will be reminded.
It doesn't matter if it was in the contract or not. It's just outrageous to reprimand someone for the type of phone they use.
She wasn't fired just for her choice of phone, she was fired for violating the contract she signed (and was paid for). There's a word for signing a contract to do something and then not doing it, it's called fraud. If you paid someone $1000 to repaint your house, and he took your money and used it to paint someone else's house, would you be arguing "It's outrageous to reprimand someone for not painting a house, people shouldn't be forced to work"?
Sure... but ordinarily I'd expect that the consequence would be dismissal, if they found out, not actually getting *sued* over it.
Unless she had received any salary or payments in advance, in which case I could see it.
Otherwise, however... Samsung shouldn't really be able to do more than fire her ass for not promoting the company as expected.
Why would you assume that? They hired and promoted her as a brand ambassador -- their damages exceed just the loss of publicity from her not using the phone in public, but also the negative press from people seeing that even someone that Samsung paid to use their phone chooses to use an iPhone.
Let's make this as simple as possible. It's wrong to just fire someone over the phone they use. Think about what I said.
Unless, of course, you were hired to promote a specific brand of phone.
Note though that she wasn't just fired, she was fired and sued for damages for breaking her contract.
Obviously it's his midichlorian level that's letting him play Tetris so well. If he can manage to beat Sebulba, then you'll know for sure.
We've already crossed several thresholds on the climate, the damage we've done will take hundreds of years to undo, if it's undoable at all.
Humanity just better get used to a hotter world, cuz that ship sailed a long time ago. We're fucked.
I just hope that the poorer coastal countries that suffer the most damage are able to seek reparations from the wealthy countries (well, country) that knew they were contributing to climate change, but not only chose to ignore it, but flaunted it by emphasizing more carbon heavy fuels.
As someone who runs a legal dialer for an acutal purpose (debt recovery, not tele-sales). We looked into utilizing SMS as a reminder system for payment arrangements. You would be amazed the cost associated with it even on a mass scale. Phone calls are just infinitely cheaper.
I set up an alert system for a former employer Twillio has a straightforward API, and charges $0.0075 per short code SMS message. If you're sending hundreds of thousands of messages, your aggregate bill may be expensive, but it's still less than a penny per reminder.
Not all robocalls are bad. Some, like appointment reminders and flight updates, are usually welcome
If you want to send me an appointment reminder or flight update, just send an SMS.
Facebook needs to email everyone at their non-Facebook contact point that they've been hacked.
Why? What is the average person going to do with this information? Would they even care? I asked my sister and my teenage nephew about it... my sister said: "Oh well, my information is already out there, so what if it's out again?". My nephew said "Didn't you notice that I haven't logged on to facebook in like 2 years?"
I don't even know what I'd do with that information - I wouldn't do anything differently whether someone stole my Facebook data or not.