So, cable companies are looking to move to metered usage at the same time they're offering WiFi boxes. Co-incidence? I don't think so. Anyone get the feeling these boxes'll be deliberately insecure?
"Yes, that's right Sir. Your access bill really is fifteen thousand, three hundred and seventy two dollars, eight-six this month. You had a near consistent 1500kbps all month... What, secure our boxes? Why would we want to do that Sir?"
And, conveniently, the competition all goes away because why pay for another ISP when you can piggy back your neighbour's? They don't care if they themselves only sell one account per neighbourhood because DAMN does it pay well! </deliberately farcical>
Of course, the simple solution is to just download songs that aren't owned by RIAA members and covered by their copyright. Then you can be sure that you won't get bogus files.
It's not that much of a sacrifice because MP3 sharing systems are only ever used for fair use (where you know the origin, as it's just your home/work PC that you're fairly using from) or they're to promote unsigned bands for whom P2P is an important system.
Right?
In next week's Ask Slashdot: "Dear Slashdot, I like fast cars but they're so expensive. Recently more and more of them are getting lowjacked. Isn't this a disturbing trend? What technical means are open to defeating this system? I only steal from big company showrooms so it's effectively victimless."
Before you mod this down as a troll, think about what I'm actually saying. When did we lose the cool technology, the valid fair use claims and the arguments that these systems are useful promotional tools for those who want them... and reach the point where we're bitching about only being stopped from the unfair uses?
"Why can't they make these available as another download or even part of the Linux download?"
On a very simple level, [almost] anyone who's planning on running a server should have easier access to the installed Windows files than they do to Bioware's FTP servers. The server itself doesn't let you do anything other than allow players to play the game on their clients. If you don't have the game, there's almost no reason, beyond staggering generosity, to tie up around a lot of bandwidth for a 64 player server that you can't use, can't charge for and, as you don't play, you probably don't understand the subtleties of configuring anyway.
Sure, there're a few cases you can come up with, like you want to install the server at work and play at home (I miss the dotcom days), but by and large, it just doesn't justify the cost to Bioware of providing a hundreds of megs/copy FTP server when 99% of their users are fine without it.
It's an interesting concept to look at: Is the relative scarcity of Linux games because there aren't enough Linux would-be-gamers, or is it more to do with Linux would-be-gamers believing that everything should be free-as-in-beer and therefore a hell of a lot more hassle to sell to than nice Windows using sheep?
Memorable bugs. Every developer has one. What were yours?
I'm a web dev, so I'll go with: Netscape. Any 4.x version.
I don't think there's much point in trying to get more specific than that. Still, if you really force me, for out and out stupidity, it's a cross between:
When assigning borders in CSS, under certain circumstances, it'll duplicate all bar the S in style of the tag. So you end up with <div Style="blah"><div Ttyle="blah"> instead of the single tag.
The other stupid one goes to its handling of Java applets where, if they're inside divs, it regularly forgets that, when you leave the page, it'd be a really good thing to close them too. As a result you end up with music continuing to play or flash animations continuing their image updates over the next page you visit (Flash being, essentially, just a java applet).
I'm not even bothering to go in to page sizes that have to be multiples of 3, inconsistent syntax or the things it just plain doesn't support.
Yeah, IE is bad, but it tended not to be so rampantly insane.
Moderated: -5 Daring to choose MS over anything else on Slashdot.
And, don't forget the Denial of Freedom (DoF) attack on Yasser Arafat. Dubya's got some balls of steel. Basically comes out and tells the people: "You can't choose your own leaders... it has to be someone that we approve of instead." Like I said - balls.
Vietnam, a "police action", turned war fought because the US said, "You have to have free and fair public elections, but you're not allowed to vote for the Communists who'd win otherwise."
Let's hope we don't see: Middle East 2003, a "police action", turned war fought because the US said, "You have to have free and fair public elections, but you're not allowed to vote for Yasser Arafat who'd win otherwise."
The idea is that you're supposed to learn from history. D.C. doesn't need a second wall as a tribute to government stupidity.
A week or so ago, the President authorized DOL (Denial Of Life) attack on world leaders he didn't like (Saddam) without considering the accepted legal standpoint (UN mandate).
Now the government wants to give businesses the right to DOS P2P networks without considering the accepted legal standpoint (that DOS attacks are illegal).
The one question you've got to ask is, how is this in any way suprising? The government has learned that it can basically ignore issues of rights and legality so long as it's dressed up as being against evil bad people (how long before the RIAA renames Pirates (who were never actually committing piracy) Terrorists?). Sadly, we sold out our rights in order to have cute, safe, little doggies.
Don't get me wrong... I love America and what it's supposed to stand for. But, to do that, I don't have to love a bunch of politicians who're scaremongering for their own benefit.
I can't help but find myself thinking that all of the closed out net broadcasters haven't been shut out by the cost of doing business but because they weren't doing the business they were actually in.
Yes, the RIAA screws the hell out of broadcasters but, in turn, as the article points out, the broadcasters, via the indies, are screwing the hell, and then some, out of the RIAA members. The end result is that you pay x to be allowed to play a song and get y (where y is vastly greater than x) to get it heard.
So, if the net broadcasters had known how the game was played, the answer would be to sign up with indies and get paid handsomely for doing it.
What about all the independant music? The net broadcasters want to play their own stuff, not corporate playlist crud? That's cool. The independant labels are complaining they can't get airtime. So, easy answer, both sides get out of the incestuous mess... The independants tell the RIAA where to stick their "representation" and release their music under a license that allows it to be played for free by the independant stations.
Yeah, the music industry is a mess. Yes, everyone's getting screwed and, you know what, they're screwing other people back again to recoup those costs. The only apparent reason the net broadcasters and the independant labels is because they're playing the existing game badly and not making up their own ones.
While it is messy, that's how the game is played. You either play the game, make up your own one with others who'd like to play it your new way, or go out of business. It's a shame that the net broadcasters have chosen to go out of business rather than invent their own game and tell the RIAA where to stick it.
You know, a guy called Linus didn't like the monopoly in another field. Fortunately, he tried to change it, rather than [just] bitch.
So, can we copyright our biometric information? I mean, let's face it, we very definitely made it ourselves. If companies get to patent segments of human DNA, we should be allowed protection of our own, complete, unique DNA.
No, I'm sorry, you can't DNA test me. Why not? I own the copyright on my DNA and it'd be an infringement for you to copy it on to your systems. Iris scan instead? No, I'm sorry, I own the rights to that too. Would you like to discuss licensing?
Surely you've never been to Scotland. Although there may be a curious pattern emerging here with people who have to sit next to us English their entire lives.
The Scottish predilection for whisky, beer and falling down drunk has nothing to do with the hard, scientific fact that they're seeing things. Nothing whatsoever. Especially not that weird floaty feeling that they're about to fall off the world as they're actually beamed up to the mothership.
Just wanted to make sure that was absolutely clear. We'll have no dispersions cast here!
"Its funny how you only see the old washed up artist compaining.."
As opposed to the massively successful ones? Quite what would they say exactly, "Yeah, this has been my biggest selling album yet. 15 times platinum, highest opening week ever. Damn those pirates!"
Seriously, it's only those who're suffering who're going to notice. Sometimes the right answer can be the obvious one, not the conspiracy that's much more fun to believe in.
Unplug the IDE cable it's quicker and less permanent.
A twist of a thumb screw, a poping off of the side pannel, an unplug, and putting it back together is all it takes to convince most users that their hard drive has crashed. Then take their machine away from them, give them a blank machine for a couple of days of sweating it, then bring it back talking of all the heroic measures you've had to go to.
Now you're a hero for saving their data and you've driven the same message home.
If you want to do it to the entire office in one go, come in one night, do it, then tell them that there was a power surge. Fix the machines belonging to people who control your promotions either impressively quickly, or sufficiently slowly to convince them that what you do really matters to them.
Why would anyone want DM'd games online? You loose pretty much every benefit of P&P rpgs; loose pretty much every benefit of single player rpgs; for what? the ability to play across distances, a computerized dice roller, and some pretty graphics?
That's pretty much the point of NWN - they've attempted to give back most of the features that you traditionally lose by moving to a computer.
For example: The freeform interaction that a real world DM gives is brought back by allowing the DMs to take over characters, manually trigger events, adjust the difficulty via a slider to ensure everything's always perfectly balanced for interesting play.
Where the computer gains the advantage is that it allows a lot of things to become automated. Think about those D&D games you played as a kid. Half the time the game degenerated while the DM focused on a single player, looked up a rule, etc. On top of that, they'd be dropping rules all over the place because they couldn't remember them or they took too long to figure out. Now all of that stuff's handled automatically.
So, the end result is you get a game that [ideally] handles everything you don't want to handle or don't have time to handle, giving that postive aspect of computerised gaming and yet allows the DM to step in wherever's needed, keeping the benefits of traditional gaming. Of course, that's assuming everything's ideal, but they're looking like they're pretty close.
I was much the same when I got a new PC at work with a large hard drive. Suddenly I could rip my entire CD collection on to it and listen to my own music all of the time.
Then I got bored.
With your own music (or MP3s), you tend to listen to everything ever released by the bands you know and then little else. You see, the point of radio, for a lot of people, is that it exposes you to new music. Granted, with the Clear Channel monopoly, that's happening less and less, but the concept is still there.
My work hard drive died about two months ago, wiping out everything I'd gone to the trouble of ripping. Since then I've installed Spinner and ripped maybe two or three albums. I now choose a genre I like so I don't have to listen to a load of junk that I'll never enjoy, yet I also get exposed to a lot of new music.
"The University of Maryland's Project NEThics is used as a prime example."
Maryland should be praised for having the courage to admit that they are just a bunch of NET hicks. Most colleges are way too arrogant to see such failings in themselves.
In related news, The University Of Tennessee has set up a NEThillbillies project where classes include streaming MP3s of dueling banjos to people in a menacing fashion.
Holy bleeding shit!!! Where do you live? in Milpitas or something?
Actually, I'm English. As a result, I come from a nation that's endured decades of [primarily US citizen sponsored (IRA)] terrorism. That in turn means that while America got to do a "Holy Shit!" knee jerk response and dress it all up as patriotism, we got over it in the 70s with internment. While England's by no mean's perfect, or even as far as "OK", the seriously insane stuff does tend to get blocked ever since we saw what a f*** up it was with internment.
I find it odd that Europe is moving from a position of protecting a great deal of data with fairly strong laws to [storing a great deal of information for law inforcement].
Europol != Europe. Seriously, does Chicago PD equal the US government? It's a draft of a law enforcement agency's wish list - a starting point for one side of a debate, not anything that's passed in to law. Just because the MPAA have probably had a debate along the lines of "OK, what'd it be cool if we could force on users?" doesn't mean they get it - or even ask for it.
"Write correct, clean code and you won't have any trouble with Mozilla-based browsers."
No, it'll just be employment you have trouble with.
Whether all browsers should work with standards based HTML, the reality is that as soon as you want to do anything complex: almost all of them break from the standards; interpret standards their own way; do random unique stuff; whatever.
So, if you want a nice, safe, white page, some blue links, maybe a table with no background, standards work wonderfully. Unfortunately, most of the people who commission websites seem to believe that the latest gimmic and losing 5% of users is a far better bet than a circa '95 web page that everyone can, and nobody will, use.
Are all of those claims nonsense? Who cares? The point is, these are the people who are paying for the sites to be made and, if they want their gimmic, they get it or they hire someone else.
(And yes, my personal website does run pretty much standards compliant and you know what, people love it, but that's about the only one where I get complete creative control.)
According to an article on Detroit News, oil may actually not be exhaustible - at least in the way we currently view it.
Thomas Gold of Cornell University says oil deposits may not actually be from decaying animal life but from methane left over from the Earth's origin. If that is the case, vast deposits would apparently exist throughout the earth, not just the surface deposits we are using now.
What that says about man's ability to destroy his environment, given a potentially limitless supply of tools, I hate to even think. No idea whether Gold'll be proved correct or not, but it's an interesting counterpoint.
As the moderator posts on the TiVo boards point out, the recording is made to a reserved part of the system, so no space is lost, and does not interrupt any other recording the users may have been doing. So, in that respect, it's not actually as offensive as it sounds.
What does strike me as dubious is, "The Dossa & Jo promo contains some bad language and is unsuitable for younger viewers. Parental controls are not effective so be careful." (quoted from Gary Sargent, a moderator at TiVo).
What they are saying is, "Regardless of how you try to protect your children's viewing habits, we will disable your controls and make whatever content we feel like accessible to anyone who uses the box - and this may well be your children who are in from school before you." Not only do they disable the parental controls, due to the nature of the TiVo unit, they also make [potentially] adult material available outside of the carefully regulated UK "watershed".
So, how long before a TV channel wants to get viewing figures up on some late night porn dressed up as a documentary and a nation comes home the next day to find their kids happily watching away at 5pm?
TV ads are a terrible bargain for the user, paying us about $1.20 per hour of our attention
...and we have the TV companies telling us that ad skipping is theft as we have a contract with them to watch their advertising. So, if they honestly regard it as a legal contract, can we sue them under minimum wage legislation?
It'd be kind of entertaining to charge for 2 hours a day x 365 days a year x the last 20 years worth of my back pay. I think I'm owed about $60,000. *grins*
Slashdot Mirror
So, cable companies are looking to move to metered usage at the same time they're offering WiFi boxes. Co-incidence? I don't think so. Anyone get the feeling these boxes'll be deliberately insecure?
"Yes, that's right Sir. Your access bill really is fifteen thousand, three hundred and seventy two dollars, eight-six this month. You had a near consistent 1500kbps all month... What, secure our boxes? Why would we want to do that Sir?"
And, conveniently, the competition all goes away because why pay for another ISP when you can piggy back your neighbour's? They don't care if they themselves only sell one account per neighbourhood because DAMN does it pay well!
</deliberately farcical>
Of course, the simple solution is to just download songs that aren't owned by RIAA members and covered by their copyright. Then you can be sure that you won't get bogus files.
It's not that much of a sacrifice because MP3 sharing systems are only ever used for fair use (where you know the origin, as it's just your home/work PC that you're fairly using from) or they're to promote unsigned bands for whom P2P is an important system.
Right?
In next week's Ask Slashdot: "Dear Slashdot, I like fast cars but they're so expensive. Recently more and more of them are getting lowjacked. Isn't this a disturbing trend? What technical means are open to defeating this system? I only steal from big company showrooms so it's effectively victimless."
Before you mod this down as a troll, think about what I'm actually saying. When did we lose the cool technology, the valid fair use claims and the arguments that these systems are useful promotional tools for those who want them... and reach the point where we're bitching about only being stopped from the unfair uses?
On a very simple level, [almost] anyone who's planning on running a server should have easier access to the installed Windows files than they do to Bioware's FTP servers. The server itself doesn't let you do anything other than allow players to play the game on their clients. If you don't have the game, there's almost no reason, beyond staggering generosity, to tie up around a lot of bandwidth for a 64 player server that you can't use, can't charge for and, as you don't play, you probably don't understand the subtleties of configuring anyway.
Sure, there're a few cases you can come up with, like you want to install the server at work and play at home (I miss the dotcom days), but by and large, it just doesn't justify the cost to Bioware of providing a hundreds of megs/copy FTP server when 99% of their users are fine without it.
It's an interesting concept to look at: Is the relative scarcity of Linux games because there aren't enough Linux would-be-gamers, or is it more to do with Linux would-be-gamers believing that everything should be free-as-in-beer and therefore a hell of a lot more hassle to sell to than nice Windows using sheep?
I'm a web dev, so I'll go with: Netscape. Any 4.x version.
I don't think there's much point in trying to get more specific than that. Still, if you really force me, for out and out stupidity, it's a cross between:
- When assigning borders in CSS, under certain circumstances, it'll duplicate all bar the S in style of the tag. So you end up with <div Style="blah"><div Ttyle="blah"> instead of the single tag.
- The other stupid one goes to its handling of Java applets where, if they're inside divs, it regularly forgets that, when you leave the page, it'd be a really good thing to close them too. As a result you end up with music continuing to play or flash animations continuing their image updates over the next page you visit (Flash being, essentially, just a java applet).
I'm not even bothering to go in to page sizes that have to be multiples of 3, inconsistent syntax or the things it just plain doesn't support.Yeah, IE is bad, but it tended not to be so rampantly insane.
Moderated: -5 Daring to choose MS over anything else on Slashdot.
Vietnam, a "police action", turned war fought because the US said, "You have to have free and fair public elections, but you're not allowed to vote for the Communists who'd win otherwise."
Let's hope we don't see: Middle East 2003, a "police action", turned war fought because the US said, "You have to have free and fair public elections, but you're not allowed to vote for Yasser Arafat who'd win otherwise."
The idea is that you're supposed to learn from history. D.C. doesn't need a second wall as a tribute to government stupidity.
Now the government wants to give businesses the right to DOS P2P networks without considering the accepted legal standpoint (that DOS attacks are illegal).
The one question you've got to ask is, how is this in any way suprising? The government has learned that it can basically ignore issues of rights and legality so long as it's dressed up as being against evil bad people (how long before the RIAA renames Pirates (who were never actually committing piracy) Terrorists?). Sadly, we sold out our rights in order to have cute, safe, little doggies.
Don't get me wrong... I love America and what it's supposed to stand for. But, to do that, I don't have to love a bunch of politicians who're scaremongering for their own benefit.
Yes, the RIAA screws the hell out of broadcasters but, in turn, as the article points out, the broadcasters, via the indies, are screwing the hell, and then some, out of the RIAA members. The end result is that you pay x to be allowed to play a song and get y (where y is vastly greater than x) to get it heard.
So, if the net broadcasters had known how the game was played, the answer would be to sign up with indies and get paid handsomely for doing it.
What about all the independant music? The net broadcasters want to play their own stuff, not corporate playlist crud? That's cool. The independant labels are complaining they can't get airtime. So, easy answer, both sides get out of the incestuous mess... The independants tell the RIAA where to stick their "representation" and release their music under a license that allows it to be played for free by the independant stations.
Yeah, the music industry is a mess. Yes, everyone's getting screwed and, you know what, they're screwing other people back again to recoup those costs. The only apparent reason the net broadcasters and the independant labels is because they're playing the existing game badly and not making up their own ones.
While it is messy, that's how the game is played. You either play the game, make up your own one with others who'd like to play it your new way, or go out of business. It's a shame that the net broadcasters have chosen to go out of business rather than invent their own game and tell the RIAA where to stick it.
You know, a guy called Linus didn't like the monopoly in another field. Fortunately, he tried to change it, rather than [just] bitch.
No, I'm sorry, you can't DNA test me. Why not? I own the copyright on my DNA and it'd be an infringement for you to copy it on to your systems. Iris scan instead? No, I'm sorry, I own the rights to that too. Would you like to discuss licensing?
Surely you've never been to Scotland. Although there may be a curious pattern emerging here with people who have to sit next to us English their entire lives.
Just wanted to make sure that was absolutely clear. We'll have no dispersions cast here!
As opposed to the massively successful ones? Quite what would they say exactly, "Yeah, this has been my biggest selling album yet. 15 times platinum, highest opening week ever. Damn those pirates!"
Seriously, it's only those who're suffering who're going to notice. Sometimes the right answer can be the obvious one, not the conspiracy that's much more fun to believe in.
Damn! I've got moderator access and can't find either -1 Petulent, -1 Chip On Shoulder or even -1 Get Over It, Move On With Your Life.
A twist of a thumb screw, a poping off of the side pannel, an unplug, and putting it back together is all it takes to convince most users that their hard drive has crashed. Then take their machine away from them, give them a blank machine for a couple of days of sweating it, then bring it back talking of all the heroic measures you've had to go to.
Now you're a hero for saving their data and you've driven the same message home.
If you want to do it to the entire office in one go, come in one night, do it, then tell them that there was a power surge. Fix the machines belonging to people who control your promotions either impressively quickly, or sufficiently slowly to convince them that what you do really matters to them.
That's pretty much the point of NWN - they've attempted to give back most of the features that you traditionally lose by moving to a computer.
For example: The freeform interaction that a real world DM gives is brought back by allowing the DMs to take over characters, manually trigger events, adjust the difficulty via a slider to ensure everything's always perfectly balanced for interesting play.
Where the computer gains the advantage is that it allows a lot of things to become automated. Think about those D&D games you played as a kid. Half the time the game degenerated while the DM focused on a single player, looked up a rule, etc. On top of that, they'd be dropping rules all over the place because they couldn't remember them or they took too long to figure out. Now all of that stuff's handled automatically.
So, the end result is you get a game that [ideally] handles everything you don't want to handle or don't have time to handle, giving that postive aspect of computerised gaming and yet allows the DM to step in wherever's needed, keeping the benefits of traditional gaming. Of course, that's assuming everything's ideal, but they're looking like they're pretty close.
Then I got bored.
With your own music (or MP3s), you tend to listen to everything ever released by the bands you know and then little else. You see, the point of radio, for a lot of people, is that it exposes you to new music. Granted, with the Clear Channel monopoly, that's happening less and less, but the concept is still there.
My work hard drive died about two months ago, wiping out everything I'd gone to the trouble of ripping. Since then I've installed Spinner and ripped maybe two or three albums. I now choose a genre I like so I don't have to listen to a load of junk that I'll never enjoy, yet I also get exposed to a lot of new music.
A net without US script kiddies, self-important housewives, the NRA, the US arms of the MPAA and RIAA spamming P2P networks... Mmmm. :)
Have you seen the pictures? That's just not right!
Taking the wrong pill, the teddy remained connected to the matrix.
Maryland should be praised for having the courage to admit that they are just a bunch of NET hicks. Most colleges are way too arrogant to see such failings in themselves.
In related news, The University Of Tennessee has set up a NEThillbillies project where classes include streaming MP3s of dueling banjos to people in a menacing fashion.
Actually, I'm English. As a result, I come from a nation that's endured decades of [primarily US citizen sponsored (IRA)] terrorism. That in turn means that while America got to do a "Holy Shit!" knee jerk response and dress it all up as patriotism, we got over it in the 70s with internment. While England's by no mean's perfect, or even as far as "OK", the seriously insane stuff does tend to get blocked ever since we saw what a f*** up it was with internment.
Europol != Europe. Seriously, does Chicago PD equal the US government? It's a draft of a law enforcement agency's wish list - a starting point for one side of a debate, not anything that's passed in to law. Just because the MPAA have probably had a debate along the lines of "OK, what'd it be cool if we could force on users?" doesn't mean they get it - or even ask for it.
No, it'll just be employment you have trouble with.
Whether all browsers should work with standards based HTML, the reality is that as soon as you want to do anything complex: almost all of them break from the standards; interpret standards their own way; do random unique stuff; whatever.
So, if you want a nice, safe, white page, some blue links, maybe a table with no background, standards work wonderfully. Unfortunately, most of the people who commission websites seem to believe that the latest gimmic and losing 5% of users is a far better bet than a circa '95 web page that everyone can, and nobody will, use.
Are all of those claims nonsense? Who cares? The point is, these are the people who are paying for the sites to be made and, if they want their gimmic, they get it or they hire someone else.
(And yes, my personal website does run pretty much standards compliant and you know what, people love it, but that's about the only one where I get complete creative control.)
Thomas Gold of Cornell University says oil deposits may not actually be from decaying animal life but from methane left over from the Earth's origin. If that is the case, vast deposits would apparently exist throughout the earth, not just the surface deposits we are using now.
What that says about man's ability to destroy his environment, given a potentially limitless supply of tools, I hate to even think. No idea whether Gold'll be proved correct or not, but it's an interesting counterpoint.
As the moderator posts on the TiVo boards point out, the recording is made to a reserved part of the system, so no space is lost, and does not interrupt any other recording the users may have been doing. So, in that respect, it's not actually as offensive as it sounds.
What does strike me as dubious is, "The Dossa & Jo promo contains some bad language and is unsuitable for younger viewers. Parental controls are not effective so be careful." (quoted from Gary Sargent, a moderator at TiVo).
What they are saying is, "Regardless of how you try to protect your children's viewing habits, we will disable your controls and make whatever content we feel like accessible to anyone who uses the box - and this may well be your children who are in from school before you." Not only do they disable the parental controls, due to the nature of the TiVo unit, they also make [potentially] adult material available outside of the carefully regulated UK "watershed".
So, how long before a TV channel wants to get viewing figures up on some late night porn dressed up as a documentary and a nation comes home the next day to find their kids happily watching away at 5pm?
TV ads are a terrible bargain for the user, paying us about $1.20 per hour of our attention
...and we have the TV companies telling us that ad skipping is theft as we have a contract with them to watch their advertising. So, if they honestly regard it as a legal contract, can we sue them under minimum wage legislation?
It'd be kind of entertaining to charge for 2 hours a day x 365 days a year x the last 20 years worth of my back pay. I think I'm owed about $60,000. *grins*
It's true about girl-friends as well.
Playability in 2D wins over less interaction in 3D for girlfriends as well? Well, I guess that explains Playboy's success then.