Leahy is an oddity in Congress. He's someone who seems to have his principles and sticks to them. He really seems to understand that there's such a thing as the First Amendment.
I wonder if there's a chance that Slashdot could do an interview with him. I'd like to see that happen.
I also like the way DirecTV DSL does things. They give you a CD with a few optional apps, plus a DSL status monitor for Windows. You can follow the CD installation program if you want, and it's really slick, but you don't have to. Their setup manual has all the network settings you'll need if you want to do it manually.
And the reason they give you those settings is to support Linux installations. Thank God there's a major DSL provider that is aware that Linux exists.
And best of all, no PPPoE! And they let you run mail and Web servers off your connection if you want. I know that many people do it anyway with other providers, but it sure is nice to have it explicitly stated that you can.
But to get back on topic, a good ISP should provide a basic package of apps and possibly also a tool to automatically configure a system for someone who is afraid to do so. However, they should also provide that config info to those who are comfortable doing it themselves. As for what to support, I think that knowing something about several different browsers and e-mail apps is important. Where I worked, we would support them up to a point. After we'd done all we could, we'd have to send the user to Microsoft, which I think is entirely proper after we've tried our best to solve the problem. After all, MS writes these apps, so they shouldn't expect other companies to support them. They wrote the code; they can fix it when it breaks.
You're exactly right. Although the politicians like to paint anti-globalization protesters as a bunch of troublemakers, these protests seem to have started an undercurrent of dissent about the supposed benefits of globalization. Getting an issue in the media seems to get people thinking about an issue that they never even knew existed.
What I'd like to know, and what everyone here needs to consider, is how long it was that the anti-globalization folks were discussing this on the Net before the issue went mainstream. I wasn't involved in those online discussions, so I can't say, but this is an important issue to consider. Right now, the CBDTPA isn't mainstream, not at all. Our first priority has to be to make it that way.
"instead of writing congress, try writing the media."
I agree with you 100%. We're a small group here, and what we think will only count if we convert others to our side. Writing to the media is a great way to do that. In fact, I'd posted a list of newspaper directories to another post in this thread. Here they are again.
And I'll issue my challenge again. If everyone here will walk away from Slashdot long enough to write to your local newspaper, we can start to make a difference. No, not all letters will get published. Maybe most of them won't. But someone there has to read them, and they'll be educated in the process, so they will be more familiar with the issue when they hear about it again.
Just one letter. That's all I ask. If you want to write more, that's great, but at least write one.
Writing to local newspapers is always a good idea because you're going to reach people who may not go online that much. Here are some lists to find them.
A few suggestions. First, do not write the same letter to several newspapers in close proximity to each other, as they won't get published because newspapers want original letters. Second, it's best to choose papers at least somewhat local to you, as they prefer to print letters from their local readers. If what you send them looks like something you sent to 100 papers around the country, you won't get it published. And finally, don't ignore the alternative papers in your area. These guys often want more content than they have, so you stand a better chance of getting published. You might even approach them about writing a guest column.
I'd like to challenge everyone here to spend a little less time on Slashdot and set aside that time to write at least one letter. I've already done it, and although mine didn't get published, someone read it, and they're a little more educated than before. Maybe my next one will get in. We'll see.
OK, let's clear one thing up here. Napster wasn't before Congress; it was before a court. It was a legal issue, plain and simple, so petitions and protests had no bearing whatsoever.
As for the rest of your post, I suppose that you don't like this bill. So then, if you don't think petitions will work, then exactly what do you propose?
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. This has nothing to do with party affiliation! There are Republicans backing it and Democrats opposing it. It's all about money, not politics.
And in case anyone is wondering why this is so important, it's bacause you cannot count on one party or another to be for or against this. If you don't understand the dynamics of this, you can't fight it effectively.
Oh, I don't know, the online media seems to be doing a fair job. As for the old media, do you see them covering much of anything that has anything to do with computers and the Internet? Most of this stuff doesn't even show up on their radar. I think people who spend lots of time online fall into the trap of believing that the issues they read about online are also known to those who don't spend so much time online. It just isn't so.
No, you can't do anything by yourself, but you can inform others, and, as a group, you can do a lot. Have you written a letter to your local newspaper? Have you told anyone you know about this thing? Power lies in numbers.
Or you could write it on paper money that you get. I've heard of people doing that. Don't know how effective it'd be, but it'd be funny if you got one back.
Yes, I've been told that Singaporeans are very "rules-oriented", but my understanding of the situation was that not only porn was subject to censorship, but also any political sites that the PAP sees as threatening its hold on power. Not to mention the other rules, such as required registration of locally-hosted political Web sites, which I'd imagine is a way to keep them offline. I can't imagine that everyone is happy with the situation, especially those who would like to stand in elections and change the government. Standing up and protesting for the right to see porn is one thing (although I'd say that what one does in one's home is their business, as long as no one else gets hurt), but stopping political speech is another thing entirely. And FWIW, at an ISP I worked at, we did get protests about filtering of porn sites. We didn't actually filter anything, but some users had filtering software on their computers without their knowledge (don't ask--they weren't the sharpest tools in the shed), and they were very clear in that they didn't want us interfereing with what they looked at. I also worked at an ISP that offered both unfiltered and filtered access, which I thought was the best solution. Whoever set up the account could tell us what kind of access they wanted, and only we could change it, so a user's kids couldn't figure out how to disable the filters. Well, I guess they could've used an outside proxy, but that wasn't our problem.
But I'm not so much making a statement here as asking the question: What would happen if one person or a group of people stated publicly that they thought that these filters are unfair and that they should be taken down, that they thought the rationale for their implementation was wrong, and that they do not serve the interests of ordinary citizens?
OK, this is a bit OT, but since you're from Singapore, I'm curious about something. I know that when filtering was proposed there, many people weren't happy about it. Has there ever been a move to form something akin to the EFF to protest this, or is the political situation still such that doing this would get you hauled into court by the government?
The whole political situation there baffles me. More repressive governments have been forced to reform by popular protests. Why hasn't it happened in Singapore? You'd think that, with the extent to which the country is connected to the rest of the world, people would see what's happened in places like Indonesia, Thailand, Yugoslavia, etc. and want to do the same.
Yes! Getting the word out is exactly what we need.
First, we need a Web site to explain to ordinary, everyday folks what's happening, why it's bad, and what they can do.
Next, we need a way to get that URL out there. In the online world, this can be done through links on other sites, as well as sig files. These are easy to do, and they're a good start.
However, this is only a start. The word needs to be taken into the offline world. This has to be done in multiple ways. Some that come to mind are:
Letters to the editor of local newspapers. Even if you don't get published, someone there has to read your letter, so the staff will become familiar with this issue.
Letters to the editor of trade magazines.
Calls to talk radio shows. If you feel most comfortable calling in to your local technology-oriented show, do that. Otherwise, call into your local open-forum show.
Discuss it with your local computer users group, if you're in one. If you're a Computer Science major at a college or university, you may be in a local chapter of the ACM. Bring it up there.
Bring it up at any other groups where it seems appropriate.
Bumper stickers are good, especially if you can get lots of them. A national organization getting this done would probably work best because they can order in bulk.
T-shirts are also good. I'd say that a group that can get a good price on lots of them would be the best route to go.
Oh, I'm cynical too, don't get me wrong. But let me ask you this. Why was it that most people never heard of the DMCA? Because the only people who were talking about it were people who already knew about it.
The same thing happened with the Communications Decency Act. I remember this one very clearly. The people who were opposed to the CDA were all there, on one mailing list or another, and they were pissed. They discussed every facet of the bill, why it was bad, who was supporting it, who was against it, where it was in Congress, and all manner of things. But the problem was that the group of people who were discussing it was relatively small, and they were primarily talking to each other. What they weren't doing such a good job of was educating people outside their immediate group. They left that to people like Par Eobertson, Ralph Reed, the American Family Association, and others in that political grouping. These folks, OTOH, got out there and beat the bushes to drum up support for the CDA. One could argue that the people they canvassed were already predisposed to support it, and that may have been true, but it's also true that many of these folks weren't Internet users. They were contacted using print, radio, TV, and face-to-face contact.
So what I'm saying is that, no, all the discussion here on Slashdot and any other online forums will do no good in fighting this unless that discussion leads to concrete action in the real world. Otherwise, all we're doing is practicing political masturbation. It may make you feel good, but it accomplishes nothing. The online community only has a voice when it takes itself into the offline world.
If you believe that, then why are you here? If this is a foregone conclusion, then we might as well all log off and go watch TV.
Yes, there are lots of stupid people who don't know the difference between copy protection and a Mr. Coffee, but don't count everyone in that group. And many people who don't care about an issue simply don't vote, which means that those who do are either a prize to be fought over or a danger to be avoided. Do senior citizens get what they want? How about Mothers Against Drunk Driving? How about the Christian Coalition? You bet they do, and it's because they're vocal about what they want, and they vote. Who has more money, MADD or the alcohol companies? When was the last time you saw the drinking age lowered or DUI laws relaxed?
The arguments in the bill are a smokescreen. The real reason for it is to further restrict what you can do with digital media and add new revenue streams. Do you want to record something off a TV channel and watch it later? It'll cost you. Do you want to listen to that CD on your portable player? That'll cost extra. Do you want to make a compilation disc of only your favorite songs from the albums you own? No can do, but we can sell you this custom-made disc for $20. You may not think they'll make money off of you personally, and they may not, but they'll make it off lots of other people.
Does anyone have a good Web site on this to list on a sig file? I looked at digitalconsumer.org and the info on the EFF site, but I found them to be difficult for someone totally unfamiliar with this to easily understand. We need something that explains the issue from the point of view of someone who's never heard of this.
It occurs to me that putting a tagline and link in e-mail and Usenet sig files may be a good way to start getting people to notice this. It won't do the job by itself by any means, but it's one small step. I'm ready to do it, but I need a good site to link to.
Not a bad idea, but I think we first need to educate as many people as possible on what's happening here. Otherwise, you'll either have not enough IT people striking, or few people will understand why they're doing it.
It matters if a politician can translate this into lost votes. Money makes a difference, but votes are more powerful in the end.
As for posting here, most politicians have never heard fo Slashdot, and they don't care what we say here. That's why the bitching and moaning here has to stop at some point, and the action that matters--educating the public and getting the attention of Congress--has to start. Politicians and the general public don't come here. They read newspapers and magazines, they listen to the radio and watch TV, and they talk to their friends and colleagues. That's where we need to be, not just coming here to discuss it.
Money has much to do with what goes on in Congress, but votes are more powerful. Unfortunately, many people don't realize this. Any politician smart enough to get elected knows that pissing off enough voters is a political death sentence.
So, to answer your question, you should contact him because, if he gets enough angry feedback from voters, he'll have to rethink his stance. Ask yourself why senior citizens get what they want and why the Christian Coalition is such a powerful political force. It's because people in these groups vote, and it's because they aren't shy about stating their political viewpoints. They say what they want, and they make damn sure the politicians know that they'll vote against them if they don't get what they want.
It's all about the money. Never forget that. These companies (Disney, News Corp., and the other media companies) are in business to make lots of money, and this will let them do that. They're going to be throwing lots of cash around to try to push this through. We don't have that much cash, so our only chance is to make Congress fear for its political life if this passes.
Political ideology has no bearing on this. It's going to be a test of wills. We've been waiting for a showdown with the entertainment industry. Well, here it is. It's going to be hard, and it's going to get nasty, so it's time to roll up our sleeves and get to work.
What the good Senator needs is as many letters as you and anyone else in Florida can send. Sure, he's made up his mind. He probably figures that if he votes for it, the media companies will throw more money his way. He also sees no danger that voting "yes" will have on his reelection chances. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you're the first person to write him about this. Write him again and pick his letter apart, argument by argument. Then mention that you're going to be telling your colleagues about this issue and his position on it. Once you've mailed that, write to your House rep about this issue, then get to work on spreading the word in your area. Use whatever tools you want: letters to the editor, talk radio, and word of mouth. This is a really new issue, so most people won't know about it yet, and we need to change that as quickly as possible.
Sen Kerry is a Democrat; and Democrats are backed very heavily (a bit more than the Republicans, especialy in terms of percentage) by Big Media. Thus, I doubt you'll get far.
Making assumptions about how a politician might vote based on political party affiliation may have been a safe bet years ago, but it isn't now. Don't forget that Patrick Leahy is strongly against this, and he's a Democrat. I'm not trying to start a fight over which party favors what, merely to point out that you can't make any assumptions on this issue. Everyone's rep needs to hear from them, no matter which way we think they're inclined to vote. In fact, if you think that Sen. Kerry is supporting this to the extent that he can't be turned, then that's a very good reason to bombard him with mail on this issue. It may give him some pause for thought if an issue that he saw as a no-brainer looks like it might turn around and bite him in the ass.
Slashdot Mirror
Leahy is an oddity in Congress. He's someone who seems to have his principles and sticks to them. He really seems to understand that there's such a thing as the First Amendment.
I wonder if there's a chance that Slashdot could do an interview with him. I'd like to see that happen.
I also like the way DirecTV DSL does things. They give you a CD with a few optional apps, plus a DSL status monitor for Windows. You can follow the CD installation program if you want, and it's really slick, but you don't have to. Their setup manual has all the network settings you'll need if you want to do it manually.
And the reason they give you those settings is to support Linux installations. Thank God there's a major DSL provider that is aware that Linux exists.
And best of all, no PPPoE! And they let you run mail and Web servers off your connection if you want. I know that many people do it anyway with other providers, but it sure is nice to have it explicitly stated that you can.
But to get back on topic, a good ISP should provide a basic package of apps and possibly also a tool to automatically configure a system for someone who is afraid to do so. However, they should also provide that config info to those who are comfortable doing it themselves. As for what to support, I think that knowing something about several different browsers and e-mail apps is important. Where I worked, we would support them up to a point. After we'd done all we could, we'd have to send the user to Microsoft, which I think is entirely proper after we've tried our best to solve the problem. After all, MS writes these apps, so they shouldn't expect other companies to support them. They wrote the code; they can fix it when it breaks.
You're exactly right. Although the politicians like to paint anti-globalization protesters as a bunch of troublemakers, these protests seem to have started an undercurrent of dissent about the supposed benefits of globalization. Getting an issue in the media seems to get people thinking about an issue that they never even knew existed.
What I'd like to know, and what everyone here needs to consider, is how long it was that the anti-globalization folks were discussing this on the Net before the issue went mainstream. I wasn't involved in those online discussions, so I can't say, but this is an important issue to consider. Right now, the CBDTPA isn't mainstream, not at all. Our first priority has to be to make it that way.
"instead of writing congress, try writing the media."
I agree with you 100%. We're a small group here, and what we think will only count if we convert others to our side. Writing to the media is a great way to do that. In fact, I'd posted a list of newspaper directories to another post in this thread. Here they are again.
And I'll issue my challenge again. If everyone here will walk away from Slashdot long enough to write to your local newspaper, we can start to make a difference. No, not all letters will get published. Maybe most of them won't. But someone there has to read them, and they'll be educated in the process, so they will be more familiar with the issue when they hear about it again.
Just one letter. That's all I ask. If you want to write more, that's great, but at least write one.
Writing to local newspapers is always a good idea because you're going to reach people who may not go online that much. Here are some lists to find them.
A few suggestions. First, do not write the same letter to several newspapers in close proximity to each other, as they won't get published because newspapers want original letters. Second, it's best to choose papers at least somewhat local to you, as they prefer to print letters from their local readers. If what you send them looks like something you sent to 100 papers around the country, you won't get it published. And finally, don't ignore the alternative papers in your area. These guys often want more content than they have, so you stand a better chance of getting published. You might even approach them about writing a guest column.
I'd like to challenge everyone here to spend a little less time on Slashdot and set aside that time to write at least one letter. I've already done it, and although mine didn't get published, someone read it, and they're a little more educated than before. Maybe my next one will get in. We'll see.
OK, let's clear one thing up here. Napster wasn't before Congress; it was before a court. It was a legal issue, plain and simple, so petitions and protests had no bearing whatsoever.
As for the rest of your post, I suppose that you don't like this bill. So then, if you don't think petitions will work, then exactly what do you propose?
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. This has nothing to do with party affiliation! There are Republicans backing it and Democrats opposing it. It's all about money, not politics.
And in case anyone is wondering why this is so important, it's bacause you cannot count on one party or another to be for or against this. If you don't understand the dynamics of this, you can't fight it effectively.
Oh, I don't know, the online media seems to be doing a fair job. As for the old media, do you see them covering much of anything that has anything to do with computers and the Internet? Most of this stuff doesn't even show up on their radar. I think people who spend lots of time online fall into the trap of believing that the issues they read about online are also known to those who don't spend so much time online. It just isn't so.
No, you can't do anything by yourself, but you can inform others, and, as a group, you can do a lot. Have you written a letter to your local newspaper? Have you told anyone you know about this thing? Power lies in numbers.
Or you could write it on paper money that you get. I've heard of people doing that. Don't know how effective it'd be, but it'd be funny if you got one back.
Yes, I've been told that Singaporeans are very "rules-oriented", but my understanding of the situation was that not only porn was subject to censorship, but also any political sites that the PAP sees as threatening its hold on power. Not to mention the other rules, such as required registration of locally-hosted political Web sites, which I'd imagine is a way to keep them offline. I can't imagine that everyone is happy with the situation, especially those who would like to stand in elections and change the government. Standing up and protesting for the right to see porn is one thing (although I'd say that what one does in one's home is their business, as long as no one else gets hurt), but stopping political speech is another thing entirely. And FWIW, at an ISP I worked at, we did get protests about filtering of porn sites. We didn't actually filter anything, but some users had filtering software on their computers without their knowledge (don't ask--they weren't the sharpest tools in the shed), and they were very clear in that they didn't want us interfereing with what they looked at. I also worked at an ISP that offered both unfiltered and filtered access, which I thought was the best solution. Whoever set up the account could tell us what kind of access they wanted, and only we could change it, so a user's kids couldn't figure out how to disable the filters. Well, I guess they could've used an outside proxy, but that wasn't our problem.
But I'm not so much making a statement here as asking the question: What would happen if one person or a group of people stated publicly that they thought that these filters are unfair and that they should be taken down, that they thought the rationale for their implementation was wrong, and that they do not serve the interests of ordinary citizens?
OK, this is a bit OT, but since you're from Singapore, I'm curious about something. I know that when filtering was proposed there, many people weren't happy about it. Has there ever been a move to form something akin to the EFF to protest this, or is the political situation still such that doing this would get you hauled into court by the government?
The whole political situation there baffles me. More repressive governments have been forced to reform by popular protests. Why hasn't it happened in Singapore? You'd think that, with the extent to which the country is connected to the rest of the world, people would see what's happened in places like Indonesia, Thailand, Yugoslavia, etc. and want to do the same.
Yes! Getting the word out is exactly what we need.
First, we need a Web site to explain to ordinary, everyday folks what's happening, why it's bad, and what they can do.
Next, we need a way to get that URL out there. In the online world, this can be done through links on other sites, as well as sig files. These are easy to do, and they're a good start.
However, this is only a start. The word needs to be taken into the offline world. This has to be done in multiple ways. Some that come to mind are:
Whatever we do, we need to get it started soon.
Oh, I'm cynical too, don't get me wrong. But let me ask you this. Why was it that most people never heard of the DMCA? Because the only people who were talking about it were people who already knew about it.
The same thing happened with the Communications Decency Act. I remember this one very clearly. The people who were opposed to the CDA were all there, on one mailing list or another, and they were pissed. They discussed every facet of the bill, why it was bad, who was supporting it, who was against it, where it was in Congress, and all manner of things. But the problem was that the group of people who were discussing it was relatively small, and they were primarily talking to each other. What they weren't doing such a good job of was educating people outside their immediate group. They left that to people like Par Eobertson, Ralph Reed, the American Family Association, and others in that political grouping. These folks, OTOH, got out there and beat the bushes to drum up support for the CDA. One could argue that the people they canvassed were already predisposed to support it, and that may have been true, but it's also true that many of these folks weren't Internet users. They were contacted using print, radio, TV, and face-to-face contact.
So what I'm saying is that, no, all the discussion here on Slashdot and any other online forums will do no good in fighting this unless that discussion leads to concrete action in the real world. Otherwise, all we're doing is practicing political masturbation. It may make you feel good, but it accomplishes nothing. The online community only has a voice when it takes itself into the offline world.
If you believe that, then why are you here? If this is a foregone conclusion, then we might as well all log off and go watch TV.
Yes, there are lots of stupid people who don't know the difference between copy protection and a Mr. Coffee, but don't count everyone in that group. And many people who don't care about an issue simply don't vote, which means that those who do are either a prize to be fought over or a danger to be avoided. Do senior citizens get what they want? How about Mothers Against Drunk Driving? How about the Christian Coalition? You bet they do, and it's because they're vocal about what they want, and they vote. Who has more money, MADD or the alcohol companies? When was the last time you saw the drinking age lowered or DUI laws relaxed?
The arguments in the bill are a smokescreen. The real reason for it is to further restrict what you can do with digital media and add new revenue streams. Do you want to record something off a TV channel and watch it later? It'll cost you. Do you want to listen to that CD on your portable player? That'll cost extra. Do you want to make a compilation disc of only your favorite songs from the albums you own? No can do, but we can sell you this custom-made disc for $20. You may not think they'll make money off of you personally, and they may not, but they'll make it off lots of other people.
Does anyone have a good Web site on this to list on a sig file? I looked at digitalconsumer.org and the info on the EFF site, but I found them to be difficult for someone totally unfamiliar with this to easily understand. We need something that explains the issue from the point of view of someone who's never heard of this.
It occurs to me that putting a tagline and link in e-mail and Usenet sig files may be a good way to start getting people to notice this. It won't do the job by itself by any means, but it's one small step. I'm ready to do it, but I need a good site to link to.
You could also send them to Patrick Leahy. He's against this as well, and, as the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he has tons of clout.
Not a bad idea, but I think we first need to educate as many people as possible on what's happening here. Otherwise, you'll either have not enough IT people striking, or few people will understand why they're doing it.
Good for you! I wrote a letter that didn't get printed, but I'm glad yours did.
Care to write one for your local paper as well?
It matters if a politician can translate this into lost votes. Money makes a difference, but votes are more powerful in the end.
As for posting here, most politicians have never heard fo Slashdot, and they don't care what we say here. That's why the bitching and moaning here has to stop at some point, and the action that matters--educating the public and getting the attention of Congress--has to start. Politicians and the general public don't come here. They read newspapers and magazines, they listen to the radio and watch TV, and they talk to their friends and colleagues. That's where we need to be, not just coming here to discuss it.
Money has much to do with what goes on in Congress, but votes are more powerful. Unfortunately, many people don't realize this. Any politician smart enough to get elected knows that pissing off enough voters is a political death sentence.
So, to answer your question, you should contact him because, if he gets enough angry feedback from voters, he'll have to rethink his stance. Ask yourself why senior citizens get what they want and why the Christian Coalition is such a powerful political force. It's because people in these groups vote, and it's because they aren't shy about stating their political viewpoints. They say what they want, and they make damn sure the politicians know that they'll vote against them if they don't get what they want.
It's all about the money. Never forget that. These companies (Disney, News Corp., and the other media companies) are in business to make lots of money, and this will let them do that. They're going to be throwing lots of cash around to try to push this through. We don't have that much cash, so our only chance is to make Congress fear for its political life if this passes.
Political ideology has no bearing on this. It's going to be a test of wills. We've been waiting for a showdown with the entertainment industry. Well, here it is. It's going to be hard, and it's going to get nasty, so it's time to roll up our sleeves and get to work.
What the good Senator needs is as many letters as you and anyone else in Florida can send. Sure, he's made up his mind. He probably figures that if he votes for it, the media companies will throw more money his way. He also sees no danger that voting "yes" will have on his reelection chances. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you're the first person to write him about this. Write him again and pick his letter apart, argument by argument. Then mention that you're going to be telling your colleagues about this issue and his position on it. Once you've mailed that, write to your House rep about this issue, then get to work on spreading the word in your area. Use whatever tools you want: letters to the editor, talk radio, and word of mouth. This is a really new issue, so most people won't know about it yet, and we need to change that as quickly as possible.
Making assumptions about how a politician might vote based on political party affiliation may have been a safe bet years ago, but it isn't now. Don't forget that Patrick Leahy is strongly against this, and he's a Democrat. I'm not trying to start a fight over which party favors what, merely to point out that you can't make any assumptions on this issue. Everyone's rep needs to hear from them, no matter which way we think they're inclined to vote. In fact, if you think that Sen. Kerry is supporting this to the extent that he can't be turned, then that's a very good reason to bombard him with mail on this issue. It may give him some pause for thought if an issue that he saw as a no-brainer looks like it might turn around and bite him in the ass.