Personally, I would have never gone with locked-in iTunes format to begin with. If for some reason I actually chose to subscribe to iTunes (first building a system to run the proprietary platform their proprietary software requires), I would have converted everything to MP3 (even if it meant burning to CDRW and re-ripping) as I went. I would never have built up a large archive of anything in a DRM/proprietary format. Anyone that does or has is a fool. And if I was using an actual MP3 player, it wouldnt' be managed by any sort of 'Media Library Management software', it would be directly on my hard drive where I can ls/cp/mv/etc whatever I want with it.
Aside - I saw some sort of 'guide to buying gifts for geeks' in the paper, and one of the suggestions was an iTunes card "if they owned an iPod or other MP3 player". Obviously the author of the article didnt get how useless an iTunes card would be for someone that had an 'other MP3 player' and not an iPod.
Uhm. If you can download the music as an MP3, and you own a (device that has a built in MP3 player), then how is that not making it available? Thats the whole point of no-DRM mp3 format downloads - you can copy them onto any device you want to that can play MP3 (or even convert them into other formats if you want)
Clue: CD's are digital. Distributing/Selling CD's is distributing digitally.
"Digital" is not a valid term distinguishing 'network transfer/download of information' from 'transfer of information on a physical medium', when the information in both cases is "digital".
And of course you apparently missed that this is Sony announcing actual online download via amazon.com, without requiring any physical purchase at a store, unlike their previous announcement which did require physical purchase of some sort of card.
As far as whether it might make more sense to buy your digital music in a physical medium (eg, on a CD) than buying it in online downloadable form, is probably going to be dependent on the price of the online option. (The ability to buy single tracks versus having to buy 12 to 15 in a package on CD at once might also weigh in, as might the methods of payment they accept)
Oddly, the two possibilities you cite seem pretty similar to the two I originally posited albeit slightly more verbose. And the third I mentioned is pretty much not going to happen (as I also mentioned)
We could 'ditch and pull out'. That seems pretty similar to 'give up'.
Or, we could continue as we are doing, helping to defend peacful Iraqis from the terrorists and insurgents, while training them to do it for themselves. We cant decide in advance how long thats going to take, so while it does count as 'end the war', it isnt something we can just decide we are going to do on X date. Its also pretty close to 'force the enemy to surrender/give up'. Granted, since the enemy chooses to hide and lie and not really identify themselves forcing any kind of outright identifiable surrender is somewhat unlikely.
And if you think there is any serious chance of making a truce with terrorists, you are insane.
So we still have two options. STAY there, and continue what we are already doing, or PULL OUT and give up. Given all the noise all the protesters have been making, it sure sounds like they want us to pull out and give up. But I could be wrong, maybe by 'end the war', they really mean 'stay in Iraq and continue pursuing our goals, just exactly like we are already doing'.
Yes, and VCR's got those tuners too (except for some extremely cheap ones). And they didnt allow the broadcaster to set a flag that the device would automatically obey preventing you from recording it.
The way this change is coming out VCR's have no tuners (except for the very expensive ones, which are forced to obey the no-timeshift flag), and all you are allowed to do is watch live.
And cable companies are using the OTA requirement as an excuse to force their proprietary digital, which requires their proprietary box no matter how new your TV is, on their customers.
Standardization of *OPEN* transmission would be a good thing, so that every VCR/Tivo/TV/PCTunerCard could tune the transmitted channelsm without DRM, without forced channels guides and menus and ads, just the simple ability to easily tune any channel. Unfortunately, its not what big cable wants, and big cable has lots of money to use to 'convince' regulators and legislators that what they want is whats 'best for us all'
Feel free to suggest some other way to 'end the war' that doesn't closely resemble one of those two.
I suppose both sides could declare a truce. Good luck with that one, assuming you can even identify and communicate with someone that could reasonable claim to represent or have any authority over the insurgents and terrorist.
1. Surrender/give up. 2. Force the other side to surrender/give up.
AFAIK, the current administration's goal is #2. I'd love to have a chance to ask the people with those bumper stickers which of those two they'd like to see.
Another 'media' assumes that anything that is physical cannot be digital, and uses the term 'digital' to distinguish something thats distringuishing feature is NOT that its digital.
For the millionth time, for the cheap seats - PHYSICAL MUSIC CD's CONTAIN (and always have contained) *DIGITAL* MUSIC.
The distinguishing features of (eg, iTunes) are that you are paying for the right to make a copy by transferring it over the network and storing it on your own media (eg hard drive), instead of on physical media, as well as the fact that instead of in a documented open public format such as used on CD's, it is usually in a 'special' programmed format which prevents it from being played anywhere other than on the original machine that downloaded it, in special proprietary software that only runs on proprietary, closed OS platforms and is under the control of the publisher/seller who may for some reason decide to revoke your right to play it, or if your 'PeeCee' gets 0wn3d (as proprietary, closed OS platforms tend to do) and you have to reinstall you've lost any record of ever having had the music and have to pay for it all again.
There is nothing physically preventing you from taking a physical CD and copying its digital music into an iPod or an MP3 player, or onto a computer, or anywhere else. You can even make a backup copy. No one can arbitrarily revoke your right to listen to it, or any of the copied you made. The only downsides are that CD's cost slightly more, you always have to buy 10 to 15 tracks, and you have to go physically purchase it (or order and wait for it to ship).
Or, since the dangers posed by a breach in this particular system are rather extreme, going to a corresponding extreme and COMPLETELY physically and electrically isolating networks used to offer interweb access to passengers and any networks used to control the aircraft, and having no interconnection between them whatsoever at all anywhere. Perhaps one interconnection - the control side should have a single connection to the entertainment side - a control to turn it off (by way of a physical power cutoff relay, not any sort of intelligent networked function)
Yeah, I saw that after I had posted my comment. But I still couldnt find where to download the server-side software or any information about how to do that.
a way to save bookmarks, etc on *MY* server. (By "My server", I mean my personally owned and operated FreeBSD box I have colo'ed', not what the average moron might mean where they confuse 'server' with 'service provider' and use 'my server' to refer to their ISP)
So privacy and security concerns go away (or at least, would be under my control rather than someone else's), but all the same functionality is there.
"new" DVD format offers anything that is *remotely* enough of an advantage over the hugely entrenched normal DVD format to replace it. I predict whichver one 'wins' will sort of 'hang on' for a while, for which there will be a small videophile market that will slowly die off. Sort of like Betamax tapes and laserdiscs.
Their wording is confusing, but they seem to imply that merely *using* GPL software places some onerous requirements on them. That is outright false. (Where using means, 'running the software for its designed purpose' eg, using a GPL editor to edit files, or GPL browser to access the web).
If by 'using' they mean 'taking the code and making it part of the code of our software', then the results of that are *FAR* less onerous than doing the same with proprietary, non-GPL, non 'open source' code. If you take the source code for (for example) part of Microsoft Word or even Notepad, and make it part of your product that you sell, Microsoft is going to sue your pants off and own your company and perhaps your children by the time they are done. Doing so with GPL code merely requires that you also release your product as GPL. In both cases, you have the option of avoiding the repurcussions by NOT including someone else's copyright code as part of your program. (Of course, in the MS case, its pretty much impossible to do anyway since they dont make their source code available to the public)
Consider the case of a supermarket. "Using" their fresh fruit that is on display, could subject you to certain requirements. If you just pick up fruit from their display and eat it, they are going to get upset with you. If you pick it up and walk out of the store with it, they are going to expect you to pay for it. Their is implicit assumption that it isnt just free for the taking - it is there for you to inspect and decide if you want it, and if you do then you choose to buy it. Why should anyone assume anything else about someone's program source code, especially when it is distributed with a very specific license that spells out the terms, and nothing has to be assumed or implied. You can inspect it. If you decide you want it, you can choose to 'buy it'. In this case the cost is the release of the combined product also as GPL.
FWIW, my provider is doing something quite interesting. They are a startup laying their own fiber, offering net, phone, and tv over it using some sort of Allied Telesyn box as CPE. That box has RJ11 ports (for phone) and RJ45 ports (for net and tv). For the TV, they are using Amino boxes that connect over Ethernet. Being the uberhacker that I am, it took me no time to plug in my laptop in place of one of the Amino boxes, and eventually found that they are using simple UDP multicast of Mpeg4 streams. So I can tune in using vlc, and even have a mythtv box setup that can directly grab channels over ethernet using its 'network recorder'.
I will tell you, they are definitely using it to push their 'digital' service. It wouldnt surprise me if some of them considered turning off their own analog services (which you can tune with as many TV's or mythtv boxes as you want), and offering only their own digital service (where you have to rent one of their 'boxes' for each program you want to tune at once)
Clue: the FCC-mandated switch has NOTHING to do with standard-def versus high-def programming. It has only to do with freeing up huge chunks of RF spectrum for use elsewhere. (And if we are very lucky Google will acquire enough of it to launch NLOS broadband for the entire country, marking the beginning of the end for phone companies, cable companies, AND television stations)
Well, I'm sure they'll continue to raise their rates, like they always do, but its not to cover any 'cost'. What is changing, is that the over-the-air broadcast TV signals (the kind you might receive with an antenna) are changing from an analog signal to a digital one. (Note this is ENTIRELY unrelated to wether to program is 'standard def', or 'high def', as either definition can be broadcast over either type of signal - the marketing likes to conflate 'digital' and 'high def')
Cable networks are not affected by this law, and can continue to transmit whatever they want over their privately-owned wires. Currently that is a mix of some analog and some proprietary digital. You can tune the analog with any TV or VCR (that has a tuner), and on order to get *their* digital you need *THEIR* box, regardless of your TV's capability.
Dish-network type companies are also unaffacted. You will continue to need *their* box to get the programming (although I'm dimply aware of some standard that uses a commodity 'box' and just requires a decoder card from the provider, but I doubt thats common)
This is an invalid argument. The only reason you need special 'drivers' for hardware is becuase the hardware makers (probably often in collusion with MS, or at the very least to their delight) instead of just releasing specs for hardware so anyone can use it, either make secret proprietary code, or releasing the specs only to MS, and in advance, so only MS knows how it works.
That has to change, and thankfully has been albeit slowly. The key is to avoid hardware made by manufactuerers that support MS' monopoly position, wether they do so intentionally or ignorantly.
And with the exception of bleeding edge wireless stuff and other oddball shit, you dont have to 'find drivers' for linux - its all just part of the kernel. With your average Dell or Compaq machine, there are special 'vendor supplied' drivers for the video card, the NIC, the sound, etc. Common mundane stuff that 'just works' with linux (yes it, it does for the preinstalled Windows, becuase the OEM preinstalled all the drivers too - try with fresh stock install and you'll be limping to another machine to go to the OEM's website to download their stuff becuase you wont be able to get on the Internet becuase your NIC wont work)
Did you *read* TFA? While pointing out that it isnt suitable or meant to be ones primary desktop machine he showers praise on it for what it does do and is capable of.
Clicking "Next, Next, Next" and waiting for reload each time is annoying. Much more efficient to put all the 'pages' on one page, so all the pictures and text can load while you are reading the first part, and then merely scroll to read the next. And sure, you can still put ad banners by each section of the story.
1. Listen to tracks via a flash-based player. (Theoretically you could capture the stream via a/dev/dsp hook or something) 2. You can download it via itunes, *IF* you have a platform for which apple has released a version of its proprietary binary only application. 3. You can buy the track at amazon. Not sure what format you get.
If a file is available for 'download' it means there is a http:/// or ftp:// link directly to the file itself, that requires only a standards-compliant http or ftp client, which can then save the file, and you can play it with a standalone player.
Regardless of the merits of what imeem is doing, they are *not* offering MP3's for download for free, at least not anywhere I can see. So I second the 'misleading summary' tag.
Guess what, if you allow data, you allow anything. "Voice" can be stored as "data". And while perhaps the providers could block well-know ports used for VoIP services, they'd have a hard time blocking a port-hopping protocol. In fact, the initiation could be done via https (since they can hardly block that - Im sure a lot of business travelers might want to check their online banking or investments, which would require that), and the https transaction could specify the source and destination ports which would be random (and since the https would be encrypted anyway, they could hardly sniff them dynamically)
Of course, if they restrict the bandwidth to 56K or something then it would affect usability, for BOTH VoIP as well as any other use.
The fact that media, including jouranlists, seem to think that Windows == Computer (or PC) is a testament to the sorry monopolized state of the technology sector.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I would have never gone with locked-in iTunes format to begin with. If for some reason I actually chose to subscribe to iTunes (first building a system to run the proprietary platform their proprietary software requires), I would have converted everything to MP3 (even if it meant burning to CDRW and re-ripping) as I went. I would never have built up a large archive of anything in a DRM/proprietary format. Anyone that does or has is a fool. And if I was using an actual MP3 player, it wouldnt' be managed by any sort of 'Media Library Management software', it would be directly on my hard drive where I can ls/cp/mv/etc whatever I want with it.
Aside - I saw some sort of 'guide to buying gifts for geeks' in the paper, and one of the suggestions was an iTunes card "if they owned an iPod or other MP3 player". Obviously the author of the article didnt get how useless an iTunes card would be for someone that had an 'other MP3 player' and not an iPod.
Uhm. If you can download the music as an MP3, and you own a (device that has a built in MP3 player), then how is that not making it available? Thats the whole point of no-DRM mp3 format downloads - you can copy them onto any device you want to that can play MP3 (or even convert them into other formats if you want)
Clue: CD's are digital. Distributing/Selling CD's is distributing digitally.
"Digital" is not a valid term distinguishing 'network transfer/download of information' from 'transfer of information on a physical medium', when the information in both cases is "digital".
And of course you apparently missed that this is Sony announcing actual online download via amazon.com, without requiring any physical purchase at a store, unlike their previous announcement which did require physical purchase of some sort of card.
As far as whether it might make more sense to buy your digital music in a physical medium (eg, on a CD) than buying it in online downloadable form, is probably going to be dependent on the price of the online option. (The ability to buy single tracks versus having to buy 12 to 15 in a package on CD at once might also weigh in, as might the methods of payment they accept)
to check if a domain is registered. *ANY*one's whois. use dig or nslookup instead.
Oddly, the two possibilities you cite seem pretty similar to the two I originally posited albeit slightly more verbose. And the third I mentioned is pretty much not going to happen (as I also mentioned)
We could 'ditch and pull out'. That seems pretty similar to 'give up'.
Or, we could continue as we are doing, helping to defend peacful Iraqis from the terrorists and insurgents, while training them to do it for themselves. We cant decide in advance how long thats going to take, so while it does count as 'end the war', it isnt something we can just decide we are going to do on X date. Its also pretty close to 'force the enemy to surrender/give up'. Granted, since the enemy chooses to hide and lie and not really identify themselves forcing any kind of outright identifiable surrender is somewhat unlikely.
And if you think there is any serious chance of making a truce with terrorists, you are insane.
So we still have two options. STAY there, and continue what we are already doing, or PULL OUT and give up. Given all the noise all the protesters have been making, it sure sounds like they want us to pull out and give up. But I could be wrong, maybe by 'end the war', they really mean 'stay in Iraq and continue pursuing our goals, just exactly like we are already doing'.
Yes, and VCR's got those tuners too (except for some extremely cheap ones). And they didnt allow the broadcaster to set a flag that the device would automatically obey preventing you from recording it.
The way this change is coming out VCR's have no tuners (except for the very expensive ones, which are forced to obey the no-timeshift flag), and all you are allowed to do is watch live.
And cable companies are using the OTA requirement as an excuse to force their proprietary digital, which requires their proprietary box no matter how new your TV is, on their customers.
Standardization of *OPEN* transmission would be a good thing, so that every VCR/Tivo/TV/PCTunerCard could tune the transmitted channelsm without DRM, without forced channels guides and menus and ads, just the simple ability to easily tune any channel. Unfortunately, its not what big cable wants, and big cable has lots of money to use to 'convince' regulators and legislators that what they want is whats 'best for us all'
Feel free to suggest some other way to 'end the war' that doesn't closely resemble one of those two.
I suppose both sides could declare a truce. Good luck with that one, assuming you can even identify and communicate with someone that could reasonable claim to represent or have any authority over the insurgents and terrorist.
Yeah, and all the 'end the war' bumper stickers.
Theres two ways to end a war:
1. Surrender/give up.
2. Force the other side to surrender/give up.
AFAIK, the current administration's goal is #2. I'd love to have a chance to ask the people with those bumper stickers which of those two they'd like to see.
Another 'media' assumes that anything that is physical cannot be digital, and uses the term 'digital' to distinguish something thats distringuishing feature is NOT that its digital.
For the millionth time, for the cheap seats - PHYSICAL MUSIC CD's CONTAIN (and always have contained) *DIGITAL* MUSIC.
The distinguishing features of (eg, iTunes) are that you are paying for the right to make a copy by transferring it over the network and storing it on your own media (eg hard drive), instead of on physical media, as well as the fact that instead of in a documented open public format such as used on CD's, it is usually in a 'special' programmed format which prevents it from being played anywhere other than on the original machine that downloaded it, in special proprietary software that only runs on proprietary, closed OS platforms and is under the control of the publisher/seller who may for some reason decide to revoke your right to play it, or if your 'PeeCee' gets 0wn3d (as proprietary, closed OS platforms tend to do) and you have to reinstall you've lost any record of ever having had the music and have to pay for it all again.
There is nothing physically preventing you from taking a physical CD and copying its digital music into an iPod or an MP3 player, or onto a computer, or anywhere else. You can even make a backup copy. No one can arbitrarily revoke your right to listen to it, or any of the copied you made. The only downsides are that CD's cost slightly more, you always have to buy 10 to 15 tracks, and you have to go physically purchase it (or order and wait for it to ship).
as opposed to a real firewall..
Or, since the dangers posed by a breach in this particular system are rather extreme, going to a corresponding extreme and COMPLETELY physically and electrically isolating networks used to offer interweb access to passengers and any networks used to control the aircraft, and having no interconnection between them whatsoever at all anywhere. Perhaps one interconnection - the control side should have a single connection to the entertainment side - a control to turn it off (by way of a physical power cutoff relay, not any sort of intelligent networked function)
Yeah, I saw that after I had posted my comment. But I still couldnt find where to download the server-side software or any information about how to do that.
a way to save bookmarks, etc on *MY* server. (By "My server", I mean my personally owned and operated FreeBSD box I have colo'ed', not what the average moron might mean where they confuse 'server' with 'service provider' and use 'my server' to refer to their ISP)
So privacy and security concerns go away (or at least, would be under my control rather than someone else's), but all the same functionality is there.
"new" DVD format offers anything that is *remotely* enough of an advantage over the hugely entrenched normal DVD format to replace it. I predict whichver one 'wins' will sort of 'hang on' for a while, for which there will be a small videophile market that will slowly die off. Sort of like Betamax tapes and laserdiscs.
Their wording is confusing, but they seem to imply that merely *using* GPL software places some onerous requirements on them. That is outright false. (Where using means, 'running the software for its designed purpose' eg, using a GPL editor to edit files, or GPL browser to access the web).
If by 'using' they mean 'taking the code and making it part of the code of our software', then the results of that are *FAR* less onerous than doing the same with proprietary, non-GPL, non 'open source' code. If you take the source code for (for example) part of Microsoft Word or even Notepad, and make it part of your product that you sell, Microsoft is going to sue your pants off and own your company and perhaps your children by the time they are done. Doing so with GPL code merely requires that you also release your product as GPL. In both cases, you have the option of avoiding the repurcussions by NOT including someone else's copyright code as part of your program. (Of course, in the MS case, its pretty much impossible to do anyway since they dont make their source code available to the public)
Consider the case of a supermarket. "Using" their fresh fruit that is on display, could subject you to certain requirements. If you just pick up fruit from their display and eat it, they are going to get upset with you. If you pick it up and walk out of the store with it, they are going to expect you to pay for it. Their is implicit assumption that it isnt just free for the taking - it is there for you to inspect and decide if you want it, and if you do then you choose to buy it. Why should anyone assume anything else about someone's program source code, especially when it is distributed with a very specific license that spells out the terms, and nothing has to be assumed or implied. You can inspect it. If you decide you want it, you can choose to 'buy it'. In this case the cost is the release of the combined product also as GPL.
FWIW, my provider is doing something quite interesting. They are a startup laying their own fiber, offering net, phone, and tv over it using some sort of Allied Telesyn box as CPE. That box has RJ11 ports (for phone) and RJ45 ports (for net and tv). For the TV, they are using Amino boxes that connect over Ethernet. Being the uberhacker that I am, it took me no time to plug in my laptop in place of one of the Amino boxes, and eventually found that they are using simple UDP multicast of Mpeg4 streams. So I can tune in using vlc, and even have a mythtv box setup that can directly grab channels over ethernet using its 'network recorder'.
I will tell you, they are definitely using it to push their 'digital' service. It wouldnt surprise me if some of them considered turning off their own analog services (which you can tune with as many TV's or mythtv boxes as you want), and offering only their own digital service (where you have to rent one of their 'boxes' for each program you want to tune at once)
Clue: the FCC-mandated switch has NOTHING to do with standard-def versus high-def programming. It has only to do with freeing up huge chunks of RF spectrum for use elsewhere. (And if we are very lucky Google will acquire enough of it to launch NLOS broadband for the entire country, marking the beginning of the end for phone companies, cable companies, AND television stations)
Well, I'm sure they'll continue to raise their rates, like they always do, but its not to cover any 'cost'. What is changing, is that the over-the-air broadcast TV signals (the kind you might receive with an antenna) are changing from an analog signal to a digital one. (Note this is ENTIRELY unrelated to wether to program is 'standard def', or 'high def', as either definition can be broadcast over either type of signal - the marketing likes to conflate 'digital' and 'high def')
Cable networks are not affected by this law, and can continue to transmit whatever they want over their privately-owned wires. Currently that is a mix of some analog and some proprietary digital. You can tune the analog with any TV or VCR (that has a tuner), and on order to get *their* digital you need *THEIR* box, regardless of your TV's capability.
Dish-network type companies are also unaffacted. You will continue to need *their* box to get the programming (although I'm dimply aware of some standard that uses a commodity 'box' and just requires a decoder card from the provider, but I doubt thats common)
This is an invalid argument. The only reason you need special 'drivers' for hardware is becuase the hardware makers (probably often in collusion with MS, or at the very least to their delight) instead of just releasing specs for hardware so anyone can use it, either make secret proprietary code, or releasing the specs only to MS, and in advance, so only MS knows how it works.
That has to change, and thankfully has been albeit slowly. The key is to avoid hardware made by manufactuerers that support MS' monopoly position, wether they do so intentionally or ignorantly.
And with the exception of bleeding edge wireless stuff and other oddball shit, you dont have to 'find drivers' for linux - its all just part of the kernel. With your average Dell or Compaq machine, there are special 'vendor supplied' drivers for the video card, the NIC, the sound, etc. Common mundane stuff that 'just works' with linux (yes it, it does for the preinstalled Windows, becuase the OEM preinstalled all the drivers too - try with fresh stock install and you'll be limping to another machine to go to the OEM's website to download their stuff becuase you wont be able to get on the Internet becuase your NIC wont work)
Did you *read* TFA? While pointing out that it isnt suitable or meant to be ones primary desktop machine he showers praise on it for what it does do and is capable of.
Clicking "Next, Next, Next" and waiting for reload each time is annoying. Much more efficient to put all the 'pages' on one page, so all the pictures and text can load while you are reading the first part, and then merely scroll to read the next. And sure, you can still put ad banners by each section of the story.
I'm American, and I'd damn LOVE to have one of these. Sadly, I'm sure the price is going to be a little higher than would allow me to buy one :P(
You can
/dev/dsp hook or something)
1. Listen to tracks via a flash-based player. (Theoretically you could capture the stream via a
2. You can download it via itunes, *IF* you have a platform for which apple has released a version of its proprietary binary only application.
3. You can buy the track at amazon. Not sure what format you get.
If a file is available for 'download' it means there is a http:/// or ftp:// link directly to the file itself, that requires only a standards-compliant http or ftp client, which can then save the file, and you can play it with a standalone player.
Regardless of the merits of what imeem is doing, they are *not* offering MP3's for download for free, at least not anywhere I can see. So I second the 'misleading summary' tag.
Guess what, if you allow data, you allow anything. "Voice" can be stored as "data". And while perhaps the providers could block well-know ports used for VoIP services, they'd have a hard time blocking a port-hopping protocol. In fact, the initiation could be done via https (since they can hardly block that - Im sure a lot of business travelers might want to check their online banking or investments, which would require that), and the https transaction could specify the source and destination ports which would be random (and since the https would be encrypted anyway, they could hardly sniff them dynamically)
Of course, if they restrict the bandwidth to 56K or something then it would affect usability, for BOTH VoIP as well as any other use.
"More than half of *Windows* users who think ...."
The fact that media, including jouranlists, seem to think that Windows == Computer (or PC) is a testament to the sorry monopolized state of the technology sector.