The problem with Krugman's argument is that he is taking the price increase in bitcoins due to massive speculation and applying it to a case of deflation that occurs when there is a decrease in the ratio of gold to goods in an economy. They are two separate things and no conclusions can be drawn from one and applied to the other, especially if you are not going to discuss the elasticity between present and future consumption. The problem with the Keynesian critiques of deflationary currencies is that they look for the most extreme cases of deflation and assume that all deflation will set off a deflationary spiral.
The argument that Krugman is making is that because people hoard money when deflation is 50% or more then its obvious they will completely hoard all their money when its 2%-3%. Its not a fair comparison at all and assumes an unreasonably high rate of intertemporal consumption elasticity. To believe this would mean that people are not willing to pay the 2% opportunity cost of consuming in the present which is almost identical to saying that people will not substitute future consumption for present consumption they face an opportunity cost of 2% or more, ie they would not take out a loan if the interest they are paying is 2% or more. Obviously no one is going to use a credit card that charges 50% but I am pretty sure that a 2% charge on present consumption is not going to stop a lot of people from thinking twice about consuming in the present.
What Krugman is really critiquing is that a deflationary currency is going to prevent people from being incentivized to drastically reduce their savings rate. As we can see in this quote: "What we want from a monetary system isn’t to make people holding money rich; we want it to facilitate transactions and make the economy as a whole rich."
We dont want hoarders (aka savers) from making risk free profits? Why not? When people pull their money out of the economy it doesnt prevent others from making transactions as long as the currency is divisible, which is completely effortless with bitcoin and only faces a modest cost under the gold standard. Luckily for us these evil hoarders will eventually dis-hoard their money in retirement and provide an even flow of savings and consumption over their lifetime. What Krugman wants is for our current generation to get the benefits of past savings while at the same time preventing future generations from having the same priviledge that we do. It works for a while and has been in operation for the past 20 years but we are quickly coming to a period in time when there will be no more dis-hoarding of savings and no hoarding to divert into present consumption. The shell game that Krugman constantly promotes on his blog is quickly coming to an end and we are soon going to have to figure out how to run an economy through a deflationary recession without recourse to inflation or borrowing.
In addition it has been shown empirically that times of mild deflation have not been the catastrophe that Krugman claims they would be. See: Milton Friedman's Monetary History of the United States.
1) Low resolution/detail. Onlive isn't streaming you a 25mbps 1080p AVCHD signal. They stream a low bitrate 720p signal. What this means is that not only are you dealing with a lower resolution but fine detail gets lost. That's how video compression works: Algorithms are used to simplify things which results in the loss of detail. The more you compress, the more you lose. So you aren't getting the full experience of a "high end system" like they want to pretend. You get something that is mid-low end at best.
2) Large amounts of interface lag. Since all the rendering is done remotely, there is lag on everything, even mouse cursor movements. The amount of lag is cumulative, so not only the lag from your monitor and mouse as you always get, but network as well. Even if you live real near a datacenter, it is going to be non-trivial and any further and it could be rather major. You can learn to adjust, to an extent, but it is amazing how much nicer a no-lag interface feels. If you have a monitor with, say, 30ms of lag, you won't notice it, it is below human perception. But add that to a 60ms network and encoding lag and you will notice.
3) It is 100% network dependent. Your Internet goes out? No games. Have a bandwidth cap? This uses heavily towards that. Someone else downloading something? You can get stuttering and dropouts. You take any problem you've ever had with streaming video and then add to the fact that there is no buffer and that's what you've got.
Now of course this is on top of the fact that you don't get to have the games. They are all "sold" on the service meaning if Onlive ever goes under, you are SOL. It isn't even something like with a DRM or download solution where you could crack it, or they could let you download before they go down for good, Onlive goes down, you are done.
Also it isn't as though you are "running" the games on Linux. You are just streaming the video to Linux. They are running on the Onlive servers.
Really, if you wish to play games a much better idea is to just get yourself a console, or mid-low end graphics card. Pick up a $80-100 graphics card and you'll get quality as good or better than what Onlive pulls, with none of the problems.
It is a service that really doesn't make any sense. Maybe back in the day when you had to have high end hardware to play games but these days not only are consoles a major option, but you don't need much computer to play games. You take a reasonable desktop computer, like a Core 2 and 2+GB of RAM, and toss in a reasonable video card and you can play what you want.
Much better idea than using Onlive.
Have you tried it? You criticisms are very exaggerated.
I gave it a go just for interest sake and I was pleasantly suprised even though I went in with extreme sketicism. Are all the criticism valid? To a certain degree but onlive achieves about 95% of the goal it claims to achieve and its no where near as bad as the haters claim.
The mouse lag to me was most noticeable when in the main starting screen with the game mode select but it dropped to barely noticable once I actually got into the main game (Played Just Cause 2 and Arkham Asylum). I am not sure if it would be playable for competitive online FPS like Call of Duty but for a single player 3rd person action game it was completely fine and way better then I thought it would be.
As for compression, its actually not that noticeable once you are playing. If you stop and really pay attention you can notice some compression here and there but its not like you are playing via youtube. Again way better than I thought.
The real problem of onlive is more with their business model than with their tech (which I am sure will be completely fixed to 100% given a year or two). There are very few games that I would be interested in playing, with most of their selection being older games. The only new game that I saw was the new Deus Ex. It could be that this also gets rectified in the c
If you arent an expert how do you know who to talk to? How am I gonna know im getting top class electrical work done or getting ripped off by some shady contractor.
Just because you talked to "experts" does not excuse you from the mistakes that are eventually going to be made, especially when it comes to a field as controversial and dynamic as economics and finance. I think someone in this thread is not thinking, I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to decide who it is.
1 million barrels per day. A new video released shows the largest hole spewing oil and natural gas from an aperture 5 feet in diameter at a rate of approximately 4 barrels per second.
I know centrifugal force isnt 'real', but in your example of moving with the ship what keeps you moving with the ship? Once your feet hit the wall wouldnt you just spin around? What gets you moving towards the wall in the first place?
If, however, you're sealed inside a spaceship rotating with constant angular velocity, that's quite another matter. You'll know about the rotation, either by reference to gyroscopes if it's spinning very slowly, or by the fact that you seem to be stuck to the wall if it's spinning very quickly...
Could someone please explain to me how this works? You are in a cylinder (spaceship or whatever) in space, you start rotating the cylinder and somehow the astronaut inside gets sucked to the wall. Where is the centrifugal force coming from?
I really dont think it would happen. I think that people are using the earth based ideas of the gravitron (the ride that spins around and you get sucked to the wall). But there is one important force in space, the earths gravity. Correct me if I am wrong but the gravitron gets it ability because you are also being affected by the earths gravity, which would not apply in space. I dont know if I am missing something but I've debated this with my physics PHD friend and he really couldnt put up a good arguement for the spinning gravity arguement.
"with satellites the fuel up to 50 per cent of the weight constitutes, because on it also the life span depends. Without drive cannot be maintained the accurate position finally"
I just hit lvl 53 in WOW and I have to totally disagree with you. WOW is only a grind if thats the way you wanna play. The majority of quests seem grindish at first. Collect x items or kill x monsters. But often times these take place in mini dungeons, that are fun short and enjoyable. If you are a casual player in wow the rest system almost guarantees that you will never spend much time grinding mobs. Occasionally you have to do it, but its usually very short even when your at normal rest.
WOW at its core is a hack 'n slash CRPG, just like 95% of CRPGs that have ever come out. It shares much in common with the final fantasy series. Its basically Diablo 3, but with more interesting combat. Starting at lvl 20 there is a dungeon every 5 lvls, dungeons that are interesting and in no way the grind of a typical mmorpg. I beta'd lineage for a bit, and basically my only option to lvl was sit in a forest and kill wolves for hours. whoop! When I play wow I actually enjoy exploring new areas, interacting with other players, and trying to overcome the challenges presented by the dungeons with the ppl that I am partied with.
As for whiney casual players that cant keep up with the hardcores, what do you expect? Anytime someone puts more time into something they are going to be better than you. Are these casuals playing just to be the best, or to enjoy the content? I would assume that casuals would enjoy the content more than obssessing over their next lvl like the hardcores are.
WOW has basically perfected the formula of the 1st generation mmorpgs. Until this point I have been intrigued by mmorpgs in theory but whenever i tried one, I hated it. I love WOW. I am very excited to see where other companies will take the next generation of mmorpgs. I certainly hope they've learnt some lessons from WOW.
The difference is, is that 4-6 were overacted, and 1-3 were underacted. Yes we get some real cheese from 4-6, but in the end we still felt an emotional connection to the characters. Because it was a great story, and had some really great moments. Ep 4-6 even had *gasp* good acting in it.
1-3 was like watching a group of actors read from their script as if they had just seen it for the first time. It was terrible, there wasnt one moment when I felt interested in anything that was going on with the characters.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the original 3 were not meant to be cheesy. The cast were a bunch of unknowns and this really shows in episode 4. But Ep 4 was fun so we can forgive them. The quality of acting took a huge leap for Ep 5, and that one is arguably the best of the 6. But look at 1-3, they are cheesy on purpose. We get Jar-Jar and those stupid trade federation robots, that act like a non-stop comedy troop. Its as if the whole series is a big joke.
Ep 4-6 are classic movies, that will be remembered for a long time. 1-3 were garbage and will not be revered like the original series.
Thats the point the parent was trying to make. Hunting doesnt turn you into a psycho killer. It just gives you the skills you need to shoot people from long range, if you are already a psycho killer.
He was making an arguement against those people who say that video games provide 'training'. Now theres a difference between providing training, and creating psychotic urges.
The point is that rational people understand its only a game. The people that go out to kill because of video games, were probably already going to go out to kill anyway. The question is whether or not video games are the cause of the violent crime. Considering that most the ppl I know play some of the most violent video games (GTA, Battlefield, etc), and yet non of them have had the urge to go and kill ppl.
Wasnt there a FDA study a while ago about the causes of violence? And wasnt Video Games/Movies down at like #10?
Actually, the philosophy of science is that we dont believe in things until we have evidence. Athiesm is just the application of the philosophy of science to religion.
Personally I would call myself a 'scientist' (as in follower of the philosophy of science) before I would call myself an athiest. But because over 90% of the worlds population believes in some sort of higher power, atheism is a short hand I use when explaining my beliefs to religious folk.
Re:Was anyone involved in the beta? Excited about
on
Wish Cancelled
·
· Score: 1
I was in the beta and played it for a couple of hours on the first night.
The first thing I encountered, as I got into my starting harbour town, was that everyone in the town had contracted some disease and started dying. You couldnt buy stuff from merchants because they were all dead. At first I thought this was just some intro quest, but when I talked to some of the players they said it had just happened the night before. I initially thought 'woah!'. The dynamic nature of it made the world feel much more alive. It was a group quest that had to be worked on by everyone, and effected everyone. I was really impressed.
That is until I spent about an hour trying to figure out what to do. It seems that the only way to complete the quest was to collect x number of healing roots and bring it back to town. yay! This is exactly what I hate about mmorpgs. I spent the next hour trying to figure if there was anything else worth while to do. In short, the only other things to do were kill monsters and pick berries. Im sorry, thats not for me.
But I have to admit, for a brief period of time the flavor of the quest really blew me away. The world felt so much more alive, just through a little bit of text and setting. These quests were to be the hook of the game. The only problem was that these quests probably took up too much of the developers time, and they had no time to spend on the core gameplay. Now if something WOW could take this idea and run with it, it could totally revolutionize the mmorpg scene.
It really has nothing to do with the amount of people that are getting together, but the amount of money that is being thrown at the government. Democracy is supposed to be about fair representation of the population. 1 person, 1 vote. Not 1 company $5 million, 200 million people $5 million.
I think there was a line in the documentary The Corporation that went like this:
"Well you should just vote with your dollars!"
"If we voted with our dollars that means you just have more votes than me"
Capitalism thrives on competition. But in a competitive environment, the best strategy is co-operation between two parties of about the same size. Eventually the smaller companies have to join or go out of business. You then get what we have now, a monopoly of several very powerful companies.
When the theory of capitalism meets human nature, we get a warped version of what the ideal is supposed to be. Hmmm, sounds a lot like another popular economic theory....
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with Krugman's argument is that he is taking the price increase in bitcoins due to massive speculation and applying it to a case of deflation that occurs when there is a decrease in the ratio of gold to goods in an economy. They are two separate things and no conclusions can be drawn from one and applied to the other, especially if you are not going to discuss the elasticity between present and future consumption. The problem with the Keynesian critiques of deflationary currencies is that they look for the most extreme cases of deflation and assume that all deflation will set off a deflationary spiral.
The argument that Krugman is making is that because people hoard money when deflation is 50% or more then its obvious they will completely hoard all their money when its 2%-3%. Its not a fair comparison at all and assumes an unreasonably high rate of intertemporal consumption elasticity. To believe this would mean that people are not willing to pay the 2% opportunity cost of consuming in the present which is almost identical to saying that people will not substitute future consumption for present consumption they face an opportunity cost of 2% or more, ie they would not take out a loan if the interest they are paying is 2% or more. Obviously no one is going to use a credit card that charges 50% but I am pretty sure that a 2% charge on present consumption is not going to stop a lot of people from thinking twice about consuming in the present.
What Krugman is really critiquing is that a deflationary currency is going to prevent people from being incentivized to drastically reduce their savings rate. As we can see in this quote: "What we want from a monetary system isn’t to make people holding money rich; we want it to facilitate transactions and make the economy as a whole rich."
We dont want hoarders (aka savers) from making risk free profits? Why not? When people pull their money out of the economy it doesnt prevent others from making transactions as long as the currency is divisible, which is completely effortless with bitcoin and only faces a modest cost under the gold standard. Luckily for us these evil hoarders will eventually dis-hoard their money in retirement and provide an even flow of savings and consumption over their lifetime. What Krugman wants is for our current generation to get the benefits of past savings while at the same time preventing future generations from having the same priviledge that we do. It works for a while and has been in operation for the past 20 years but we are quickly coming to a period in time when there will be no more dis-hoarding of savings and no hoarding to divert into present consumption. The shell game that Krugman constantly promotes on his blog is quickly coming to an end and we are soon going to have to figure out how to run an economy through a deflationary recession without recourse to inflation or borrowing.
In addition it has been shown empirically that times of mild deflation have not been the catastrophe that Krugman claims they would be. See: Milton Friedman's Monetary History of the United States.
Well I suppose if you ignore:
1) Low resolution/detail. Onlive isn't streaming you a 25mbps 1080p AVCHD signal. They stream a low bitrate 720p signal. What this means is that not only are you dealing with a lower resolution but fine detail gets lost. That's how video compression works: Algorithms are used to simplify things which results in the loss of detail. The more you compress, the more you lose. So you aren't getting the full experience of a "high end system" like they want to pretend. You get something that is mid-low end at best.
2) Large amounts of interface lag. Since all the rendering is done remotely, there is lag on everything, even mouse cursor movements. The amount of lag is cumulative, so not only the lag from your monitor and mouse as you always get, but network as well. Even if you live real near a datacenter, it is going to be non-trivial and any further and it could be rather major. You can learn to adjust, to an extent, but it is amazing how much nicer a no-lag interface feels. If you have a monitor with, say, 30ms of lag, you won't notice it, it is below human perception. But add that to a 60ms network and encoding lag and you will notice.
3) It is 100% network dependent. Your Internet goes out? No games. Have a bandwidth cap? This uses heavily towards that. Someone else downloading something? You can get stuttering and dropouts. You take any problem you've ever had with streaming video and then add to the fact that there is no buffer and that's what you've got.
Now of course this is on top of the fact that you don't get to have the games. They are all "sold" on the service meaning if Onlive ever goes under, you are SOL. It isn't even something like with a DRM or download solution where you could crack it, or they could let you download before they go down for good, Onlive goes down, you are done.
Also it isn't as though you are "running" the games on Linux. You are just streaming the video to Linux. They are running on the Onlive servers.
Really, if you wish to play games a much better idea is to just get yourself a console, or mid-low end graphics card. Pick up a $80-100 graphics card and you'll get quality as good or better than what Onlive pulls, with none of the problems.
It is a service that really doesn't make any sense. Maybe back in the day when you had to have high end hardware to play games but these days not only are consoles a major option, but you don't need much computer to play games. You take a reasonable desktop computer, like a Core 2 and 2+GB of RAM, and toss in a reasonable video card and you can play what you want.
Much better idea than using Onlive.
Have you tried it? You criticisms are very exaggerated.
I gave it a go just for interest sake and I was pleasantly suprised even though I went in with extreme sketicism. Are all the criticism valid? To a certain degree but onlive achieves about 95% of the goal it claims to achieve and its no where near as bad as the haters claim.
The mouse lag to me was most noticeable when in the main starting screen with the game mode select but it dropped to barely noticable once I actually got into the main game (Played Just Cause 2 and Arkham Asylum). I am not sure if it would be playable for competitive online FPS like Call of Duty but for a single player 3rd person action game it was completely fine and way better then I thought it would be.
As for compression, its actually not that noticeable once you are playing. If you stop and really pay attention you can notice some compression here and there but its not like you are playing via youtube. Again way better than I thought.
The real problem of onlive is more with their business model than with their tech (which I am sure will be completely fixed to 100% given a year or two). There are very few games that I would be interested in playing, with most of their selection being older games. The only new game that I saw was the new Deus Ex. It could be that this also gets rectified in the c
If you arent an expert how do you know who to talk to? How am I gonna know im getting top class electrical work done or getting ripped off by some shady contractor.
Just because you talked to "experts" does not excuse you from the mistakes that are eventually going to be made, especially when it comes to a field as controversial and dynamic as economics and finance. I think someone in this thread is not thinking, I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to decide who it is.
1 million barrels per day. A new video released shows the largest hole spewing oil and natural gas from an aperture 5 feet in diameter at a rate of approximately 4 barrels per second.
4 X 60 X 60 X 24 = 345600
learn math slashdot!
Have you ever met the government? It does what ever big moeny says!!!
WOAH! There were booth babes pics IN the article!?!?!?! Now I guess I have to read it!
KHUUUUNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!
You cant get a RIM job without giving a rim-job!
I know centrifugal force isnt 'real', but in your example of moving with the ship what keeps you moving with the ship? Once your feet hit the wall wouldnt you just spin around? What gets you moving towards the wall in the first place?
Could someone please explain to me how this works? You are in a cylinder (spaceship or whatever) in space, you start rotating the cylinder and somehow the astronaut inside gets sucked to the wall. Where is the centrifugal force coming from?
I really dont think it would happen. I think that people are using the earth based ideas of the gravitron (the ride that spins around and you get sucked to the wall). But there is one important force in space, the earths gravity. Correct me if I am wrong but the gravitron gets it ability because you are also being affected by the earths gravity, which would not apply in space. I dont know if I am missing something but I've debated this with my physics PHD friend and he really couldnt put up a good arguement for the spinning gravity arguement.
"with satellites the fuel up to 50 per cent of the weight constitutes, because on it also the life span depends. Without drive cannot be maintained the accurate position finally"
I just hit lvl 53 in WOW and I have to totally disagree with you. WOW is only a grind if thats the way you wanna play. The majority of quests seem grindish at first. Collect x items or kill x monsters. But often times these take place in mini dungeons, that are fun short and enjoyable. If you are a casual player in wow the rest system almost guarantees that you will never spend much time grinding mobs. Occasionally you have to do it, but its usually very short even when your at normal rest.
WOW at its core is a hack 'n slash CRPG, just like 95% of CRPGs that have ever come out. It shares much in common with the final fantasy series. Its basically Diablo 3, but with more interesting combat. Starting at lvl 20 there is a dungeon every 5 lvls, dungeons that are interesting and in no way the grind of a typical mmorpg. I beta'd lineage for a bit, and basically my only option to lvl was sit in a forest and kill wolves for hours. whoop! When I play wow I actually enjoy exploring new areas, interacting with other players, and trying to overcome the challenges presented by the dungeons with the ppl that I am partied with.
As for whiney casual players that cant keep up with the hardcores, what do you expect? Anytime someone puts more time into something they are going to be better than you. Are these casuals playing just to be the best, or to enjoy the content? I would assume that casuals would enjoy the content more than obssessing over their next lvl like the hardcores are.
WOW has basically perfected the formula of the 1st generation mmorpgs. Until this point I have been intrigued by mmorpgs in theory but whenever i tried one, I hated it. I love WOW. I am very excited to see where other companies will take the next generation of mmorpgs. I certainly hope they've learnt some lessons from WOW.
The difference is, is that 4-6 were overacted, and 1-3 were underacted. Yes we get some real cheese from 4-6, but in the end we still felt an emotional connection to the characters. Because it was a great story, and had some really great moments. Ep 4-6 even had *gasp* good acting in it.
1-3 was like watching a group of actors read from their script as if they had just seen it for the first time. It was terrible, there wasnt one moment when I felt interested in anything that was going on with the characters.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the original 3 were not meant to be cheesy. The cast were a bunch of unknowns and this really shows in episode 4. But Ep 4 was fun so we can forgive them. The quality of acting took a huge leap for Ep 5, and that one is arguably the best of the 6. But look at 1-3, they are cheesy on purpose. We get Jar-Jar and those stupid trade federation robots, that act like a non-stop comedy troop. Its as if the whole series is a big joke.
Ep 4-6 are classic movies, that will be remembered for a long time. 1-3 were garbage and will not be revered like the original series.
Then mabey Rob Thomas shouldnt have signed his contract.
Thats the point the parent was trying to make. Hunting doesnt turn you into a psycho killer. It just gives you the skills you need to shoot people from long range, if you are already a psycho killer.
He was making an arguement against those people who say that video games provide 'training'. Now theres a difference between providing training, and creating psychotic urges.
So now video games arent immersive enough?
The point is that rational people understand its only a game. The people that go out to kill because of video games, were probably already going to go out to kill anyway. The question is whether or not video games are the cause of the violent crime. Considering that most the ppl I know play some of the most violent video games (GTA, Battlefield, etc), and yet non of them have had the urge to go and kill ppl.
Wasnt there a FDA study a while ago about the causes of violence? And wasnt Video Games/Movies down at like #10?
Rabid atheism is no more scientific than wicca.
Actually, the philosophy of science is that we dont believe in things until we have evidence. Athiesm is just the application of the philosophy of science to religion.
Personally I would call myself a 'scientist' (as in follower of the philosophy of science) before I would call myself an athiest. But because over 90% of the worlds population believes in some sort of higher power, atheism is a short hand I use when explaining my beliefs to religious folk.
Damn you shreevatsa, katsiris, Adrilla, bigtallmofo, Ligur, lucabrasi999, dsginter, and darkmeridian!
Your computers are faster than mine! I'm coming to steal them!
I actually got first post!
Breakin 3: Electric Wookie!
Dreams are nice. I remember when I had dreams. Those were fun.
gay! GAY!
GaaaaaaaaaaaaaaYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was in the beta and played it for a couple of hours on the first night.
The first thing I encountered, as I got into my starting harbour town, was that everyone in the town had contracted some disease and started dying. You couldnt buy stuff from merchants because they were all dead. At first I thought this was just some intro quest, but when I talked to some of the players they said it had just happened the night before. I initially thought 'woah!'. The dynamic nature of it made the world feel much more alive. It was a group quest that had to be worked on by everyone, and effected everyone. I was really impressed.
That is until I spent about an hour trying to figure out what to do. It seems that the only way to complete the quest was to collect x number of healing roots and bring it back to town. yay! This is exactly what I hate about mmorpgs. I spent the next hour trying to figure if there was anything else worth while to do. In short, the only other things to do were kill monsters and pick berries. Im sorry, thats not for me.
But I have to admit, for a brief period of time the flavor of the quest really blew me away. The world felt so much more alive, just through a little bit of text and setting. These quests were to be the hook of the game. The only problem was that these quests probably took up too much of the developers time, and they had no time to spend on the core gameplay. Now if something WOW could take this idea and run with it, it could totally revolutionize the mmorpg scene.
It really has nothing to do with the amount of people that are getting together, but the amount of money that is being thrown at the government. Democracy is supposed to be about fair representation of the population. 1 person, 1 vote. Not 1 company $5 million, 200 million people $5 million.
I think there was a line in the documentary The Corporation that went like this:
"Well you should just vote with your dollars!"
"If we voted with our dollars that means you just have more votes than me"
Thats no way for any democracy to be run.
Capitalism thrives on competition. But in a competitive environment, the best strategy is co-operation between two parties of about the same size. Eventually the smaller companies have to join or go out of business. You then get what we have now, a monopoly of several very powerful companies.
When the theory of capitalism meets human nature, we get a warped version of what the ideal is supposed to be. Hmmm, sounds a lot like another popular economic theory....