Re:You've already fallen into their trap
on
The DRM Scorecard
·
· Score: 1
Ah: my apologies, I had not considered that.
What I have stated is true to the best of my knowledge in America. I don't know where you're from, so I made the assumption that you were also from America.
...I also made that assumption because I thought that America was the country with the worst ridiculous copyright laws. Apparently (and unfortunately for you) I was wrong...
Dan Aris
You've already fallen into their trap
on
The DRM Scorecard
·
· Score: 1
(Standard disclaimer, IANAL, I only think I know what I'm talking about, etc, etc)
Now, the licenser can dictate how I may use the item, that's his right.
No, he really can't.
Copyright law says that you can't distribute copies of a work. However, Fair Use provides for all the noncommercial, personal copies you want. Under the law. And there's nothing the copyright holder can do about it! The only way they can take that right away from you is with a separate contract—and unless you've actually been buying CDs with shrinkwrap EULAs, they don't have one with you (and it might or might not be legal even if they did).
You're already falling into their trap, equating music & movies with software, thinking of them all as "licensed" to you. They're not. You own that copy of the music, and you can do anything you want with it except as prohibited by copyright law, which says you can't distribute it, sell it, perform it in public at all or private for profit.
That's why they need DRM, because without it, they can't prevent you from buying just 1 copy and listening to it on your CD player, on your computer, on your MP3 player, in your car, in the shower—wherever you want. With it, however, they can sell you a separate copy for everywhere you want to listen to it. And that's what they want.
Don't let them make that happen. Don't fall into their trap. Don't think of music as "licensed". It's not: it's owned with restrictions.
Now, I'm no expert (and I am biased in favour of trackballs), but...have you ever considered the possibility that your RSI was not caused simply by the fact that you were using a trackball, but rather by the fact that it was 3" in diameter?
Try a smaller one sometime, see if you notice a difference.
I guess the reason why trackball manufacturers don't bother with doing the most obvious interface design change is because users (such as yourself) aren't asking for it.
We're not?
There is a petition (yeah, I know, online petitions are useless) to get Logitech to come out with a bluetooth trackball, and I have personally, on 2 separate occasions, submitted feedback to their support website asking why they don't have one.
What more are we supposed to do?
...I have not, yet, gone and told Kensington they'd pick up a customer if they made a bluetooth trackball. Perhaps I should do that next.
Trackball here, too, though my pick is the Logitech Optical TrackMan (I think; don't remember the actual name for certain). I love being able to use it without any significant flat surface with my laptop.
What I really don't understand, though, is why oh why does nobody make a good Bluetooth trackball?? Every cordless trackball out there (except for one, called The Ball, but I need many buttons, not just 2 & no scroll wheel...) uses an RF transmitter that plugs in by USB. I would have thought that doing away with that transmitter would be an absolute no-brainer once Bluetooth became common on laptops...
On all my recent TV remotes, volume and channel change are in a little cross shape, with up and down being volume increase and decrease, and right and left being channel increment and decrement
Really?
That's funny; they've almost always been the other way around for me...
Will this bill put things right for the affected people if they are found innocent?
(emphasis mine)
Bill? What bill? This is an executive order. The president makes it, and if you want to argue, you have to take it up with Congress (to explicitly override it) or the courts (to declare it unconstitutional or otherwise illegal).
Good luck.
(PS. I'm not a lawyer; this is just my understanding, and could be somewhat incorrect. But the gist I'm sure of.)
...you can't make a profit in a competitive market.
...if you want to make billions, you need a monopoly, oligopoly or cartel.
Y'know, I think the problem you and your debating partner are having here is you're neglecting the middle ground. You appear to be positing that either one can make $billions in profit, or one can make $0 in profit, with no other possibilities.
I think that you and I both know that's not true, which suggests that the problem is simply in the terminology.
Am I correct in my belief that what you really mean by "you can't make a profit in a competitive market" is "you can't make a big profit in a competitive market"?
First, let me say that yes, I believe you, and am willing to accept your numbers, at least for the sake of argument. There are Chinese workers being exploited, and there are American companies who have no problem doing so. This is horrible and shameful and has to stop.
However, that doesn't mean that all Chinese labour is necessarily exploitive. There are many places where exactly what falconwolf speaks of is happening. As a matter of fact, my wife will be visiting the Chinese factory that the company she works for owns/runs early next month. She's been there several times already, and it's pretty darn nice: new, spacious, clean, good working conditions, well air-conditioned. Not a sweatshop.
Just because some Chinese workers are being exploited doesn't mean that the whole idea of it is wrong. Yes, they need better worker protection laws—in fact, they need a lot of better protection laws on all sides. But so far as I can tell, they really are working on it, and in the meantime, most Chinese companies who do business with US companies seem to be doing their best to keep their noses clean.
Unfortunately, if it happens any time soon (longer if Hillary is elected, hopefully less so if Obama is elected), you can bet pretty safely on the government using a big corporate implementation of public key crypto for it...so every single person in the country will need to put their new SS# in the hands of (for instance) Microsoft.
My comments deal explicitely with the bad coding style of any application which attempts to store any sort of data in a binary format inside human readable user's comment field.
My apologies, then: I interpreted your comment as a criticism of a feature of iTunes, which you do not use, versus WinAmp, which you do. Since that is apparently not the case, my entire post is moot:-)
Have you ever considered the possibility that it's WinAmp, not iTunes, that is b0rking the metadata?
Personally, I don't know the answer, but just assuming that it's iTunes seems an awful lot like jumping to conclusions to me.
Before you rant and rave about how iTunes is destroying your metadata, why don't you try taking a look at the same tagged MP3 in a few other players? You should also put the same tags on in those other players, then open it in iTunes, and in WinAmp. That should tell you who the real culprit is.
If it's iTunes, then you were right, and can rant and rave all you want (or, better, tell Apple about it and ask them to fix it). If it's WinAmp, then shut up and quit complaining about things you don't know anything about.
I'm afraid I'm not enough of a student of history to be able to personally speak to this, so I have nothing to cite. However, I've heard from some people who are (and whom I would trust to be relatively impartial on the subject) that, while it's true that there has been a lot of corruption before, and dark things done by our government in the name of Truth, Justice, and the American Lay of Wife or whatever, there has never been such a high concentration of it before...particularly not when we're more or less in a time of peace.
Sure, but Bush is the current--and most flagrant--example.
That said, you're quite right, the problem is systemic and has been going on for a long time. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about it, though: indeed, it means we absolutely must try to do something, and that it will take even more effort to do so.
Corruption being a widespread and old-fashioned pastime of the rich and powerful does not in any way diminish its severity and the degree to which we should condemn and those who participate in it.
Three out of four Americans are Christians, and they're definitely not ready. So are most other people of faith - since little green men from Tau Ceti would pretty much blow their creation stories out of the water.
Um, well, I'm (technically) Christian, and I have no problem with the idea of intelligent life on other planets.
You see, many of us are bright enough to realize that Genesis is NOT literal truth: that we were not created as "God's only chosen people," or any BS like that. That's (mostly) reserved for those who also believe that we didn't evolve from primal primate ancestors.
Frankly, I think that an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God would get really *bored* if he only had one planet of intelligent beings to watch over in the whole vast universe.
So please don't go around assuming that anyone willing to call themselves a Christian has simply thrown reason out the window.
Yeah, well, welcome to the US (figuratively, of course;-) ).
The rule here, so far as I can tell, is one cable company, one phone company, and maybe satellite (if you like the type) in any given area...and speeds of 3Mbps down, 384-768kbps up. For at least $50/month.
To be sure, there are exceptions, but from all I've gathered from what I've seen and heard, that's the most prevalent situation throughout the country. That's why I'm praying that the "third pipe" really happens...though I know it's probably doomed to be swallowed up by the telecom conglomerates just like everything else:-P
We had reliable estimates of what was likely to happen before we invaded Iraq. We did it anyway.
To be fair, though, those estimates were given by humans, and it can always be claimed that a human is biased. It's much more difficult to claim that a machine is biased (particular examples like opaque voting machines aside...).
If Congress had had access to data like this, it's an interesting question as to whether they would have been as willing to vote for the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (or whatever the heck BS name they came up with for the thing)...
It might still have happened, but it would at least have made people think more about it from the start.
Yes, granted, there is, at the most basic level, competition between Verizon and Time-Warner for my money for their broadband service. However, I do not have the choices that would be available in a free market. All I get to choose is which of 2 questionably ethical behemoths I think the lesser evil is (hey, sounds like politics! But I digress...).
So if Time-Warner decides that they want to degrade my service to Slashdot, because CmdrTaco didn't pay them ransom money, yeah, I could switch to Verizon. But Taco hasn't paid them anything, either, and three months after I switch, they decide, "Hey, Time-Warner is doing this, we can probably get away with it, too," and then what does that leave me?
There is no real, effective competition in most areas in the broadband market, redelm. You can claim it's there, but that doesn't make it so. Two parties, both with a vested interest in keeping prices high and services cheap to provide, are not enough to prevent price fixing and other monopolistic behaviour. They don't even have to explicitly collude for it to happen: they just have to see that their "competitor" is charging X amount and getting away with it, and charge about the same.
Until and unless this changes, there will be no serious "market pressure" on internet service, and thus no way to self-correct for predatory behaviour like AT&T wants to try.
Desert how? I don't know about you, but where I am, there are just 2 choices: Time-Warner cable and Verizon DSL. That means that if just 2 companies (both of which are already known for being greedy behemoths who would gleefully raid their customers' bank accounts for more cash if they thought they could get away with it) decide to adopt this utterly greedy plan, I'll have nowhere to turn.
If you're assuming no competition [monopoly]...
Why do we have to assume this? We can see that it's the case.
...that's like you sending an encrypted file to me, with the understanding that Joe is in the room with me and will also see it on my monitor. I don't have to give the encryption key to show Joe what you sent me.
...Until Joe pulls out his baseball bat and threatens to break your kneecaps if you don't give it to him.
Which is about the closest analogy I could get to "you open the player up and start analyzing its guts with a multimeter and logic probes", which you can do with a media player, legally, with easily available tools and a moderate knowledge of electronics.
So yes, in fact, for all intents and purposes, you are both Bob and Carol, given a reasonable amount of time.
Dan Aris
Let the players run the game
on
Rethinking the MMOG
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
The best massively multiplayer online game I've seen or heard of, bar none, is Tom Vogt's BattleMaster. (Said Tom is actually a Slashdot regular, too, and with a 3-digit UID;-) ) While it is not perfect (as what can be?) and is more or less in a state of perpetual beta (which I find a great deal of fun, but others wouldn't), it does a great job, in general, of dealing with the powergamers who want to turn the whole thing into a numbers game, and does its best to give even casual gamers the chance to participate meaningfully (ie, invest ~15 mins/day, and keep up pretty well with those who invest 15 mins/hour).
BattleMaster is a roleplaying strategy game, where the player has a small family of nobles who can command troops in any of several different classes. The real key here is that in BattleMaster, there is precious little centrally-provided content: the interaction between the players is, essentially, the whole game. Which isn't to say that it's pure, text-based roleplaying (though the game is entirely text-based, aside from the maps); it has a relatively comprehensive system that helps to model a medieval European setting, complete with diplomacy, battles, wars, etc. But all the story is created by the players.
It's a heck of a lot of fun, and I've been playing it for the past 3 years and more. I don't explain it too well, so take a look at the site, linked both above and in my sig.
If someone were to take the concept and make a commercial MMORPG out of it, I dare say they could do pretty darn well--at least, once they had enough players signed up to populate a large area. The fun is directly proportional to the complexity of the system, which grows out of the number of people playing...
I really don't see how Apple couldn't do the same thing.
I would say there are two main reasons (which are really just different side of the same reason):
Apple has to deal with the labels in the US directly, and there's no way they'd get the rights to sell the music through the iTMS if they didn't put the DRM on it
AllOfMP3 is only able to do what they do because they operate in Russia, don't actually get ANY legal permissions from ANY artists or labels, and thus, more or less, sell stuff they don't own.
I wouldn't call downloading music of BitTorrent for my own enjoyment theft (copyright infringement it may be, but not theft). I would call either buying the CDs or downloading the songs and then setting up shop to sell copies of them left and right, making a huge profit in the process, theft.
So, basically, the reason Apple couldn't do the same thing is IT'S BLATANTLY ILLEGAL, YOU MORON!
Leaving aside for the moment the question of whether a degree in theology is worthless, would you really believe "Dan Everyman" over the doctor when the question was one of theology--that is, the area that he had spent several years researching deeply?
I can understand not giving any extra weight to his opinion when the matter at hand is international politics, particle physics, or comparative programming languages, but if you wouldn't trust a doctor in his own field, then I think you have a really warped view about knowledge, its worth, and how it's obtained...
You're simply wrong. What he said counts, in my estimation, as flamebait, not a troll. As he correctly pointed out, trolling requires it to be done purely to gain a reaction, not out of real conviction, while flamebait simply requires the post to be likely to attract flames.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah: my apologies, I had not considered that.
What I have stated is true to the best of my knowledge in America. I don't know where you're from, so I made the assumption that you were also from America.
...I also made that assumption because I thought that America was the country with the worst ridiculous copyright laws. Apparently (and unfortunately for you) I was wrong...
Dan Aris
No, he really can't.
Copyright law says that you can't distribute copies of a work. However, Fair Use provides for all the noncommercial, personal copies you want. Under the law. And there's nothing the copyright holder can do about it! The only way they can take that right away from you is with a separate contract—and unless you've actually been buying CDs with shrinkwrap EULAs, they don't have one with you (and it might or might not be legal even if they did).
You're already falling into their trap, equating music & movies with software, thinking of them all as "licensed" to you. They're not. You own that copy of the music, and you can do anything you want with it except as prohibited by copyright law, which says you can't distribute it, sell it, perform it in public at all or private for profit.
That's why they need DRM, because without it, they can't prevent you from buying just 1 copy and listening to it on your CD player, on your computer, on your MP3 player, in your car, in the shower—wherever you want. With it, however, they can sell you a separate copy for everywhere you want to listen to it. And that's what they want.
Don't let them make that happen. Don't fall into their trap. Don't think of music as "licensed". It's not: it's owned with restrictions.
Dan Aris
Now, I'm no expert (and I am biased in favour of trackballs), but...have you ever considered the possibility that your RSI was not caused simply by the fact that you were using a trackball, but rather by the fact that it was 3" in diameter?
Try a smaller one sometime, see if you notice a difference.
Dan Aris
We're not?
There is a petition (yeah, I know, online petitions are useless) to get Logitech to come out with a bluetooth trackball, and I have personally, on 2 separate occasions, submitted feedback to their support website asking why they don't have one.
What more are we supposed to do?
...I have not, yet, gone and told Kensington they'd pick up a customer if they made a bluetooth trackball. Perhaps I should do that next.
Dan Aris
Trackball here, too, though my pick is the Logitech Optical TrackMan (I think; don't remember the actual name for certain). I love being able to use it without any significant flat surface with my laptop.
What I really don't understand, though, is why oh why does nobody make a good Bluetooth trackball?? Every cordless trackball out there (except for one, called The Ball, but I need many buttons, not just 2 & no scroll wheel...) uses an RF transmitter that plugs in by USB. I would have thought that doing away with that transmitter would be an absolute no-brainer once Bluetooth became common on laptops...
Dan Aris
Really?
That's funny; they've almost always been the other way around for me...
Dan Aris
(emphasis mine)
Bill? What bill? This is an executive order. The president makes it, and if you want to argue, you have to take it up with Congress (to explicitly override it) or the courts (to declare it unconstitutional or otherwise illegal).
Good luck.
(PS. I'm not a lawyer; this is just my understanding, and could be somewhat incorrect. But the gist I'm sure of.)
Dan Aris
Y'know, I think the problem you and your debating partner are having here is you're neglecting the middle ground. You appear to be positing that either one can make $billions in profit, or one can make $0 in profit, with no other possibilities.
I think that you and I both know that's not true, which suggests that the problem is simply in the terminology.
Am I correct in my belief that what you really mean by "you can't make a profit in a competitive market" is "you can't make a big profit in a competitive market"?
Dan Aris
It doesn't mean they are, either.
First, let me say that yes, I believe you, and am willing to accept your numbers, at least for the sake of argument. There are Chinese workers being exploited, and there are American companies who have no problem doing so. This is horrible and shameful and has to stop.
However, that doesn't mean that all Chinese labour is necessarily exploitive. There are many places where exactly what falconwolf speaks of is happening. As a matter of fact, my wife will be visiting the Chinese factory that the company she works for owns/runs early next month. She's been there several times already, and it's pretty darn nice: new, spacious, clean, good working conditions, well air-conditioned. Not a sweatshop.
Just because some Chinese workers are being exploited doesn't mean that the whole idea of it is wrong. Yes, they need better worker protection laws—in fact, they need a lot of better protection laws on all sides. But so far as I can tell, they really are working on it, and in the meantime, most Chinese companies who do business with US companies seem to be doing their best to keep their noses clean.
Dan Aris
It sounds like a great idea.
Unfortunately, if it happens any time soon (longer if Hillary is elected, hopefully less so if Obama is elected), you can bet pretty safely on the government using a big corporate implementation of public key crypto for it...so every single person in the country will need to put their new SS# in the hands of (for instance) Microsoft.
...Yes, I'm feeling pretty cynical tonight.
Dan Aris
My apologies, then: I interpreted your comment as a criticism of a feature of iTunes, which you do not use, versus WinAmp, which you do. Since that is apparently not the case, my entire post is moot :-)
Dan Aris
Have you ever considered the possibility that it's WinAmp, not iTunes, that is b0rking the metadata?
Personally, I don't know the answer, but just assuming that it's iTunes seems an awful lot like jumping to conclusions to me.
Before you rant and rave about how iTunes is destroying your metadata, why don't you try taking a look at the same tagged MP3 in a few other players? You should also put the same tags on in those other players, then open it in iTunes, and in WinAmp. That should tell you who the real culprit is.
If it's iTunes, then you were right, and can rant and rave all you want (or, better, tell Apple about it and ask them to fix it). If it's WinAmp, then shut up and quit complaining about things you don't know anything about.
Dan Aris
I'm afraid I'm not enough of a student of history to be able to personally speak to this, so I have nothing to cite. However, I've heard from some people who are (and whom I would trust to be relatively impartial on the subject) that, while it's true that there has been a lot of corruption before, and dark things done by our government in the name of Truth, Justice, and the American Lay of Wife or whatever, there has never been such a high concentration of it before...particularly not when we're more or less in a time of peace.
Dan Aris
Sure, but Bush is the current--and most flagrant--example.
That said, you're quite right, the problem is systemic and has been going on for a long time. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about it, though: indeed, it means we absolutely must try to do something, and that it will take even more effort to do so.
Corruption being a widespread and old-fashioned pastime of the rich and powerful does not in any way diminish its severity and the degree to which we should condemn and those who participate in it.
Dan Aris
Um, well, I'm (technically) Christian, and I have no problem with the idea of intelligent life on other planets.
You see, many of us are bright enough to realize that Genesis is NOT literal truth: that we were not created as "God's only chosen people," or any BS like that. That's (mostly) reserved for those who also believe that we didn't evolve from primal primate ancestors.
Frankly, I think that an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God would get really *bored* if he only had one planet of intelligent beings to watch over in the whole vast universe.
So please don't go around assuming that anyone willing to call themselves a Christian has simply thrown reason out the window.
Dan Aris
Yeah, well, welcome to the US (figuratively, of course ;-) ).
The rule here, so far as I can tell, is one cable company, one phone company, and maybe satellite (if you like the type) in any given area...and speeds of 3Mbps down, 384-768kbps up. For at least $50/month.
To be sure, there are exceptions, but from all I've gathered from what I've seen and heard, that's the most prevalent situation throughout the country. That's why I'm praying that the "third pipe" really happens...though I know it's probably doomed to be swallowed up by the telecom conglomerates just like everything else :-P
Dan Aris
To be fair, though, those estimates were given by humans, and it can always be claimed that a human is biased. It's much more difficult to claim that a machine is biased (particular examples like opaque voting machines aside...).
If Congress had had access to data like this, it's an interesting question as to whether they would have been as willing to vote for the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (or whatever the heck BS name they came up with for the thing)...
It might still have happened, but it would at least have made people think more about it from the start.
Dan Aris
You don't seem to have grasped the point here.
Yes, granted, there is, at the most basic level, competition between Verizon and Time-Warner for my money for their broadband service. However, I do not have the choices that would be available in a free market. All I get to choose is which of 2 questionably ethical behemoths I think the lesser evil is (hey, sounds like politics! But I digress...).
So if Time-Warner decides that they want to degrade my service to Slashdot, because CmdrTaco didn't pay them ransom money, yeah, I could switch to Verizon. But Taco hasn't paid them anything, either, and three months after I switch, they decide, "Hey, Time-Warner is doing this, we can probably get away with it, too," and then what does that leave me?
There is no real, effective competition in most areas in the broadband market, redelm. You can claim it's there, but that doesn't make it so. Two parties, both with a vested interest in keeping prices high and services cheap to provide, are not enough to prevent price fixing and other monopolistic behaviour. They don't even have to explicitly collude for it to happen: they just have to see that their "competitor" is charging X amount and getting away with it, and charge about the same.
Until and unless this changes, there will be no serious "market pressure" on internet service, and thus no way to self-correct for predatory behaviour like AT&T wants to try.
Dan Aris
Desert how? I don't know about you, but where I am, there are just 2 choices: Time-Warner cable and Verizon DSL. That means that if just 2 companies (both of which are already known for being greedy behemoths who would gleefully raid their customers' bank accounts for more cash if they thought they could get away with it) decide to adopt this utterly greedy plan, I'll have nowhere to turn.
Why do we have to assume this? We can see that it's the case.
Dan Aris
...Until Joe pulls out his baseball bat and threatens to break your kneecaps if you don't give it to him.
Which is about the closest analogy I could get to "you open the player up and start analyzing its guts with a multimeter and logic probes", which you can do with a media player, legally, with easily available tools and a moderate knowledge of electronics.
So yes, in fact, for all intents and purposes, you are both Bob and Carol, given a reasonable amount of time.
Dan Aris
The best massively multiplayer online game I've seen or heard of, bar none, is Tom Vogt's BattleMaster. (Said Tom is actually a Slashdot regular, too, and with a 3-digit UID ;-) ) While it is not perfect (as what can be?) and is more or less in a state of perpetual beta (which I find a great deal of fun, but others wouldn't), it does a great job, in general, of dealing with the powergamers who want to turn the whole thing into a numbers game, and does its best to give even casual gamers the chance to participate meaningfully (ie, invest ~15 mins/day, and keep up pretty well with those who invest 15 mins/hour).
BattleMaster is a roleplaying strategy game, where the player has a small family of nobles who can command troops in any of several different classes. The real key here is that in BattleMaster, there is precious little centrally-provided content: the interaction between the players is, essentially, the whole game. Which isn't to say that it's pure, text-based roleplaying (though the game is entirely text-based, aside from the maps); it has a relatively comprehensive system that helps to model a medieval European setting, complete with diplomacy, battles, wars, etc. But all the story is created by the players.
It's a heck of a lot of fun, and I've been playing it for the past 3 years and more. I don't explain it too well, so take a look at the site, linked both above and in my sig.
If someone were to take the concept and make a commercial MMORPG out of it, I dare say they could do pretty darn well--at least, once they had enough players signed up to populate a large area. The fun is directly proportional to the complexity of the system, which grows out of the number of people playing...
Dan Aris
I would say there are two main reasons (which are really just different side of the same reason):
I wouldn't call downloading music of BitTorrent for my own enjoyment theft (copyright infringement it may be, but not theft). I would call either buying the CDs or downloading the songs and then setting up shop to sell copies of them left and right, making a huge profit in the process, theft.
So, basically, the reason Apple couldn't do the same thing is IT'S BLATANTLY ILLEGAL, YOU MORON!
Have a nice day.
Dan Aris
Leaving aside for the moment the question of whether a degree in theology is worthless, would you really believe "Dan Everyman" over the doctor when the question was one of theology--that is, the area that he had spent several years researching deeply?
I can understand not giving any extra weight to his opinion when the matter at hand is international politics, particle physics, or comparative programming languages, but if you wouldn't trust a doctor in his own field, then I think you have a really warped view about knowledge, its worth, and how it's obtained...
Dan Aris
You're simply wrong. What he said counts, in my estimation, as flamebait, not a troll. As he correctly pointed out, trolling requires it to be done purely to gain a reaction, not out of real conviction, while flamebait simply requires the post to be likely to attract flames.
Dan Aris
"No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame."
...And we know how that prediction turned out...
Dan Aris