> The RIAA is once again revising their lawsuit strategy, and will now be sending college students and others "pre-lawsuit letters." People will now be able to settle for a discount. How nice.
Slashdotters are once again revising their RIAA strategies, and will now be sending RIAA extortionists and barrators "pre-letter responses." Barrators and extortionists will now be encouraged to go fuck themselves sideways with a bowling pin. How goatse.
From TFA:
> Each morning at 6:30, he is jolted awake by a soldier in fatigues shouting, "This is for your own good!"'
'Smith!' screamed the shrewish voice from the telescreen. '6079 Smith W.! Yes, you! Bend lower, please! You can do better than that. You're not trying. Lower, please! That's better, comrade. Now stand at ease, the whole squad, and watch me.'
> Thanks to his parents' intervention and the treatment, he now has life mapped out until he's 84.
But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
And as long as I'm on an Orwell kick today, "the Slashdotters looked from TFA to the dystopian science fiction novel, and from the dystopian science fiction novel to TFA, and from TFA to the dystopian science fiction article again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
In other news, Boston was shut down for the second time in a month due to LED billboards...
Err: "Notice how we fit together?"
Ignignokt: "Except this time I'm doing it as wide as I can!"
Boston Mayor: "How can you treat this with kid gloves?"
Berdovsky and Stevens: "That's a goat question, not a hair question."
> > Jesus. If they can see that far out, imagine what they can see when they look straight down.
> NASA says that if you don't stop doing you-know-what, you're going to go blind.
No, that's NSA, not NASA.
(Keyhole cat is watching you masturbate, but he works for NRO, not the other two agencies;)
> He's hardly alone in that view. The current plan for what to do with the ISS is bloody ridiculous: finish spending a fortune to get it built, and then not fund it for long past there. The components mostly have expected ~40 year lifespans (and judging by other craft, say the MERs, this is probably an underestimate), but once we finally get to the "cheap" part (maintenence of the station), we're just going to let it burn.
Agreed, but the fundamental problem is that the "purpose" of a project like ISS depends on who you ask.
For just about every politician (with the exception of John Glenn, who, as an astronaut, may be excused for having an interest in science:), the only "purpose" of a project ISS is to funnel tax dollars into local industries.
The more expensive it is and the longer it takes to build, the better. As soon as it's "built", however, the "cheap" (maintenance) phase of the project begins, and its usefulness as a vehicle for directing pork to campaign donors ends. Hence...
> It's this whole "lets get it up to full capacity so we can say we built it, then let it crash so that we can move onto our next disturbingly-similar project" attitude that bothers me.
...what you said. Bothers me too. But we don't get to vote. Only the politicians get to vote; we just get to pay for it.
> Then let's settle into a nice discussion about how vista sucks because it's more of the same and office 2007 sucks because it's not more of the same.
You are coming to a sad realization. Deny, allow, or throw chair?
> > Paradoxically, those that do understand the GPL, are also prone to reinvent it... just as poorly. > >How do you tell a GPL advocate? Well, it's someone who reads the GPL. And how do you tell a GPL opponent? It's someone who understands the GPL.
> I just wonder why there's so much support for laws restricting freedom in the land of the free. Or was that rewritten and nobody told me?
It got rewritten and nobody told you.
Republicans are the party of Big Daddy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your bedroom to make sure you're not having sex the wrong way, because pornography is a national epidemic.
Democrats are the party of Big Mommy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your kitchen to make sure you're not eating the wrong kinds of food, because obesity is a national epidemic.
Once upon a time, Americans valued "freedom to" over "freedom from". The past 40 years of "every life is precious" and "you are a unique and valuable snowflake" rhetoric has changed that; as a nation, we've pretty much decided we'd rather be safe than free. Kinda sucks for us oldthinkers who unbellyfeel amsoc, but that's our problem, not New America's.
> It took me a moment to realize that you didn't type "cunnilingus". That class would've been much more interesting than calculus. Except to the average Slashdotter... unless they were somehow combined. *contemplates*
...and now you know why the integral sign is shaped the way it is.
In other news, poster also describes the Grand Canyon is a "ditch", and the the act of drawing the Virgo Supercluster through a trillion light-year section of buckytube as "suck".
> In many respects it reminds me of East Germany. At the height of their power the East German Stasi employed one in fifty members of the population as full or part-time spies. This doesn't count the large beureucratic staff that they had or the massive infrastructure that was built and run just to sort through it all. The social costs were enormous as any infraction was targeted for no good reason. The economic costs in turn were insane and deprived the state budget of much of the money that might have been spent say building an infrastructure or feeding the population. No nation on earth had more complete information on its citizens and no nation on earth spent more obtaining it.
Ah, but that's the point. East Germany failed because neither powerful computers nor large databases existed.
Without powerful computers and large databases, STASI-level surveillance required that one in fifty people work for it. If we use the ratio of 300,000 informants to 100,000 employees, we get a pretty "human" number: one agent can process the intelligence from three informants.
> None of the objectives of the Stasi were acheived and East Germany fell, it fell and noone misses it.
Evidently, someone misses it, or we wouldn't be rebuilding it here.
East Germany's STASI was the alpha test; it failed due to massive manpower requirements.
The PRC's Great Firewall of China appears to be a beta test; now that manpower requirements are alleviated by the use of technology, let's see if it scales. The test is ongoing, and has been a useful proving ground (and sales opportunity!) for US-based manufacturers of networking gear. If we consider the collapse of the USSR in the face of the free flow of information, we must also consider the survival of the Communist Party in the PRC in the face of the same free flow of information. Part of the reason the government of China held power has to do with cultural leanings that tend towards collectivism, but part of it has something to do with the Chinese state's ability to track, target, and eliminate its opposition's leading figures before they have a chance to do harm. Tienanmen Square gave the PRC's government a wake-up call, and unlike the Soviet Union, the Chinese government adapted, survived, and maintained control over its population.
East Germany's alpha test demonstrated the proof of concept (but failed due to scaling issues). China's beta test has demonstrated both the concept, and proved scalability. It's time to move to the implementation phase.
> Why don't they just put everyone in prison? Then we wouldn't have any crime at all. Problem solved.
The Party's goal isn't to eliminate crime by throwing everyone in jail -- it's to eliminate people who piss it off by merely being able to throw anyone in jail.
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said
Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that
it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know
that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power
and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick,
and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men.
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares
so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live
without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens'
What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that
can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and
you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt."
- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, 1957
You don't have to like Rand to apppreciate that she was onto something when it came to how governments think during the design phase of legislation.
> It's with Microsoft itself. His opinion is that Microsoft has stopped focusing on end users. They 'now seemingly make many decisions based on these two things: 1. Avoiding negative publicity (especially about security and software quality) 2. Making sure the largest enterprise customers are happy.'"
That's been the case since 2K/XP, and arguably since Win9x and the introduction of IE/ActiveX.
Word and Excel macros on by default? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and all content created by people in the office is trusted!
NetBIOS filesharing on by default in 9x? Of course! Everybody's on a LAN, everyone should be able to share their documents with each other!
ActiveX things that autoinstall and execute when some string on a webpage tells them to? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and the only thing they should be browsing is the company Intranet, and the only web applications are going to be about entering your vacation time into a database of timesheets!
Javashit on by default! Of course! See above -- how else can we be sure to tell those UNIX greybeards that they're fired (because they can't run ActiveX TimeSheet Thingy that the consultant was paid $100K to write) unless they're running IE!
Install IIS by default and make it listen to requests from everywhere? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and wouldn't it be cool if everyone had their own little web server thingy running on their desktop so they could share their Word documents with other people in the office?
UPnP on by default? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and wouldn't it be cool if you just plugged the computer into the LAN, and it automatically knew about the printer down the hall.
DCOM and RCP services turned on by default, listening on ports 135, 139, 445 or 593 for requests from everywhere? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and DCOM makes it easy for people to stick Excel spreadsheets in their Word documents!
Goddamn near every out-of-the-box remote exploit (and most of the designed-in insecurities in IE and the Office suite) arises from the assumption that everyone's on a LAN, and that all content is trusted.
> While little is truly known about how effective the key revocation system in AACS is, in theory it should be possible for the AACS LA to identify the players responsible for the breach and prevent later pressings of discs from playing back on those players until they are updated. As such, if the hole can be patched in the players [emphasis added], the leak of volume keys could be limited to essentially what is already on the market.
If the players are non-patchable:
1) We will live in a universe in which, every year or so, an unknown number of players will play discs produced up to, but not after, a certain date.
Consider the sales/support implications of customers selecting products for Christmas 2008: "Well, sir, this Foobar-1000 plays discs up produced in 2006-2007, a Foobar-1130 plays discs produced from 2006-2008, and a Fonybaz-1900 plays discs produced from 2006 to August 2008."
If the players are patchable, it's even worse for the industry:
1) Your Foobar 1000 will play discs produced in 2006 and 2007. It ceases to work for discs produced between February 2007 until you buy a disc produced a few months later that happens to contains some code that query the player whether it's a Foobar 1000... and if so, to automatically/silently patch the firmware. Then all your discs work again.
That's a good thing for the user, and a bad thing for the industry, because as soon as you've got a firmware patch on a DVD, the obvious thing for an enterprising hacker to do is to put his own firmware patch on his own DVD, and your Foobar 1000, all of a sudden, ceases to implement the DRMish crap which the MPAA crammed onto it...
...until, of course, a few months after that hack, where the firmware-updating discs are modified to downgrade any hacked players to MPAA-compliant revisions of the firmware (or even to self-destruct)...
...and someone else comes up with a better hack to make the hacked firmware indistinguishable from the "approved" firmware...
In short, if players can be patched in the field (and this applies to both hardware/firmware-based players in embedded systems and to PC-based disc-playing software), it's a long-term battle of the rootkits, and that's a battle that MPAA is likely to lose.
> They're going to what? >Don't they mean purify humanity?
Abbot: "Not they, Hu."
Costello: "Who's going to what?"
Abbot: "Hu's going to purify the Internet. What's going to purify humanity."
Costello: "I don't know who or what's gonna purify humanity! Or how!"
Abbot: "Hao? Who's Hao?"
Costello: "I don't know!"
Both: "All your base!"
> > proximity becomes irrelevant: neighbours become irrelevant.
> >
Right, I will make sure to email you when I'm sick and need groceries, or to look after my kid when I need to go out a bit.
And if you'd spent more time with your computer instead of your SO, you wouldn't have a kid who needs looking after when you need to go out a bit. More importantly, you'd have finished that "nifty robot who'd be able to go out and get your groceries for you when you're sick" project that's been sitting in your basement since you left college.
"I look at you all, see the love there that's sleeping,
Robo-guitar gently weeps.
I look at the floor, and I at least Roomba's sweeping,
Robo-guitar gently weeps."
> Ultracapacitors have many advantages over traditional electrochemical batteries. Unlike batteries, "ultracaps" can completely absorb and release a charge at high rates and in a virtually endless cycle with little degradation.
10 amp-hour 12V Li-Ion Battery: 500 grams ($100).
versus
10 amp-hour 12V Ultracapacitor (or 36-amp-second 12kV ultracapacitor): 50 grams ($100).
Current-limiting resistor of sufficient wattage rating to ensure that ultracapacitor storing that much energy won't vaporize any conductor that it happens to touch...: 450g. ($Priceless)
> > What with all the exploding robots exploring them, of course they're going to be a bit hazardous.
> >
I would hate to be one of the engineers testing these.
"Engineers? What about the poor robots?"
- PETRO: People for the Ethical Treatment of Robot Overlords
> Considering that the couple of folks that tried to clone the AppleII way back when were mercilessly hunted down and killed, (legalistically speaking), by Apple, and the short time Apple tried to license out their OS to clone makers was such a miserable failure due to their overly restrictive terms and high fees, I think my opinion is an honest one, not a troll.
> >
Contrast to IBM and M$, who let the IBM PC clones freak flags fly, welcoming any and all third party developers and apps.
It was a weird time in the industry. Everyone was trying to figure out whether or not to go with open or closed architectures, and changing their minds about it every couple of years.
Compared to the Mac, the Apple ][ was an exceptionally open platform. It not only had slots, when you bought an Apple ][, you got the schematics for the hardware, and you got a commented disassembly of the ROM in your documentation. Whereas the Mac needed a special Programmer's Key just to reset the machine.
And as for IBM, the same IBM that let the clones out of the closet... was the same IBM that came up with the PS/2 and MCA (Micro Channel Architecture). Sure the second generation of IBM machines had slots and ran DOS (whether it was PC-DOS or MS-DOS:-), but what good were the machine's slots if you had to sign a licensing agreement just to build hardware for 'em?
>...perhaps a non-fascist technology company that embraces third party developers and applications, rather than a company that engages in propritary pogroms against any and all that think they can add to the glory that is Apple?
No, that's what Apple would have been with Steve Wozniak.
> "If digital media was available for sale at a reasonable price, but subject to a DRM scheme that allowed full legitimate usage (format shifting, time shifting, playback on different devices, etc.) and only blocked illicit usage (illegal copying), would you support the usage of such a DRM scheme? Especially if it meant a wealth of readily available compatible devices? In other words, if you object to DRM schemes, is your objection based on principled or practical concerns?"
The ability to shift formats, shift time, play back on different devices, "etc", is indistinguishable from "illegal copying". The question is based upon the incorrect premise that the two things are distinguishable.
Consequently, my objection to DRM is based on both philosophical and practical terms.
I object on philosophical grounds because there exists no such device.
I object on practical grounds because any device that purports to "allow full legitimate usage but... block illicit usage" is a device that does not allow full legitimate usage.
The root of your problem is the notion of "legitimate" and "illegitimate" versus "copying", "playback", and so on. The former terms are terms of law; they are defined by lawyers and enforced by men with guns. The latter terms are descriptions of functionality; they are defined by the laws of physics and mathematics, which are enforced by the universe itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdotters are once again revising their RIAA strategies, and will now be sending RIAA extortionists and barrators "pre-letter responses." Barrators and extortionists will now be encouraged to go fuck themselves sideways with a bowling pin. How goatse.
> Thanks to his parents' intervention and the treatment, he now has life mapped out until he's 84.
And as long as I'm on an Orwell kick today, "the Slashdotters looked from TFA to the dystopian science fiction novel, and from the dystopian science fiction novel to TFA, and from TFA to the dystopian science fiction article again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
In other news, Boston was shut down for the second time in a month due to LED billboards...
Err: "Notice how we fit together?"
Ignignokt: "Except this time I'm doing it as wide as I can!"
Boston Mayor: "How can you treat this with kid gloves?"
Berdovsky and Stevens: "That's a goat question, not a hair question."
> NASA says that if you don't stop doing you-know-what, you're going to go blind.
No, that's NSA, not NASA.
(Keyhole cat is watching you masturbate, but he works for NRO, not the other two agencies ;)
It's not even a real VM anyway.
Agreed, but the fundamental problem is that the "purpose" of a project like ISS depends on who you ask.
For just about every politician (with the exception of John Glenn, who, as an astronaut, may be excused for having an interest in science :), the only "purpose" of a project ISS is to funnel tax dollars into local industries.
The more expensive it is and the longer it takes to build, the better. As soon as it's "built", however, the "cheap" (maintenance) phase of the project begins, and its usefulness as a vehicle for directing pork to campaign donors ends. Hence...
> It's this whole "lets get it up to full capacity so we can say we built it, then let it crash so that we can move onto our next disturbingly-similar project" attitude that bothers me.
...we could tell you if it works, but then we'd have to decide whether or not we killed this cat.
You are coming to a sad realization. Deny, allow, or throw chair?
>
>How do you tell a GPL advocate? Well, it's someone who reads the GPL. And how do you tell a GPL opponent? It's someone who understands the GPL.
Who says I wasn't talking about RMS all along? :-)
Paradoxically, those that do understand the GPL, are also prone to reinvent it... just as poorly.
It got rewritten and nobody told you.
Republicans are the party of Big Daddy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your bedroom to make sure you're not having sex the wrong way, because pornography is a national epidemic.
Democrats are the party of Big Mommy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your kitchen to make sure you're not eating the wrong kinds of food, because obesity is a national epidemic.
Once upon a time, Americans valued "freedom to" over "freedom from". The past 40 years of "every life is precious" and "you are a unique and valuable snowflake" rhetoric has changed that; as a nation, we've pretty much decided we'd rather be safe than free. Kinda sucks for us oldthinkers who unbellyfeel amsoc, but that's our problem, not New America's.
In other news, poster also describes the Grand Canyon is a "ditch", and the the act of drawing the Virgo Supercluster through a trillion light-year section of buckytube as "suck".
I, for one, welcome our understated overlords.
Ah, but that's the point. East Germany failed because neither powerful computers nor large databases existed.
Without powerful computers and large databases, STASI-level surveillance required that one in fifty people work for it. If we use the ratio of 300,000 informants to 100,000 employees, we get a pretty "human" number: one agent can process the intelligence from three informants.
> None of the objectives of the Stasi were acheived and East Germany fell, it fell and noone misses it.
Evidently, someone misses it, or we wouldn't be rebuilding it here.
East Germany's STASI was the alpha test; it failed due to massive manpower requirements.
The PRC's Great Firewall of China appears to be a beta test; now that manpower requirements are alleviated by the use of technology, let's see if it scales. The test is ongoing, and has been a useful proving ground (and sales opportunity!) for US-based manufacturers of networking gear. If we consider the collapse of the USSR in the face of the free flow of information, we must also consider the survival of the Communist Party in the PRC in the face of the same free flow of information. Part of the reason the government of China held power has to do with cultural leanings that tend towards collectivism, but part of it has something to do with the Chinese state's ability to track, target, and eliminate its opposition's leading figures before they have a chance to do harm. Tienanmen Square gave the PRC's government a wake-up call, and unlike the Soviet Union, the Chinese government adapted, survived, and maintained control over its population.
East Germany's alpha test demonstrated the proof of concept (but failed due to scaling issues). China's beta test has demonstrated both the concept, and proved scalability. It's time to move to the implementation phase.
"Nothing to hear for you, see? Please move along."
The Party's goal isn't to eliminate crime by throwing everyone in jail -- it's to eliminate people who piss it off by merely being able to throw anyone in jail.
You don't have to like Rand to apppreciate that she was onto something when it came to how governments think during the design phase of legislation.
That's been the case since 2K/XP, and arguably since Win9x and the introduction of IE/ActiveX.
Word and Excel macros on by default? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and all content created by people in the office is trusted!
NetBIOS filesharing on by default in 9x? Of course! Everybody's on a LAN, everyone should be able to share their documents with each other!
ActiveX things that autoinstall and execute when some string on a webpage tells them to? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and the only thing they should be browsing is the company Intranet, and the only web applications are going to be about entering your vacation time into a database of timesheets!
Javashit on by default! Of course! See above -- how else can we be sure to tell those UNIX greybeards that they're fired (because they can't run ActiveX TimeSheet Thingy that the consultant was paid $100K to write) unless they're running IE!
Install IIS by default and make it listen to requests from everywhere? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and wouldn't it be cool if everyone had their own little web server thingy running on their desktop so they could share their Word documents with other people in the office?
UPnP on by default? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and wouldn't it be cool if you just plugged the computer into the LAN, and it automatically knew about the printer down the hall.
DCOM and RCP services turned on by default, listening on ports 135, 139, 445 or 593 for requests from everywhere? Of course! Everybody's on the LAN, and DCOM makes it easy for people to stick Excel spreadsheets in their Word documents!
Goddamn near every out-of-the-box remote exploit (and most of the designed-in insecurities in IE and the Office suite) arises from the assumption that everyone's on a LAN, and that all content is trusted.
If the players are non-patchable:
1) We will live in a universe in which, every year or so, an unknown number of players will play discs produced up to, but not after, a certain date.
Consider the sales/support implications of customers selecting products for Christmas 2008: "Well, sir, this Foobar-1000 plays discs up produced in 2006-2007, a Foobar-1130 plays discs produced from 2006-2008, and a Fonybaz-1900 plays discs produced from 2006 to August 2008."
If the players are patchable, it's even worse for the industry:
1) Your Foobar 1000 will play discs produced in 2006 and 2007. It ceases to work for discs produced between February 2007 until you buy a disc produced a few months later that happens to contains some code that query the player whether it's a Foobar 1000... and if so, to automatically/silently patch the firmware. Then all your discs work again.
That's a good thing for the user, and a bad thing for the industry, because as soon as you've got a firmware patch on a DVD, the obvious thing for an enterprising hacker to do is to put his own firmware patch on his own DVD, and your Foobar 1000, all of a sudden, ceases to implement the DRMish crap which the MPAA crammed onto it...
In short, if players can be patched in the field (and this applies to both hardware/firmware-based players in embedded systems and to PC-based disc-playing software), it's a long-term battle of the rootkits, and that's a battle that MPAA is likely to lose.
>Don't they mean purify humanity?
Abbot: "Not they, Hu."
Costello: "Who's going to what?"
Abbot: "Hu's going to purify the Internet. What's going to purify humanity."
Costello: "I don't know who or what's gonna purify humanity! Or how!"
Abbot: "Hao? Who's Hao?"
Costello: "I don't know!"
Both: "All your base!"
>
> Right, I will make sure to email you when I'm sick and need groceries, or to look after my kid when I need to go out a bit.
And if you'd spent more time with your computer instead of your SO, you wouldn't have a kid who needs looking after when you need to go out a bit. More importantly, you'd have finished that "nifty robot who'd be able to go out and get your groceries for you when you're sick" project that's been sitting in your basement since you left college.
"I look at you all, see the love there that's sleeping,
Robo-guitar gently weeps.
I look at the floor, and I at least Roomba's sweeping,
Robo-guitar gently weeps."
10 amp-hour 12V Li-Ion Battery: 500 grams ($100).
versus
10 amp-hour 12V Ultracapacitor (or 36-amp-second 12kV ultracapacitor): 50 grams ($100).
Current-limiting resistor of sufficient wattage rating to ensure that ultracapacitor storing that much energy won't vaporize any conductor that it happens to touch...: 450g. ($Priceless)
>
> I would hate to be one of the engineers testing these.
"Engineers? What about the poor robots?"
- PETRO: People for the Ethical Treatment of Robot Overlords
>
> Contrast to IBM and M$, who let the IBM PC clones freak flags fly, welcoming any and all third party developers and apps.
It was a weird time in the industry. Everyone was trying to figure out whether or not to go with open or closed architectures, and changing their minds about it every couple of years.
Compared to the Mac, the Apple ][ was an exceptionally open platform. It not only had slots, when you bought an Apple ][, you got the schematics for the hardware, and you got a commented disassembly of the ROM in your documentation. Whereas the Mac needed a special Programmer's Key just to reset the machine.
And as for IBM, the same IBM that let the clones out of the closet... was the same IBM that came up with the PS/2 and MCA (Micro Channel Architecture). Sure the second generation of IBM machines had slots and ran DOS (whether it was PC-DOS or MS-DOS :-), but what good were the machine's slots if you had to sign a licensing agreement just to build hardware for 'em?
No, that's what Apple would have been with Steve Wozniak.
This is a classic example of begging the question.
The ability to shift formats, shift time, play back on different devices, "etc", is indistinguishable from "illegal copying". The question is based upon the incorrect premise that the two things are distinguishable.
Consequently, my objection to DRM is based on both philosophical and practical terms.
I object on philosophical grounds because there exists no such device.
I object on practical grounds because any device that purports to "allow full legitimate usage but ... block illicit usage" is a device that does not allow full legitimate usage.
The root of your problem is the notion of "legitimate" and "illegitimate" versus "copying", "playback", and so on. The former terms are terms of law; they are defined by lawyers and enforced by men with guns. The latter terms are descriptions of functionality; they are defined by the laws of physics and mathematics, which are enforced by the universe itself.