Oh, jayzus (excuse my Irish-tainted French). I didn't realize it was that bad in the UK at the moment (assuming you're in the UK ?). Hope you don't have to live in London or nearby, though (renting a flat is a ripoff in that area).
Right now in France, we're struggling against a Thatcherization of the economy and of social conditions. Yeah, call us strike-prone, lazy, cheese-eating surrendering monkeys if you like (though this sounds more like US neocon drivel), but this is a battle I'm not willing to lose. And it looks like if we lose this battle, the French Socialist Party won't be any more help than the Labour is at the moment in the UK...
Hoax...urba legend...load of crap. But on CNN ?!? What is the world coming to?
CNN ? Isn't this the news outlet that had us believe that Saddam hid WMDs in his garage ?
"Comin' up soon on CNN : the weather forecasts, with severe frost expected in Hell; and a special report from ButtFuck, OH, where our cameramen caught pictures of pigs flying around."
Not only that, but somebody's gonna get beaten to a pulp when Linus finds out *who the Hell* has used the ugly C++ish "cout" instruction in the kernel !:-)
Well of course ! Air is (so far) about the last public resource that has not been privatized yet. And sheeesh, what a market ! Just imagine:
(Bangs at the door) Lady (opening) : - Yes ? Employee : - Hello, Ma'am. We're from the FooBar Air Company. Our company has bribed your governor into selling the air of this state to F.A.C. for distribution. You have to subscribe for our service. We have all the air-o-meters needed for you, your family, your pets, your cars and your fireplace. Lady : -Uh, well... Employee : - Please sign here. Lady : - OK. Here you are... Hey, what are you dommflfff muflmufl !... Employee(fitting a mask with an air-meter on the lady's face) - Sorry Ma'am, these are our orders : customers must use our air-o-meter as soon as their subscription starts.
(A few months later)
Employee : Hello Ma'am, we noticed that you have not paid for your subscription last month. We have to suspend it until you have paid the bill. (Goes around the house and turns knobs off everywhere on every mask and air-o-meter, with a special key. People collapse to the floor after suffocating for a while. Before leaving, he tells them:) Be assured that we will resume our service as soon as we have received the payment. Do not hesitate to call us for any details. Bye-bye ! Employee(to his fellow) : See, Jim, this is what I like in this job : be strict on the rules, but keep the customer satified.
Aaah, the joys of free market applied to public utilities...
... other countries will surely find a cheap way out of this crap. After all, the market rules, and with the development of the IT market in countries like China and India, you can be pretty sure that cheap non-Palladium alternatives will meet a large demand, significant enough that no hardware manufacturer will take a risk in ignoring it. The US may still have a dominant share in the IT market these days, but we should expect it to lose its lead in the next few years.
About time they realized their place in the world.
OK, let's all sing a little song...
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
(Sung to the tune of "If you're happy and you know
it...")
If you cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq. If the markets are a drama, bomb Iraq. If the terrorists are frisky, Pakistanis looking shifty, North Korea is too risky, Bomb Iraq.
If we have no allies with us, bomb Iraq. If we think someone has dissed us, bomb Iraq. So to hell with the inspections, Let's look tough for the elections, Close your mind and take directions, Bomb Iraq.
It's "pre-emptive non-aggression", bomb Iraq. Let's prevent this mass destruction, bomb Iraq. They've got weapons we can't see, And that's good enough for me 'Cos it'all the proof I need Bomb Iraq.
If you never were elected, bomb Iraq. If your mood is quite dejected, bomb Iraq. If you think Saddam's gone mad, With the weapons that he had, And he tried to kill your dad, Bomb Iraq.
If your corporate fraud is growin', bomb Iraq. If your ties to it are showin', bomb Iraq. If your politics are sleazy, And hiding that ain't easy, And your manhood's getting queasy, Bomb Iraq.
Fall in line and follow orders, bomb Iraq. For our might knows not our borders, bomb Iraq. Disagree? We'll call it treason, Let's make war not love this season, Even if we have no reason, Bomb Iraq.
Re: Religion [A bad day for international thugs]
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Actually, getting rid as well of corrupt/fanatical christianism (particularly, but not only, rabid baptist protestants) would also probably make the world a better place. That would at least avoid us wars declared on the basis of the lame, ignorant, simple-minded "Good vs. Evil" argument.
... they would have been much better off releasing a version of their distribution tuned for i686 years ago, rather that sticking to their puny Pentium optimization until very recently. What was to prevent them from maintaining their 486-optimized release for the older machines and, for the mainstream, switch to the most widely-used platform nowadays (and probably for the next few years), i686 ?
This humble opinion comes from somebody who's sick and tired of having a sluggish Mandrake distro on his AMD Atlon. And don't tell me about Gentoo : I don't have a fast network connnection anyway, which pretty much rules it out.
Let's estrange all the (Unix) geeks who advise their 20 friends on what PC to buy.
You actually made an excellent point. One should wonder, given the potential influence that the average geek may have on average Joe's computer-related buyings, whether some marketing types have decided to target them instead of directly targeting Joe Sixpack, and turn on the Linux spin.
A geek does not necessarily influence a buyer on the operating system he is going to choose, but he can certainly recommend not to buy such and such hardware brand because they are reluctant to give away their specifications to free OS developers -- just in case Joe gets tired of Windows and wants to use Linux or *BSD instead on the machine.
Hell, I can get windows for free just as well, just talk to my l33t h4ck0r neighbour kid and ask him to burn me a copy.
Sure you can, and there's very little chance that MS sues you for using only one pirated copy of their software. But no everyone is as computer-savvy as you, and yet lots of people would like to get rid of that overpriced licensing model. I think the argument at stake, here, is the cost of software for businesses. When the cost of software is skyrocketing thanks to the so-called "Software Assurance", many businesses can't cope (particularly in these hard times).
And since MS and their BSA minions will certainly not hesitate to sue a business who is using a few copies of pirated software, they certainly can't afford that option either. So they have to find something else.
Finally, this article says a lot about how shallow the "Total Cost of Ownership" arguments were when comparing proprietary software and free software. Facts show that many managers (and maybe even some pointy-haired ones) are no longer afraid to move from an MS-Office document management system to an OpenOffice-powered system, for instance.
Unfortunately, the powers-that-be fail to realize that the economics of science, knowledge and information do not follow the economy of regular goods.
When you trade or sell regular goods to somebody, there is a real trade : goods for money or other goods. Whatever the material goods, when you've sold it or traded it, it is no longer yours and you may no longer benefit from it. Therefore, there is an interest in creating a market economy based on shortage of goods -- which is what capitalism is based upon, and which appears (so far) to be sustainable : the society as a whole does not suffer too much from that shortage, given that prices tend to regulate through the demand and supply mechanisms.
On the other hand, when you trade ideas or informations with somebody, or when you teach him/her a new skill, you *still* have the skill/idea/information that you have just given to your partner. Even if your partner has nothing to trade for this information, you still have that information and you can continue to benefit from it ; you do not end up "poorer" than before the exchange, contrary to what may happen with material goods. Actually, if you trade an information for another, you end up being *wealthier* than before, which is not likely to happen when you trade material goods at a regular price [i.e., with little margin, if at all]. Then you may share/trade this new amount of information with someone else, and so on. Contrary to what the SIIA says, the whole society benefits from having lots of ideas and information running around freely, instead of having only a few wealthy research groups being able to afford such information.
Therefore, a society has no interest in creating a market of science or information based on shortage of the "goods". Sure, it takes effort and money to produce that information, and yes, these should be rewarded as well. But creating a shortage of information to enforce an oligopoly, which seems to be the aim of SIIA, may have dramatic consequences on the economy of a society, and even for the SIIA itself. When tolls are instated for the exchange of information and ideas, the whole process of research and creation will be badly hampered. Scientific breakthroughs will be fewer and farther between. And foreign nations and societies might know better...
I think the whole idea of having the people pay for access to knowledge (and I mean paying obscene amounts of money, like for a scholarship in the US -- not paying the basic costs of teaching and rewarding the research of scientists) is a handicap for a society. The more people have access to knowledge, the more likely someone is to come up with a brilliant idea. And no, being able to afford a Harvard scholarship does not mean you are a genius. To me, having the State pay for making scientific information freely available, is something that the whole socitey benefits from in the long term.
However, having people pay for access to information seems to be a general trend these days. Oh, well...
Also pay a visit to the telecom museum, located in the main antenna basement (that huuuuuge white balloon that can be seen miles around). I think there's also a planetarium nearby.
Beautiful place (I've lived in the area, I'm intending to go back there within a few months...)
[Sorry, can't mod this up, I'm still a greenhorn in Slashdot land. I'd have modded it as "interesting" if I could.]
I don't think the question is whether or not "the people" want to "pirate" music. Even the term "pirating" is very much dependent on the status that a code of laws (or a society) gives to an immaterial good such as music. What are the rules for sharing/distributing that music ? What are the rights of the end-user ? What are the rights of the performer/musician ? The rights of RIAA members are written in the law, whereas the rights of consumers are not !
Basically, what gets on my nerves is that some people still consider the US as the greatest achievement in terms of democracy, and a government by the people, for the people. This is ridiculous. Let's face it : currently, the easiest way to pass a law is to buy a congressman. The higher the bid, the easier it is. Which makes corporations and/or rich lobbying groups the de facto lawmakers in the US. A fine lobbycracy you're living in !
Of course, you might say that consumer associations could also gather to defend their point of view, using the same lobbying weapons. But how can a consumer association, the funding of which relies on the donations of its members, ever compare with a group of corporations in terms of funding ? I mean, you really have to afford to pay those lawyers and to fund those congressmen !
How come there are no controls on the fundings of campaigns for congressmen / senators ? What amendments could possibly enhance the way the interests of people are represented in those houses ? This is waaaaaay off-topic, but it might be a start for a reflection on how to avoid having big corporations dictating their laws on consumers.
Not everybody is using Hotmail or MSN. Alternative solutions to MS Passport or "Palladium" exist, supported by big brands such as Sun, Oracle and so on. Why would everybody suddenly turn to an all-M$ solution ?
Besides, that "Palladium" thing is still a long way down the road : no release before 2006 AFAIK. Right now, there are plenty of governments and organizations that are considering migrating part or all of their administration to Linux or other open-source based solutions, one of the main reasons being (surprise !) the openness of those products and the availability of the source code.
This means that they have weighed in all the involved costs (migration, maintenance, training and so on), and they are not likely to go backwards to a proprietary M$ solution in 5 years (which would involve another heap of money for training, data migration, etc.)
Since M$ is not going to release any major rework of its flagship OS for the next 5 years or so, I see a chance for Linux and other free software OSes to dramatically increase their respective user bases in the meantime. And if the users turn out to be major organizations / administrations / companies, they will be in a position to negociate an open-source (or at least, much less restrictive) alternative to M$ Palladium from the contents providers / secured businesses they might have to deal with.
Has anyone got any tips as to which standard might be implemented on those newly allocated UHF channels ?
In Europe we would surely have settled for DVB-T (digital video broadcasting, terrestrial) which allows for IP networking up to a rate of 25 Mbps per UHF channel. I do not know whether the US equivalent for that kind of networking (ATSC Terrestrial Data Broadcasting, same principle) would allow such rates.
Actually, last time I heard of general performance for ATSC terrestrial broadcasting, it did pretty poorly compared with is european (DVB-T) and asian (ISDB-T, thebroadcasting equivalent of ISDN) counterparts. Or would they settle of some 802.11x variant ? Or some 3G-CDMA standard ?
I'd like to know how the whole matter will turn out...
If used well the patent could be a good thing, it could prevent any closed source implementations of the technology.
Well, certainly, and I wish the patents on free software could only be used this way. I also think the people in SELinux believed it was the best thing to do, and they may actually have filed the patent with such thoughts on their minds.
However, since software companies come and go, since a patent is to be accounted as part of the goods owned by a company, who is to guarantee that the owner of SELinux won't change ? Who is to guarantee that once the patents are transferred to another company, the attitude of the new owner won't bet totally opposite ?
This, along with the RedHat patents in the Linux Kernel, rises a series of good questions:
how are those patents going to benefit the companies that filed them ? It's mainly a closed-source word out there, how are they to prove that a competitor used the same technology in a closed-source product ?
it does not appear to harm the free software community for the moment, but what later ? What if those components are no longer distributed under a free license ? SE Linux raises the problem with the explicit mention being removed from their pages, as mentionned by LWN.
isn't it just a problem with the US patent office, who are overloaded with work, who do not always check the validity of a patent with regards to prior art, and the US legal system which allows lawyers of big companies to blackmail and racket smaller companies on unfair patent claims ? See this site which refers to a previous/. post on the subject. I personnaly think that kind of situation is an incentive for RedHat and SELinux to spend big bucks on patents.
I clearly don't see the free software community benefiting from this situation. Individual programmers will have to face both the possiblity that a rogue company sues them unfairly for patent infringement, and the possibility that another company, owning patents on parts of free software, changes its attitude towards the GPL and decides to un-GPL their code and go proprietary.
Say "thanks" to US lawyers and Powers That Be for allowing that nightmare to come true.
Well, same for me. However, I'm wondering if there is a clear correspondance between the kinds of music that sell less than expected and the kinds of music that are actually downloaded and burnt on CDs. What I mean is that the RIAA probably expects some types of artists to produce hits, yet they fail to do so, and nobody even cares to download their junk ; and others are expected to sell just fairly well, but they may really produce big hits on P2P networks.
So, is there a correlation between the kinds of music that fail to sell as expected and the kinds of music that are massively downloaded ?
We seriously lack solid figures on these points, both due to the fact that expected sales figures are confidential marketing data, and P2P traffic is everything but public and official.
And your average congressperson will (probably) just listen to the RIAA drivel and vote the Hollings Bills as they are told, which won't help.
Never EVER allow sloppy work to ever become acceptable. and anything that is IE specific is sloppy work.
That's right, but this is also probably due to the fact that lots of web developers use FrontPage x.xx or any such poor HTML code-producing tool because of their power and ease of use. Once again, are there a whole lot of affordable tools that could be widely used, producing really standard code, with the required ease of use ?
This is where Mozilla, IMHO, has a lead to take : the Composer tool, which comes in handy to edit single HTML pages, should have more features developped, allowing it to manage entire web projects. Come to think of it : this is already a powerful tool; enabling it to handle several files, to have a nice IDE for JScript/ECMAScript, and (which I would really appreciate) a set of HTML/webpage templates, would make it an excellent alternative to other IE-friendly-crappy-code-producing tools. Of course, this is another whole load of work...
Just my 0.02 euros anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Right now in France, we're struggling against a Thatcherization of the economy and of social conditions. Yeah, call us strike-prone, lazy, cheese-eating surrendering monkeys if you like (though this sounds more like US neocon drivel), but this is a battle I'm not willing to lose. And it looks like if we lose this battle, the French Socialist Party won't be any more help than the Labour is at the moment in the UK...
Cheers
CNN ? Isn't this the news outlet that had us believe that Saddam hid WMDs in his garage ?
"Comin' up soon on CNN : the weather forecasts, with severe frost expected in Hell; and a special report from ButtFuck, OH, where our cameramen caught pictures of pigs flying around."
Sounds more like mustard to me. YMMV.
(Bangs at the door)
Lady (opening) : - Yes ?
Employee : - Hello, Ma'am. We're from the FooBar Air Company. Our company has bribed your governor into selling the air of this state to F.A.C. for distribution. You have to subscribe for our service. We have all the air-o-meters needed for you, your family, your pets, your cars and your fireplace.
Lady : -Uh, well...
Employee : - Please sign here.
Lady : - OK. Here you are... Hey, what are you dommflfff muflmufl !...
Employee (fitting a mask with an air-meter on the lady's face) - Sorry Ma'am, these are our orders : customers must use our air-o-meter as soon as their subscription starts.
(A few months later)
Employee : Hello Ma'am, we noticed that you have not paid for your subscription last month. We have to suspend it until you have paid the bill. (Goes around the house and turns knobs off everywhere on every mask and air-o-meter, with a special key. People collapse to the floor after suffocating for a while. Before leaving, he tells them :) Be assured that we will resume our service as soon as we have received the payment. Do not hesitate to call us for any details. Bye-bye !
Employee (to his fellow) : See, Jim, this is what I like in this job : be strict on the rules, but keep the customer satified.
Aaah, the joys of free market applied to public utilities...
About time they realized their place in the world.
Actually, getting rid as well of corrupt/fanatical christianism (particularly, but not only, rabid baptist protestants) would also probably make the world a better place. That would at least avoid us wars declared on the basis of the lame, ignorant, simple-minded "Good vs. Evil" argument.
This humble opinion comes from somebody who's sick and tired of having a sluggish Mandrake distro on his AMD Atlon. And don't tell me about Gentoo : I don't have a fast network connnection anyway, which pretty much rules it out.
You actually made an excellent point. One should wonder, given the potential influence that the average geek may have on average Joe's computer-related buyings, whether some marketing types have decided to target them instead of directly targeting Joe Sixpack, and turn on the Linux spin.
A geek does not necessarily influence a buyer on the operating system he is going to choose, but he can certainly recommend not to buy such and such hardware brand because they are reluctant to give away their specifications to free OS developers -- just in case Joe gets tired of Windows and wants to use Linux or *BSD instead on the machine.
Sure you can, and there's very little chance that MS sues you for using only one pirated copy of their software. But no everyone is as computer-savvy as you, and yet lots of people would like to get rid of that overpriced licensing model. I think the argument at stake, here, is the cost of software for businesses. When the cost of software is skyrocketing thanks to the so-called "Software Assurance", many businesses can't cope (particularly in these hard times).
And since MS and their BSA minions will certainly not hesitate to sue a business who is using a few copies of pirated software, they certainly can't afford that option either. So they have to find something else.
Finally, this article says a lot about how shallow the "Total Cost of Ownership" arguments were when comparing proprietary software and free software. Facts show that many managers (and maybe even some pointy-haired ones) are no longer afraid to move from an MS-Office document management system to an OpenOffice-powered system, for instance.
When you trade or sell regular goods to somebody, there is a real trade : goods for money or other goods. Whatever the material goods, when you've sold it or traded it, it is no longer yours and you may no longer benefit from it. Therefore, there is an interest in creating a market economy based on shortage of goods -- which is what capitalism is based upon, and which appears (so far) to be sustainable : the society as a whole does not suffer too much from that shortage, given that prices tend to regulate through the demand and supply mechanisms.
On the other hand, when you trade ideas or informations with somebody, or when you teach him/her a new skill, you *still* have the skill/idea/information that you have just given to your partner. Even if your partner has nothing to trade for this information, you still have that information and you can continue to benefit from it ; you do not end up "poorer" than before the exchange, contrary to what may happen with material goods. Actually, if you trade an information for another, you end up being *wealthier* than before, which is not likely to happen when you trade material goods at a regular price [i.e., with little margin, if at all]. Then you may share/trade this new amount of information with someone else, and so on. Contrary to what the SIIA says, the whole society benefits from having lots of ideas and information running around freely, instead of having only a few wealthy research groups being able to afford such information.
Therefore, a society has no interest in creating a market of science or information based on shortage of the "goods". Sure, it takes effort and money to produce that information, and yes, these should be rewarded as well. But creating a shortage of information to enforce an oligopoly, which seems to be the aim of SIIA, may have dramatic consequences on the economy of a society, and even for the SIIA itself. When tolls are instated for the exchange of information and ideas, the whole process of research and creation will be badly hampered. Scientific breakthroughs will be fewer and farther between. And foreign nations and societies might know better...
I think the whole idea of having the people pay for access to knowledge (and I mean paying obscene amounts of money, like for a scholarship in the US -- not paying the basic costs of teaching and rewarding the research of scientists) is a handicap for a society. The more people have access to knowledge, the more likely someone is to come up with a brilliant idea. And no, being able to afford a Harvard scholarship does not mean you are a genius. To me, having the State pay for making scientific information freely available, is something that the whole socitey benefits from in the long term.
However, having people pay for access to information seems to be a general trend these days. Oh, well...
Also pay a visit to the telecom museum, located in the main antenna basement (that huuuuuge white balloon that can be seen miles around). I think there's also a planetarium nearby. Beautiful place (I've lived in the area, I'm intending to go back there within a few months...)
I don't think the question is whether or not "the people" want to "pirate" music. Even the term "pirating" is very much dependent on the status that a code of laws (or a society) gives to an immaterial good such as music. What are the rules for sharing/distributing that music ? What are the rights of the end-user ? What are the rights of the performer/musician ? The rights of RIAA members are written in the law, whereas the rights of consumers are not !
Basically, what gets on my nerves is that some people still consider the US as the greatest achievement in terms of democracy, and a government by the people, for the people. This is ridiculous. Let's face it : currently, the easiest way to pass a law is to buy a congressman. The higher the bid, the easier it is. Which makes corporations and/or rich lobbying groups the de facto lawmakers in the US. A fine lobbycracy you're living in !
Of course, you might say that consumer associations could also gather to defend their point of view, using the same lobbying weapons. But how can a consumer association, the funding of which relies on the donations of its members, ever compare with a group of corporations in terms of funding ? I mean, you really have to afford to pay those lawyers and to fund those congressmen !
How come there are no controls on the fundings of campaigns for congressmen / senators ? What amendments could possibly enhance the way the interests of people are represented in those houses ? This is waaaaaay off-topic, but it might be a start for a reflection on how to avoid having big corporations dictating their laws on consumers.
This means that they have weighed in all the involved costs (migration, maintenance, training and so on), and they are not likely to go backwards to a proprietary M$ solution in 5 years (which would involve another heap of money for training, data migration, etc.)
Since M$ is not going to release any major rework of its flagship OS for the next 5 years or so, I see a chance for Linux and other free software OSes to dramatically increase their respective user bases in the meantime. And if the users turn out to be major organizations / administrations / companies, they will be in a position to negociate an open-source (or at least, much less restrictive) alternative to M$ Palladium from the contents providers / secured businesses they might have to deal with.
Just my 0.02 euros anyway...
In Europe we would surely have settled for DVB-T (digital video broadcasting, terrestrial) which allows for IP networking up to a rate of 25 Mbps per UHF channel. I do not know whether the US equivalent for that kind of networking (ATSC Terrestrial Data Broadcasting, same principle) would allow such rates.
Actually, last time I heard of general performance for ATSC terrestrial broadcasting, it did pretty poorly compared with is european (DVB-T) and asian (ISDB-T, thebroadcasting equivalent of ISDN) counterparts. Or would they settle of some 802.11x variant ? Or some 3G-CDMA standard ?
I'd like to know how the whole matter will turn out...
Well, certainly, and I wish the patents on free software could only be used this way. I also think the people in SELinux believed it was the best thing to do, and they may actually have filed the patent with such thoughts on their minds.
However, since software companies come and go, since a patent is to be accounted as part of the goods owned by a company, who is to guarantee that the owner of SELinux won't change ? Who is to guarantee that once the patents are transferred to another company, the attitude of the new owner won't bet totally opposite ?
That's a risky bet...
- how are those patents going to benefit the companies that filed them ? It's mainly a closed-source word out there, how are they to prove that a competitor used the same technology in a closed-source product ?
- it does not appear to harm the free software community for the moment, but what later ? What if those components are no longer distributed under a free license ? SE Linux raises the problem with the explicit mention being removed from their pages, as mentionned by LWN.
- isn't it just a problem with the US patent office, who are overloaded with work, who do not always check the validity of a patent with regards to prior art, and the US legal system which allows lawyers of big companies to blackmail and racket smaller companies on unfair patent claims ? See this site which refers to a previous
/. post on the subject. I personnaly think that kind of situation is an incentive for RedHat and SELinux to spend big bucks on patents.
I clearly don't see the free software community benefiting from this situation. Individual programmers will have to face both the possiblity that a rogue company sues them unfairly for patent infringement, and the possibility that another company, owning patents on parts of free software, changes its attitude towards the GPL and decides to un-GPL their code and go proprietary.Say "thanks" to US lawyers and Powers That Be for allowing that nightmare to come true.
So, is there a correlation between the kinds of music that fail to sell as expected and the kinds of music that are massively downloaded ?
We seriously lack solid figures on these points, both due to the fact that expected sales figures are confidential marketing data, and P2P traffic is everything but public and official.
And your average congressperson will (probably) just listen to the RIAA drivel and vote the Hollings Bills as they are told, which won't help.
This is where Mozilla, IMHO, has a lead to take : the Composer tool, which comes in handy to edit single HTML pages, should have more features developped, allowing it to manage entire web projects. Come to think of it : this is already a powerful tool; enabling it to handle several files, to have a nice IDE for JScript/ECMAScript, and (which I would really appreciate) a set of HTML/webpage templates, would make it an excellent alternative to other IE-friendly-crappy-code-producing tools. Of course, this is another whole load of work...
Just my 0.02 euros anyway.