It is obvious that there is no way to make "slashdot-terminal" smarter by argument. Signal-to-noise is getting worse and worse because this imbecile has the ability to infuriate ppl with ridiculous lines of argument.
Best thing is to handle this the way you handle a child's tantrum: let "slashdot-terminal" (how pretentious! and the.sig! oh dear...) have some quiet time alone, for starters.
I am a former Rogers @Home customer. I know of more than one incident in Vancouver where DoS attacks were traced to @Home users locally but nothing was done about the abuse. They (Rogers@Home) are simply clueless about their responsibility to deal with service problems, and of course Rogers' customer service in general has always left a lot to be desired.
The only thing that is going to smarten them up is if they have to surrender their monopoly on "internet on cable", or if DSL providers achieve credibility and pricing parity. So far, it is more difficult to get DSL in most areas than it is to get @Home or other cable modem services.
I don't think the problem is that there are too many users on @Home, or that the company is naive about their responsibilities on the net. I think the problem is that the companies involved have made a decision to restrict the amount of service that they are going to provide. Long waits on support lines are not an accident, the company has calculated how much they can spend on phone support employees if they want to achieve profit margin x. I do know for certain that Rogers dispatches their installers on a strict time-and-motion-study basis: something like "If you can't make the hardware installation work in 12.5 minutes, leave anyway". My guess is that the same applies to complaints about DoS, SPAM, etc.: they don't want to spend the money that it would take for them to become a better net citizen, and so far nobody has forced them to rethink.
Yes, well said. My intent really was to expand on what you were saying, not try to argue against it.
In the long view, historical events tend to change their meaning, so in some ways "positive" and "negative" impacts of historical figures and events tend to change. Bloodthirsty rebels become saintly freedom fighters, dictators become "statesmen" or "nation-builders", important technological or economic advances become overshadowed, etc. I mean, i haven't seen Charles Lindbergh on any of these lists, at least not that I can remember...
Not to say that abuses of human rights, genocide, slavery, aren't just plain wrong, but that views of history have a way of ignoring these things when some other aspect of a life or event becomes more relevant to current beliefs and events.
OK, most influential people of the century? Of course, history is not really immutable, it is of a different shape, form and consistency depending upon the position of the observer (geographic, economic, and of course the era the observer is living in.) So "newsmaker of the century" could be Hitler, sure - it could also be Churchill, who arguably changed the course of history by galvanizing Britain. It could also be Mao Zedong, who took a backward, chaotic China and gave it a rebirth as a world power. Ten years ago many people might have chosen Gorbachev. And then there are the many names from science, or the arts and culture...
All of this is to say that in spite of this well-written appreciation of George Marshall, there is no right answer.
OK, to clarify: the quote in the.sig is from a translation of Marx's essay "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon".
So, I guess it should say "Marx says somewhere 'Hegel says somewhere that great historic facts and personages recur twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.' but Marx did not forget to add that phrase as you can see here." -me
Well, there is Amnesty International, to name a prominent example of non-nationals attempting to sway government officials and policy-makers. They are certainly others as well - European groups have been very influential in North American policies affecting forestry and commercial hunting.
So, you're right, a politician's immediate concern is the people who get them elected. However, this doesn't mean that they can't be influenced by voices on the other side of the world, given the right conditions.
Falsifying your city of residence or nationality is no way to advance a cause you believe in. If you think that the national policy level is a good place to promote OSS (note this is an "if" - there is bound to be a spectrum of opinions on whether this is strategically/ethically right), then go ahead, make your best arguments to whoever will listen.
--
Re:Frankenstein was published in 1831...
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for posting this! As someone who has done a lot of reading of Mary Shelley, I find it quite annoying that her best-known book receives such shallow readings. Ppl who don't want to really _read_ the thing (like all of those who talk about Adam Smith, Marx, Freud without ever bothering to consult the texts - this means 90% of the ones who will eagerly enter into a heated discussion of the merits and failings of each) always want it to be about a "scientist playing God". In fact, looking closely at the narrative, it is not exactly clear that the monster even exists - Victor only ever speaks to the monster when nobody else is around, and aside from the polar explorer who open and closes the narrative, there are no accounts by anyone in the story of actually having seen the monster. Rather than Victor's "creation" the monster is to some extent Victor's alter ego in the original text.
Also, Victor is not a "scientist" - he is rather identified as a "natural philosopher". So, the monster is unleashed not by technology, but by ideas. There are some critics who have gone as far as to say the monster is the French Revolution. His intellectual curiosity and the sympathy he expresses toward Goethe's Werther seem to place him in the company of several late-Romantic thinkers and poseurs.
Katz is supposed to be a journalist, right? A professional? Can't he be bothered to read the books he refers to? (On the other hand, that's typical of a professional journalist - laziness when it comes to facts and independent thought.)
I remember about 10 years ago seeing an advertisement for a steam iron made in the PRC - the slogan was "The best necessary". Get it? You could get a decadent, Western iron with a lot of flashy features, but you really don't need it. Buy our domestic product instead, it is good enough for what you need, and doesn't add complexity.
Although there are lots of things wrong with the PRC (hard to even know where to start that list), this utilitarian, practical approach has served them well in industry (imagine if all of China had the same wasteful manufacturing and consumption practices as the West - disaster!). So it is not surprising that they would "officially" adopt an OS that is inexpensive, utilitarian, and not ostentatious or bloated.
Also, my guess is that this will not dent in any way the MS market penetration is Asia, since such a big part of it is due to bootleggers.
The difference between the US and Canada in the telecom and cable fields has partly to do with the history of telecommunications policy. I think for most of this century, Canadians valued telecommunications more highly than Americans did (doesn't seem possible, does it).
The first Broadcasting Act (1920s? 30s?) said that the "National" broadcasting system would be responsible for providing service to the entire nation. It is not clear in the Act whether the CBC=="national broadcasting system" or whether the CBC is just one part of it, and I believe this lack of clarity has persisted. The CBC does have those millions of repeaters in remote villages though.
This policy environment was probably at least partly responsible for stimulating the academic debates that resulted in the work of communication theorists like Innis (and later, McLuhan). Innis in particular was able to see a centre vs. hinterlands communications environment, one of the touchstones of his work, developing in front of his eyes.
Given the immense distances between population centres (and a lack of suitable land lines, and the availability of some ready cash from governments), Canada was an early adopter of satellite and microwave-repeater technologies and played a key role in telecom development (at least a role out of proportion to Canada's economic and population status).
When cable became a viable technology in the early 70's, cable companies were set up as government-mandated monopolies. The philosophy at this time was still that anything that arrived in your house via a pipe or wire should be regarded as a "natural monopoly", because any other way of handling it would just be too difficult to manage.
The original Canadian cable monopolies were mostly small, and mostly confined to one city or a clearly defined portion of a city. This led to rapid availability of the service - nobody could get the monopoly for an area unless they made a guarantee that they would deliver the service more or less uniformly across that region. Having made the initial investment in dishes, wires, and other hardware, the companies also had to build their customer base quickly, so "free" services such as premium movie channels or late night soft porn were available in some areas. Households with cable quickly climbed to over 70% in urban areas.
What the regulators and policy-makers either didn't foresee (or weren't bothered about) was the rapid (over the period of ten years or so) accumulation of smaller cable companies in the hands of huge media companies like Rogers and Maclean-Hunter (Shaw, as far as I know, wasn't really huge until a bit later on). The broadcast regulators seem instead to have spent most of their energy in wringing their hands over their failure to foster a domestic television and radio production industry. Every new service which has been added to cable since the early 80's - pay channels, packages of specialty channels, pay-per-view - has been implemented with assurances that it would somehow benefit film and television production in Canada. Some of these efforts have been unconditional failures (the pay-tv service called "C-channel" in the early 80s); others have been mild successes (the demand for animation from Canadian studios has arguably increased, and the markets for those studios' products may have widened).
Given the wide adoption of cable and the fact that it is controlled by a very few companies, Canada was able to deliver cable modems to consumers very quickly and relatively cheaply, in spite of a late start relative to the US. The telcos, which had been dragging their feet in bringing ADSL to consumers. Given the fact that the "old" telcos were few in number and were accustomed to collaborating on and setting national standards, ADSL's availability around urban switches was good - once they made up their minds to deliver it.
Since the telcos were forewarned that local service was going to be opened up to competition, they started a furious program of developing premium services, and ADSL was on this list. The services themselves are useless for retaining customers unless the customers adopt them, so between the initial planning stages and the actual public availability of ADSL, the price kept dropping and dropping, and believe is still dropping. Rogers, Shaw, et al would have beens tupid not to see that coming, so they adjusted the rates for their cable modem service. Now both sit at around the same level in most locales, about 1.5 to 2x the cost of an unlimited dialup account with an ISP.
True to form, the delivery of "broadband" to consumers in Canada has resulted in a lot of homes being wired, but most of the content going to those homes is from the US. The banks, retail businesses, and media outlets in Canada have all dragged their feet where the internet is concerned (even while some of them have been spending enormous sums on it). The old (70s/80s/90s) strategy of taxing the delivery services to fund domestic content, or regulating the percentage of Canadian-produced content in a particular medium, just will not work in the current net environment (if they could ever have been said to have "worked").
I assume that my version of history has some good holes in it too. But that's the view from the clouds.
Is it just me? Somehow I can't help but visualize something that looks a lot like Gerry Anderson's Fireball XL5 - a rocket-aided launch of an aerodynimcally-shaped spacecraft from a track (although the track would have to be a bit more vertical).
Maybe somebody could start designing a prototype of Captain Steve Zodiac's space scooter as well.
"Fall of the nation State" has to go in the same bin with "end of the decadent monarchies" (circa 1900 - 1910). The death of the nation-state is a philosophical death, like the end of modernism or the death of painting or the death of rock and roll. The nation-state has certainly lost its reason for existence and its vitality as a concept. This doesn't mean that nation-states will cease to exist any more than monarchies ceased to exist after WW1, or rock and roll ceased to exist after the Sex Pistols. It does mean that something else will become more relevant to world politics, although it is not yet clear what this will be - competing distributed oligarchies?
Expect commercially viable (i.e. good price point) petrochemical-based fuel cells to replace diesel in commercial transportation soon (next 2-5 years). This will make a small dent in the deplection of fossil fuels, but more importantly will introduce technologies which will make it easier to deploy industrial-quality engines using alternative fuel sources.
This is possibly not all that exciting as fuel cell technology has been touted since at least the 1970s, but it will pave the way for other, more gee-whiz tech to be used in transportation and HVAC...
I seem to recall from a long-ago lecture that a series of studies had suggested that information conveyed to the eyes by reflected light (as in reading paper) was retained differently from information conveyed to the eyes by direct light (as in television or rear-projection slide screens). Subjectively, I would say that although it is easy to take in ideas from a monitor screen, it is nearly impossible to proofread or copy-edit.
The source of the study? Couldn't tell you. Although I do think there is something like this cited in Jerry Mander's book.
(Sorry to use Amazon link, I was in too much of a hurry to go digging for something more informative.)
I'm also worried about people possibly getting stuck inside one of those sidewalk chalk drawings when it starts to rain, or not being able to get down from the ceiling after a laughing fit. Why are these possible crises not being addressed in the media?
There is pretty good evidence that same-sex preferences are "natural" for individuals across several species. Of course, medical science is likely to view a lot of things as disorders - witness the first edition of DSM, which noted a "runaway slave disorder" as a legitimate mental illness definition. Or the speech therapists who "cured" a friend of mine of his Louisiana accent at age eight. Or the number of surgeries, electroshock therapies, etc., which have been administered to make individual appearances and behaviours less "unnatural" and disturbing.
My recommendation: get therapy. You have a mental illness, xenophobia. It's not natural. You yourself know that something is wrong with you, as you have taken steps to conceal it. Let's pray for a cure soon!
Did I say "hey hotmail users, stop reading Wired News because I said so!"? Nope. I did say that I couldn't believe someone would use them as an authoritative source. For most things, they aren't - like most internet news sites, they are picking up what is published elsewhere and regurgitating it. For a casual read this is OK. However, if you want to see material written by people who specialize in a subject (like recent issues with Apple hardware/software), this is easy to do on the internet. So if you need an authoritative source, there is not much of an excuse for not going and finding one.
It appears to be related to one version of the Open Firmware on blue&white G3s, so not all of them were shipped with the block (however, all of them were shipped with a sticker on the motherboard which has to be removed to upgrade the processor: "removal voids warranty" - kind of like the "no user serviceable parts inside", this sort of thing has never stopped me before).
Also a recent Open Firmware flasher that apple distributed apparently installs the block if used.
So, what is required is another update to the machine's OF to remove the block. My guess is that the upgrade card manufacturers already know how to do this, as they have done private demos and have announced their products publicly. The only question for them to address is the legality of the OF update. (well, I guess stability as well...)
I can't believe that/. uses wired news as an authoritative source! Come on guys! That's like getting your international news from Reader's Digest!
Same passage, english to portuguese then portuguese to english:
== The features of Subnetting de IPv4 had not very offered with the options and the choice regarding the attribution of the IP address, the allocation, or networking in the general. E when Subnetting the network (the subdivision of
The IP address of the network of the father) alliviated congestion, since that profits of the performance, and improved management. Needless to say, these were certainly significant benefits for the starts groping. Still,
fêz nothing not to magnify the number of addresses of the IP for the allocation to establish a new network, that is, offers one another exterior connection: the network of the father. However, it supplied the IETF with a foundation, if explored, would prevent the one necessity urgency promoted by the explosive growth, to execute a project directing itself new of the IP.
== Hmm, that's not really all that different from the original...
Slashdot Mirror
Best thing is to handle this the way you handle a child's tantrum: let "slashdot-terminal" (how pretentious! and the .sig! oh dear ...) have some quiet time alone, for starters.
The only thing that is going to smarten them up is if they have to surrender their monopoly on "internet on cable", or if DSL providers achieve credibility and pricing parity. So far, it is more difficult to get DSL in most areas than it is to get @Home or other cable modem services.
I don't think the problem is that there are too many users on @Home, or that the company is naive about their responsibilities on the net. I think the problem is that the companies involved have made a decision to restrict the amount of service that they are going to provide. Long waits on support lines are not an accident, the company has calculated how much they can spend on phone support employees if they want to achieve profit margin x. I do know for certain that Rogers dispatches their installers on a strict time-and-motion-study basis: something like "If you can't make the hardware installation work in 12.5 minutes, leave anyway". My guess is that the same applies to complaints about DoS, SPAM, etc.: they don't want to spend the money that it would take for them to become a better net citizen, and so far nobody has forced them to rethink.
So far they lack Quicken and on-line brokerage, but more than make up for it in quality of service, low fees, and ethical business practices.
In the long view, historical events tend to change their meaning, so in some ways "positive" and "negative" impacts of historical figures and events tend to change. Bloodthirsty rebels become saintly freedom fighters, dictators become "statesmen" or "nation-builders", important technological or economic advances become overshadowed, etc. I mean, i haven't seen Charles Lindbergh on any of these lists, at least not that I can remember ...
Not to say that abuses of human rights, genocide, slavery, aren't just plain wrong, but that views of history have a way of ignoring these things when some other aspect of a life or event becomes more relevant to current beliefs and events.
All of this is to say that in spite of this well-written appreciation of George Marshall, there is no right answer.
So keep on arguing.
OK, to clarify: the quote in the .sig is from a translation of Marx's essay "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon".
So, I guess it should say "Marx says somewhere 'Hegel says somewhere that great historic facts and personages recur twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.' but Marx did not forget to add that phrase as you can see here." -me
Happy?
--
So, you're right, a politician's immediate concern is the people who get them elected. However, this doesn't mean that they can't be influenced by voices on the other side of the world, given the right conditions.
Falsifying your city of residence or nationality is no way to advance a cause you believe in. If you think that the national policy level is a good place to promote OSS (note this is an "if" - there is bound to be a spectrum of opinions on whether this is strategically/ethically right), then go ahead, make your best arguments to whoever will listen.
--
Also, Victor is not a "scientist" - he is rather identified as a "natural philosopher". So, the monster is unleashed not by technology, but by ideas. There are some critics who have gone as far as to say the monster is the French Revolution. His intellectual curiosity and the sympathy he expresses toward Goethe's Werther seem to place him in the company of several late-Romantic thinkers and poseurs.
Katz is supposed to be a journalist, right? A professional? Can't he be bothered to read the books he refers to? (On the other hand, that's typical of a professional journalist - laziness when it comes to facts and independent thought.)
--
If you want an opinion on that - http://www.amnestyusa.org/rightsf orall/index.html.
--
I remember about 10 years ago seeing an advertisement for a steam iron made in the PRC - the slogan was "The best necessary". Get it? You could get a decadent, Western iron with a lot of flashy features, but you really don't need it. Buy our domestic product instead, it is good enough for what you need, and doesn't add complexity.
Although there are lots of things wrong with the PRC (hard to even know where to start that list), this utilitarian, practical approach has served them well in industry (imagine if all of China had the same wasteful manufacturing and consumption practices as the West - disaster!). So it is not surprising that they would "officially" adopt an OS that is inexpensive, utilitarian, and not ostentatious or bloated.
Also, my guess is that this will not dent in any way the MS market penetration is Asia, since such a big part of it is due to bootleggers.
--
Vancouver also has a big dope problem.
His name is Phillip Owen.
--
Yes, but it's a dry cold.
I have heard that one so many times from Albertans that I think they should make it their tourism slogan.
--
The first Broadcasting Act (1920s? 30s?) said that the "National" broadcasting system would be responsible for providing service to the entire nation. It is not clear in the Act whether the CBC=="national broadcasting system" or whether the CBC is just one part of it, and I believe this lack of clarity has persisted. The CBC does have those millions of repeaters in remote villages though.
This policy environment was probably at least partly responsible for stimulating the academic debates that resulted in the work of communication theorists like Innis (and later, McLuhan). Innis in particular was able to see a centre vs. hinterlands communications environment, one of the touchstones of his work, developing in front of his eyes.
Given the immense distances between population centres (and a lack of suitable land lines, and the availability of some ready cash from governments), Canada was an early adopter of satellite and microwave-repeater technologies and played a key role in telecom development (at least a role out of proportion to Canada's economic and population status).
When cable became a viable technology in the early 70's, cable companies were set up as government-mandated monopolies. The philosophy at this time was still that anything that arrived in your house via a pipe or wire should be regarded as a "natural monopoly", because any other way of handling it would just be too difficult to manage.
The original Canadian cable monopolies were mostly small, and mostly confined to one city or a clearly defined portion of a city. This led to rapid availability of the service - nobody could get the monopoly for an area unless they made a guarantee that they would deliver the service more or less uniformly across that region. Having made the initial investment in dishes, wires, and other hardware, the companies also had to build their customer base quickly, so "free" services such as premium movie channels or late night soft porn were available in some areas. Households with cable quickly climbed to over 70% in urban areas.
What the regulators and policy-makers either didn't foresee (or weren't bothered about) was the rapid (over the period of ten years or so) accumulation of smaller cable companies in the hands of huge media companies like Rogers and Maclean-Hunter (Shaw, as far as I know, wasn't really huge until a bit later on). The broadcast regulators seem instead to have spent most of their energy in wringing their hands over their failure to foster a domestic television and radio production industry. Every new service which has been added to cable since the early 80's - pay channels, packages of specialty channels, pay-per-view - has been implemented with assurances that it would somehow benefit film and television production in Canada. Some of these efforts have been unconditional failures (the pay-tv service called "C-channel" in the early 80s); others have been mild successes (the demand for animation from Canadian studios has arguably increased, and the markets for those studios' products may have widened).
Given the wide adoption of cable and the fact that it is controlled by a very few companies, Canada was able to deliver cable modems to consumers very quickly and relatively cheaply, in spite of a late start relative to the US. The telcos, which had been dragging their feet in bringing ADSL to consumers. Given the fact that the "old" telcos were few in number and were accustomed to collaborating on and setting national standards, ADSL's availability around urban switches was good - once they made up their minds to deliver it.
Since the telcos were forewarned that local service was going to be opened up to competition, they started a furious program of developing premium services, and ADSL was on this list. The services themselves are useless for retaining customers unless the customers adopt them, so between the initial planning stages and the actual public availability of ADSL, the price kept dropping and dropping, and believe is still dropping. Rogers, Shaw, et al would have beens tupid not to see that coming, so they adjusted the rates for their cable modem service. Now both sit at around the same level in most locales, about 1.5 to 2x the cost of an unlimited dialup account with an ISP.
True to form, the delivery of "broadband" to consumers in Canada has resulted in a lot of homes being wired, but most of the content going to those homes is from the US. The banks, retail businesses, and media outlets in Canada have all dragged their feet where the internet is concerned (even while some of them have been spending enormous sums on it). The old (70s/80s/90s) strategy of taxing the delivery services to fund domestic content, or regulating the percentage of Canadian-produced content in a particular medium, just will not work in the current net environment (if they could ever have been said to have "worked").
I assume that my version of history has some good holes in it too. But that's the view from the clouds.
--
Maybe somebody could start designing a prototype of Captain Steve Zodiac's space scooter as well.
--
"Fall of the nation State" has to go in the same bin with "end of the decadent monarchies" (circa 1900 - 1910). The death of the nation-state is a philosophical death, like the end of modernism or the death of painting or the death of rock and roll. The nation-state has certainly lost its reason for existence and its vitality as a concept. This doesn't mean that nation-states will cease to exist any more than monarchies ceased to exist after WW1, or rock and roll ceased to exist after the Sex Pistols. It does mean that something else will become more relevant to world politics, although it is not yet clear what this will be - competing distributed oligarchies?
--
This is possibly not all that exciting as fuel cell technology has been touted since at least the 1970s, but it will pave the way for other, more gee-whiz tech to be used in transportation and HVAC ...
--
The source of the study? Couldn't tell you. Although I do think there is something like this cited in Jerry Mander's book.
(Sorry to use Amazon link, I was in too much of a hurry to go digging for something more informative.)
--
I'm also worried about people possibly getting stuck inside one of those sidewalk chalk drawings when it starts to rain, or not being able to get down from the ceiling after a laughing fit. Why are these possible crises not being addressed in the media?
--
Is that something that happens when a sports bra is on too tight?
--
How about a revival of Space 1999! Even better series than Voyager!
--
There is pretty good evidence that same-sex preferences are "natural" for individuals across several species. Of course, medical science is likely to view a lot of things as disorders - witness the first edition of DSM, which noted a "runaway slave disorder" as a legitimate mental illness definition. Or the speech therapists who "cured" a friend of mine of his Louisiana accent at age eight. Or the number of surgeries, electroshock therapies, etc., which have been administered to make individual appearances and behaviours less "unnatural" and disturbing.
My recommendation: get therapy. You have a mental illness, xenophobia. It's not natural. You yourself know that something is wrong with you, as you have taken steps to conceal it. Let's pray for a cure soon!
--
... when I read that "forewire is going to be cut". Not sure why.
--
Did I say "hey hotmail users, stop reading Wired News because I said so!"? Nope. I did say that I couldn't believe someone would use them as an authoritative source. For most things, they aren't - like most internet news sites, they are picking up what is published elsewhere and regurgitating it. For a casual read this is OK. However, if you want to see material written by people who specialize in a subject (like recent issues with Apple hardware/software), this is easy to do on the internet. So if you need an authoritative source, there is not much of an excuse for not going and finding one.
--
It appears to be related to one version of the Open Firmware on blue&white G3s, so not all of them were shipped with the block (however, all of them were shipped with a sticker on the motherboard which has to be removed to upgrade the processor: "removal voids warranty" - kind of like the "no user serviceable parts inside", this sort of thing has never stopped me before).
...)
/. uses wired news as an authoritative source! Come on guys! That's like getting your international news from Reader's Digest!
Also a recent Open Firmware flasher that apple distributed apparently installs the block if used.
So, what is required is another update to the machine's OF to remove the block. My guess is that the upgrade card manufacturers already know how to do this, as they have done private demos and have announced their products publicly. The only question for them to address is the legality of the OF update. (well, I guess stability as well
I can't believe that
--
Same passage, english to portuguese then portuguese to english:
...
==
The features of Subnetting de IPv4 had not very offered with the options and the
choice regarding the attribution of the IP address, the allocation, or networking in
the general. E when Subnetting the network (the subdivision of
The IP address of the network of the father) alliviated congestion, since that profits
of the performance, and improved management. Needless to say, these were
certainly significant benefits for the starts groping. Still,
fêz nothing not to magnify the number of addresses of the IP for the allocation to
establish a new network, that is, offers one another exterior connection: the
network of the father. However, it supplied the IETF with a foundation, if explored,
would prevent the one necessity urgency promoted by the explosive growth, to
execute a project directing itself new of the IP.
==
Hmm, that's not really all that different from the original
--