Just for the record, in the US you don't actually have the right to copy CD's borrowed from the library. You can copy a portion for a research paper, etc, but copying the whole CD moves back outside of "fair use".
The RIAA is not taking collective action, #1. It is suing a bunch of individuals. Unless the RIAA's targets all have a single hive mind (and are not just like-minded), SPEWS targets the collective infinitely worse than the RIAA.
It is using the civil legal system alone. This is not reaching beyond its boundaries #2. Everyday you wake up you are both subject to, and protected by this, assuming you live in the US of course. That is also a personal choice, living in the US that is, just like being on the internet and having mail.
Entering of property does not come into this. The location of the deed is not an issue. The RIAA is using resources it owns (its lawyers) to do everything it can to protect what it perceives as its interests. Just like you do with your blacklist. And both will sometimes hurt innocent people.
I'm in no way saying the RIAA is right, just calling out this blantant hypocrisy.
P.S. I have never been on any blacklist (that I know of or that has prevented me from doing my business) nor am I in danger of being sued by the RIAA. I'm just an interested observer calling it as I see it.
If I leave a relay that I am responsible for open, but don't actually do the spamming, why should I be held responsible? I didn't spam anyone, why are you blocking me?
Oh, collateral damage is acceptable and good?
If I leave a network that I am responsible for open for content sharing, but don't actually share anything personally, why should I be held responsible? I didn't share anything, why are you suing me?
Oh, collateral damage is acceptable and good?
Damn, some people want it both ways. Seems to me, if you back SPEWS you should back the RIAA in this case. Conversely, if you don't believe in this kind of accountability, you shouldn't be backing SPEWS. Same damn thing, except the RIAA might actually let you negotiate.
That post could definitely use a summary and some links.
I of course have heard about such studies, but never an independent one funded by someone with nothing to prove. I want a LONG term study. Follow some young people from early adolesence until adulthood. Let them play games as they are normally inclined to do. Run all the brain tests one does for alcoholism, schizophrenia, etc both while they are playing, after the stop, and periodically at random and compare to the control group. Do that many times throughout their life then report the results. Sure it will take a long time, but it will actually be useful and conclusive for once.
Why do I think games are possibly different? They are the first truly interactive medium. You participate. You do and not just watch. Do I claim to know that that means anything? No. But I don't think anyone can claim, at this point anyway, it doesn't make a difference either.
I am just willing to accept that games might be able to affect the brain. How and how much is what I want to know. Can they possibly: 1) Reduce inhibitions? 2) Induce a trance-like state? 3) Induce a schizophrenic-like state? 4) Induce a bipolar-like state? 5) Etc.
Until we have conclusive evidence, and I think it will be possible to come up with this evidence, I don't like it that everyone jumps to conclusions. As was said, most of these articles offer anecdotal evidence at best. I just want some facts and until I get them my mind is open to all possibilities.
Hi Mike Hawk here again to take a deep breath and not tow the party line.
I'm not concerned about violent video games today. I'm not even concerned about violence.
So the point of this post then... What I am concerned about is our (slashdot, gamespy, the video game industry) response. IMMEDIATELY everyone has come out to say that no way video games had a part in this. My problem is, while instinct goes along way, we are not studying this enough for a possible correlation. I mean, if a kid shoots a truck to complete a goal in GTA:VC, then grabs his buddy and goes outside and shoots at trucks, noone considers it even within the realm of possibility than there was some slight connection? But then again, I'm not saying that post hoc ergo proctor hoc either. I'd just like an intelligent discussion on the issue rather than knee-jerk from both sides as we traditionally get here. I'd also like to see a serious independent study on the issue. I'd like to see how the brain reacts during and after playing the most violent games over an extended period. An increase in emotional release during gameplay is good; an extended tendancy toward release after play has ended and the real world has begun could be bad.
What are my solutions? I'd don't pretend to offer any. Do I think we should ban them altogether? Hell no, this is America dag nab it. Do I think we could restrict purchase to those over 18 as we do pornography? Thats again a little knee-jerk for me at this point, though there is no downside to anyone but the Entertainment Software Association and its members. (Keep your "slippery slope" and 1st amendment arguements to yourself, we already do this with porn in America and there have been no conclusive studies about that either.) Can we do nothing? I guess, until it is your kid (or you) that takes it in the chest.
I'd just like more real knowledge and less instinct running around here.
Sure there is a rep on the boards. But just for appearances one would hope.
In my entire history of gaming and the internet, I've never seen a random forum suggestion get put into a retail game AND the result being something better that it already was.
Very simply, if you put a PR guy in charge of your forums, make him a community yes man. "Uh-huh, we are also concerned about that". "Thats a good idea." "We are definitely exploring that."
If the fan(boy)base was that adept at creating something, they would be industry and not the fanbase.
Disclaimer: Personally, I don't buy or infringe music because I don't find the medium very entertaining.
Many posters here have argued that they share files because the RIAA member's business model is outdated. There have been arguements that one shares files because the money from your CD purchase does not go to the artist. Basically, this hypothetical is for anyone who is arguing they share because it is the right thing to do.
Here it is: Imagine a system in which the artist negotiated directly with an online distributor to give them copyright. This distributor then would post the song for sale on their site for a nominal fee. No new rights would be created for the end-user, however.
(Yeah, I know this sounds alot like Apple's system and others, but with the important difference in artist direct involvement and no RIAA in the picture at any stage.)
This seems to get all the "evil corporation" stuff out of the picture leaving the relationship up to the artist to decide. If this all came to pass, would you stop sharing?
If not, is there a viable system to profit the artist that would convince you to cease copyright infringement?
it's like the PI gathering the information and then bringing charges himself.
Actually since these would be lawsuits rather than criminal charges, your analogy is more perfect than you know. A PI might be hired to follow a spouse around to find out if that spouse is cheating and under what circumstances. He would follow the suspected party around in public places, watch for any routines, and keep a log. The PI might even stage a p2p (face-to-face rather than over a network, of course) meeting to gather other information. The information then gathered could be used to sue for divorce under more favorable terms.
That's pretty much what happened here. Just substitute filesharer information for spouse information.
Actually, you should probably recalculate those numbers assuming a standard connection coming out of a university. I'd imagine their up would blow away a cable modem.
play games that look marginally better than GBA games
Alright, I've had just about enough of the untruths flying around here. Pre-hate if you must, but please be accurate. Here is the GBA version of THPS:GBA
C'mon folks, you don't have to like it, but at least be honest. The GBA version is barely the same game while the N-Gage version is exactly the same as the original.
Someone keeps modding me down for not towing the party line here, but its clear this device is not going to do well, so why keep lying about it?
I also played it. My impression could not have been farther from yours.
It was pushing smooth frame rates of Playstation quality graphics. Maybe you weren't playing an N-Gage? What game were you playing? I saw Tomb Raider and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater running flawlessly. Maybe you were looking at some screenshots and mistook them for video?
joeldg wrote: Have you seen the stats? 90% of slashdot users use windows or mac's..
Not saying that nobody here is a tech, but honestly, the majority are actually not really techs.
Then in his next post wrote: on a linux-centric site...
I shouldn't have to.
Co-publish with Lucasarts. Clearly the Star Wars IP is still owned by Lucas. They have to "co-publish" with Activision because Lucasarts wants to work with Ravensoft on the Jedi Knight games and Raven is owned by Activision. There is no grounds to sue, as it would appear Lucas has not even licensed Activision anything in this case.
Please mod parent "Unlikely hypothetical karma-whoring".
You wouldnt? I definitely wouldn't want to be in your circle of friends.
If one of my friend's PCs go down. I fix it for free.
If my car breaks down my mechanic friend would put in a new engine if necessary. Free, provided I help him with stuff like lifting and moving the transmission.
If I need something notarized: free. The notary in the group hooks it up.
If I need something special for my phone service, the telco buddy is over within a week and will do a custom job. Gratis.
Someone is working in retail or at a restaurant? Employee discount for sure. No more of course, we still pay, but they hook up whatever they are allowed.
And on and on.
Its not like we are a fraternity or some messed-up artificial construct. We are friends from HS or jobs or wherever that have stayed in touch. Friends should help friends. If that annoys you, I don't even know what to say. Hell, if my buddy needs 10 bucks I give it to him, not even a loan. I know he'll do 10 bucks worth of something for me some day. Try to relax and not always see life in terms of $$$.
You know, in those terms, fixing or setting up a PC seems like a small price to pay for the better of all.
impel
tr.v. impelled, impelling, impels
To urge to action through moral pressure; drive: I was impelled by events to take a stand.
To drive forward; propel.
If I may, not because I am a naysayer, but because I care about the Consitution and want to protect what it really says. When someone misquotes or misunderstands it that hurts everyone.
Ex post facto in the Constitution refers strictly to criminal law. Congress can't make something illegal now and go back and prosecute people for it. They can't add new punishment for people who already did something. Etc.
This is not really criminal law so they can constitutionally do this. Just like they could retroactively raise tuition fees or taxes, etc.
For the record it was those very 1.99 games that killed your so called "golden age". The market got saturated with crap-ware, the bottom dropped out of the prices, the bubble burst.
All the measures taken by Sony and MS were invented by Nintendo for the NES to protect against this exact thing from happening again.
Actually its pretty far-fetched to assume they shared information too. Belonging to a small group whose sole goal everyday is to survive tends to discourage helping the competition. And yes, other groups of humans would have been competition.
But hey, it made for good copy and karma right?
I'll definitely give you the first two, plus or minus 5%.
The last one, however, is not at issue at work. Unless you are the type that actually enjoys harassment suits.
Clearly, you don't get it in the way to which I was referring. Your boy Miyamoto #1 has not been directly involved with the development of a game since the SNES days and #2 no longer gets it. The "IT" that I am referring to here, is that what the typical US gamer wants is different than what the typical Japanese gamer wants. And again, thats ok. What I am interested in is that Sega realizes this and is trying to cope.
Nintendo may come around yet, but they are living in 1989 when they had monopoly power and thus could do no wrong. We have since seen the light. I prefer games that use more than one big green button.
We're actively developing our business overseas, of course. The North American marketplace, especially, is twice the size of Japan's. The first fundamental of our overseas strategy is: if the title's meant for North America, then it's Americans that make it. There will always be a culture barrier that we can't completely bury. For example, Japanese people wouldn't understand what a player should say when he's tackled in a football game.
OMFG! Someone over there gets it. I'd expect no less from the Japanese company founded by an American.
See, all joking about Nintendo aside, they don't make things with Americans in mind. They make products, then decide what the Americans are likely to buy. And that is why they are increasingly niche in this country. (Ok fanboys, please notice increasingly, compare the NES to today...) See, when they made the NES, it was designed largely by Nintendo of America. It was significantly different from the Famicom because the markets are significantly different. Today there is no difference between a Japanese and an American Gamecube outside of region encoding. The result? The Gamecube is a non-standard size and does not fit in the standard American entertainment unit slot. And thats just one example, but it isn't my main point in this post...
I'm concerned because he ackowledges the differences and explains Sega's solution (different developers for different regions as appropriate), but goes back on it when talking about simpler gameplay. The thing is, the numbers indicate Americans want more complex gameplay. A sampling from the PS2 SCEA greatest hits list:
THPS3
Metal Gear Solid 2
WWE Smackdown
SOCOM
Max Payne
NBA 2k2
NFL 2k2
Grand Theft Auto 3
Not a dance title in the bunch. Sure there are a few examples of Japanese style games in the whole list, but these are really the exception that proves the rule. The fact is, that as the American mainstream embraces gaming more and more, the Japanese and American markets are becoming more different than ever. And thats ok. I just hope Sega and Nintendo and the others can learn to embrace it like Konami has (they make MGS even though it only ever does well Stateside) and target completely different games for the two completely different audiences.
One wouldn't expect the games on the list above to do well in Japan, why does one expect that their games will go over well with the US mainstream? Sure Nintendo will always have its fans. And thats ok. But if they want to hit the mainstream, they might want to consider thinking different.
And stinkier. It sounds like a good idea until you experience every tech guy in the building sweating profusely. Its not pretty.
Though I am lucky in that we have a gym nearby, so I actually do go outside to play (footy, not basketball), this is not as easy as you make it out to be.
Chance of offending someone with your odor after playing Quake...less than 10%.
Slashdot Mirror
I gotta agree with you. The piss-poor parallels, hypotheticals, and anecdotes show how poorly the issue is understood on both sides.
Just for the record, in the US you don't actually have the right to copy CD's borrowed from the library. You can copy a portion for a research paper, etc, but copying the whole CD moves back outside of "fair use".
Not my opinion, but thats the rules as they are.
The RIAA is not taking collective action, #1. It is suing a bunch of individuals. Unless the RIAA's targets all have a single hive mind (and are not just like-minded), SPEWS targets the collective infinitely worse than the RIAA.
It is using the civil legal system alone. This is not reaching beyond its boundaries #2. Everyday you wake up you are both subject to, and protected by this, assuming you live in the US of course. That is also a personal choice, living in the US that is, just like being on the internet and having mail.
Entering of property does not come into this. The location of the deed is not an issue. The RIAA is using resources it owns (its lawyers) to do everything it can to protect what it perceives as its interests. Just like you do with your blacklist. And both will sometimes hurt innocent people.
I'm in no way saying the RIAA is right, just calling out this blantant hypocrisy.
P.S. I have never been on any blacklist (that I know of or that has prevented me from doing my business) nor am I in danger of being sued by the RIAA. I'm just an interested observer calling it as I see it.
If I leave a relay that I am responsible for open, but don't actually do the spamming, why should I be held responsible? I didn't spam anyone, why are you blocking me?
Oh, collateral damage is acceptable and good?
If I leave a network that I am responsible for open for content sharing, but don't actually share anything personally, why should I be held responsible? I didn't share anything, why are you suing me?
Oh, collateral damage is acceptable and good?
Damn, some people want it both ways. Seems to me, if you back SPEWS you should back the RIAA in this case. Conversely, if you don't believe in this kind of accountability, you shouldn't be backing SPEWS. Same damn thing, except the RIAA might actually let you negotiate.
That post could definitely use a summary and some links.
I of course have heard about such studies, but never an independent one funded by someone with nothing to prove.
I want a LONG term study. Follow some young people from early adolesence until adulthood. Let them play games as they are normally inclined to do. Run all the brain tests one does for alcoholism, schizophrenia, etc both while they are playing, after the stop, and periodically at random and compare to the control group. Do that many times throughout their life then report the results. Sure it will take a long time, but it will actually be useful and conclusive for once.
Why do I think games are possibly different? They are the first truly interactive medium. You participate. You do and not just watch. Do I claim to know that that means anything? No. But I don't think anyone can claim, at this point anyway, it doesn't make a difference either.
I am just willing to accept that games might be able to affect the brain. How and how much is what I want to know. Can they possibly:
1) Reduce inhibitions?
2) Induce a trance-like state?
3) Induce a schizophrenic-like state?
4) Induce a bipolar-like state?
5) Etc.
Until we have conclusive evidence, and I think it will be possible to come up with this evidence, I don't like it that everyone jumps to conclusions. As was said, most of these articles offer anecdotal evidence at best. I just want some facts and until I get them my mind is open to all possibilities.
Hi Mike Hawk here again to take a deep breath and not tow the party line.
I'm not concerned about violent video games today. I'm not even concerned about violence.
So the point of this post then...
What I am concerned about is our (slashdot, gamespy, the video game industry) response. IMMEDIATELY everyone has come out to say that no way video games had a part in this. My problem is, while instinct goes along way, we are not studying this enough for a possible correlation. I mean, if a kid shoots a truck to complete a goal in GTA:VC, then grabs his buddy and goes outside and shoots at trucks, noone considers it even within the realm of possibility than there was some slight connection?
But then again, I'm not saying that post hoc ergo proctor hoc either. I'd just like an intelligent discussion on the issue rather than knee-jerk from both sides as we traditionally get here.
I'd also like to see a serious independent study on the issue. I'd like to see how the brain reacts during and after playing the most violent games over an extended period. An increase in emotional release during gameplay is good; an extended tendancy toward release after play has ended and the real world has begun could be bad.
What are my solutions? I'd don't pretend to offer any. Do I think we should ban them altogether? Hell no, this is America dag nab it. Do I think we could restrict purchase to those over 18 as we do pornography? Thats again a little knee-jerk for me at this point, though there is no downside to anyone but the Entertainment Software Association and its members. (Keep your "slippery slope" and 1st amendment arguements to yourself, we already do this with porn in America and there have been no conclusive studies about that either.) Can we do nothing? I guess, until it is your kid (or you) that takes it in the chest.
I'd just like more real knowledge and less instinct running around here.
Sure there is a rep on the boards. But just for appearances one would hope.
In my entire history of gaming and the internet, I've never seen a random forum suggestion get put into a retail game AND the result being something better that it already was.
Very simply, if you put a PR guy in charge of your forums, make him a community yes man. "Uh-huh, we are also concerned about that". "Thats a good idea." "We are definitely exploring that."
If the fan(boy)base was that adept at creating something, they would be industry and not the fanbase.
Disclaimer: Personally, I don't buy or infringe music because I don't find the medium very entertaining. Many posters here have argued that they share files because the RIAA member's business model is outdated. There have been arguements that one shares files because the money from your CD purchase does not go to the artist. Basically, this hypothetical is for anyone who is arguing they share because it is the right thing to do. Here it is: Imagine a system in which the artist negotiated directly with an online distributor to give them copyright. This distributor then would post the song for sale on their site for a nominal fee. No new rights would be created for the end-user, however. (Yeah, I know this sounds alot like Apple's system and others, but with the important difference in artist direct involvement and no RIAA in the picture at any stage.) This seems to get all the "evil corporation" stuff out of the picture leaving the relationship up to the artist to decide. If this all came to pass, would you stop sharing? If not, is there a viable system to profit the artist that would convince you to cease copyright infringement?
it's like the PI gathering the information and then bringing charges himself. Actually since these would be lawsuits rather than criminal charges, your analogy is more perfect than you know. A PI might be hired to follow a spouse around to find out if that spouse is cheating and under what circumstances. He would follow the suspected party around in public places, watch for any routines, and keep a log. The PI might even stage a p2p (face-to-face rather than over a network, of course) meeting to gather other information. The information then gathered could be used to sue for divorce under more favorable terms. That's pretty much what happened here. Just substitute filesharer information for spouse information.
Actually, you should probably recalculate those numbers assuming a standard connection coming out of a university. I'd imagine their up would blow away a cable modem.
play games that look marginally better than GBA games
Alright, I've had just about enough of the untruths flying around here. Pre-hate if you must, but please be accurate.
Here is the GBA version of THPS:GBA
And here is the N-Gage version:N-Gage
C'mon folks, you don't have to like it, but at least be honest. The GBA version is barely the same game while the N-Gage version is exactly the same as the original.
Someone keeps modding me down for not towing the party line here, but its clear this device is not going to do well, so why keep lying about it?
I also played it. My impression could not have been farther from yours.
It was pushing smooth frame rates of Playstation quality graphics. Maybe you weren't playing an N-Gage? What game were you playing? I saw Tomb Raider and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater running flawlessly. Maybe you were looking at some screenshots and mistook them for video?
I just had to point this out:
..
Not saying that nobody here is a tech, but honestly, the majority are actually not really techs.
joeldg wrote:
Have you seen the stats? 90% of slashdot users use windows or mac's
Then in his next post wrote:
on a linux-centric site... I shouldn't have to.
Genious!
Co-publish with Lucasarts. Clearly the Star Wars IP is still owned by Lucas. They have to "co-publish" with Activision because Lucasarts wants to work with Ravensoft on the Jedi Knight games and Raven is owned by Activision. There is no grounds to sue, as it would appear Lucas has not even licensed Activision anything in this case. Please mod parent "Unlikely hypothetical karma-whoring".
Isn't the tradition to complain about the "hype" surrounding a game before its release?
Once again, on slashdot, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
You wouldnt? I definitely wouldn't want to be in your circle of friends.
If one of my friend's PCs go down. I fix it for free.
If my car breaks down my mechanic friend would put in a new engine if necessary. Free, provided I help him with stuff like lifting and moving the transmission.
If I need something notarized: free. The notary in the group hooks it up.
If I need something special for my phone service, the telco buddy is over within a week and will do a custom job. Gratis.
Someone is working in retail or at a restaurant? Employee discount for sure. No more of course, we still pay, but they hook up whatever they are allowed.
And on and on.
Its not like we are a fraternity or some messed-up artificial construct. We are friends from HS or jobs or wherever that have stayed in touch. Friends should help friends. If that annoys you, I don't even know what to say. Hell, if my buddy needs 10 bucks I give it to him, not even a loan. I know he'll do 10 bucks worth of something for me some day. Try to relax and not always see life in terms of $$$.
You know, in those terms, fixing or setting up a PC seems like a small price to pay for the better of all.
impel
:)
tr.v. impelled, impelling, impels
To urge to action through moral pressure; drive:
I was impelled by events to take a stand.
To drive forward; propel.
I am Jack's redudant vocabulary.
If I may, not because I am a naysayer, but because I care about the Consitution and want to protect what it really says. When someone misquotes or misunderstands it that hurts everyone.
Ex post facto in the Constitution refers strictly to criminal law. Congress can't make something illegal now and go back and prosecute people for it. They can't add new punishment for people who already did something. Etc.
This is not really criminal law so they can constitutionally do this. Just like they could retroactively raise tuition fees or taxes, etc.
For the record it was those very 1.99 games that killed your so called "golden age". The market got saturated with crap-ware, the bottom dropped out of the prices, the bubble burst.
All the measures taken by Sony and MS were invented by Nintendo for the NES to protect against this exact thing from happening again.
I am not from either YSA, but I'll way in.
To which YSA re you referring? Youth Service America or The Young Scientists of Australia.
Maybe you should lay off the haterade and preview your post before you look silly again.
Actually its pretty far-fetched to assume they shared information too. Belonging to a small group whose sole goal everyday is to survive tends to discourage helping the competition. And yes, other groups of humans would have been competition. But hey, it made for good copy and karma right?
I'll definitely give you the first two, plus or minus 5%. The last one, however, is not at issue at work. Unless you are the type that actually enjoys harassment suits.
Clearly, you don't get it in the way to which I was referring. Your boy Miyamoto #1 has not been directly involved with the development of a game since the SNES days and #2 no longer gets it. The "IT" that I am referring to here, is that what the typical US gamer wants is different than what the typical Japanese gamer wants. And again, thats ok. What I am interested in is that Sega realizes this and is trying to cope.
Nintendo may come around yet, but they are living in 1989 when they had monopoly power and thus could do no wrong. We have since seen the light. I prefer games that use more than one big green button.
We're actively developing our business overseas, of course. The North American marketplace, especially, is twice the size of Japan's. The first fundamental of our overseas strategy is: if the title's meant for North America, then it's Americans that make it. There will always be a culture barrier that we can't completely bury. For example, Japanese people wouldn't understand what a player should say when he's tackled in a football game.
OMFG! Someone over there gets it. I'd expect no less from the Japanese company founded by an American.
See, all joking about Nintendo aside, they don't make things with Americans in mind. They make products, then decide what the Americans are likely to buy. And that is why they are increasingly niche in this country. (Ok fanboys, please notice increasingly, compare the NES to today...) See, when they made the NES, it was designed largely by Nintendo of America. It was significantly different from the Famicom because the markets are significantly different. Today there is no difference between a Japanese and an American Gamecube outside of region encoding. The result? The Gamecube is a non-standard size and does not fit in the standard American entertainment unit slot. And thats just one example, but it isn't my main point in this post...
I'm concerned because he ackowledges the differences and explains Sega's solution (different developers for different regions as appropriate), but goes back on it when talking about simpler gameplay. The thing is, the numbers indicate Americans want more complex gameplay. A sampling from the PS2 SCEA greatest hits list:
THPS3
Metal Gear Solid 2
WWE Smackdown
SOCOM
Max Payne
NBA 2k2
NFL 2k2
Grand Theft Auto 3
Not a dance title in the bunch. Sure there are a few examples of Japanese style games in the whole list, but these are really the exception that proves the rule. The fact is, that as the American mainstream embraces gaming more and more, the Japanese and American markets are becoming more different than ever. And thats ok. I just hope Sega and Nintendo and the others can learn to embrace it like Konami has (they make MGS even though it only ever does well Stateside) and target completely different games for the two completely different audiences.
One wouldn't expect the games on the list above to do well in Japan, why does one expect that their games will go over well with the US mainstream? Sure Nintendo will always have its fans. And thats ok. But if they want to hit the mainstream, they might want to consider thinking different.
And stinkier. It sounds like a good idea until you experience every tech guy in the building sweating profusely. Its not pretty. Though I am lucky in that we have a gym nearby, so I actually do go outside to play (footy, not basketball), this is not as easy as you make it out to be.
Chance of offending someone with your odor after playing Quake...less than 10%.