If they ban only the ones who practice constitutionally protected rights, I am equally outraged.
You see, the difference between banning strip clubs in general and only "Crazy Jack's lady emporium" is that in one, it is an across the board ban based on community standard or whatever they are using to justify the ban not related to the expression of first amendment rights, the other is singling a specific business out because of first amendment expression and religious freedom.
Without this distinction, then any government entity could ban or use the public infrastructure to interfere with the business of anyone who supports another candidate for office or a position that the political officer doesn't like. Would you find it equally tolerable if the mayor of New York banned Amazon or Starbucks (amazon's founder donates 2.5 million to defend Washington's gay marriage law, Starbucks says on their web page they support gay marriage and some are trying to create a gay starbucks appreciation day) from doing business there because they support rewriting marriage laws to allow gays to marry? That's a more appropriate comparison to what these mayors are doing and it is a matter of the first amendment and a government punishing specific companies based on their or their owner's expression of it. It is simply wrong whether you agree on the message or not.
Alcohol sales is a bit different because the repeal of prohibition specifically gives the states explicit control over alcohol which would allow them to limit the amount of bars and or times alcohol sales could happen in certain areas.
I'm not sure if he is discounting probes that sort of die on impact or not. In fact, I'm not even sure what countries have visited other planets outside of Russia which I think has an orbiter and the EU who crashed one.
HA,, they haven't even released information about the shooter and you know it was a right winger.
I was just talking with someone earlier today who is convinced that Obama and company would stage some some terrorist attack so he could use it as an excuse to get reelected like Bush did and possibly take out guns.
I guess he wasn't off- Right wing domestic terrorist...lol
Speaking of commentators, is anyone else annoyed at the NASA commentator?
They were giving the location of the landing and she cut in blabbing about something in the middle of them saying how far off their initial expected landing point was. I think they were saying it was just a couple meters which is outstanding considering the distance involved and the ability or chances to stray slightly in the process.
I mean I'm watching the NASA feed in order to hear all the details. If I cared about someone's comments, I would wait until some news agency did a write up on it. They should have shut the hell up while they were reading the results of the different stages off.
I don't know. I guess when you have democrat mayors so easily making statements of their intentions to use the government and public resources around them to economically harm a corporation because of free of speech by the CEO of a company made in a personal manner, you tend to think there are some people who will use information they do not agree with against you in ways that are not only unethical but illegal as well.
You are right, what part of freedom is that? But we were reminded recently of it so it is a concern.
You could argue that a member of the political party who is currently serving in the government who is seeking reelection is the government. Isn't that what is happening?
Why would you say tea party nut? You do realize the last several shooting incidents were most likely people who would vote democrat right? They also were somewhat crazy and probably never connected their political ideology with their desire to kill people.
It's interesting, I was just thinking- so now I know how to find out who all is voting for the other guy without drawing attention to myself.
Not that I would ever do anything to harm them or anything. But if I decide I don't want Bill's lawn service taking care of my lawn because he is a democrat, I don't need to sign for a big list at some government office and suffer people wondering why I want it. Come to think about it, there are a lot of performance reviews coming up, perhaps I can show some people how evil big corporation really can be.
Note: I am not over anyone who doesn't already think like me. There is absolutely no chance I could economically harm anyone with this information, But others could. Kind of really creepy isn't it.. lol
I could have swore that some time around 2000 a hard drive went out and they found the backups only contained parts of the database. This would be about the time they moved the servers to California. They recovered the articles but not the comments and a lot of users had to do a password reset
But I can't seem to find one article about it. I thought there was a mention to it in the fact page on slashdot even but I can't find it now either.
Well, I've always said it is hard to hate hog. Especially when it's slow smoke roasted until it pulls apart with ease and put in a sandwich bun smothered with creamy coleslaw with some sweet pork and beans on the side.
7th day Adventist aren't completely vegan. They allow dairy products and fish.
Their health probably is more related to inclusions in and other factors of their diet rather then their limits on meat. For instance, the bread needs to be made from whole grain flour, not just wheat flower. Instead of drinking fruit juices, they encourage it's consumption of the whole fruit instead. They limit fats and oils and attempt to get it from nuts instead. They shy away from fried foods, eat a lot in the morning. less at lunch, and even less at dinner. They avoid alcohol, sweets, and stimulants like caffeine.
One of the benefits of meat is a B vitamin. I forget exactly which is it, but it is difficult to get it strictly through vegan foods.
I used to run around with a vegan who about once a year or so went to get a b12 shot at the doctors. You could see a noticeable difference in how perky she was, how energetic and so on after getting the shot. I guess vegan foods have this vitamin but it either isn't in a high enough concentration or if in a form that is difficult for the body to take advantage of.
It could be that she wasn't smart enough to get a complete diet. You should have seen the look on her face when I explained what Jell-O really was. But my understanding is that a lot of strict vegans has that issue too.
I'm glad your imagination is working. I'm also glad you reached the mental wherewithal to post something about it instead of sitting in your mom's basement all day playing extreme candyland- the shoots and ladders edition.
Let me explain something, this is a lot like memory for the computer. You know, that thing that allows you to surf porn and post remarks to show the world your lack of intelligence. If the power fails, the reason your Asian babes with porcupines page disappears and needs reloaded when the computer restarts is because it is part of a memory that needs a constant voltage to maintain it's condition. Much like a fully functioning brain, we can measure that voltage and even monitor activity. Now there is another type of memory, this type of memory hard codes the information until it is manipulated again which is why you computer can restart and load the operating system in the first place. In both scenarios, when the power is gone, you get the appearance of nothing and when the power is on, you get activity that can be measured. However, even if the information is still there, it cannot be perceived as being there.
So is the consciousness random access memory that disappears with a power failure, or one that remains except that you know it because the monitor was damaged in the power outage? Should I automatically assume the computer is dead and throw it away, or should I look at it to see if there is another way to access the information- perhaps with a new monitor.
Now go back to thinking about your animal feces and what that means to you and let the adults talk for a bit.
Forgive me if I do not spend much time arguing with idiots to scared to log in from an account that might be traceable to them in some way.
But you and the GP aren't adding anything of value either. i'm sort of glad too, because from both your attempts at posting so far, it appears we all would be more dumb after reading it if you did.
As I said, everything is everything... the "problem" with that is, it doesn't make much sense to speak of individuality then, either.
I'm not sure why you would think that, even everything will have parts of the collective that might need identified. The every thing is everything should be everything is everything that functions.
My point was, even though everything that can be learned about neurology seems to utterly destroy most notions we have about ourselves and our decisions, we still have them. We go further and further away from just being, and coming up with objecties and properties to "possess", and "narratives" and all that nonsense. So yeah, let's ponder our mortality. I have great trust we won't fatfinger it. We already applied our rational brain to economics and politics, let's do this now.
Are you suggesting we should stop trying to learn?
what you're implying is that the gray matter is possibly a connector to some nether-ether-heaven-whatever-bunch soul system. well, that's all and good but there's nothing to prove that. 5 million dollars thrown into that isn't going to change that, people have spent very, very, very long time trying to prove otherwise already without any success.
No, I am implying that we do not know how the conscious works and it can be the part of other organs or collective intelligence of the individual cells or groups of them acting as a whole that make up the body in it's entirety. People have spent a very long time trying to prove the moon landings are faked too. The difference is that technology has progressed and our understanding has progressed and it will not hurt anything if we take another look at it. It may even benefit victims of brain trauma if we find the conscious is still there and we can access it differently only through the damaged brain matter.
if your body(brain) ceases to exist you're dead. however "you" can still have an effect on the world after that through having put into motion events that will roll out after you're dead, most common case is that you had inspired or affected someones life before dying, in some way you're still giving out a message. now it's debatable if your personality could be simulated to some extent after you're dead would that mean that "you" are still alive("uploading yourself to the net", "ai clone", etc bullshit) - however this debate needs zero amount of money to progress currently and it's a purely philosophical question for the foreseeable future(one of the aims of the study is to find out just this. well fuck you don't need 5 mil to find out that you can't do it now nor with any tech we currently can foresee being a practicality even).
Are you upset because someone is spending money on science you will not participate in or the possibility that they might find something more to death then now your gone? It seems to me that those objecting to this are somehow connecting it to a spirit or soul and appear threatened that someone might look into the reality of it.
doesn't mean that you wouldn't be dead though. this is a stupid victorian mumbo-jumbo mysticism study - furthermore it's ran by liars and it's done solely to pump out money out of a foundation created for pro-theology reasons.
Yep, thought so. You are scared they might find something that would completely disprove your view in religion or science and that you might have made the wrong decisions in life.
It doesn't matter if they are liars, the point of science is finding facts, not supporting false claims. If they make inaccurate claims, it will be disproved by other testing or stand on it's merits. That is how science works.
Well, yes? If you write a text file, save it locally, and then destroy harddrive, CPU and RAM Chips, that text file is pretty much gone.
If you arrange a bunch of sticks in a pattern, and then destroy the sticks, and/or disperse them -- where has the pattern gone?
Nobody would even ask that. But that's because we don't care about a bunch of squiggly lines formed by sticks on some beach in the middle of nowhere, do we. But when that own personality is that pattern, ohhhh, it's such a mystery, where does that pattern go... it has to go somewhere...
If you start from the assumption that the conscious is only what the brain can muster, this makes sense. If you however question if the conscious is something beyond the brain or still resident in the brain, and seek to find if it is limited to the brain, then it doesn't. I seriously do not understand the hostility in looking or trying to find out. It is not like you have something to lose do you?
The question of course is, is this applicable to the consciousness... I dunno. And even if it is, do we want to apply it? Personally, I (think I) know for a fact that everything is everything, that nothing we do will change the outcome, which will be nothing/everything, and that free will may very well be a complete illusion. I (think I) know that, but I consider it more noble to pretend otherwise. I have no arguments for this, I just do. It beats the alternative; Nietzsche warned of nihilism for a reason, it sucks:P Though of course there is another way to look at it, too:
Well, not asking the question is the best way to not have it answered. As for free will, even if it is an illusion, it is sufficient as you get to ask and answer you own question of meaning.
But while I'm rambling: What I wonder about is *real* AI. Since the 90's I'm waiting, I'm convinced that actual AI wouldn't do squat, since thorough computations would show the end result to be the same, heat death of the universe. So yeah, we could build this city and then wait until it decays, or we could just not bother. Kinda like Marvin from HGttG, but without the pain in the diodes and nagging ^^
But of course, we'll create it in our own image, so that won't happen, it will happily slave on, like a dog that never gets tired of fetching stick. Then we'll start to worship it, because it's bigger than us individually, just like we already worship the herd. It will be great:/
That would be my logical conclusion. It solves the problem of low numbers of Linux on the desktop. Allows them to build to a specific hardware set that if the source is shared will allow the bulk of the work for other distributions to be handled by the community or the distros themselves. I understand that most of the code will be written to hardware intermediates like OpenGL and such but drivers for such hardware can creep issues in sometimes.
If they can produce something relatively cheap compared with a phone or something, they would be in a lot of homes in no time.
Sure it is pretty extreme, but it was a person who said it as a person, not a CEO as he was representing the company's views. Now I understand you cannot totally divorce the views of a company's CEO, but it is being over played here concerning the company's involvement. That's all I was saying.
I guess you are missing the question. Even if you cut out part of the brain, are you removing part of the consciousness or the ability to express it. In other words, if someone steals your Cell Phone and you have no other way of getting a message out, does that mean the message disappears. And with that scenario, it could be that the message is just as important and will wait until you find another way of conveying it or it might not be longer relevant and not need conveyed at all.
Well, I never thought they were all conspiring together anyway, so I guess you were objecting to something that wasn't in my words either. I guess we have a mutual failure of reading comprehension. That said, there is a readily identifiable group with a given pattern of behavior that I have observed, whose arguments tend to follow in particular directions regarding this situation. If you haven't noticed, maybe you need to pay more attention.
Fair enough.
But you're manufacturing a hypocrisy where there is none. You're seeing something that isn't there, except by your own false warping of the views of the people who want equal treatment. Which you try to treat as bigoted because we want ourselves to be accepted, and not to be oppressed? You must think we're morons to not recognize how you're ignoring the one side to attack the other.
I'm not manufacturing it, I'm pointing it out. The parent said those claiming to be tolerant need to be tolerant. You, well, I can't be certain it was you because you haven't logged in with an account that can reference your input to, said it was ok to be interlocutor with those you expect to be tolerant. That is hypocrisy whether you want to admit it or not.
That's why YOU are batshit crazy. (Note I'm repeating your words again, did you really think that would persuade?) If you're not endorsing something, then I think you're going to have to do a lot better job distancing yourself from it, but I'm seeing you as endorsing it with your repetition of it. You thought it was a solid idea. But I disagree with the idea that it's an insult to criticize somebody in this way, or that it's always ineffectual. Sometimes it's important to say somebody is a bigot, to complain about their lack of tolerance. Sometimes you're not playing to that person, but to others. And I really consider an insult to be of a different character, like saying "You're a basement dwelling geek who can't get a woman" than the criticism we're talking about here. Which I've received too.
I said I agreed with him. Why are you trying to make it sound like I'm objecting to it at the same time I'm saying it's logical? As for the batshit crazy, I'm talking about- trying to persuade someone by insulting them..lol
But actually, peaceful ways are tried. Peaceful ways are used. Politeness is all around the discussion. You seem to be confusing the idea of the discussion you have with being representative of all of what's going on. But just because persuasion is useful sometimes, at other times you need to call out somebody for who they are and what they're doing. Or sometimes you just decide to be a bit rude.
I'm only commenting to you about what I saw here. The rudeness can easily out do any politeness brought to the table. It reminds me of when I was a kid in the 80's and was told that gays are just like us, then a flammer dressed in a couple feathers that barely covered anything jumped out saying he was in our face then pretended to perform oral sex on another guy in an assless leather chaps with a fake dick hanging out the zipper. It cause my dad who just got done explaining that gay people are just like normal people to beat the piss out of him, calling him slurs in the process right in front of us. And no, we had no clue some gay parade was happening the day we ended up on an otherwise pleasant vacation. He later explained that it wasn't because they were gay, it was because of what they did in front of the children. The cops agreed which goes to show how much things have changed since then.
Also, guess what you're not mentioning? Who is also doing that. Why are you silent on what the other side does, when they come in kicking and screaming about how God disapproves of people who have homosexual relationships, how we should go to hell, how we should be locked up into concentration camps, and how dare we even think about aski
Slashdot Mirror
If they ban only the ones who practice constitutionally protected rights, I am equally outraged.
You see, the difference between banning strip clubs in general and only "Crazy Jack's lady emporium" is that in one, it is an across the board ban based on community standard or whatever they are using to justify the ban not related to the expression of first amendment rights, the other is singling a specific business out because of first amendment expression and religious freedom.
Without this distinction, then any government entity could ban or use the public infrastructure to interfere with the business of anyone who supports another candidate for office or a position that the political officer doesn't like. Would you find it equally tolerable if the mayor of New York banned Amazon or Starbucks (amazon's founder donates 2.5 million to defend Washington's gay marriage law, Starbucks says on their web page they support gay marriage and some are trying to create a gay starbucks appreciation day) from doing business there because they support rewriting marriage laws to allow gays to marry? That's a more appropriate comparison to what these mayors are doing and it is a matter of the first amendment and a government punishing specific companies based on their or their owner's expression of it. It is simply wrong whether you agree on the message or not.
Alcohol sales is a bit different because the repeal of prohibition specifically gives the states explicit control over alcohol which would allow them to limit the amount of bars and or times alcohol sales could happen in certain areas.
I heard it.
I'm not sure if he is discounting probes that sort of die on impact or not. In fact, I'm not even sure what countries have visited other planets outside of Russia which I think has an orbiter and the EU who crashed one.
HA,, they haven't even released information about the shooter and you know it was a right winger.
I was just talking with someone earlier today who is convinced that Obama and company would stage some some terrorist attack so he could use it as an excuse to get reelected like Bush did and possibly take out guns.
I guess he wasn't off- Right wing domestic terrorist...lol
Speaking of commentators, is anyone else annoyed at the NASA commentator?
They were giving the location of the landing and she cut in blabbing about something in the middle of them saying how far off their initial expected landing point was. I think they were saying it was just a couple meters which is outstanding considering the distance involved and the ability or chances to stray slightly in the process.
I mean I'm watching the NASA feed in order to hear all the details. If I cared about someone's comments, I would wait until some news agency did a write up on it. They should have shut the hell up while they were reading the results of the different stages off.
MAybe you can get some pointers from the-rent-is-too-damn-high party.
So you equate using government punishing free speech as the same as government encouraging actions it agrees with?
Let me tell you the difference, both is free speech, but the constitution prohibits the government from denying it.
I don't know. I guess when you have democrat mayors so easily making statements of their intentions to use the government and public resources around them to economically harm a corporation because of free of speech by the CEO of a company made in a personal manner, you tend to think there are some people who will use information they do not agree with against you in ways that are not only unethical but illegal as well.
You are right, what part of freedom is that? But we were reminded recently of it so it is a concern.
You could argue that a member of the political party who is currently serving in the government who is seeking reelection is the government. Isn't that what is happening?
Why would you say tea party nut? You do realize the last several shooting incidents were most likely people who would vote democrat right? They also were somewhat crazy and probably never connected their political ideology with their desire to kill people.
It's interesting, I was just thinking- so now I know how to find out who all is voting for the other guy without drawing attention to myself.
Not that I would ever do anything to harm them or anything. But if I decide I don't want Bill's lawn service taking care of my lawn because he is a democrat, I don't need to sign for a big list at some government office and suffer people wondering why I want it. Come to think about it, there are a lot of performance reviews coming up, perhaps I can show some people how evil big corporation really can be.
Note: I am not over anyone who doesn't already think like me. There is absolutely no chance I could economically harm anyone with this information, But others could. Kind of really creepy isn't it.. lol
Well, I guess I'm imagining it.
I could have swore that some time around 2000 a hard drive went out and they found the backups only contained parts of the database. This would be about the time they moved the servers to California. They recovered the articles but not the comments and a lot of users had to do a password reset
But I can't seem to find one article about it. I thought there was a mention to it in the fact page on slashdot even but I can't find it now either.
Well, I've always said it is hard to hate hog. Especially when it's slow smoke roasted until it pulls apart with ease and put in a sandwich bun smothered with creamy coleslaw with some sweet pork and beans on the side.
7th day Adventist aren't completely vegan. They allow dairy products and fish.
Their health probably is more related to inclusions in and other factors of their diet rather then their limits on meat. For instance, the bread needs to be made from whole grain flour, not just wheat flower. Instead of drinking fruit juices, they encourage it's consumption of the whole fruit instead. They limit fats and oils and attempt to get it from nuts instead. They shy away from fried foods, eat a lot in the morning. less at lunch, and even less at dinner. They avoid alcohol, sweets, and stimulants like caffeine.
One of the benefits of meat is a B vitamin. I forget exactly which is it, but it is difficult to get it strictly through vegan foods.
I used to run around with a vegan who about once a year or so went to get a b12 shot at the doctors. You could see a noticeable difference in how perky she was, how energetic and so on after getting the shot. I guess vegan foods have this vitamin but it either isn't in a high enough concentration or if in a form that is difficult for the body to take advantage of.
It could be that she wasn't smart enough to get a complete diet. You should have seen the look on her face when I explained what Jell-O really was. But my understanding is that a lot of strict vegans has that issue too.
I'm glad your imagination is working. I'm also glad you reached the mental wherewithal to post something about it instead of sitting in your mom's basement all day playing extreme candyland- the shoots and ladders edition.
Let me explain something, this is a lot like memory for the computer. You know, that thing that allows you to surf porn and post remarks to show the world your lack of intelligence. If the power fails, the reason your Asian babes with porcupines page disappears and needs reloaded when the computer restarts is because it is part of a memory that needs a constant voltage to maintain it's condition. Much like a fully functioning brain, we can measure that voltage and even monitor activity. Now there is another type of memory, this type of memory hard codes the information until it is manipulated again which is why you computer can restart and load the operating system in the first place. In both scenarios, when the power is gone, you get the appearance of nothing and when the power is on, you get activity that can be measured. However, even if the information is still there, it cannot be perceived as being there.
So is the consciousness random access memory that disappears with a power failure, or one that remains except that you know it because the monitor was damaged in the power outage? Should I automatically assume the computer is dead and throw it away, or should I look at it to see if there is another way to access the information- perhaps with a new monitor.
Now go back to thinking about your animal feces and what that means to you and let the adults talk for a bit.
Forgive me if I do not spend much time arguing with idiots to scared to log in from an account that might be traceable to them in some way.
But you and the GP aren't adding anything of value either. i'm sort of glad too, because from both your attempts at posting so far, it appears we all would be more dumb after reading it if you did.
I'm not sure why you would think that, even everything will have parts of the collective that might need identified. The every thing is everything should be everything is everything that functions.
Are you suggesting we should stop trying to learn?
No, I am implying that we do not know how the conscious works and it can be the part of other organs or collective intelligence of the individual cells or groups of them acting as a whole that make up the body in it's entirety. People have spent a very long time trying to prove the moon landings are faked too. The difference is that technology has progressed and our understanding has progressed and it will not hurt anything if we take another look at it. It may even benefit victims of brain trauma if we find the conscious is still there and we can access it differently only through the damaged brain matter.
Are you upset because someone is spending money on science you will not participate in or the possibility that they might find something more to death then now your gone? It seems to me that those objecting to this are somehow connecting it to a spirit or soul and appear threatened that someone might look into the reality of it.
Yep, thought so. You are scared they might find something that would completely disprove your view in religion or science and that you might have made the wrong decisions in life.
It doesn't matter if they are liars, the point of science is finding facts, not supporting false claims. If they make inaccurate claims, it will be disproved by other testing or stand on it's merits. That is how science works.
If you start from the assumption that the conscious is only what the brain can muster, this makes sense. If you however question if the conscious is something beyond the brain or still resident in the brain, and seek to find if it is limited to the brain, then it doesn't. I seriously do not understand the hostility in looking or trying to find out. It is not like you have something to lose do you?
Well, not asking the question is the best way to not have it answered. As for free will, even if it is an illusion, it is sufficient as you get to ask and answer you own question of meaning.
But while I'm rambling: What I wonder about is *real* AI. Since the 90's I'm waiting, I'm convinced that actual AI wouldn't do squat, since thorough computations would show the end result to be the same, heat death of the universe. So yeah, we could build this city and then wait until it decays, or we could just not bother. Kinda like Marvin from HGttG, but without the pain in the diodes and nagging ^^
But of course, we'll create it in our own image, so that won't happen, it will happily slave on, like a dog that never gets tired of fetching stick. Then we'll start to worship it, because it's bigger than us individually, just like we already worship the herd. It will be great :/
your probably right.
Is that the best you have? lol..
You mom must be so proud.
Heh.. they must have put the N in there to throw us off adroid ads on Steroids.
That would be my logical conclusion. It solves the problem of low numbers of Linux on the desktop. Allows them to build to a specific hardware set that if the source is shared will allow the bulk of the work for other distributions to be handled by the community or the distros themselves. I understand that most of the code will be written to hardware intermediates like OpenGL and such but drivers for such hardware can creep issues in sometimes.
If they can produce something relatively cheap compared with a phone or something, they would be in a lot of homes in no time.
Sure it is pretty extreme, but it was a person who said it as a person, not a CEO as he was representing the company's views. Now I understand you cannot totally divorce the views of a company's CEO, but it is being over played here concerning the company's involvement. That's all I was saying.
I guess you are missing the question. Even if you cut out part of the brain, are you removing part of the consciousness or the ability to express it. In other words, if someone steals your Cell Phone and you have no other way of getting a message out, does that mean the message disappears. And with that scenario, it could be that the message is just as important and will wait until you find another way of conveying it or it might not be longer relevant and not need conveyed at all.
Fair enough.
I'm not manufacturing it, I'm pointing it out. The parent said those claiming to be tolerant need to be tolerant. You, well, I can't be certain it was you because you haven't logged in with an account that can reference your input to, said it was ok to be interlocutor with those you expect to be tolerant. That is hypocrisy whether you want to admit it or not.
I said I agreed with him. Why are you trying to make it sound like I'm objecting to it at the same time I'm saying it's logical? As for the batshit crazy, I'm talking about- trying to persuade someone by insulting them..lol
I'm only commenting to you about what I saw here. The rudeness can easily out do any politeness brought to the table. It reminds me of when I was a kid in the 80's and was told that gays are just like us, then a flammer dressed in a couple feathers that barely covered anything jumped out saying he was in our face then pretended to perform oral sex on another guy in an assless leather chaps with a fake dick hanging out the zipper. It cause my dad who just got done explaining that gay people are just like normal people to beat the piss out of him, calling him slurs in the process right in front of us. And no, we had no clue some gay parade was happening the day we ended up on an otherwise pleasant vacation. He later explained that it wasn't because they were gay, it was because of what they did in front of the children. The cops agreed which goes to show how much things have changed since then.