if I am, or not, presumably did or, not... you are smoking some heavy shit aren't you!
I just said the patent is bullshit, maybe English isn't your first language, I apologise therefore becuase my writting is rather 'lax.
patent = bullshit because 'hand' feedback of users actions has prior art in video games, and how old is the patent he [did not specify which] mentioned.
I didn't claim he did or did not say anything, or something... or... I feel like Vicky Pollard.
Is there any evident, fact or basis for this story rather than conjecture? Yes, but this is a prime example of SITE WRAPPING which I see more and more of.
A worm infection in villages in Africa - when it wants to burst out and have its eggs in water, it persuades the host to place its feet in the local river, so when another local drinks that water, the infection will continue.
It does this by making the hosts foot burn. It burrows down the body to the feet.
This kinda life makes me argue against evolution, and against creationism.
It is just too freaky! (the humans, not the worm;-) lol)
American prices come within prices in Europe, and everyone thinks it is the end of the world.
What is ironic, is the government should have been taxing petrol up to this level for years, to pay for better education and reduce fuel consumption, and promote more healthier lifestyles.
Low petrol costs damaged the countries coffers, damaged the countries health (and thus cost them), vastly inflated the transit economies, which will now crash.
The whole system seemed on a knife edge. To think that all western countries tax fuel to the hilt, and the US are always trying to drive down the cost, promote WASTE of fuel (by using TAXES to sponsor the purchase of SUV's for those who can afford them already, and heck, why not give aforementioned people a tax cut to help them with their low cost fuel.)
Now all this fuel consumption may be the reason you have already had 13 hurricanes, whereas the norm is 4.
You have an obligation to stop whatever harm is happening as soon as you discover the wrong doing. Otherwise you are consenting.
He did consent, that is the point I make in my previous post - however I want to add [in bold, oh pompous me!]
It could be said that by [hot] linking to his work they were consenting that he publish on their website.
Cogito ergo, the guy was allowed to make any changes he wants. It takes two to tango. There is no way you could argue he did anything wrong if you are talking about implied consent because of inaction.
Plus, he can ask for $1000 a day for each day that they hot linked to his content [until the day he discovered], a FURTHER example of where you are wrong, even if he asks them to stop or not, when he discovers, he can spend time putting together a license, and then present it to them, I found out you were using my game, great, here is a chaneg for it, if you would like to keep using it, these are the terms.
I am unsure (IANAL) if he can charge for a time after he knew they were using it [granted], I mean, they knew they were using his work without license. His copyright work. So therefore he is allowed to claim money.
Even now after his playful little nudge in their ribs, which made a great ripple to warn others about doing this (I have long worried about flash games being raped, image people selling CD's of every linked game on the JayIsGames.com site (there are measures I know of to stop this, but I won't divuldge them for fear it will comprimise my own game play enjoyment offline) for a pittance.
Anyway. This isn't a argument against you, just a mere commentary.
He didn't want to stop them using it, he was happy with them linking to his site.
His artistic spirit did feel that he should devolve his hamburger game back to the state of pre-additives, to the state of a posthumous cow.
Your last example is BS (politely), because that is just an invalid charge for the service, since you never went into agreement, and you are not supposed to know if it is a free channel or not, it is their responsibility to charge you the right ammounts.
So while you are right in saying they cannot slap you a $500 bill, you are wrong in stating they had a 'duty' to say '"no"' at the moment they discovered the 'theft'. [again, innocent until proven guilty, my cable install left all channels open, which I presume had nothing to do with the 3 cases of heineken (my flat mates) which happened to end up on the installers van]. In a case of theft, they could not charge you, but the real wrong is:
You are trying to argue a case of ownership of content and domain with an entirely different case, which while may be correct, doens't make a point on this case. We call that strawman tactics, trying to gain a victory in one area of discussion by stating an uncontended fact in another unrelated area of discussion.
This is how our current discussion looks to an alien:
A: "I think that Microsoft are making a bad move with their new ad center" B: "But Muhammad Ali was a great boxer" A: "..." B: "ha... so I win!"
Although the general premise of 'after the fact' had some meaning, the changing of content owned by party A, has nothing to do with cable company billing, they are goverened by different laws.
Financial laws and sales laws, consumer laws and tax laws [and advertising laws] do not govern what party A can show on his website, yet do govern your irrelevant example.
I hope I have shown you that trying to make irrelevant unchallenged victories in a discussionon something else is a very stupid and child-like way of trying to show someone that they are '100% wrong'. I do not wish to discuss something with someone who cannot stay on topic, and uses straw man tactics, it is the most annoying thing, and I am sure other slashdotters agree!!
Devils advocate - traditionally in advertising - noone knows what works, so targetted may work, at the end of the day:
Someone looking at a gardening site - will they buy into ads selling 'gardening things' or things related to that aricle (it doesn't always work):: OR is that person has just refinanced his house, o rmaxed out credit cards, or is a gambler or has lots of finance, will they hit ads that target them with refinancing, credit cards, and online gambling.
It is this crowd of 'financials' that microsoft look to be targetting, and I think that this will lead to people calling microsoft ads 'mortgage ads' or 'gambling ads'.
I wonder if M$ will succumb to the click-fraud crowd.
Adsense and their gmail ads. Still only if you have your google cookie set.
However this microsoft ploy is what one reader 'predicted', if microsoft offer a 'killer' ad program (lets face it, it isn't a sodding technical marvel) with extra data and sod, and then basically give all the money to the people who operate it (read cheap advertising and high payouts) then they will crush google.
Except they will have to imitate google, and perhaps their arrogance (using credit data) has gone against them.
I for one don't block adsense frames, because I find it interesting to see who can get ads on certain pages.
That is how unobstrusive it is. I choose what I watch, and sod the advertisers, I would rather a cheap and nasty ad free internet than a cheap and nasty adfull internet (which we have now).
I will adblock any flash or video ads that encumber my screen, and no visit websites that have 'interval' ign style ads. 'skip this ad'
'Microsoft' have no class, is a statement being passed around by in the hyperswill - and I think this offering, timely after the whole 'I will bury google' release, will show that despite a mountain of cash, they will not be able to topple google.
Internet has shown that inertia is enough of a force with people to let even shit sites (ebay) win through. Google have been pushing for this, and probably on day 1 they knew this would happen, and worked out their game plan.
Microsoft are such lazy uncoordinated bastards, they sit and wait too much, with worked in googles favour.
They are spending all their time on faux blog sites, shitty 'Microsoft are cute and fun' reaching out to developers and crap. Please develop for our platform only, tie in etc.
Now most download sites and 'open' downloads are for linux, 3 years ago it was windows software, and someone please bring it to linux, and now it is 'Windows Version - someone managed to get this to compile, it is 3 versions old, but good luck'.
File in Java (which Microsoft had a game planon how to trash - and failed) and you see where this is going.
One final point fo rpeople who say Microsoft don't innovate:
According to Eva Balan, MSN's international marketing manager for MSN adCenter, advertisers pay a one-time subscription fee of S$5 (US$3) for MSN Keywords. For each keyword, they bid a minimum of S$0.10 and pay for the number of times search users click on their advertisements, which appear as sponsored links alongside search results. The placement of the links will depend on the bid price, click-through rate as well as the types of user profiles captured by the system. [why is this bold not italic? I hate reading italic on screen]...you are right they are not innovative! Grounds for a google counter sue for their advertising style? pteesh.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: recast
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Fuddruckers.com points to google. In olde internet disney.com or yahoo.com were key exit points, and now google is the 'this page intentionally left blank'.
Presumably they think they were HACKED rather than them hotlinking a server which was sending them content pointing to new places.
What is funny - he hot linked the images himself...
Hot linking is firstly theft of bandwidth, because you deliver content to people coming to your site, whereas now you are delivering content to other peoples site.
Imagine a [real world] newspaper taking columns from another newspaper. Now, just because the technology makes it easy to do, doesn't make it right.
A 'page' is how it is represented or supposed to be represented in your browser (as some browsers could auto detect cross site linking and open up original sites etc).
Anyone could have LINKED to his site. like this but taking a bite of content here and there and framing it (in a popup) is wrong, unless you have a license to.
From what you are saying, I can have all flash games on my site, and even charge people to use it, because I am just hotlinking them.
Yeah, also, in true form of stats, I am guessing it is more the fact that online music purchasers also share music, rather than music sharers also buy music.
i.e. a greater percentage of online music buyers share music than the percentage of music sharers that buy music.
The motivation is that an online buyer also looks for other music, not vice versa.
My point was that blogging cannot 'get you sued' as his title states. You cannot sue someone merely for the act of blogging. The content may be reason, but not the mere fact of having a blog.
Unless we enter into an agreement where you are not allowed to have a blog, you blog, and I could sue, but it wouldn't stand up would it?
I thought about my explaination of 'audio file in xml' and realised, what would I call it?
But the problem isn't the notion of this word, it is the fact that before the word 'podcasting' nobody wanted to put up mp3's of their voice, and have people download it via RSS...
Maybe it was the simple realisation that binary files linked over RSS could be fun as well.
Anyway, regardless - the parent is right about misuse of this word now. Maybe I am just hypersensitive, but in a word of AJAX, JSON, SAX, DOM, XML, XSLT, SOAP, WSDL, CSS, SMIL, SVG, file types, jargon, buzz words and geekspeak I guess I feel annoyed and a little put out when 'the unwashed masses' (could that be used to desribe non-geeks without being overly contrary?) get their own buzz words, and I have to look them up and find out they are not really anything much.
I agree, it is the concept rather than the technology that is labelled here. Still I hate the word blogging, blog, vlog et al. (moblog)...
Look, you have to see calling it 'pod' casting for nintendo is a little skeptical. Who is the self-righteous person who coined this phrase?
I just know that bloggers and techno-fans everywhere went into full scale hump alert when this new word came around.
People who have never, and I mean NEVER thought about recording their voice into an audio file, and placing it online, suddenly were... COMPELLED to, as if somehow some new technology had some about that made it possible.
IF there was a new technology, or even a new xml spec, then maybe it would be valid.
Since there isn't, then it isn't. Plus it grates at me. Forget nails on a blackboard, I am talking glass on my nerve endings.
No, blogging cannot get you sued, nor can owning and firing a gun.
Who you point you blog or gun at, and where you aim, that can in general cause various reprocussions.
Now stop hiding behind shit words, and face up to this properly, and for those who start talking about freedom of speech and Internet, you are playing the wrong game.
This should be tried as any other case, imagine if it was a reply in a newspaper (giving too much credit to anything that is a 'blog' *spit*). Or someone calling into a radio show. (the aspects of competition may cloud it, IANAL [as if they wasn't self evident]).
Look, there is no reason for the word podcasting to exist.
It is one of those words when you first hear it you imagine this immense technology behind it. But no, it is a URL to an audio file, inserted into XML.
Wow. I realise that Audio available through a non-html interface, i.e. a 'play list' application is good, but there is no reason to call this crap podcasting, any more than it is to call downloading a zip file of the internet spudcasting.
Slashdot Mirror
WHat the hell are you talking about?
if I am, or not, presumably did or, not... you are smoking some heavy shit aren't you!
I just said the patent is bullshit, maybe English isn't your first language, I apologise therefore becuase my writting is rather 'lax.
patent = bullshit because 'hand' feedback of users actions has prior art in video games, and how old is the patent he [did not specify which] mentioned.
I didn't claim he did or did not say anything, or something... or... I feel like Vicky Pollard.
Anyway, yeah. Chillax!!111OMG!!!111kthxbi
Those condoms can last a long time. ...if it wasn't for that pesky 'expiration date' on the unopened packet....
/.'ing and wow'ing!
I mean, who ever listens to those "one use only" instructions?
Yeah, when zero use takes away far less time from
ok, it is late.
According to, and should expect.
Is there any evident, fact or basis for this story rather than conjecture? Yes, but this is a prime example of SITE WRAPPING which I see more and more of.
This story is FOUND HERE
and the engadget post is just a fucking traffic drive link wrap.
Do not read engadget, read a real news source. OK, so you could argue they 'quote small and expand' but I think not.
I am really at odds with engaydget and all the other shitty weblogsinc crap.
Read the reuters article.
My claim to fame is I patented showing miniature hands on the screen.
Bullshit.
Anyone played any driving game on an 8bit platform?
Hands that show your movements on the steering wheel are there, so surely prior art(even if it isn't a button controller, they even changed gears).
A worm infection in villages in Africa - when it wants to burst out and have its eggs in water, it persuades the host to place its feet in the local river, so when another local drinks that water, the infection will continue.
;-) lol)
It does this by making the hosts foot burn. It burrows down the body to the feet.
This kinda life makes me argue against evolution, and against creationism.
It is just too freaky! (the humans, not the worm
Please tell me how I can get some 'gas' that cheap, you insensitive clod.
Maybe you should just accept higher prices, maybe the gov. should tax it up to $5.60 in the US and let people figure it out.
American prices come within prices in Europe, and everyone thinks it is the end of the world.
What is ironic, is the government should have been taxing petrol up to this level for years, to pay for better education and reduce fuel consumption, and promote more healthier lifestyles.
Low petrol costs damaged the countries coffers, damaged the countries health (and thus cost them), vastly inflated the transit economies, which will now crash.
The whole system seemed on a knife edge. To think that all western countries tax fuel to the hilt, and the US are always trying to drive down the cost, promote WASTE of fuel (by using TAXES to sponsor the purchase of SUV's for those who can afford them already, and heck, why not give aforementioned people a tax cut to help them with their low cost fuel.)
Now all this fuel consumption may be the reason you have already had 13 hurricanes, whereas the norm is 4.
Just how it looks.
You have an obligation to stop whatever harm is happening as soon as you discover the wrong doing. Otherwise you are consenting.
He did consent, that is the point I make in my previous post - however I want to add [in bold, oh pompous me!]
It could be said that by [hot] linking to his work they were consenting that he publish on their website.
Cogito ergo, the guy was allowed to make any changes he wants. It takes two to tango. There is no way you could argue he did anything wrong if you are talking about implied consent because of inaction.
Plus, he can ask for $1000 a day for each day that they hot linked to his content [until the day he discovered], a FURTHER example of where you are wrong, even if he asks them to stop or not, when he discovers, he can spend time putting together a license, and then present it to them, I found out you were using my game, great, here is a chaneg for it, if you would like to keep using it, these are the terms.
I am unsure (IANAL) if he can charge for a time after he knew they were using it [granted], I mean, they knew they were using his work without license. His copyright work. So therefore he is allowed to claim money.
Even now after his playful little nudge in their ribs, which made a great ripple to warn others about doing this (I have long worried about flash games being raped, image people selling CD's of every linked game on the JayIsGames.com site (there are measures I know of to stop this, but I won't divuldge them for fear it will comprimise my own game play enjoyment offline) for a pittance.
Anyway. This isn't a argument against you, just a mere commentary.
He didn't want to stop them using it, he was happy with them linking to his site.
His artistic spirit did feel that he should devolve his hamburger game back to the state of pre-additives, to the state of a posthumous cow.
Your last example is BS (politely), because that is just an invalid charge for the service, since you never went into agreement, and you are not supposed to know if it is a free channel or not, it is their responsibility to charge you the right ammounts.
So while you are right in saying they cannot slap you a $500 bill, you are wrong in stating they had a 'duty' to say '"no"' at the moment they discovered the 'theft'. [again, innocent until proven guilty, my cable install left all channels open, which I presume had nothing to do with the 3 cases of heineken (my flat mates) which happened to end up on the installers van]. In a case of theft, they could not charge you, but the real wrong is:
You are trying to argue a case of ownership of content and domain with an entirely different case, which while may be correct, doens't make a point on this case. We call that strawman tactics, trying to gain a victory in one area of discussion by stating an uncontended fact in another unrelated area of discussion.
This is how our current discussion looks to an alien:
A: "I think that Microsoft are making a bad move with their new ad center"
B: "But Muhammad Ali was a great boxer"
A: "..."
B: "ha... so I win!"
Although the general premise of 'after the fact' had some meaning, the changing of content owned by party A, has nothing to do with cable company billing, they are goverened by different laws.
Financial laws and sales laws, consumer laws and tax laws [and advertising laws] do not govern what party A can show on his website, yet do govern your irrelevant example.
I hope I have shown you that trying to make irrelevant unchallenged victories in a discussionon something else is a very stupid and child-like way of trying to show someone that they are '100% wrong'. I do not wish to discuss something with someone who cannot stay on topic, and uses straw man tactics, it is the most annoying thing, and I am sure other slashdotters agree!!
I love slashdot.
for cell phones that allowed for viewing of 32 high definition video streams, while traveling in an automobile at 20 kilometers per hour.
Hey I can't watch 32 channels on my 32 inch tv, let along my 3.2 inch mobile/pda, and that is sat still!
Still, wow... *tingle* looks like this is AWEEESSSSOOOME!!!!
YEY.
http://www.adcmedia.com/
:: OR is that person has just refinanced his house, o rmaxed out credit cards, or is a gambler or has lots of finance, will they hit ads that target them with refinancing, credit cards, and online gambling.
Devils advocate - traditionally in advertising - noone knows what works, so targetted may work, at the end of the day:
Someone looking at a gardening site - will they buy into ads selling 'gardening things' or things related to that aricle (it doesn't always work)
It is this crowd of 'financials' that microsoft look to be targetting, and I think that this will lead to people calling microsoft ads 'mortgage ads' or 'gambling ads'.
I wonder if M$ will succumb to the click-fraud crowd.
Adsense and their gmail ads. Still only if you have your google cookie set.
...you are right they are not innovative! Grounds for a google counter sue for their advertising style? pteesh.
However this microsoft ploy is what one reader 'predicted', if microsoft offer a 'killer' ad program (lets face it, it isn't a sodding technical marvel) with extra data and sod, and then basically give all the money to the people who operate it (read cheap advertising and high payouts) then they will crush google.
Except they will have to imitate google, and perhaps their arrogance (using credit data) has gone against them.
I for one don't block adsense frames, because I find it interesting to see who can get ads on certain pages.
That is how unobstrusive it is. I choose what I watch, and sod the advertisers, I would rather a cheap and nasty ad free internet than a cheap and nasty adfull internet (which we have now).
I will adblock any flash or video ads that encumber my screen, and no visit websites that have 'interval' ign style ads. 'skip this ad'
'Microsoft' have no class, is a statement being passed around by in the hyperswill - and I think this offering, timely after the whole 'I will bury google' release, will show that despite a mountain of cash, they will not be able to topple google.
Internet has shown that inertia is enough of a force with people to let even shit sites (ebay) win through. Google have been pushing for this, and probably on day 1 they knew this would happen, and worked out their game plan.
Microsoft are such lazy uncoordinated bastards, they sit and wait too much, with worked in googles favour.
They are spending all their time on faux blog sites, shitty 'Microsoft are cute and fun' reaching out to developers and crap. Please develop for our platform only, tie in etc.
Now most download sites and 'open' downloads are for linux, 3 years ago it was windows software, and someone please bring it to linux, and now it is 'Windows Version - someone managed to get this to compile, it is 3 versions old, but good luck'.
File in Java (which Microsoft had a game planon how to trash - and failed) and you see where this is going.
One final point fo rpeople who say Microsoft don't innovate:
According to Eva Balan, MSN's international marketing manager for MSN adCenter, advertisers pay a one-time subscription fee of S$5 (US$3) for MSN Keywords. For each keyword, they bid a minimum of S$0.10 and pay for the number of times search users click on their advertisements, which appear as sponsored links alongside search results. The placement of the links will depend on the bid price, click-through rate as well as the types of user profiles captured by the system. [why is this bold not italic? I hate reading italic on screen]
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: recast
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Fuddruckers.com points to google. In olde internet disney.com or yahoo.com were key exit points, and now google is the 'this page intentionally left blank'.
Presumably they think they were HACKED rather than them hotlinking a server which was sending them content pointing to new places.
What is funny - he hot linked the images himself...
Ooooh I love it. I just love it, the chair, the swearing, its just so perfect.
I notice cowboyneal has modified the confirmation script image...
Hot linking is firstly theft of bandwidth, because you deliver content to people coming to your site, whereas now you are delivering content to other peoples site.
Imagine a [real world] newspaper taking columns from another newspaper. Now, just because the technology makes it easy to do, doesn't make it right.
A 'page' is how it is represented or supposed to be represented in your browser (as some browsers could auto detect cross site linking and open up original sites etc).
Anyone could have LINKED to his site. like this but taking a bite of content here and there and framing it (in a popup) is wrong, unless you have a license to.
From what you are saying, I can have all flash games on my site, and even charge people to use it, because I am just hotlinking them.
'Jay is' website is good linking.
This is funny, I would have done the same thing. They cannot counter sue because they had no business.
If someone steals what I am saying, and puts it on their own site, then sues me when i change what I say, screw them!
Good for him!
Poo: fuddruckers.com is down. Oh, slashdot?
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: blithe
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
TFA: On a theoretical basis, the rise in development costs is driven directly by Moore's Law.
Is it just me who is sickened by sentences such as these?
I am a bastard cynic, but I am sure I am not the only one.
Check one of my pathetic journals for a diatribe on Moores 'Law'.
Teh Link4g3 for teh lazy
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: hirers
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Yeah, also, in true form of stats, I am guessing it is more the fact that online music purchasers also share music, rather than music sharers also buy music.
i.e. a greater percentage of online music buyers share music than the percentage of music sharers that buy music.
The motivation is that an online buyer also looks for other music, not vice versa.
Anyway.
My point was that blogging cannot 'get you sued' as his title states. You cannot sue someone merely for the act of blogging. The content may be reason, but not the mere fact of having a blog.
Unless we enter into an agreement where you are not allowed to have a blog, you blog, and I could sue, but it wouldn't stand up would it?
I thought about my explaination of 'audio file in xml' and realised, what would I call it?
But the problem isn't the notion of this word, it is the fact that before the word 'podcasting' nobody wanted to put up mp3's of their voice, and have people download it via RSS...
Maybe it was the simple realisation that binary files linked over RSS could be fun as well.
Anyway, regardless - the parent is right about misuse of this word now. Maybe I am just hypersensitive, but in a word of AJAX, JSON, SAX, DOM, XML, XSLT, SOAP, WSDL, CSS, SMIL, SVG, file types, jargon, buzz words and geekspeak I guess I feel annoyed and a little put out when 'the unwashed masses' (could that be used to desribe non-geeks without being overly contrary?) get their own buzz words, and I have to look them up and find out they are not really anything much.
I agree, it is the concept rather than the technology that is labelled here. Still I hate the word blogging, blog, vlog et al. (moblog)...
Look, you have to see calling it 'pod' casting for nintendo is a little skeptical. Who is the self-righteous person who coined this phrase?
I just know that bloggers and techno-fans everywhere went into full scale hump alert when this new word came around.
People who have never, and I mean NEVER thought about recording their voice into an audio file, and placing it online, suddenly were... COMPELLED to, as if somehow some new technology had some about that made it possible.
IF there was a new technology, or even a new xml spec, then maybe it would be valid.
Since there isn't, then it isn't. Plus it grates at me. Forget nails on a blackboard, I am talking glass on my nerve endings.
Repercussions damnit.
Repercussions of bad spelling and / or typos on slashdot? arrogant self-vaulting twatwits correctly you ad-infinitum.
BTW I am not assigning guilt, just stopping people using the Internet and 'blog' to cloud the issue.
Yes it was other peoples comments, but the fact they are on the Internet or 'blog' is irrelevant really. Or is it?
I dunno...
Timely Warnings...Blogging Can Get You Sued!
No, blogging cannot get you sued, nor can owning and firing a gun.
Who you point you blog or gun at, and where you aim, that can in general cause various reprocussions.
Now stop hiding behind shit words, and face up to this properly, and for those who start talking about freedom of speech and Internet, you are playing the wrong game.
This should be tried as any other case, imagine if it was a reply in a newspaper (giving too much credit to anything that is a 'blog' *spit*). Or someone calling into a radio show. (the aspects of competition may cloud it, IANAL [as if they wasn't self evident]).
Look, there is no reason for the word podcasting to exist.
It is one of those words when you first hear it you imagine this immense technology behind it. But no, it is a URL to an audio file, inserted into XML.
Wow. I realise that Audio available through a non-html interface, i.e. a 'play list' application is good, but there is no reason to call this crap podcasting, any more than it is to call downloading a zip file of the internet spudcasting.
It makes no sense.
From teleo.com I found This m1ccy$0ft connect site.
.net post backs when I reselect a combo box... bloody view state.
No beta on there though, but the teleo site says there should be.
Painful registration as well, very slow... stupid
Anyway