A lot of hand waving and playing to the crowd but not a lot of meat with regard to the central point.
The point of the article you apparently completely missed is this:
IF YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING ILLEGAL ALL THE RATIONALIZATION IN THE WORLD DOESN'T MAKE IT LEGAL. IF YOU ARE STUPID AND DO ILLEGAL ACTIONS AROUND LAW ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE YOU FORGOT IT WAS ILLEGAL YOU WILL PAY FINES OR GO TO JAIL.
On the copyright infringement. All the talk in the world is not going to make this legal. Taking a person's work output without compensating them when they reasonably expected compensation is clearly wrong. You can argue the semantics any way you want, but they are going to keep finding ways to make it illegal or punish you since it is clearly wrong and very easy to get a law passed by the vast majority of lawmakers in any country.
I know that pro-infringers like to argue that and I've got just a few mp3's myself.
I also agree that the term needs to be fought because copyright infringment is *like* stealing but it is *not* stealing.
However, if you and your 10,000 closest friends end up with copies of the artists song and the artist ends up with ZERO, NADA, begging for food on the street corner when they should have rightfully had at least a few grand then something bad happened and all your weasel wording won't hide that fact.
Artists *should* be compensated for new works by people who consume those new works.
Artists (and corporations... and their heirs to the 3rd generation) do not deserve to be compensated for songs they recorded in the distant past-- or worse while they were alive and now they are dead.
My personal line is 28 years because that was a commonly agreed on number for a long time. However, if I were to download beatles songs- I'd probably avoid torrents with 10,737 members because I know it's illegal and can get me in to trouble. I'd probably stay in small tight communities- low and under the radar.
It's critical when you engage in some kind of immoral or illegal activity to be honest with yourself that you about what you are doing or the next thing you know, you are the stupid guy getting arrested because he lacked the sense to hide his illegal activity from law enforcement because he'd completely lost all sense of right and wrong about what he was doing.
You see it all the time- people do things wrong and rationalize it to themselves that it's not wrong and then they get in trouble because they lose proper caution.
Put another way-- it's one thing to have a joint at a concert surrounded by 20,000 strangers and quite another to have one in the starbucks or casually walking down a major thoroughfare.
His language was precise and I think his analogy holds.
Copyright infringement is "stealing" yes-- but there is a technical difference between theft and copyright infringement even tho they are very similar.
Levies are "taxes" yes-- but there is a technical difference between a levy and a tax even tho they are very similar.
Star Wreck was something (tho not exactly) like this.
It was worth the time I spent to watch it and I got some intentional laughs from it.
The key is the writing. It was decent but a little sophmoric in SW. Some parts were brilliant- truly brilliant- fresh new concepts- well delivered. A few parts were stale and cliched and probably should have been rewritten a few more times.
Then you need good actors to deliver the writing. While no one was a pro in SW, they were never wooden. Too camp for my taste but I recognize that was intentional.
A problem shared by the biggest budget, slickest hollywood production and the smallest fan film is when the person with power falls in love with some stupid idea. In the hollywood thing, they have the money so they destroy the film because they want something stupid in. In the independent thing, they are the creative force so they create the film that they want to create- it's true to their vision- but it stinks because some part of that vision was irritating to 99.9% of the rest of the world.
Big picture: We have a HUGE GLUT of entertainment in the world all ready. There are many wonderful 1930's films that are still rib crackingly funny (Bringing up Baby, A night at the Opera) or heartbreaking etc. Decades of great music. Decades of films. Decades of television shows. Every day the target audience fragments more. At some point- the salaries and the prices of entertainment must drop. Already, there's no point in pirating most movies since if you wait a few months you can pick them up for $5 to $8 bucks.
Copyright is not needed to encourage entertainment creation. If you create anything even remotely popular, at a $1 a pop, you are set for a couple years. That's huge incentive.
Voting solutions need to be pure hardware. Software can be patched to do whatever I want it to do-- including counting votes one way and then erasing itself after if a certain pattern of votes are entered .
You can't climb mountains- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others! You can't enter contests- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others! You can't eat fatty foods- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others! You can't smoke- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others! You can't do cocaine- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others! You can't go on 2 hours sleep for a week- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others! You can't not brush your teeth- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
Just because you *want* to pay for some kind of care for me, you get to take away every bit of freedom I have one action at a time.
First... I mostly agree with you... That being said. 1. Marijuana -- The State says what you can put into your body (doing no crime to no one else), probably funded by the big medical business No problem- hard to sneak to people and if you do, there is no immediate addiction.
3. Cocaine -- See #1. No crime committed against anyone else. Now if you kill someone (when on drugs or off), I can agree that a crime is committed, but the intoxicant shouldn't matter. Sometimes that intoxicant is adrenaline. Used to addict prostitutes by pimps. While ordinary cocaine is only about as addictive as alchohol, the crack form *horrifically* addictive. It's very easy to sneak into people.
4. Opion/Heroin -- See #1 (doing crime to no one else). Very addictive. Easy to sneak into people.
My issue is with substances that may be added to my food, or to the smoky air or to cigarettes or pot that make them much more addictive. If it's not addictive and easy to sneak to others, then the government shouldn't be wasting its time.
We have destroyed mexico, central, and south america with the war on drugs. If coke and pot were legal this wouldn't have happened. If coke and pot were legal, people would actually believe the harder drugs were dangerous. However- heroin *really* works for people in massive pain. It has value and shouldn't be thrown aside so cavalierly.
Well.. I'm male (6'5" actually) and I've worn a corset *and* fishnet hose....
I would think from the context I was speaking of a male who had become a female.
Obviously the law varies in different parts of the country.
This is slash dot and I will use ABSOLUTELY casual examples in my casual conversations for any major or minor group.
And really it's easier to casually insult everyone equally without any malice rather than being paralyzed and unable to talk because I may not know the sub-rules that one member of a class may hold.
However- your opinion's are valid and will probably influence future transexual examples that I give.
That being said the last transexual conversation I had involved the planet transylvania.
I'm betting that at least one female transexual who was flat-chested would plead male-ness to escape a fine.
Personally, the entire nipple thing on either sex is bogus (even when attached to big bouncing boobies).
What about bikini pics that you can make out anatomy through (oh wait, JC Penneys add three months ago had that and it ran in the newspaper too).
What about a lady in a full corset & stockings (that cover more than the bikini)....holding a banana...holding a zuchinni...holding a vibrator...holding a realistic dildo...holding a real guy....with just a hint of her aereola showing....with the top half showing....with nipples....oh wait, it's really a male transexual (male nipples being legal)...but he's in a corset....but that was fine for Tim Curry
Someone else said it best here in the past.
PLEASE post a web page with a continuam of pictures from fully appropriate to fully inappropriate with each one flagged as to how appropriate or inappropriate it is. That way we can all go to it and see what is an is not appropriate to have on the web.
Actually, the scouts are drifting far enough into a right wing religious organization in many areas of the country that they are starting to lose access to schools and free government facilities.
The funny thing for me, is when I was a scout growing up the literature showed young boys of all faiths being scouts. Okay until you realize that some of those faiths said that the other faiths were false.
Dare doesn't really use good brainwashing techniques.
Isolation, social pressure from the already trained, absolutely no counter examples, lack of sleep.
Dare has a lot of counter programming in society-- Dope is perceived as "fun", "entertaining", "get you laid" in movies and games a lot (sure- also "get you killed" but kids are immortal or so pissed at life they don't care).
Likewise, Pot is so *clearly* less dangerous than cigarettes and alchohol (and less intoxicating usually given the way people use it) that Dare just comes across as stupid. And it cuts down respect for any OTHER message those authority figures try to deliver since it is so clearly bogus. Sure mescaline and heroin are dangerous-- but since the same cheesehead told you pot was bad, how can you be sure before you are dead or addicted.
While 99% are successfully brainwashed, the wonder about humans is that 1% seem to do what they have to do regardless. Call it destiny, a sense of purpose, or being a sociopath.
And how about when something is legal and moral (copying "It's a wonderful Life") and then some big corporation comes in and makes it illegal?
How about a song that's legal to copy-- but the same song sold in a "reissued collection" has a new copyright so it is not legal to copy?
This really applies to old cartoons big time. They are legal via certain paths- but not via other paths. in some of them, the music is legal and then when they are *reissued* the cartoon studio purposely re-records the EXACT same music and lays it back over the cartoon so now it has modern copyrights which will extend another 50 years?
How can you be morally upright and true when you are dealing with incredibly scummy people who bribe congressmen and corrupt government?
It's like watching the barber cut someone's hair, and cutting your own hair and he sues you because he's a magical barber like magicians and expects to get paid for the REST OF HIS LIFE and 50 YEARS after HE DIES for cutting hair in a PARTICULAR pattern and way with particular tools.
Not to mention that 99% of the stuff downloaded would never have been purchased at the desired price. Not to mention that 80% of the stuff will probably never be listened too or only listened to once. Not to mention that the 20% that is listened to will probably expand the market. Not to mention that lots of people are as moral as they afford to be and when they make more money, they'll buy the products if they like them since they want the "real" thing. Not to mention the products that you *can't BUY period* and can only get these ways.
Seriously- if barbers were like musicians, the fact that they wet the right side of your head, combed it back, then combed a row and clipped it with no.6 scissors would be equivalent to a "chord" and they could sue other barbers for cutting hair using the same sequence of "chords" and ever barber who invented a new haircut (like "the bob cut" or the "monica cut" or the "shag cut" could copyright it.
Then they could sue the hell out of anyone who cut hair that way (including people who cut their own hair) and they would add a.25 cent fee to any hair cut of that style for the rest of their lives and for 50 years after they die which would be paid to a big "hair cut production company" that had rights to that style of hair cut.
Why are musicians SO MUCH better than a barber who invites a new style of hair cut?
I haven't done a pure SF con in about 5 years. Too busy. But I assume it hasn't changed.
Little goths playing on each other with knives and so on. Folks hooking up in hotel rooms. Scandal of one of my cons was someone's daughter deciding to take on more than one guy.
Stable passionate relationships with three ladies for 7, 9, and 18 years. Was up to five but one moved away and the other one finally found mr. right (which is cool for her). Started a new one recently that looks promising.
Everyone's happy and knows up front that I'm a bachelor and I have relationships with multiple women.
Close enough I guess.
Oh yea... I forgot #6
#6: FOR GOD'S SAKE LEARN TO DANCE. Swing- Country Western-Whip, Ballroom, Foxtrot. Just do it.
a) You'll have lots of different females in your arms.
b) A LOT of marriages and long term relationships come out of dance classes.
c) Programmers are *EXCELLENT* at the more complicated dances (like "Push"/"Southwest Whip").
If you can dance well, when you are old you can get free cruises and spend them dancing and romancing (tho officially you are not allowed to romance, that's with a wink and a nod, know what I mean... say no more...)
Wow started off easy and has gotten harder and more EQ like.
With each release EQ has become easier and more Wow like.
EQ was always about when you could log on more than about your skill (if you could log on at 3pm and get all the rare spawns/gear before the rest of the world got home, you win!). But the last vestages of skill probably left about 2 years ago. It had a serious increase in wimpiness/friendliness. The old EQ was *cruel* and *hard*. You screw up, you lose ALL your gear that took hundreds of hours to obtain. You *had* to stay up til 3am to CR your corpse out of Sebilous because if it rotted, you were screwed. It felt very intense- and when some stranger helped you- it mattered.
Today-- you die anywhere, you pay a little plat and you are fine again. No big.
Some of the raid encounters do require a little skill. Not sure grouping does. It's more about time spent grouping.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of hand waving and playing to the crowd but not a lot of meat with regard to the central point.
The point of the article you apparently completely missed is this:
IF YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING ILLEGAL ALL THE RATIONALIZATION IN THE WORLD DOESN'T MAKE IT LEGAL. IF YOU ARE STUPID AND DO ILLEGAL ACTIONS AROUND LAW ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE YOU FORGOT IT WAS ILLEGAL YOU WILL PAY FINES OR GO TO JAIL.
On the copyright infringement. All the talk in the world is not going to make this legal. Taking a person's work output without compensating them when they reasonably expected compensation is clearly wrong. You can argue the semantics any way you want, but they are going to keep finding ways to make it illegal or punish you since it is clearly wrong and very easy to get a law passed by the vast majority of lawmakers in any country.
What astounds me, is that you could put every song recorded in the 1950's at 128 or 192 bitrate on a dvd and sell it for five bucks.
That's the true value of that content in my opinion.
I know that pro-infringers like to argue that and I've got just a few mp3's myself.
I also agree that the term needs to be fought because copyright infringment is *like* stealing but it is *not* stealing.
However, if you and your 10,000 closest friends end up with copies of the artists song and the artist ends up with ZERO, NADA, begging for food on the street corner when they should have rightfully had at least a few grand then something bad happened and all your weasel wording won't hide that fact.
Artists *should* be compensated for new works by people who consume those new works.
Artists (and corporations... and their heirs to the 3rd generation) do not deserve to be compensated for songs they recorded in the distant past-- or worse while they were alive and now they are dead.
My personal line is 28 years because that was a commonly agreed on number for a long time. However, if I were to download beatles songs- I'd probably avoid torrents with 10,737 members because I know it's illegal and can get me in to trouble. I'd probably stay in small tight communities- low and under the radar.
It's critical when you engage in some kind of immoral or illegal activity to be honest with yourself that you about what you are doing or the next thing you know, you are the stupid guy getting arrested because he lacked the sense to hide his illegal activity from law enforcement because he'd completely lost all sense of right and wrong about what he was doing.
You see it all the time- people do things wrong and rationalize it to themselves that it's not wrong and then they get in trouble because they lose proper caution.
Put another way-- it's one thing to have a joint at a concert surrounded by 20,000 strangers and quite another to have one in the starbucks or casually walking down a major thoroughfare.
Not really.
His language was precise and I think his analogy holds.
Copyright infringement is "stealing" yes-- but there is a technical difference between theft and copyright infringement even tho they are very similar.
Levies are "taxes" yes-- but there is a technical difference between a levy and a tax even tho they are very similar.
Yup. Seems like a reasonably good analogy to me.
Ooo. SAT style
42) COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT:THEFT TAX: (CAR: FINE: TARRIFF: LEVY)
Star Wreck was something (tho not exactly) like this.
It was worth the time I spent to watch it and I got some intentional laughs from it.
The key is the writing. It was decent but a little sophmoric in SW. Some parts were brilliant- truly brilliant- fresh new concepts- well delivered. A few parts were stale and cliched and probably should have been rewritten a few more times.
Then you need good actors to deliver the writing. While no one was a pro in SW, they were never wooden. Too camp for my taste but I recognize that was intentional.
A problem shared by the biggest budget, slickest hollywood production and the smallest fan film is when the person with power falls in love with some stupid idea. In the hollywood thing, they have the money so they destroy the film because they want something stupid in. In the independent thing, they are the creative force so they create the film that they want to create- it's true to their vision- but it stinks because some part of that vision was irritating to 99.9% of the rest of the world.
Big picture: We have a HUGE GLUT of entertainment in the world all ready. There are many wonderful 1930's films that are still rib crackingly funny (Bringing up Baby, A night at the Opera) or heartbreaking etc. Decades of great music. Decades of films. Decades of television shows. Every day the target audience fragments more. At some point- the salaries and the prices of entertainment must drop. Already, there's no point in pirating most movies since if you wait a few months you can pick them up for $5 to $8 bucks.
Copyright is not needed to encourage entertainment creation. If you create anything even remotely popular, at a $1 a pop, you are set for a couple years. That's huge incentive.
Voting solutions need to be pure hardware.
Software can be patched to do whatever I want it to do-- including counting votes one way and then erasing itself after if a certain pattern of votes are entered .
what a horrific statement.
You can't climb mountains- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
You can't enter contests- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
You can't eat fatty foods- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
You can't smoke- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
You can't do cocaine- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
You can't go on 2 hours sleep for a week- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
You can't not brush your teeth- don't you realize hurting yourself hurts others!
Just because you *want* to pay for some kind of care for me, you get to take away every bit of freedom I have one action at a time.
No thanks- let me die free.
First... I mostly agree with you...
That being said.
1. Marijuana -- The State says what you can put into your body (doing no crime to no one else), probably funded by the big medical business
No problem- hard to sneak to people and if you do, there is no immediate addiction.
3. Cocaine -- See #1. No crime committed against anyone else. Now if you kill someone (when on drugs or off), I can agree that a crime is committed, but the intoxicant shouldn't matter. Sometimes that intoxicant is adrenaline.
Used to addict prostitutes by pimps. While ordinary cocaine is only about as addictive as alchohol, the crack form *horrifically* addictive. It's very easy to sneak into people.
4. Opion/Heroin -- See #1 (doing crime to no one else).
Very addictive. Easy to sneak into people.
My issue is with substances that may be added to my food, or to the smoky air or to cigarettes or pot that make them much more addictive.
If it's not addictive and easy to sneak to others, then the government shouldn't be wasting its time.
We have destroyed mexico, central, and south america with the war on drugs. If coke and pot were legal this wouldn't have happened. If coke and pot were legal, people would actually believe the harder drugs were dangerous. However- heroin *really* works for people in massive pain. It has value and shouldn't be thrown aside so cavalierly.
Well.. I'm male (6'5" actually) and I've worn a corset *and* fishnet hose....
I would think from the context I was speaking of a male who had become a female.
Obviously the law varies in different parts of the country.
This is slash dot and I will use ABSOLUTELY casual examples in my casual conversations for any major or minor group.
And really it's easier to casually insult everyone equally without any malice rather than being paralyzed and unable to talk because I may not know the sub-rules that one member of a class may hold.
However- your opinion's are valid and will probably influence future transexual examples that I give.
That being said the last transexual conversation I had involved the planet transylvania.
I'm betting that at least one female transexual who was flat-chested would plead male-ness to escape a fine.
Personally, the entire nipple thing on either sex is bogus (even when attached to big bouncing boobies).
What about string bikini pics.
...holding a banana ...holding a zuchinni ...holding a vibrator ...holding a realistic dildo ...holding a real guy. ...with just a hint of her aereola showing. ...with the top half showing. ...with nipples. ...oh wait, it's really a male transexual (male nipples being legal) ...but he's in a corset. ...but that was fine for Tim Curry
What about bikini pics that you can make out anatomy through (oh wait, JC Penneys add three months ago had that and it ran in the newspaper too).
What about a lady in a full corset & stockings (that cover more than the bikini).
Someone else said it best here in the past.
PLEASE post a web page with a continuam of pictures from fully appropriate to fully inappropriate with each one flagged as to how appropriate or inappropriate it is. That way we can all go to it and see what is an is not appropriate to have on the web.
Pants that zip in .2 seconds could be very painful.
Actually, the scouts are drifting far enough into a right wing religious organization in many areas of the country that they are starting to lose access to schools and free government facilities.
The funny thing for me, is when I was a scout growing up the literature showed young boys of all faiths being scouts. Okay until you realize that some of those faiths said that the other faiths were false.
nt.
Dare doesn't really use good brainwashing techniques.
Isolation, social pressure from the already trained, absolutely no counter examples, lack of sleep.
Dare has a lot of counter programming in society-- Dope is perceived as "fun", "entertaining", "get you laid" in movies and games a lot (sure- also "get you killed" but kids are immortal or so pissed at life they don't care).
Likewise, Pot is so *clearly* less dangerous than cigarettes and alchohol (and less intoxicating usually given the way people use it) that Dare just comes across as stupid. And it cuts down respect for any OTHER message those authority figures try to deliver since it is so clearly bogus. Sure mescaline and heroin are dangerous-- but since the same cheesehead told you pot was bad, how can you be sure before you are dead or addicted.
And-- for now at least, you can legally record off the radio.
It's rapidly becoming impossible/illegal to do so however.
Another right lost.
You have a very good point.
While 99% are successfully brainwashed, the wonder about humans is that 1% seem to do what they have to do regardless. Call it destiny, a sense of purpose, or being a sociopath.
I have to agree with you.
Clinton was amazingly fiscally conservative.
He was almost my dream of a succesful libertarian candidate.
Totally fiscal conservative while totally liberal socially.
For a trivial investment they were getting huge benefits.
Yet they'll continue wasting money hand over fist for way less return elsewhere in government.
And how about when something is legal and moral (copying "It's a wonderful Life") and then some big corporation comes in and makes it illegal?
How about a song that's legal to copy-- but the same song sold in a "reissued collection" has a new copyright so it is not legal to copy?
This really applies to old cartoons big time. They are legal via certain paths- but not via other paths. in some of them, the music is legal and then when they are *reissued* the cartoon studio purposely re-records the EXACT same music and lays it back over the cartoon so now it has modern copyrights which will extend another 50 years?
How can you be morally upright and true when you are dealing with incredibly scummy people who bribe congressmen and corrupt government?
Yup, that's why 12 year olds should rat out their parents for light recreational drug use, get taken by the state, the parents put in prison.
Not all laws are moral.
Increasingly laws are immoral.
God in East Germany they ratted out their parents for watching TV shows. Some of the parents basically just disappeared.
But hey- IT'S THE LAW.
No.
.25 cent fee to any hair cut of that style for the rest of their lives and for 50 years after they die which would be paid to a big "hair cut production company" that had rights to that style of hair cut.
Jesus. This is such a broken record.
to use YOUR article for the example.
It's like watching the barber cut someone's hair, and cutting your own hair and he sues you because he's a magical barber like magicians and expects to get paid for the REST OF HIS LIFE and 50 YEARS after HE DIES for cutting hair in a PARTICULAR pattern and way with particular tools.
Not to mention that 99% of the stuff downloaded would never have been purchased at the desired price.
Not to mention that 80% of the stuff will probably never be listened too or only listened to once.
Not to mention that the 20% that is listened to will probably expand the market.
Not to mention that lots of people are as moral as they afford to be and when they make more money, they'll buy the products if they like them since they want the "real" thing.
Not to mention the products that you *can't BUY period* and can only get these ways.
Seriously- if barbers were like musicians, the fact that they wet the right side of your head, combed it back, then combed a row and clipped it with no.6 scissors would be equivalent to a "chord" and they could sue other barbers for cutting hair using the same sequence of "chords" and ever barber who invented a new haircut (like "the bob cut" or the "monica cut" or the "shag cut" could copyright it.
Then they could sue the hell out of anyone who cut hair that way (including people who cut their own hair) and they would add a
Why are musicians SO MUCH better than a barber who invites a new style of hair cut?
Actually, more likely to be like the kids in "Jesus Camp".
You get to people young enough- you define who they are and what they feel is right and wrong.
At slash cons they were almost 90% female.
I haven't done a pure SF con in about 5 years. Too busy. But I assume it hasn't changed.
Little goths playing on each other with knives and so on. Folks hooking up in hotel rooms. Scandal of one of my cons was someone's daughter deciding to take on more than one guy.
Hmmm.
Stable passionate relationships with three ladies for 7, 9, and 18 years. Was up to five but one moved away and the other one finally found mr. right (which is cool for her). Started a new one recently that looks promising.
Everyone's happy and knows up front that I'm a bachelor and I have relationships with multiple women.
Close enough I guess.
Oh yea... I forgot #6
#6: FOR GOD'S SAKE LEARN TO DANCE. Swing- Country Western-Whip, Ballroom, Foxtrot. Just do it.
a) You'll have lots of different females in your arms.
b) A LOT of marriages and long term relationships come out of dance classes.
c) Programmers are *EXCELLENT* at the more complicated dances (like "Push"/"Southwest Whip").
If you can dance well, when you are old you can get free cruises and spend them dancing and romancing (tho officially you are not allowed to romance, that's with a wink and a nod, know what I mean... say no more...)
Wow started off easy and has gotten harder and more EQ like.
With each release EQ has become easier and more Wow like.
EQ was always about when you could log on more than about your skill (if you could log on at 3pm and get all the rare spawns/gear before the rest of the world got home, you win!). But the last vestages of skill probably left about 2 years ago. It had a serious increase in wimpiness/friendliness. The old EQ was *cruel* and *hard*. You screw up, you lose ALL your gear that took hundreds of hours to obtain. You *had* to stay up til 3am to CR your corpse out of Sebilous because if it rotted, you were screwed. It felt very intense- and when some stranger helped you- it mattered.
Today-- you die anywhere, you pay a little plat and you are fine again. No big.
Some of the raid encounters do require a little skill. Not sure grouping does. It's more about time spent grouping.