When MS dropped the hammer on Datel's large, 3rd party memory cards, they said they had to do it since those devices allowed cheating. That is, they were read/writable from non-Xboxes since they used SD cards for storage and thus you could easily mod saves.
How does MS square that with this action? This device is read/writeable from non-Xboxes since it's regular USB, isn't it?
I personally never believed that MS' actions were for any reason other than to protect their revenue stream. But can't really go back on their story now, can they? Can Datel sue over something like this if they do?
First, your comment is non-responsive. He never said Intel was cheaper, he said AMD doesn't have a model with performance levels high enough to merit a $1000 price tag when compared to what you can get for $1000 from Intel.
Second, you cherry pick innovations for AMD.
What do you care if your four cores are on-die? Larger dice means lower yield. Two-dice in a package can increase yield and thus reduce price or allow you to have a lot more cache, which helps performance.
Did not Intel do L3 cache first with the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition on Gallatin in September 2003? I think AMD's largest contribution to cache technology is NUMA, not L3 cache. It took Intel at least 5 years to even approximate the advantages of NUMA.
AMD didn't eliminate the Northbridge, they just took one part of it out, the memory controller. The Northbridge was still needed for fast I/O devices, most notably PCIe slots. Intel was first to remove the Northbridge with the Core i7/8xx series.
Intel did on-chip cache first. They did hyperthreading first. They did SIMD extensions (MMX) first. They did superscalar first (with Pentium and its U and V pipes). They did on-chip floating point first (486DX). They did power/heat management first with Speedstep. Intel did 32-bit memory spaces first (and the technology is still used, even with 64-bit extensions in place). Intel pushed the bounds of memory bandwidth far beyond what AMD did. When AMD had 1GB/sec memory bandwidth (133MHz, 8-byte wide), Intel had 6.4GB/sec (800MHz, 8-byte wide). Intel went to pinless page (no more bent pins!) first.
AMD obvious did a ton of good stuff, well disproportionate to their slice of the competitive marketplace. Besides NUMA above, they did 64-bit, they also were deep into multi-package (multi-chip) MP back when Intel wasn't. This never became mainstream because the motherboards cost $300, but it was an advance. They integrated the memory controller (a feature I think was vastly overrated, given that it tied AMD to memory technologies, keeping them stuck on DDR as DDR2 dropped below DDR in price and was already well past it in performance and power).
More importantly, there is the stuff AMD didn't do. AMD didn't put CPUs on a huge cartridge package (slot 1 and the truly massive slot 2!) in order to try to bundle SRAM memory (cache) chips into your CPU purchase to increase sales. AMD didn't sign an exclusive with RAMBUS forcing everyone to use massively overpriced, underperforming RAM. AMD didn't jump on FB-DIMMs (essentially RDRAM-lite), which again are massively slow and power hungry.
AMD matters, but I think you give them too much credit on innovations.
You are speaking of reimports. They're just one aspect of the grey market.
There are other grey market goods. For example, Intel might give out a sample of an i920 to a distributor or retailer for free as a gift. They say not to resell it, but you know, maybe they just do anyway. This becomes a grey market good too.
Basically, any a good is resold against some agreement (borders as you say, NFR in my case) it becomes a grey market good. As you mention, it's typically still a perfectly good item, it's not counterfeit or anything.
I don't really agree on your definition of black market. Black market goods are typically anything that is illegal to sell, they can still be legit goods, just you're not supposed to be able to buy/sell them. If I buy illegally imported liquor that the government didn't get their taxes on, it's black market liquor, even though it's still legit. It also can be a legit good that was stolen and resold. And it's still a legit good, but you might not get a warranty (you might not on grey market goods either!). These two examples are the most typical things people think of when you hear black market.
I don't watch religious or shopping channels. And it doesn't come close to evening out. And as to channels being free, no channel is free for long. They beg to be put in the basic tier, then they get clearance, then they put two shows on, then they start charging and if the cable company removes them, they scream bloody murder, unless of course they have enough backing from their big conglomerate to to force them in.
Everything you see on commercial/mainstream media TV comes from about a half dozen corps. You can play games with percentage cutoffs vs number of providers, but "most TV comes from about 6 major corporations" is more or less correct. So there is no financial reason to have more or less than about a half dozen bundles.
Wrong. Absolutely wrong. The big companies create bundles TO the cable companies that but force them to add new channels. Why do I have 5 ESPNs when I watch two or less? No one was drying to get ESPN Classic! Look at what happened with Versus. They wanted $0.21 per viewer, and DirecTV said no. What happens with the current bundling system? Next year big daddy Comcast comes and forces them to carry Versus or lose other channels. And I end up paying the $0.21/month (plus markup). With A La Carte, I can decide whether that channel is worth $0.21 to me.
So, you can pay the big media corps $75 for 300 channels of which you only watch 3, or you can pay $25/each to only get the three channels you watch. Either way the big media corp total revenue will be unchanged.
That's short-term thinking. People will be unhappy about paying $25/month for one channel and a competitor will come along that only charges $12 for that channel, and people might pick that one up instead. It's called competition. Similarly, if you say only 3 channels cost $25, then all those other channels will be pretty cheap, won't they? So why do you suddenly say I'll only have 3 channels if all the others have to go down to pennies a channel in order for me to pick them up? Maybe I'll start picking them up then, but only the ones I want. And I'll still only be paying about $75/month.
5) Ha Ha very funny dude. Actually, they have to sell eyeballs to advertisers.
If people aren't watching, they don't have eyeballs to sell. So in order to sell eyeballs, they have to make content people watch.
If you only like one show, you watch only that show, it'd be interesting if you only had to pay for that show. As to the ads, they take care of themselves, you only see the ads from that one show.
I would love to see the channel system gone, where you just watch what you want. Like Hulu does. And if this bundling system where you pay just to have a channel as an option goes away, maybe we'll see it happen.
You want to know why your cable bill is so high? This is why. Cable stations (and now network stations) charge cable companies to carry their channels. So they get paid whether you watch their content or not!
It is these deals that keep things like Hulu from happening because why would a cable station offer their program for only advertising revenue online when they can get fixed monthly revenue plus advertising over cable/satellite.
And this is why your cable bill is so high. You are paying for channels whether you watch them or not. And due to big bundles, you're paying for a lot of them.
Meanwhile, the cable (and satellite) companies make these big bundles so they can hide the cost of carrying these channels by making you think you're paying for breadth of content. Mostly, you're actually paying most of it for 5 ESPN channels! And that's great if you want to pay that much for ESPN. But the rest of us need more choice.
Each channel should be individually tallied so you know how much you're paying for each channel. If you feel the channel is worth the price, you pay for it. If you feel it isn't worth it, you can not pay for it. And if enough channels don't get picked up by people, they will realize they can't just get free money, they have to provide content people want to watch, and once they do that, they won't care if they get their viewers from cable companies or Hulu.
This would be preferable to seeing larger and larger bundles pushed on us.
Isn't that all games. In reality I have a job and killing scads of people makes you a bad person and usually lands you in jail. In games, neither of these are the case.
So how is "alternate reality" a qualifier that separates one kind of game from another?
The damages depend on how much of the value of the stamp is derived from the picture on it. Most of the value of the stamp is tied up in what it can do for you (convince the USPS to deliver your letter/package), not the picture on front.
And no problems figuring out which pedal I was pressing and how hard. As if a spring on the other end of a throttle cable somehow were superior in feel to a spring on the pedal down by your foot. Insane.
There is no car with brake-by-wire, the pedal always operates the brakes directly, but the computer may modulate the boost for you to change exactly how much it does it. But even if the computer craps out completely, you still have that direct hydraulic connection to the master cylinder and from there to the brake pads.
The interlock, presuming it is the same as Audi has had for a decade, is that if you press the brake while the gas is on it cancels the gas. But, if you press the gas while the brake is on, the gas comes on normally.
So it doesn't prevent brake torquing, it doesn't prevent heel-toe, since both of those have you pressing the gas while the brake is down, not the brake while the gas is down.
I am not sure as to what you two think trail braking is. Trail braking is simply applying the brake after you have already started to turn into the corner instead of the standard way of braking, then turning. It doesn't have to do with having the gas and brake on at the same time at all. So it shouldn't be affected either.
I'm sure there are laws against this. I'm also quite certain that a wise local can get around them. This is one of the biggest problems in China. They can tighten the law all they want and it doesn't stop things because the enforcement is corrupt.
It also creates a huge inequity against foreign companies (like Google) because the same people who take the bribes either are already bribed by the locals or are afraid if they accept bribes from foreigners, the foreigners will be more likely to rat them out for taking bribes (an offense which carries the death penalty) later.
And this is all before you get into the question as to whether the government is breaking the law, which is quite possible, it happens in a lot of countries.
Summary says: 'The free video format Ogg Theora was already at least as good for web video (see a comparison) as its nonfree competitor H.264'
Except the source linked (at see a comparison) says:
'In the case of the 499kbit/sec H.264 I believe that under careful comparison many people would prefer the H.264 video.'
This is the only comparison statement made versus H.264 in that article and H.264 comes out on top. The article primarily uses H.263 as a reference, stating that H.264 isn't used in mainstream streamed internet video, we all know is no longer true.
It would be great if slashdot at least checked the summaries a little bit.
Also note that is a very low-end profile for H.264, any one of you can make a lot better looking version of Big Buck Bunny at 499kbit/sec simply using ffmpeg.
And this flash app doesn't even do anything complex.
Go there and watch your CPU go to over 50% usage. No matter how much CPU you have! If you are on a laptop, your fan will come on within 1 minute.
The problem is that it is easy to hog the CPU with flash. So when you browse, you are hoping that the developers of every flash program you run is a good one. And unfortunately, there are a lot of bad programmers out there.
It's not all Flash's fault. If you ran 500 programs each day on your computer even as native apps, you'd run into a lot of stinkers. But that's what you're doing with flash, running programs from every site you go to, sometimes multiple ones.
If every developer was a good one and if they (and their managers) kept power usage and CPU efficiency in mind, then Flash would be a lot more viable on small portable devices.
He blamed 'politicians, the Catholic Church, the "unthinkable atrocities" committed by big business and the government bailouts' for his own failures to reach his goals. This is classic schizophrenic behavior, it is delusions of grandeur. With delusions of grandeur, you are convinced you are the most amazing person in the world and you should be able to succeed at anything. When you don't succeed, you start finding reasons as to why. And since you're convinced you are the best, you start at the top, because clearly it takes powerful forces to keep a great man like you down.
So you blame any powerful group. The government, big religion and big business.
My uncle had the same symptoms. He had all his genius ideas written down and the government was trying to steal them (physically!). He wrote to Kofi Annan (the head of the UN) to tell him that George Tenet (the head of the CIA) was in the building across the street spying on him. This is how these delusions work. Not only is the government out to get you, but the important people in the government are involved!
So what makes these guys? Well, primarily their own mental illness. The media has a role (previously lore did) in helping them choose the bad guys who they are going to list as out to get them. But the media doesn't create them, they'd just select other enemies if the media changed their tune.
I believe that is incorrect. Filers were rigging the system, delaying their patent being approved because they knew they'd be covered during approval and for 17 years after. These were called submarine patents. So they changed the figures to be just 20 years from filing. If it takes 5 years to go through, you get 15 after.
The only data in the article you refer to was captured data from XPnet that said that >90% of RAM was in use in Windows 7 machines. There was no data saying it led to swapping, that was supposition.
If I open the shutters, I can now see through the windows. If I open the windows, it lets air circulate in and out (and boy will it!). This appears to be opening the shutters to expose the windows, correct?
It's becoming highly unreliable. Advances in error correction are plugging some of the holes, but you can expect to start to see real problems soon, especially with cheap brands where they don't up their controller quality (the controller has the ECC) to compensate for the low-grade NAND they buy.
As to Bunnie, I was pretty sure he'd been around the block already. Of course Kingston just repackages other people's NAND chips. There's only something like 7 manufacturers of NAND, and even that counts Intel and Micron separately even though they both sell the same designs every time. What did Bunnie think was in iPhones and XBox 360s? Apple and Microsoft don't make NAND either!
Slashdot Mirror
That's not the conventional definition of freedom. That page attempts to define "free works", which is not the same as "freedom".
One different than the one I do.
Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.
No seriously, who is selling counterfeit cars in the US?
You all should be ashamed of yourselves for modding up hateful comments.
When MS dropped the hammer on Datel's large, 3rd party memory cards, they said they had to do it since those devices allowed cheating. That is, they were read/writable from non-Xboxes since they used SD cards for storage and thus you could easily mod saves.
How does MS square that with this action? This device is read/writeable from non-Xboxes since it's regular USB, isn't it?
I personally never believed that MS' actions were for any reason other than to protect their revenue stream. But can't really go back on their story now, can they? Can Datel sue over something like this if they do?
First, your comment is non-responsive. He never said Intel was cheaper, he said AMD doesn't have a model with performance levels high enough to merit a $1000 price tag when compared to what you can get for $1000 from Intel.
Second, you cherry pick innovations for AMD.
What do you care if your four cores are on-die? Larger dice means lower yield. Two-dice in a package can increase yield and thus reduce price or allow you to have a lot more cache, which helps performance.
Did not Intel do L3 cache first with the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition on Gallatin in September 2003? I think AMD's largest contribution to cache technology is NUMA, not L3 cache. It took Intel at least 5 years to even approximate the advantages of NUMA.
AMD didn't eliminate the Northbridge, they just took one part of it out, the memory controller. The Northbridge was still needed for fast I/O devices, most notably PCIe slots. Intel was first to remove the Northbridge with the Core i7/8xx series.
Intel did on-chip cache first. They did hyperthreading first. They did SIMD extensions (MMX) first. They did superscalar first (with Pentium and its U and V pipes). They did on-chip floating point first (486DX). They did power/heat management first with Speedstep. Intel did 32-bit memory spaces first (and the technology is still used, even with 64-bit extensions in place). Intel pushed the bounds of memory bandwidth far beyond what AMD did. When AMD had 1GB/sec memory bandwidth (133MHz, 8-byte wide), Intel had 6.4GB/sec (800MHz, 8-byte wide). Intel went to pinless page (no more bent pins!) first.
AMD obvious did a ton of good stuff, well disproportionate to their slice of the competitive marketplace. Besides NUMA above, they did 64-bit, they also were deep into multi-package (multi-chip) MP back when Intel wasn't. This never became mainstream because the motherboards cost $300, but it was an advance. They integrated the memory controller (a feature I think was vastly overrated, given that it tied AMD to memory technologies, keeping them stuck on DDR as DDR2 dropped below DDR in price and was already well past it in performance and power).
More importantly, there is the stuff AMD didn't do. AMD didn't put CPUs on a huge cartridge package (slot 1 and the truly massive slot 2!) in order to try to bundle SRAM memory (cache) chips into your CPU purchase to increase sales. AMD didn't sign an exclusive with RAMBUS forcing everyone to use massively overpriced, underperforming RAM. AMD didn't jump on FB-DIMMs (essentially RDRAM-lite), which again are massively slow and power hungry.
AMD matters, but I think you give them too much credit on innovations.
You are speaking of reimports. They're just one aspect of the grey market.
There are other grey market goods. For example, Intel might give out a sample of an i920 to a distributor or retailer for free as a gift. They say not to resell it, but you know, maybe they just do anyway. This becomes a grey market good too.
Basically, any a good is resold against some agreement (borders as you say, NFR in my case) it becomes a grey market good. As you mention, it's typically still a perfectly good item, it's not counterfeit or anything.
I don't really agree on your definition of black market. Black market goods are typically anything that is illegal to sell, they can still be legit goods, just you're not supposed to be able to buy/sell them. If I buy illegally imported liquor that the government didn't get their taxes on, it's black market liquor, even though it's still legit. It also can be a legit good that was stolen and resold. And it's still a legit good, but you might not get a warranty (you might not on grey market goods either!). These two examples are the most typical things people think of when you hear black market.
1) Some pay?
I don't watch religious or shopping channels. And it doesn't come close to evening out. And as to channels being free, no channel is free for long. They beg to be put in the basic tier, then they get clearance, then they put two shows on, then they start charging and if the cable company removes them, they scream bloody murder, unless of course they have enough backing from their big conglomerate to to force them in.
Everything you see on commercial/mainstream media TV comes from about a half dozen corps. You can play games with percentage cutoffs vs number of providers, but "most TV comes from about 6 major corporations" is more or less correct. So there is no financial reason to have more or less than about a half dozen bundles.
Wrong. Absolutely wrong. The big companies create bundles TO the cable companies that but force them to add new channels. Why do I have 5 ESPNs when I watch two or less? No one was drying to get ESPN Classic! Look at what happened with Versus. They wanted $0.21 per viewer, and DirecTV said no. What happens with the current bundling system? Next year big daddy Comcast comes and forces them to carry Versus or lose other channels. And I end up paying the $0.21/month (plus markup). With A La Carte, I can decide whether that channel is worth $0.21 to me.
So, you can pay the big media corps $75 for 300 channels of which you only watch 3, or you can pay $25/each to only get the three channels you watch. Either way the big media corp total revenue will be unchanged.
That's short-term thinking. People will be unhappy about paying $25/month for one channel and a competitor will come along that only charges $12 for that channel, and people might pick that one up instead. It's called competition. Similarly, if you say only 3 channels cost $25, then all those other channels will be pretty cheap, won't they? So why do you suddenly say I'll only have 3 channels if all the others have to go down to pennies a channel in order for me to pick them up? Maybe I'll start picking them up then, but only the ones I want. And I'll still only be paying about $75/month.
5) Ha Ha very funny dude. Actually, they have to sell eyeballs to advertisers.
If people aren't watching, they don't have eyeballs to sell. So in order to sell eyeballs, they have to make content people watch.
100%.
If you only like one show, you watch only that show, it'd be interesting if you only had to pay for that show. As to the ads, they take care of themselves, you only see the ads from that one show.
I would love to see the channel system gone, where you just watch what you want. Like Hulu does. And if this bundling system where you pay just to have a channel as an option goes away, maybe we'll see it happen.
Al la carte, please.
You want to know why your cable bill is so high? This is why. Cable stations (and now network stations) charge cable companies to carry their channels. So they get paid whether you watch their content or not!
It is these deals that keep things like Hulu from happening because why would a cable station offer their program for only advertising revenue online when they can get fixed monthly revenue plus advertising over cable/satellite.
And this is why your cable bill is so high. You are paying for channels whether you watch them or not. And due to big bundles, you're paying for a lot of them.
Meanwhile, the cable (and satellite) companies make these big bundles so they can hide the cost of carrying these channels by making you think you're paying for breadth of content. Mostly, you're actually paying most of it for 5 ESPN channels! And that's great if you want to pay that much for ESPN. But the rest of us need more choice.
Each channel should be individually tallied so you know how much you're paying for each channel. If you feel the channel is worth the price, you pay for it. If you feel it isn't worth it, you can not pay for it. And if enough channels don't get picked up by people, they will realize they can't just get free money, they have to provide content people want to watch, and once they do that, they won't care if they get their viewers from cable companies or Hulu.
This would be preferable to seeing larger and larger bundles pushed on us.
How about 100%?
Have you never played a Flash game online? It uses the same code on all platforms and it picks up where you left off even if you switch platforms.
What's the big deal?
Alternate Reality Game?
Isn't that all games. In reality I have a job and killing scads of people makes you a bad person and usually lands you in jail. In games, neither of these are the case.
So how is "alternate reality" a qualifier that separates one kind of game from another?
Did we learn nothing from "ogg"?
Please use terminology that doesn't evince giggles from the general public.
The damages depend on how much of the value of the stamp is derived from the picture on it. Most of the value of the stamp is tied up in what it can do for you (convince the USPS to deliver your letter/package), not the picture on front.
And no problems figuring out which pedal I was pressing and how hard. As if a spring on the other end of a throttle cable somehow were superior in feel to a spring on the pedal down by your foot. Insane.
There is no car with brake-by-wire, the pedal always operates the brakes directly, but the computer may modulate the boost for you to change exactly how much it does it. But even if the computer craps out completely, you still have that direct hydraulic connection to the master cylinder and from there to the brake pads.
So in summary, it's in your head.
The interlock, presuming it is the same as Audi has had for a decade, is that if you press the brake while the gas is on it cancels the gas. But, if you press the gas while the brake is on, the gas comes on normally.
So it doesn't prevent brake torquing, it doesn't prevent heel-toe, since both of those have you pressing the gas while the brake is down, not the brake while the gas is down.
I am not sure as to what you two think trail braking is. Trail braking is simply applying the brake after you have already started to turn into the corner instead of the standard way of braking, then turning. It doesn't have to do with having the gas and brake on at the same time at all. So it shouldn't be affected either.
Get the flash.
I'm sure there are laws against this. I'm also quite certain that a wise local can get around them. This is one of the biggest problems in China. They can tighten the law all they want and it doesn't stop things because the enforcement is corrupt.
It also creates a huge inequity against foreign companies (like Google) because the same people who take the bribes either are already bribed by the locals or are afraid if they accept bribes from foreigners, the foreigners will be more likely to rat them out for taking bribes (an offense which carries the death penalty) later.
And this is all before you get into the question as to whether the government is breaking the law, which is quite possible, it happens in a lot of countries.
Summary says:
'The free video format Ogg Theora was already at least as good for web video (see a comparison) as its nonfree competitor H.264'
Except the source linked (at see a comparison) says:
'In the case of the 499kbit/sec H.264 I believe that under careful comparison many people would prefer the H.264 video.'
This is the only comparison statement made versus H.264 in that article and H.264 comes out on top. The article primarily uses H.263 as a reference, stating that H.264 isn't used in mainstream streamed internet video, we all know is no longer true.
It would be great if slashdot at least checked the summaries a little bit.
Also note that is a very low-end profile for H.264, any one of you can make a lot better looking version of Big Buck Bunny at 499kbit/sec simply using ffmpeg.
Here's flash's problem in a nutshell.
http://kakuro.com/
And this flash app doesn't even do anything complex.
Go there and watch your CPU go to over 50% usage. No matter how much CPU you have! If you are on a laptop, your fan will come on within 1 minute.
The problem is that it is easy to hog the CPU with flash. So when you browse, you are hoping that the developers of every flash program you run is a good one. And unfortunately, there are a lot of bad programmers out there.
It's not all Flash's fault. If you ran 500 programs each day on your computer even as native apps, you'd run into a lot of stinkers. But that's what you're doing with flash, running programs from every site you go to, sometimes multiple ones.
If every developer was a good one and if they (and their managers) kept power usage and CPU efficiency in mind, then Flash would be a lot more viable on small portable devices.
He blamed 'politicians, the Catholic Church, the "unthinkable atrocities" committed by big business and the government bailouts' for his own failures to reach his goals. This is classic schizophrenic behavior, it is delusions of grandeur. With delusions of grandeur, you are convinced you are the most amazing person in the world and you should be able to succeed at anything. When you don't succeed, you start finding reasons as to why. And since you're convinced you are the best, you start at the top, because clearly it takes powerful forces to keep a great man like you down.
So you blame any powerful group. The government, big religion and big business.
My uncle had the same symptoms. He had all his genius ideas written down and the government was trying to steal them (physically!). He wrote to Kofi Annan (the head of the UN) to tell him that George Tenet (the head of the CIA) was in the building across the street spying on him. This is how these delusions work. Not only is the government out to get you, but the important people in the government are involved!
So what makes these guys? Well, primarily their own mental illness. The media has a role (previously lore did) in helping them choose the bad guys who they are going to list as out to get them. But the media doesn't create them, they'd just select other enemies if the media changed their tune.
I believe that is incorrect. Filers were rigging the system, delaying their patent being approved because they knew they'd be covered during approval and for 17 years after. These were called submarine patents. So they changed the figures to be just 20 years from filing. If it takes 5 years to go through, you get 15 after.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_of_patent_in_the_United_States
The only data in the article you refer to was captured data from XPnet that said that >90% of RAM was in use in Windows 7 machines. There was no data saying it led to swapping, that was supposition.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9158258/Most_Windows_7_PCs_max_out_memory
If I open the shutters, I can now see through the windows. If I open the windows, it lets air circulate in and out (and boy will it!). This appears to be opening the shutters to expose the windows, correct?
It's becoming highly unreliable. Advances in error correction are plugging some of the holes, but you can expect to start to see real problems soon, especially with cheap brands where they don't up their controller quality (the controller has the ECC) to compensate for the low-grade NAND they buy.
As to Bunnie, I was pretty sure he'd been around the block already. Of course Kingston just repackages other people's NAND chips. There's only something like 7 manufacturers of NAND, and even that counts Intel and Micron separately even though they both sell the same designs every time. What did Bunnie think was in iPhones and XBox 360s? Apple and Microsoft don't make NAND either!
Or is it massive enough that it must purchase two seats?