1) Although DRM has not impacted on many acts permitted by law,
certain permitted acts are being adversely affected by the use of
DRM; 2) This is in spite of the existence of technological solutions
(enabling partitioning and authentication of users) to
accommodate those permitted acts (privileged exceptions); 3) Beneficiaries of privileged exceptions who have been prevented
from carrying out those permitted acts (because of the
employment of DRM) have not used the complaints mechanism
set out in UK law; 4) Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive put an onus on
content owners to accommodate privileged exceptions
voluntarily. Voluntary measures have emerged in the publishing
field, but not all content owners are ready to act unless they are
told to do so by regulatory authorities.
My commentary:
1) As far as I can tell, DRM for the most part also hasn't had a noticeable impact on the uses not permitted by law. In other words: DRM only harms the customers, not the pirates.
2) As the record has shown in various court cases, the media companies are a bunch of assholes. Of course they're not going to care if little Ms. Teacher wants to (fairly!) use some copyrighted piece of work in hear lessons. They have "Power!! Unlimited POWAH!!!!"
3) What, there's a complaints mechanism? That would have been pretty good if people knew about it and used it.
4) Wait, what??? The DRM control freaks are supposed to voluntarily give up control? That sounds like a misunderstanding of human psychology. Also, quote The Matrix 2 (too bad they never made any sequels): "[Oracle] What do all men with power want? [Neo]... [Oracle] More power".
Alexa's top 20 sites have names that have no real connection to the business. They're just rarely used words that lack much meaning in everyday life (Google, Amazon).
What are you talking about? The name "Google" has everything to do with Google's business: they index about 10^100 pages and serve 10^100 ads per second.
Obviously it's possible for any national government to make biased value judgments (one might even say that it's necessary some of the time)
Isn't the purpose of any governmental organization to make value judgments that have the same bias as that of its constituents?
It's not just inevitable, or sometimes called for. It's their duty.
That being said, any government is boneheaded if it implements policies whose effects are contrary to its goals, even if the policy through appeal to (misguided) common sense sounds like it achieves the stated goal.
(A particular case: increasing taxation may decrease government revenue because people work less so there's less exchange of money to tax.)
What if someone took the WoW engine and put an actual business behind it and started hiring on the basis that you would be represented within the company as your virtual self instead of a physical presence?
I'd think people would
Work in the WoW business from 9 to 5.
Do boring, repetitive tasks which produce (or otherwise make available) a limited good.
Exchange the good for money
(You know, like a real job).
I have a great idea for a virtual business the two of us should get working on (but don't tell anyone). It's the greatest WoW business of all time:
Gold Mining!
Enjoy the perilous, adventurous quest for precious metal (and the handsome rewards that go with it), all from the safety and comfort of your own home.
I think this will revolutionize WoW. Let's pioneer this wonderful new business model!
MPAA is still working on the technology to allow playback there.
Yeah, commenting out if (disc.region == player.region) before the { play(disc); } is really something novel...
Although... can you "comment out" a (sub)circuit that's already been cast into silicon? I s'pose you can cut it off and replace it with a big resistor (if it's linear)...
But perhaps more importantly: what were they going to watch?
See the young girls wearing skimpy little space suits, lying on the Andromeda beach, catching some sun and a mild gust of solar wind. [something about sex, short-term relationships and jealousy]. Tune in tomorrow, where we see who will have to leave... the Paradise Planet.
Does this mean Windows isn't ready for the Average Joe's desktop yet?;-)
There are already people posting "well, they should have checked to make sure their computer could play DVDs." Why?
Because they're sending it into space. If you send stuff into space, and you want to expect it to work, you test it.
One good reason: it's really hard to service once it's up there. Should it be the case that the testing of DVD playback is trying it once, saying "yep, it works", and then moving on? Yeah, I'm coll with that. But if you want it to work in space, you test it.
releases a CPU that does what I mean, not what I say.
They have that, it's called a Girlfriend.
However, it has the freedom to decide what you mean however it wants. Beware of the "dilf, itd" instruction---it's short for "do I look fat in this dress?"
So why the need to force it to happen through a government-backed monopoly?
Because, NOMINALLY, the government is accountable to the people and will not abuse its monopoly. A private enterprise owning all the roads will. The market will converge to a monopoly due to network effects.
"Oh, you have a road, how nice. It's a real shame it costs consumers 1000$ to cross the roads adjacent to yours."
Judge for yourself whether that's reality.
In economics, there's something called a Vickrey Auction, where you have n distinct goods and m players, each valuing each subset S of {1..n} at different levels.
(having 23 volumes of a 24 volume encyclopedia is worth less than 23/24 times the value of a full encyclopedia; having a million apples is worth less than one million times the value of one apple: they rot)
It's possible to solve a Vickrey Auction for maximal social benefit (IIRC), and each person ends up paying their externality---that is, how much "damage" they cause to the other participants.
I wonder if microeconomics 101 (supply curve crosses demand curve at the market clearing price) can be derived from this.
But I assume it's the reasoning behind green taxes on gas (you pay for the damage you cause to others due to pollution) and weight taxes (since your heavy car wears out the roads more than other cars, you pay for the repair work in proportion to how much you cause it).
In some economic games, government intervention is preferable to anarchy (in theory). ISTR network construction and/or routing being among those games.
No socialist effort is going to make a web site that beats Google, Apple's itune Store, or Amazon.
No, but a pair of university students could easily come up with an algorithm, let's call it PageSort, which is better than all the current offerings.
Then, their university (let's call in Stanfort) could host the first implementation until it becomes so big and popular that it needs dedicated hosting.
Who knows, maybe it could become something big that will overthrow Yahoo...
It wasn't the Google boys' student loans that gave them the idea for PageRank. Socialism (i.e. tax-paid tuition) could just as easily have given you Google, in its early stages.
The reason Google wouldn't be able to progress is that no one will provide Google with the data center it needs through a socialist effort---and I have a nagging suspicion that you'll say "no, they earn the money the use for their operational costs, they're not socialist."
Communism/socialism, on the other hand, demands forced collaboration.
Yes, and I think it's a real shame I'm not in financial ruin from my five years of tuition (no fees) and my summer vacation spent in the hospital plus ongoing check-ups (no fees).
What especially worries me is that the doctors who treated me---even though they're great doctors, really smart people, if their parents weren't rich enough to put them (and their siblings) through college, is it really right for me to accept their treatment?
And should I ever leave the safety of the university and get a Real Job, I can look forward to paying it all back on the taxes, so that I can only afford a big (not huge) house with a big (not huge) lawn and a fast (not flying) car.
Really. We don't have flying cars in Denmark. But we do have free education, free health care, free public libraries, free telephony (50 texts and 50 minutes per month, cheaper than US rates if you go beyond), only a few of the ISPs are evil (not mine), and we're a socialist country:
Our constitution, our frigging constitution, says the state will support you if you can't do it yourself (in exchange for you fulfilling the responsibilities that go along with it, i.e. a state-appointed job).
the Linux community has yet to meet the opportunity with an office platform that does for Windows what OS X did for Mac OS.
Didn't NT (2000, XP) implement memory protection and pre-emptive multitasking? Didn't Unix do those in the '70s? Didn't Linux do those from day 1?
Or do you mean the symmetric multiprocessing that was added in OS X? I hear that Linux already does that.
I haven't owned a Mac, and I have only used them in the early '90s, so maybe I'm not the most qualified person to talk here*.
But... what are the major features that OS X has, that neither of OS 9, Linux nor Windows has?
* I'm not an Apple hater or an MS hater or a Linux fanboi (any longer:D). All three OSes have issues. The Linux crap is just easier and more pleasant for me to fix or work around.
It's basically a rewrite of a bunch of command line utilities that few people really care about now.
Such as grep, sed, sort, find, wc, tar, gzip, cat, ls, rm, mv, mkdir, rmdir, head, tail, sha1sum, uniq,...?
The stuff you use in your day-to-day operation (or in your shell scripts). Right. Nobodoy could possibly care about those.
Okay, so most people run X and $DESKENV. Fine, but try uninstalling the GNU coreutils and findutils once, just for kicks. Then, try reinstalling them afterwards. Let me know if reinstalling them actually words.
Or did you perhaps mean autoconf, automake, make, gdb and emacs? Try uninstalling them, then compiling KDE or GNOME.
"But I don't need to compile GNOME, I can download the binaries". Yeah, but someone has to do it for you.
Just because you don't see them doesn't mean they aren't there, nor does it mean they aren't important.
Can you only move around in your text with arrow keys, page up/down and home/end? That's a deal breaker for me. I've given VS some flak for that at http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1245985&cid=28106773 but it applies to most editors except emacs and vi.
Last time I checked, you had to move your hands all the way over to the arrow keys just to move around in your text.
Sure, you can cheat and get Ergo Elan keyboard from Kinesis, which puts the arrow keys in what's essential the Fn/Ctrl/Alt/Space "sub-bottom" row (and it puts Ctrl, Alt, Space, Enter, PgUp, PgDn, Home, End, Delete and Backspace under your thumb; go look at keyboard pr0n to see how it makes sense). But that's still in the sub-bottom row. Way harder to reach than the home or top row.
I don't think it's "actually very good". I think it gets the very basics wrong. It may have great features that are easier to use than in emacs and vi, but if I'm constantly pissed of by having gross inefficiency or discomfort imposed on me by poor design decisions, I'm not going to be happy and (thus) I'm not going to be as productive.
And it's not like Microsoft doesn't have the resources to fix the editor: they have many in-house coders who prefer to use emacs (more than they like to admit, in any case). Why don't they ask them why they prefer emacs, and think about how they can make VS provide what emacs users want?
(How do I insert 78 '#'es? How do I move forward five words? How do I select for copy-pasting the current function? How do I go to the next preprocessor directive? How do I jump to the matching parenthesis? How do I navigate the sexp tree? How do I look up in three seconds what a key does, or which keys a function is bound to? How do I jump to a function/struct/union/enum definition? All without a mouse, of course)
That doesn't sound right, so I'll assume that the job of everyone else is to produce Lego bricks, and the compositor's job is to assemble a Lego model from the individual pieces. (That'd make sense, seeing how "composi" is also a prefix of "composing", as in music composition.) In movie terms, a compositor is the Director who turns {screenplay} plus {sets, actors, props, etc.} into {shots} with a dose of Editor who turns {shots} into {master roll}.
I have mixed feelings about the Starcraft cinematics.
Video-production-wise, they were not just par but good (or higher) for the course. They were interlaced, not exactly high-res and 256 color palette (IIRC). But damn those zergs attacking the terrans in the science vessel sent you "omg, this is baaad".
But narration-wise, they didn't do much. The first can be summarised as "two terrans get ambushed by zergs in the wastelands". Great, but that's only a minor piece of the story. The bulk of the story is told, not shown (nor played).
To me, they seem like they're bling which is there mostly for the sake of being bling. That doesn't mean they're good bling, though;-)
Let's compare to Warcraft III (Say, reign of chaos since that's what I know best). Each campaign has two (pre-rendered) cinematic videos: one at the beginning and one at the end. During the game there are video sequences for briefings and story development. They are rendered on the fly, by the game engine, and the transition back and forth between playing and watching is quite smooth.
Also, you feel like you're participating in the store more (in WC3). I think it's the interspersed videos showing your characters (well, units) playing out the zero-choice points in the story. By having it shown rather than told, you experience the story more cohesively (the individual "story points" have more and stronger connections). It might also be that the story is "narrower": it doesn't skip over too many events (so the "story points" are closer together). It might also just be a better written story, not sure.
I think Starcraft has a good story with an interesting theme: the struggle of control vs. freedom and rebellion against governmental, familial (Kerrigan "vs." sibling cerebrates and a parental Overmind) and religious authority.
But Warcraft III beats it on execution, on how the story is told.
Hoping that I'm not about to start a flame war: why?
I should add to myself (sorry for the self-reply): I hope I'm also not feeding the trolls. I mean, seriously, 10 klocs is too much? On second reflection, that has a mild troll odor to it. At least as far as I nose.
But even if I am, I think I'm making valid points that not everybody knows about or would have though about.
Slashdot Mirror
Here are the conclusions of the study:
1) Although DRM has not impacted on many acts permitted by law,
certain permitted acts are being adversely affected by the use of
DRM;
2) This is in spite of the existence of technological solutions
(enabling partitioning and authentication of users) to
accommodate those permitted acts (privileged exceptions);
3) Beneficiaries of privileged exceptions who have been prevented
from carrying out those permitted acts (because of the
employment of DRM) have not used the complaints mechanism
set out in UK law;
4) Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive put an onus on
content owners to accommodate privileged exceptions
voluntarily. Voluntary measures have emerged in the publishing
field, but not all content owners are ready to act unless they are
told to do so by regulatory authorities.
My commentary:
1) As far as I can tell, DRM for the most part also hasn't had a noticeable impact on the uses not permitted by law. In other words: DRM only harms the customers, not the pirates.
2) As the record has shown in various court cases, the media companies are a bunch of assholes. Of course they're not going to care if little Ms. Teacher wants to (fairly!) use some copyrighted piece of work in hear lessons. They have "Power!! Unlimited POWAH!!!!"
3) What, there's a complaints mechanism? That would have been pretty good if people knew about it and used it.
4) Wait, what??? The DRM control freaks are supposed to voluntarily give up control? That sounds like a misunderstanding of human psychology. Also, quote The Matrix 2 (too bad they never made any sequels): "[Oracle] What do all men with power want? [Neo] ... [Oracle] More power".
Ahh, I see you slipped a cute physics joke through one of the slits.
Alexa's top 20 sites have names that have no real connection to the business. They're just rarely used words that lack much meaning in everyday life (Google, Amazon).
What are you talking about? The name "Google" has everything to do with Google's business: they index about 10^100 pages and serve 10^100 ads per second.
Give control to France.
They'll surrender control to the first party who asks nicely.
(Sorry. Just kidding. I have seen the crosses. Sadly, I can't remember all the names on them.)
Obviously it's possible for any national government to make biased value judgments (one might even say that it's necessary some of the time)
Isn't the purpose of any governmental organization to make value judgments that have the same bias as that of its constituents?
It's not just inevitable, or sometimes called for. It's their duty.
That being said, any government is boneheaded if it implements policies whose effects are contrary to its goals, even if the policy through appeal to (misguided) common sense sounds like it achieves the stated goal.
(A particular case: increasing taxation may decrease government revenue because people work less so there's less exchange of money to tax.)
It randomly generated my character name as "Inoob"
I don't like it :(
the only requirement is that the successful poster be garrulous and loquacious.
That's not necessary. You just need to talk a lot, although xenonymous grandiloquence certainly helps ;)
What if someone took the WoW engine and put an actual business behind it and started hiring on the basis that you would be represented within the company as your virtual self instead of a physical presence?
I'd think people would
(You know, like a real job).
I have a great idea for a virtual business the two of us should get working on (but don't tell anyone). It's the greatest WoW business of all time:
Gold Mining!
Enjoy the perilous, adventurous quest for precious metal (and the handsome rewards that go with it), all from the safety and comfort of your own home.
I think this will revolutionize WoW. Let's pioneer this wonderful new business model!
MPAA is still working on the technology to allow playback there.
Yeah, commenting out if (disc.region == player.region) before the { play(disc); } is really something novel...
Although... can you "comment out" a (sub)circuit that's already been cast into silicon? I s'pose you can cut it off and replace it with a big resistor (if it's linear)...
But perhaps more importantly: what were they going to watch?
See the young girls wearing skimpy little space suits, lying on the Andromeda beach, catching some sun and a mild gust of solar wind. [something about sex, short-term relationships and jealousy]. Tune in tomorrow, where we see who will have to leave... the Paradise Planet.
Does this mean Windows isn't ready for the Average Joe's desktop yet? ;-)
There are already people posting "well, they should have checked to make sure their computer could play DVDs." Why?
Because they're sending it into space. If you send stuff into space, and you want to expect it to work, you test it.
One good reason: it's really hard to service once it's up there. Should it be the case that the testing of DVD playback is trying it once, saying "yep, it works", and then moving on? Yeah, I'm coll with that. But if you want it to work in space, you test it.
releases a CPU that does what I mean, not what I say.
They have that, it's called a Girlfriend.
However, it has the freedom to decide what you mean however it wants. Beware of the "dilf, itd" instruction---it's short for "do I look fat in this dress?"
If a unified tool can be more easily configured securely than many best of bread applications
Sounds like a half-baked idea ;-)
So why the need to force it to happen through a government-backed monopoly?
Because, NOMINALLY, the government is accountable to the people and will not abuse its monopoly. A private enterprise owning all the roads will. The market will converge to a monopoly due to network effects.
"Oh, you have a road, how nice. It's a real shame it costs consumers 1000$ to cross the roads adjacent to yours."
Judge for yourself whether that's reality.
In economics, there's something called a Vickrey Auction, where you have n distinct goods and m players, each valuing each subset S of {1..n} at different levels.
(having 23 volumes of a 24 volume encyclopedia is worth less than 23/24 times the value of a full encyclopedia; having a million apples is worth less than one million times the value of one apple: they rot)
It's possible to solve a Vickrey Auction for maximal social benefit (IIRC), and each person ends up paying their externality---that is, how much "damage" they cause to the other participants.
I wonder if microeconomics 101 (supply curve crosses demand curve at the market clearing price) can be derived from this.
But I assume it's the reasoning behind green taxes on gas (you pay for the damage you cause to others due to pollution) and weight taxes (since your heavy car wears out the roads more than other cars, you pay for the repair work in proportion to how much you cause it).
In some economic games, government intervention is preferable to anarchy (in theory). ISTR network construction and/or routing being among those games.
No socialist effort is going to make a web site that beats Google, Apple's itune Store, or Amazon.
No, but a pair of university students could easily come up with an algorithm, let's call it PageSort, which is better than all the current offerings.
Then, their university (let's call in Stanfort) could host the first implementation until it becomes so big and popular that it needs dedicated hosting.
Who knows, maybe it could become something big that will overthrow Yahoo...
It wasn't the Google boys' student loans that gave them the idea for PageRank. Socialism (i.e. tax-paid tuition) could just as easily have given you Google, in its early stages.
The reason Google wouldn't be able to progress is that no one will provide Google with the data center it needs through a socialist effort---and I have a nagging suspicion that you'll say "no, they earn the money the use for their operational costs, they're not socialist."
from the no-in-soviet-russia-jokes-i-swear-to-god dept.
In Soviet Russia, God swears at You!
Communism/socialism, on the other hand, demands forced collaboration.
Yes, and I think it's a real shame I'm not in financial ruin from my five years of tuition (no fees) and my summer vacation spent in the hospital plus ongoing check-ups (no fees).
What especially worries me is that the doctors who treated me---even though they're great doctors, really smart people, if their parents weren't rich enough to put them (and their siblings) through college, is it really right for me to accept their treatment?
And should I ever leave the safety of the university and get a Real Job, I can look forward to paying it all back on the taxes, so that I can only afford a big (not huge) house with a big (not huge) lawn and a fast (not flying) car.
Really. We don't have flying cars in Denmark. But we do have free education, free health care, free public libraries, free telephony (50 texts and 50 minutes per month, cheaper than US rates if you go beyond), only a few of the ISPs are evil (not mine), and we're a socialist country:
Our constitution, our frigging constitution, says the state will support you if you can't do it yourself (in exchange for you fulfilling the responsibilities that go along with it, i.e. a state-appointed job).
I think Apple will take a page out of Nintendo's book and reinvent casual, portable gaming.
Would that be the iBoy?
Or maybe the iDS, which will also monitor your network :D
the Linux community has yet to meet the opportunity with an office platform that does for Windows what OS X did for Mac OS.
Didn't NT (2000, XP) implement memory protection and pre-emptive multitasking? Didn't Unix do those in the '70s? Didn't Linux do those from day 1?
Or do you mean the symmetric multiprocessing that was added in OS X? I hear that Linux already does that.
I haven't owned a Mac, and I have only used them in the early '90s, so maybe I'm not the most qualified person to talk here*.
But... what are the major features that OS X has, that neither of OS 9, Linux nor Windows has?
* I'm not an Apple hater or an MS hater or a Linux fanboi (any longer :D). All three OSes have issues. The Linux crap is just easier and more pleasant for me to fix or work around.
It's basically a rewrite of a bunch of command line utilities that few people really care about now.
Such as grep, sed, sort, find, wc, tar, gzip, cat, ls, rm, mv, mkdir, rmdir, head, tail, sha1sum, uniq, ...?
The stuff you use in your day-to-day operation (or in your shell scripts). Right. Nobodoy could possibly care about those.
Okay, so most people run X and $DESKENV. Fine, but try uninstalling the GNU coreutils and findutils once, just for kicks. Then, try reinstalling them afterwards. Let me know if reinstalling them actually words.
Or did you perhaps mean autoconf, automake, make, gdb and emacs? Try uninstalling them, then compiling KDE or GNOME.
"But I don't need to compile GNOME, I can download the binaries". Yeah, but someone has to do it for you.
Just because you don't see them doesn't mean they aren't there, nor does it mean they aren't important.
Can you only move around in your text with arrow keys, page up/down and home/end? That's a deal breaker for me. I've given VS some flak for that at http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1245985&cid=28106773 but it applies to most editors except emacs and vi.
Visual Studio is actually very good.
Really?
Last time I checked, you had to move your hands all the way over to the arrow keys just to move around in your text.
Sure, you can cheat and get Ergo Elan keyboard from Kinesis, which puts the arrow keys in what's essential the Fn/Ctrl/Alt/Space "sub-bottom" row (and it puts Ctrl, Alt, Space, Enter, PgUp, PgDn, Home, End, Delete and Backspace under your thumb; go look at keyboard pr0n to see how it makes sense). But that's still in the sub-bottom row. Way harder to reach than the home or top row.
I don't think it's "actually very good". I think it gets the very basics wrong. It may have great features that are easier to use than in emacs and vi, but if I'm constantly pissed of by having gross inefficiency or discomfort imposed on me by poor design decisions, I'm not going to be happy and (thus) I'm not going to be as productive.
And it's not like Microsoft doesn't have the resources to fix the editor: they have many in-house coders who prefer to use emacs (more than they like to admit, in any case). Why don't they ask them why they prefer emacs, and think about how they can make VS provide what emacs users want?
(How do I insert 78 '#'es? How do I move forward five words? How do I select for copy-pasting the current function? How do I go to the next preprocessor directive? How do I jump to the matching parenthesis? How do I navigate the sexp tree? How do I look up in three seconds what a key does, or which keys a function is bound to? How do I jump to a function/struct/union/enum definition? All without a mouse, of course)
As a compositor
Just to make sure I understand...
The Wikipedia article on Digital Compositing, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_compositing, talks mostly about alpha blending, scaling and color correction.
That doesn't sound right, so I'll assume that the job of everyone else is to produce Lego bricks, and the compositor's job is to assemble a Lego model from the individual pieces. (That'd make sense, seeing how "composi" is also a prefix of "composing", as in music composition.) In movie terms, a compositor is the Director who turns {screenplay} plus {sets, actors, props, etc.} into {shots} with a dose of Editor who turns {shots} into {master roll}.
Is that about right?
I have mixed feelings about the Starcraft cinematics.
Video-production-wise, they were not just par but good (or higher) for the course. They were interlaced, not exactly high-res and 256 color palette (IIRC). But damn those zergs attacking the terrans in the science vessel sent you "omg, this is baaad".
But narration-wise, they didn't do much. The first can be summarised as "two terrans get ambushed by zergs in the wastelands". Great, but that's only a minor piece of the story. The bulk of the story is told, not shown (nor played).
To me, they seem like they're bling which is there mostly for the sake of being bling. That doesn't mean they're good bling, though ;-)
Let's compare to Warcraft III (Say, reign of chaos since that's what I know best). Each campaign has two (pre-rendered) cinematic videos: one at the beginning and one at the end. During the game there are video sequences for briefings and story development. They are rendered on the fly, by the game engine, and the transition back and forth between playing and watching is quite smooth.
Also, you feel like you're participating in the store more (in WC3). I think it's the interspersed videos showing your characters (well, units) playing out the zero-choice points in the story. By having it shown rather than told, you experience the story more cohesively (the individual "story points" have more and stronger connections). It might also be that the story is "narrower": it doesn't skip over too many events (so the "story points" are closer together). It might also just be a better written story, not sure.
I think Starcraft has a good story with an interesting theme: the struggle of control vs. freedom and rebellion against governmental, familial (Kerrigan "vs." sibling cerebrates and a parental Overmind) and religious authority.
But Warcraft III beats it on execution, on how the story is told.
Hoping that I'm not about to start a flame war: why?
I should add to myself (sorry for the self-reply): I hope I'm also not feeding the trolls. I mean, seriously, 10 klocs is too much? On second reflection, that has a mild troll odor to it. At least as far as I nose.
But even if I am, I think I'm making valid points that not everybody knows about or would have though about.