No... If you're referring to ARPANET, they evidently paid some company named "BBN Technologies" to do it.
Universities got the first hookups. Nowadays, private companies have peering agreements, where they pay each other to interconnect their network segments.
So, if by "build" you mean "solicited bids," then yes. Makes you wonder why they've had so little success with the process lately.
If a private company does it, you can choose not to pay them. Maybe I won't use the internet.
If the government does it, you're boned. Try saying "Maybe I won't pay my taxes!" to the IRS and see how many gun-toting men visit your house. (Probably not, maybe just a mailman with an audit notice, but tyou know what I mean.)
Companies do not lower price points on services still in high demand, even if it is cheaper to produce.
So they're earning extra profit. And if selling a series of tubes makes a lot of money, guess what more people are going to want to sell? In a perfectly competitive market, a new company will spring up, looking to take advantage of that extra profit. And then, prices go down - else, why would you switch?
Problem is that "perfectly competitive" part. If something's expensive, look for the (lack of) "perfectly competitive."
Because everyone wants the most expensive product billed at the cheapests rates, on someone elses dime.
That's a market feature. It's balanced by ISPs wanting to sell the cheapest product at the most expensive rates. The compromise in my area is $20 for 3 Mbit down.
I also read further down - evidently plastic bags are made from natural gas, not petroleum, and take less energy to make than paper bags.
If you get your energy from coal and oil plants, you're really not doing the environment a favor by using paper.
But, if we want to help the environment, we should start first at A) stop using electricity when there are so many alternatives available and B) stop driving cars when there are so many alternatives available and C) stop exhaling carbon dioxide when there are so many alternatives available...
Problem is that most broadband is wired, and the US has a lot of acreage. It's easier in Japan, for example - a mile of wire can connect a helluva lot more people than here.
Just in case anyone's curious, I live in Green Bay, WI. 3/768 (not sure on the upload) is $20 a month from AT&T, some cable companies have 5 Mbit for $bucks, but I know a few friends that 10 Mbit connections from who knows where.
And... does the entire country of Ecuador share a slashdot account, or is your name misleading? ^.^
We all gotta eat, don't we? Ignoring the populist "woe, the farmers will turn a profit now!" crap (most of our food production is corporate), increasing food prices means the same dollar buys less.
That's inflation. Hope you don't have any savings or retirement plans.
I hope nVidia continues to be a bastard. ATI and AMD seem to always have better technology than nVidia and Intel, but they get tramped on.
They get tramped on because they don't have better hardware - not since nVidia bought Voodoo, anyway. Their Phenom chips can't even best the low-end Intel chips, and that was pre-Nehalem.
They're playing with the whole "spider" platform for a reason - hoping that a bunch of parallelized, crappy hardware is the same as one good, expensive piece of hardware. (Generally, it's not - e.g., CrossFire and SLI generally don't double performance.)
There are some nifty approaches to onboard sound. The Striker Extreme series motherboards (also from Asus, conspiracy?!) come with onboard audio on a riser card. It plugs into what's essentially a PCIe 1x slot, but backwards so you can't stick something else into it by accident.
Having the "onboard" audio on its own card means that it's distanced from motherboard electrical noise, and for the "range compressed to hell" stuff it sounds just fine.
Human beings are small, insignificant. The creator of the universe if he exists wouldn't blink twice at what Humans care about.
Well, maybe that's true if you assume someone like me created the universe and got bored. Christians believe that this God fellow had his only begotten Son nailed to a giant plus sign to destroy death for us. I'll leave as an exercise to the reader what this implies.
If there is a creator, it's entirely possible that he does care for us. To steal a "quote" from higher up on the page for comedic purposes: It's all explained in this nifty book called the "Bible" - I suggest you read it instead of listening to crappy reviews about it.
"Christians argue against abortion?" Did we all agree on something while I was out?! I know Christians who are "pro-choice." I know Christains who think anyone who would believe in such a vile, horrific act cannot possibly be Christian. And I know Christians who think that no one who's such a judgmental prick us a Christian - "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
That I know of, the Bible makes no specific mention of abortion - but most Christians like to think that they (should) value life as a gift from God.
This kind of stuck-up, human arrogance is where our whole idea of "human rights" come from. If we truly are insignificant - and you, therefore, are 1-nine-billionth of "insignificant" - does it really matter all that much if I kill you? Beliving that, could you muster indignance with a straight face? Deal with it - we're special. (Just like everybody else.) It's a required assumption for society to function.
Religion is a mad house that delights in psychotic behavior of all kinds
Stupid people are found everywhere, and they're free to label themselves whatever they want. Some sects of Christianity are saner than others, but thats not the point - saying religion is the sole source of all our modern-day consternation is ignoring the necessary human element that makes it all possible. Do guns kill people, or do people kill people? Would no one be killed if we got rid of guns? Would no one "delight in psychotic behavior" were there no religion?
You forget that religion is also a poweful motivation for good. Like that St. Mary broad who keeps building all those hospitals - I don't think she's Wiccan. Or the youth groups who joined everyone else after Katrina. Or those missionaries who selflessly do more for the television-less parts of the world than I ever will.
I guess I should bring my rant to a close, and end with the magic formula of "I can smell my karma burning" or whatever gets you the +5 Insightfuls around here. To bring everything to a point: Most Christians are rational, sane people. Just like you and me. They're not the ones you see on TV because the "Christians" who bomb abortion clinics make better news. YLPMMNRRCYLL. (Your Local Programming May or May Not Reflect Reality, Consult Your Local Listings. [Pronounced "yulp-MIN-ur-syl." {No, really}]).
If a bug creams the user's settings file on Windows, you can restore it, too. In fact, the same program can restore any settings file! How, you ask? Because we have that nifty regedit!
I wouldn't say OSX developers are "smarter," but if they "work harder" it's because of how convoluted Cocoa is. Try MFC or.NET for nice APIs.
"How many Windows systems croak permanently because of a problem with the registry?" Considering the registry can't damage the hardware, 0. Considering XP and others have "system restore", where that one central point of failure is automatically backed up for you, a completely hosed registry is trivial to fix if you have your OS CD.
The registry will always be faster than a plaintext file. That's just how the math works. Considering Windows checks almost a hundred settings every time you open a folder - does it have a background? Where are the icons positioned? Do I show hidden files? - that speed is necessary. For other applications, not so much - but there's nothing stopping them from using a plaintext ASCII file, either. In fact, you'll find that most games do just that - World of Warcraft, Empire Earth, etc.
If you erase a program's registry keys, they'll replace 'em for you, too. Although Windows Installer (another single point of failure!) has that change/repair option that will do the same thing. But - I've never found a computer borked like that. (Well, I lied, but I can't blame the registry from failing after the hard disk crashed.)
I was referring to how it was illegal to do some (seemingly) perfectly legal things such as install modchips, break CSS to duplicate DVDs, break DRM on your media... Im not saying that the DMCA is necessarily evil, but it stops innovation nonetheless.
Sure, the DMCA prevents you from breaking CSS on your DVDs. Sure, that's stupid. But, being told not to break CSS everytime you fire up VLC hardly stifles "innovation."
but some people don't think that coffee is going to be hot and sue McDonalds, does that really justify a warning label?
A non-sequitur, really, but the granny who spilled coffee on her lap had a fairly valid case. In New York, at least, there's an upper limit on how hot beverages can be. At that temperature it takes ~1 minute for the coffe to burn through your clothes. McDonalds, despite previous complaints, injuries, and fines, kept their coffee much hotter (40 degrees or something, IIRC, 'cuz they thought coffee that would stay hotter longer would sell better to commuters.) The lady argued that she wouldn't have been burned at the legal temperature, and was probably right. As much as I, lover of corporate America, hates to admit it, even the stupid $bucks jury award makes sense considering other lesser fines hadn't deterred that McDonalds.
The problem though is, it won't be "piracy is illegal and so don't do it" it will be some online predators use pirated versions of Windows which probably is a fact, then it becomes all online predators use pirated Windows, then it becomes pirating Windows == online stalking.
Yes, there is a slippery slope. But this one has giant, metaphorical OSHA guard railings. It's hard for me to make the connection from "piracy is illegal" to "pirating the same software pedophiles (allegedly) do makes you a pedohpile!"
But... it's probably a stupid class anyway. They should send home a flyer - Everyone can see your myspace! What goes on the internet is there forever! etc.
Now, what we really need is an improved health/sex-ed class. When I had to take it sex-ed, there weren't any labs! I'm guessing budget cuts.
It's far harder to get a linux or OSX or BSD infection going as you trigger the "you are trying to install "XXXX" enter your admin information to allow this to install for applications that are going to get it's hooks in the system.
Wow, Linux/OSX/BSD finally got UAC? I guess it's only a "feature" if it's not on Vista...
windows apps all think they need to shove crap all over the pc. and therefore pc users are usedto having even a fricking mp3 playing app shoving thing in the windows system directory, changing the registry, etc...
This is a problem with Redmond's "developers developers developers!" stance. A lot of them are bad and shouldn't be accommodated.
The registry isn't a half-bad idea. A limited user won't have access to the Program Files directory - no updating highscores.dat or changing program.ini for you! But, HKEY_CURRENT_USER is free.
(Or, maybe you'd argue put everything in their "My Documents" folder instead. But, the binary registry hive is a lot faster to parse than ASCII text. Even if speed doesn't matter - I mean, how many times do you read the user's preferred screen resolution anyway? - there are nice, shrink-wrapped, API calls for accessing the registry; they're a lot easier than writing your own INI parser.)
Microsoft has always discouraged overwriting system libraries - most of the time, it's just a lazy programmer who can't be bothered to 1) put the DLL in the app's directory because, after all, his app is the only one linking with it or 2) at least check to make sure that they aren't overwriting CriticalSystemFile32 version 12 with version 7 and breaking every program that links with it.
DLL Hell has been solved since at least XP, tho - try to overwrite a system DLL and the OS will check signatures and file versions. If it's not an "upgrade", the write will invisibly fail, and no one will be the wiser.
But, if OSX "software makers have 1/2 a brain", why are they developing for OSX? ^.^
True - but then it wouldn't really be "$x" dollars worth.
Yahoo shareholders seem to be cheering the buyout - their share prices jumped up quite a bit the first time Microsoft announced this. So, I doubt that everyone with Microsoft stock is going to sell it all at once, in volumes large enough to affect the going price, especially since most people seem to like this deal.
You're assuming that one is not free to sell $X worth of Microsoft shares for $X (minus brokerage fees and capital gains tax.) If you're given Microsoft shares in exchange for your Yahoo ones, nobody's forcing you to keep them after the company's sold.
However, if you hold on to the Microsoft shares, you are someone correct. The price of a stock does vary with the "whim" of the market, but if you'd rather have $X, sell the shares.
(But, presumably, if you were already holding Yahoo! shares instead of cash, odds are you won't want the cash.)
I mean that, right now, Microsoft pretty much owns the market. They're not worried about growing their userbase, they're worried about keeping their user base.
Linux and Mac are still looking at growing their userbase. I wonder how long until the tables are turned.
Interesting - I'll have to try NeoOffice. Generally, it opens documents just fine - but it managed to garble a Pivot Table one time, and another time managed to mangle a crappy Word document someone made with a billion pictures space-space-spaced into position by hand. (Although Office 2007 choked on that one, too!)
I wonder how long it'll take for Microsoft to have to take users away from OSS, rather than keep their existing ones from migrating.
If Microsoft Office Business Ultimate Professional Subscriber's Kittens Edition 2009 had an ODF importer/exporter built in (or available in convenient download form, like the PDF exporter for 2007), they could claim perfect support for their (only) competitor's product.
On the other hand, Open Office still manages to choke on the minutae in Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc. documents. If Microsoft supported ODF - but Open Office barely supports two standard deviations of Word features - they could tack on yet another bullet point on their display boxes.
On the other other hand, they would probably only write an importer. I see this becoming a reality when Microsoft has to convince customers to switch back to Office as opposed to stay put. (See? It opens all your existing ODFs just fine!)
Slashdot Mirror
Uh...the US government did build the internet.
No... If you're referring to ARPANET, they evidently paid some company named "BBN Technologies" to do it.
Universities got the first hookups. Nowadays, private companies have peering agreements, where they pay each other to interconnect their network segments.
So, if by "build" you mean "solicited bids," then yes. Makes you wonder why they've had so little success with the process lately.
The consumer will pay. PERIOD. Even if the content owners pay, the costs STILL get passed down to the consumer.
Hmm. I pay for my bandwidth. Apple pays for theirs. Are you saying that Apple sends me an internet bill, too! Curse you, Woz...
Oh! You're saying that if I buy a song on iTunes, the $.99 not only covers their costs, but gives them a miniscule profit?!
Well, I'm down with that. It's cool, I guess.
If a private company does it, you can choose not to pay them. Maybe I won't use the internet.
If the government does it, you're boned. Try saying "Maybe I won't pay my taxes!" to the IRS and see how many gun-toting men visit your house. (Probably not, maybe just a mailman with an audit notice, but tyou know what I mean.)
Companies do not lower price points on services still in high demand, even if it is cheaper to produce.
So they're earning extra profit. And if selling a series of tubes makes a lot of money, guess what more people are going to want to sell? In a perfectly competitive market, a new company will spring up, looking to take advantage of that extra profit. And then, prices go down - else, why would you switch?
Problem is that "perfectly competitive" part. If something's expensive, look for the (lack of) "perfectly competitive."
Because everyone wants the most expensive product billed at the cheapests rates, on someone elses dime.
That's a market feature. It's balanced by ISPs wanting to sell the cheapest product at the most expensive rates. The compromise in my area is $20 for 3 Mbit down.
Do you really think the government could build the internet, when neither the Census nor the FBI can even order computers?
Oh yea? Well, you have an e-mail from Comcast.
Who's clueless now?
#137 is a stolen account, methinks.
"Lol."
I also read further down - evidently plastic bags are made from natural gas, not petroleum, and take less energy to make than paper bags.
If you get your energy from coal and oil plants, you're really not doing the environment a favor by using paper.
But, if we want to help the environment, we should start first at A) stop using electricity when there are so many alternatives available and B) stop driving cars when there are so many alternatives available and C) stop exhaling carbon dioxide when there are so many alternatives available...
Problem is that most broadband is wired, and the US has a lot of acreage. It's easier in Japan, for example - a mile of wire can connect a helluva lot more people than here.
Just in case anyone's curious, I live in Green Bay, WI. 3/768 (not sure on the upload) is $20 a month from AT&T, some cable companies have 5 Mbit for $bucks, but I know a few friends that 10 Mbit connections from who knows where.
And... does the entire country of Ecuador share a slashdot account, or is your name misleading? ^.^
True - but MP3 did come first, and I'm willing to pay a premium to have technology advance faster.
I still use plastic bags at the groecery store, but I reuse them over-and-over.
You could use paper bags over and over...
Why are high food prices a danger?
We all gotta eat, don't we? Ignoring the populist "woe, the farmers will turn a profit now!" crap (most of our food production is corporate), increasing food prices means the same dollar buys less.
That's inflation. Hope you don't have any savings or retirement plans.
I hope nVidia continues to be a bastard. ATI and AMD seem to always have better technology than nVidia and Intel, but they get tramped on.
They get tramped on because they don't have better hardware - not since nVidia bought Voodoo, anyway. Their Phenom chips can't even best the low-end Intel chips, and that was pre-Nehalem.
They're playing with the whole "spider" platform for a reason - hoping that a bunch of parallelized, crappy hardware is the same as one good, expensive piece of hardware. (Generally, it's not - e.g., CrossFire and SLI generally don't double performance.)
There are some nifty approaches to onboard sound. The Striker Extreme series motherboards (also from Asus, conspiracy?!) come with onboard audio on a riser card. It plugs into what's essentially a PCIe 1x slot, but backwards so you can't stick something else into it by accident.
Having the "onboard" audio on its own card means that it's distanced from motherboard electrical noise, and for the "range compressed to hell" stuff it sounds just fine.
Human beings are small, insignificant. The creator of the universe if he exists wouldn't blink twice at what Humans care about.
Well, maybe that's true if you assume someone like me created the universe and got bored. Christians believe that this God fellow had his only begotten Son nailed to a giant plus sign to destroy death for us. I'll leave as an exercise to the reader what this implies.
If there is a creator, it's entirely possible that he does care for us. To steal a "quote" from higher up on the page for comedic purposes: It's all explained in this nifty book called the "Bible" - I suggest you read it instead of listening to crappy reviews about it.
"Christians argue against abortion?" Did we all agree on something while I was out?! I know Christians who are "pro-choice." I know Christains who think anyone who would believe in such a vile, horrific act cannot possibly be Christian. And I know Christians who think that no one who's such a judgmental prick us a Christian - "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
That I know of, the Bible makes no specific mention of abortion - but most Christians like to think that they (should) value life as a gift from God.
This kind of stuck-up, human arrogance is where our whole idea of "human rights" come from. If we truly are insignificant - and you, therefore, are 1-nine-billionth of "insignificant" - does it really matter all that much if I kill you? Beliving that, could you muster indignance with a straight face? Deal with it - we're special. (Just like everybody else.) It's a required assumption for society to function.
Religion is a mad house that delights in psychotic behavior of all kinds
Stupid people are found everywhere, and they're free to label themselves whatever they want. Some sects of Christianity are saner than others, but thats not the point - saying religion is the sole source of all our modern-day consternation is ignoring the necessary human element that makes it all possible. Do guns kill people, or do people kill people? Would no one be killed if we got rid of guns? Would no one "delight in psychotic behavior" were there no religion?
You forget that religion is also a poweful motivation for good. Like that St. Mary broad who keeps building all those hospitals - I don't think she's Wiccan. Or the youth groups who joined everyone else after Katrina. Or those missionaries who selflessly do more for the television-less parts of the world than I ever will.
I guess I should bring my rant to a close, and end with the magic formula of "I can smell my karma burning" or whatever gets you the +5 Insightfuls around here. To bring everything to a point: Most Christians are rational, sane people. Just like you and me. They're not the ones you see on TV because the "Christians" who bomb abortion clinics make better news. YLPMMNRRCYLL. (Your Local Programming May or May Not Reflect Reality, Consult Your Local Listings. [Pronounced "yulp-MIN-ur-syl." {No, really}]).
Hello? Morgan Greywolf? Is that you?
OK, it is. Just checkin'.
If someone's ever not Morgan Greywolf, plz to let me now kthx.
If a bug creams the user's settings file on Windows, you can restore it, too. In fact, the same program can restore any settings file! How, you ask? Because we have that nifty regedit!
I wouldn't say OSX developers are "smarter," but if they "work harder" it's because of how convoluted Cocoa is. Try MFC or .NET for nice APIs.
"How many Windows systems croak permanently because of a problem with the registry?" Considering the registry can't damage the hardware, 0. Considering XP and others have "system restore", where that one central point of failure is automatically backed up for you, a completely hosed registry is trivial to fix if you have your OS CD.
The registry will always be faster than a plaintext file. That's just how the math works. Considering Windows checks almost a hundred settings every time you open a folder - does it have a background? Where are the icons positioned? Do I show hidden files? - that speed is necessary. For other applications, not so much - but there's nothing stopping them from using a plaintext ASCII file, either. In fact, you'll find that most games do just that - World of Warcraft, Empire Earth, etc.
If you erase a program's registry keys, they'll replace 'em for you, too. Although Windows Installer (another single point of failure!) has that change/repair option that will do the same thing. But - I've never found a computer borked like that. (Well, I lied, but I can't blame the registry from failing after the hard disk crashed.)
I was referring to how it was illegal to do some (seemingly) perfectly legal things such as install modchips, break CSS to duplicate DVDs, break DRM on your media... Im not saying that the DMCA is necessarily evil, but it stops innovation nonetheless.
Sure, the DMCA prevents you from breaking CSS on your DVDs. Sure, that's stupid. But, being told not to break CSS everytime you fire up VLC hardly stifles "innovation."
but some people don't think that coffee is going to be hot and sue McDonalds, does that really justify a warning label?
A non-sequitur, really, but the granny who spilled coffee on her lap had a fairly valid case. In New York, at least, there's an upper limit on how hot beverages can be. At that temperature it takes ~1 minute for the coffe to burn through your clothes. McDonalds, despite previous complaints, injuries, and fines, kept their coffee much hotter (40 degrees or something, IIRC, 'cuz they thought coffee that would stay hotter longer would sell better to commuters.) The lady argued that she wouldn't have been burned at the legal temperature, and was probably right. As much as I, lover of corporate America, hates to admit it, even the stupid $bucks jury award makes sense considering other lesser fines hadn't deterred that McDonalds.
The problem though is, it won't be "piracy is illegal and so don't do it" it will be some online predators use pirated versions of Windows which probably is a fact, then it becomes all online predators use pirated Windows, then it becomes pirating Windows == online stalking.
Yes, there is a slippery slope. But this one has giant, metaphorical OSHA guard railings. It's hard for me to make the connection from "piracy is illegal" to "pirating the same software pedophiles (allegedly) do makes you a pedohpile!"
But... it's probably a stupid class anyway. They should send home a flyer - Everyone can see your myspace! What goes on the internet is there forever! etc.
Now, what we really need is an improved health/sex-ed class. When I had to take it sex-ed, there weren't any labs! I'm guessing budget cuts.
It's far harder to get a linux or OSX or BSD infection going as you trigger the "you are trying to install "XXXX" enter your admin information to allow this to install for applications that are going to get it's hooks in the system.
Wow, Linux/OSX/BSD finally got UAC? I guess it's only a "feature" if it's not on Vista...
windows apps all think they need to shove crap all over the pc. and therefore pc users are usedto having even a fricking mp3 playing app shoving thing in the windows system directory, changing the registry, etc...
This is a problem with Redmond's "developers developers developers!" stance. A lot of them are bad and shouldn't be accommodated.
The registry isn't a half-bad idea. A limited user won't have access to the Program Files directory - no updating highscores.dat or changing program.ini for you! But, HKEY_CURRENT_USER is free.
(Or, maybe you'd argue put everything in their "My Documents" folder instead. But, the binary registry hive is a lot faster to parse than ASCII text. Even if speed doesn't matter - I mean, how many times do you read the user's preferred screen resolution anyway? - there are nice, shrink-wrapped, API calls for accessing the registry; they're a lot easier than writing your own INI parser.)
Microsoft has always discouraged overwriting system libraries - most of the time, it's just a lazy programmer who can't be bothered to 1) put the DLL in the app's directory because, after all, his app is the only one linking with it or 2) at least check to make sure that they aren't overwriting CriticalSystemFile32 version 12 with version 7 and breaking every program that links with it.
DLL Hell has been solved since at least XP, tho - try to overwrite a system DLL and the OS will check signatures and file versions. If it's not an "upgrade", the write will invisibly fail, and no one will be the wiser.
But, if OSX "software makers have 1/2 a brain", why are they developing for OSX? ^.^
True - but then it wouldn't really be "$x" dollars worth.
Yahoo shareholders seem to be cheering the buyout - their share prices jumped up quite a bit the first time Microsoft announced this. So, I doubt that everyone with Microsoft stock is going to sell it all at once, in volumes large enough to affect the going price, especially since most people seem to like this deal.
You're assuming that one is not free to sell $X worth of Microsoft shares for $X (minus brokerage fees and capital gains tax.) If you're given Microsoft shares in exchange for your Yahoo ones, nobody's forcing you to keep them after the company's sold.
However, if you hold on to the Microsoft shares, you are someone correct. The price of a stock does vary with the "whim" of the market, but if you'd rather have $X, sell the shares.
(But, presumably, if you were already holding Yahoo! shares instead of cash, odds are you won't want the cash.)
I mean that, right now, Microsoft pretty much owns the market. They're not worried about growing their userbase, they're worried about keeping their user base.
Linux and Mac are still looking at growing their userbase. I wonder how long until the tables are turned.
Interesting - I'll have to try NeoOffice. Generally, it opens documents just fine - but it managed to garble a Pivot Table one time, and another time managed to mangle a crappy Word document someone made with a billion pictures space-space-spaced into position by hand. (Although Office 2007 choked on that one, too!)
I wonder how long it'll take for Microsoft to have to take users away from OSS, rather than keep their existing ones from migrating.
That might not be a bad idea for them, actually.
If Microsoft Office Business Ultimate Professional Subscriber's Kittens Edition 2009 had an ODF importer/exporter built in (or available in convenient download form, like the PDF exporter for 2007), they could claim perfect support for their (only) competitor's product.
On the other hand, Open Office still manages to choke on the minutae in Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc. documents. If Microsoft supported ODF - but Open Office barely supports two standard deviations of Word features - they could tack on yet another bullet point on their display boxes.
On the other other hand, they would probably only write an importer. I see this becoming a reality when Microsoft has to convince customers to switch back to Office as opposed to stay put. (See? It opens all your existing ODFs just fine!)