I would just like to point out that citing an encyclopedia, online or hard copy, paid or free, is not academically acceptable. College profs and peers alike prefer that you go right to the source of the bias for your hard information instead of using many people to the vetting (and admittedly research) for you. Fair enough... find the works of others and draw your own conclusions. Still, snooty intellectuals cannot deny that as an encyclopedia, WikiPedia consistently serves up more information, and on non-controversial subjects is more up-to-date and accurate than a dusty rack of books in a library. Maybe we should all go back to microfiche.
It would be impossible to feed all of us without preservatives, mass-manufacturing and ease of distribution. I would argue that it is predominantly a result of population overgrowth worldwide, not profit-taking.
Maybe we should starve a few billion people in the interest of cleaner, organic food and healthier cats.
"A democracy is two wolves and a small lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." --- Benjamin Franklin
*talked down IE
*talked up FOSS
*forcibly spread FOSS
How could I possibly satisfy you? Develop nukes in mass quantity and take out the world excepting your basement? Fsck you for saying I have an agenda... I help people, real ones, in need of tech support. In exchange for installation and use of FOSS I specify, GNU or "neigh," I help them for beer.
Horseshit! Are you saying that people eat animals?! We need to get this onto the front page of Slashdot, neigh, the Times!!! Is there a gallop poll regarding Japan's or the United States' horse meat consumption? And does it give you the trots?
For Barbaro's sake... the horse had a good run. Making hay from an article about web browsers is to saddle the issue with an agenda; please do not bridle our argument by being a horse's ass. This is a discussion about software, and to jockey animal rights into it is just putting the cart before the horse. So slow down there, cowboy... Reign it in. While I am sure you're chomping at the bit to get this kind of information out, I am fresh out of insensitive horse puns and we will have to put this discussion out to stud.
The headline: "Put Down"
It's like they shot Barbaro. Netscape was not retired out of sympathy (empathy for those of you in Rio Linda) for the browser; The Old Blue N died of natural causes. May she rest in Bittorrent.
Thankfully, this will increase Firefox market share. I am a Firefox enthusiast, having first used it on the RedHat system at work and then forcing it down the throats of all who ask me for free (as-in-I-get-free-beer) Windows support. While Firefox is not without its flaws, it IS without the flaws of Internet Exploder, and in that the project is a respectable and fruitful mix of public service and development enterprise. Firefox is the child of Netscape, and children must bury their parents. Hail, Farewell, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.
Thank you for commenting on slashdot! LOL! You'd love the zany TOTALLY NUDE shots from my webcam! All you have to do is CLICK MY LINK and you will see me totally exposed! This is not a hack or virus or any of that, I am just trying to increase my exposure (if you know what I mean) in !script=LOCAL_CITY!@user! so I thought I would hit you up personally, since you seem soooo kewl! I luv yer pix and maybe we can get a little more personal if you Czech out my pix on my sight. XOXOXO 3 --Bubbles.
As a Hoosier (DEF: born and currently a resident of Indiana), I confidently assure you that they would gleefully pass the bill today. Anyone objecting would be branded a pi-denier. [insert boring local politics]
No politician wants to be the one refusing to give our poor and homeless their much needed pi.
I absolutely agree regarding ephedrine. I always hate that 1984 moment when I hand over my ID for the decongestants I require. I used to buy the stay-awakes for their stay-breathing qualities, and while ephedrine is not for everyone, I had always found it to be extremely effective for my resilient sinus woes.
Regarding the lack of cash-receiving utility on gas pumps, there is a combination of factors here. An earlier post mentions the risk of retrieving the currency, and I refer you to the benefit of forcing many customers indoors, where the selling happens
I will now take this a step further. I would argue that people who use credit cards to purchase fuel are generally better with money than cash customers, because they are capable of saving and responsibly maintaining functional credit records by controlling expenditures. People who cannot acquire cards are less capable regarding saving money, and gas vendors find it worthwhile to exploit this weakness by forcing the weak saver into a spending environment.
As for whom the public blames for the lack of bill slots, I don't suspect they need to blame anyone. The status quo is accepted. The real event here is the shift to prepay--the customers have money in their hands, so the willingness to make a purchase is increased, thanks to the careful marketing I earlier described and the desire for convenience.
The customer considers the already enforced opportunity cost of leaving their vehicle, and would likely prefer to pay a higher price for a good than to repeat the cost of leaving their vehicle again (paying the same opportunity cost) to purchase something they now have convinced themselves they would have bought anyway.
Your points are absolutely valid in your context, but I think we are dangerously placing the cart before our collective ass.
Just like the military, NASA has experienced declining general interest. This is not a SETI-esque venture to solve the great mysteries of space travel, nor is it some kind of "Last Starfighter" quest for an Alex Rogan. It is a valid, overdue tossing of kerosene onto a thirsty and faltering flame; a genuine attempt to generate interest among young people regarding space exploration, and we both can support something like that.
It's sort of a "hook em' while they're young" deal, and the casualty-to-mission rating of NASA is nothing like that of the Army. The excitement factor of NASA pales in comparison to that of the Army. Hopefully, this game lands where these demand curves intersect.
I would also add (to your letter) that you used to get your morning coffee, pack of cigarettes and package of decongestant there every morning as well. Profit margins on gasoline are actually surprisingly low; retail locations rely on those ridiculously marked-up impulse buys, mostly made by the morning/evening commuter. Prepay (pay inside, then pump) at gas stations was not instituted because a few jerk-offs gas-n-go. They want those cash customers in the selling environment! Either skip to the last paragraph for the point, or allow me to elaborate:
Mega chain retailers, gas stations included, rely on conformity to "plan-o-grams," actual required product placement blueprints, at which the minimum-wage dregs while away the hours in some attempt to conform. The aspirin goes near the coffee and next to the gum, because the hangover crowd will be there in the morning. Useless crap lead-containing toys are placed at knee-level next to the lines for the registers, because the little scamps will invariably demand the purchase of such items, just when impatient mommy has her wallet out--that is if the yuppie parents of said scamps have not left them in a still-running, unlocked car in an unattended parking lot. The tire gauges are near the motor oil, but just around the bend from the tampons; men buy them (both even), but single moms concerned about highway safety do as well. The expensive cigarette lighters are on the counter for easy theft, but the equally capable ones are behind it, hidden, where they are only stolen by employees. You practically trip over Red Bull and Coca-Cola on the way in, but god help you to find the generic cola. Just scratching the surface here, but you get my drift.
These plan-o-grams change frequently, as trends are explored and exploited. The monitors are another campaign in the impulse buy campaign, and I have only addressed gas (petrol) stations. I have multiple experiences as a retail manager, and as a gas station employee, and I am somewhat fascinated by these ploys.
Moving to other sellers, specifically electronics.... Next Christmas, or at any competitive sale time, closely examine the "loss leaders" employed by retailers. The idea is this: sell item X at near or below cost, knowing that it will trigger increased revenue from accessory items Y and Z, either instantly via the marketing miracle of "batteries not included" or continuously via "games sold separately." Barbies need outfits. Xboxen require games. My favorite, from my Radio $hack days, was to sell the remote control car at my cost exactly (which I revealed), so that I could easily demand that the poor sucker dad buy two rechargeable batteries (gotta have a spare, especially at well over 90% margin) and all the 9-volts he could carry (insane low cost, insane standard market price fixing), all the while coming out smelling like a rose. This is standard procedure, so you know the more devious schemes are way more insulting, such as video screens on your shopping cart.
As for grocery stores, we have always realized that kid cereal is on the bottom, bargain cereal is at waist level and receives limited shelf real estate, and that premium cereal is highlighted with "sale pricing" (also known as standard mark-up) and is at shoulder level, as far as the eye can see. Frankly, grocers endure painfully low profit margin percentages, but thankfully for them, humans cannot live without food (particularly for rural markets, the choke price for milk and bread can get pretty ridiculous). Closely examine the items in the advertisement from week to week. When ground beef is on sale, regularly priced hamburger buns are generously placed right in the meat market, with a slammin' pyramid of regularly priced ketchup and pickle slices opposing; lettuce and onions are not on special either. The same gas station methods are employed at the registers, and it is no accident that toys and school supplies come right after cereal, aisle-wise. You'll also notice t
Sun will use virtualization and consolidation to reduce its data center space and energy usage by 50 percent by 2013, with a goal of moving it all online two years later.
Sun will use buzzwords to reduce its data center space and perceived energy usage by 50 percent by 2013, with a goal of moving it all to India two years later.
There, fixed that for Sun.
First, I would like to point out that providing anything over the internet requires that servers somewhere invariably consume electricity at that somewhere, so relinquishing web services to the cloud does not amount to a smaller overall energy consumption, it just eliminates the evident level of corporate consumption. Granted, they have migrated to more energy efficient equipment thus far, but that does not amount to a hill of soybeans because newer equipment is nearly always more efficient. Top marks for obfuscation.
The proverbial cloud seems more efficient because it consumes precious unused cycles (we recently discussed the value of these), but it could be argued that it: (a) artificially inflates perceived demand for traffic provision over certain ~tubes~ to the computing source, increasing necessary power supply for those paths, (b) increases power consumption incrementally at the point of the processing computer, and (c) via the law of diminishing returns, increases overall resource consumption thanks to the resource cost of transporting the information to less efficient equipment. The processing requirement is not diminished, only distributed and increased through that distribution. How many hops through these abominable "25-50% efficient" data centers before the relatively minuscule reduction in Sun's data centers is met? And what of the jobs lost? And what of the increased commute consumption of unemployed coders and hardware wonks to their stately new stations behind Burger King grills?
We now employ both centralized systems and massively distributed systems to host information we demand, and generally these are selected based on monetary capital versus willingness or incentive to participate, overall robustness being fairly equal. SETI and many other number-crunching projects rely on the generous support of willing software installers to participate in their projects, but if an already stable bandwidth-consuming entity is forced on nearly all consumers of a basic internet need (and their hosts), I think their piece of the system will collapse because the participants will not be so willing! The internet changes rapidly, as many players swiftly respond to changing conditions. We generally have a state of equilibrium, except where governmental players attempt rule changes. When a commercial entity (Microsoft, etc) prods around rule changes, we make major waves. If Sun chooses to put their whole school of thought into this particular sea, I think they'll have plenty of sharks to worry about.
Sun would like to cut the monetary cost of operating data centers, and their chosen method to shove it down our throats is to first douse it with the chocolate syrup of environmentalism. How insulting; do they really think we're that stupid? A forced migration to a new system is pretty retarded in itself, and the trifecta of security concerns, implementation nightmares, and environmental balderdash seems to be suicidal.
Protracting a bit, as a forced (college student) user of Sun products, I would be absolutely resistant to any such environmentally shrouded money grab, preferring the security and stability of normal centralized (particularly open source, mind you) not-for and for-profit entities. I would be very favorable to future competitors of Sun that oppose these vulnerabilities.
Finally, I would like to clearly state that I believe this this to be a mere political statement to justify already existent a
They don't give a rip about your collection of real media. A single exception is enough evidence to prosecute, and any difference between your physical collection and your digital one only strengthens their case--you clearly knew the difference! Packrat!
I have always felt that the only reason a citizen should ever point a firearm at another person or creature is to kill it. The known presence of firearms, however, makes a nice deterrent. When I leave my truck at a trail head for a weekend backpacking or hunting excursion, I always scatter a few shotgun shells on the dashboard. They can take their chances breaking in, but you never know when I may turn up.
It is alledged by some that there is no evidence that there is a government policy to screw with Wikipedia. Claiming that the US government is manipulating Wikipedia due to some IP numbers matching vandals is believed by some to be like claiming that the University of Washington is manipulating Wikipedia for the same reason. This of course does not disprove a relationship aimed at bringing harm to the United States.
There, the house of representatives fixed that for ya.
I would also like to point out the date on the edit linked in the article: Revision as of 17:49, 12 August 2005
Heheheh, I can't wait until the first time some idiot decides to crack one of these babies open! The news channels will be running around like chickens with their heads cut off, speculating on which branch of which terrorist network the geeky white kid works for. Needle nose pliers of Damocles?
Slashdot Mirror
I would just like to point out that citing an encyclopedia, online or hard copy, paid or free, is not academically acceptable. College profs and peers alike prefer that you go right to the source of the bias for your hard information instead of using many people to the vetting (and admittedly research) for you. Fair enough... find the works of others and draw your own conclusions. Still, snooty intellectuals cannot deny that as an encyclopedia, WikiPedia consistently serves up more information, and on non-controversial subjects is more up-to-date and accurate than a dusty rack of books in a library. Maybe we should all go back to microfiche.
Profits, etc...
It would be impossible to feed all of us without preservatives, mass-manufacturing and ease of distribution. I would argue that it is predominantly a result of population overgrowth worldwide, not profit-taking.
Maybe we should starve a few billion people in the interest of cleaner, organic food and healthier cats.
Processes also destroy pathogens.
"A democracy is two wolves and a small lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." --- Benjamin Franklin
DOOD:
/.ers like me I presume.
*talked down IE
*talked up FOSS
*forcibly spread FOSS
How could I possibly satisfy you? Develop nukes in mass quantity and take out the world excepting your basement? Fsck you for saying I have an agenda... I help people, real ones, in need of tech support. In exchange for installation and use of FOSS I specify, GNU or "neigh," I help them for beer.
Me and thousands of
Horseshit! Are you saying that people eat animals?! We need to get this onto the front page of Slashdot, neigh, the Times!!! Is there a gallop poll regarding Japan's or the United States' horse meat consumption? And does it give you the trots?
For Barbaro's sake... the horse had a good run. Making hay from an article about web browsers is to saddle the issue with an agenda; please do not bridle our argument by being a horse's ass. This is a discussion about software, and to jockey animal rights into it is just putting the cart before the horse. So slow down there, cowboy... Reign it in. While I am sure you're chomping at the bit to get this kind of information out, I am fresh out of insensitive horse puns and we will have to put this discussion out to stud.
Polo!
The headline: "Put Down" It's like they shot Barbaro. Netscape was not retired out of sympathy (empathy for those of you in Rio Linda) for the browser; The Old Blue N died of natural causes. May she rest in Bittorrent.
Thankfully, this will increase Firefox market share. I am a Firefox enthusiast, having first used it on the RedHat system at work and then forcing it down the throats of all who ask me for free (as-in-I-get-free-beer) Windows support. While Firefox is not without its flaws, it IS without the flaws of Internet Exploder, and in that the project is a respectable and fruitful mix of public service and development enterprise. Firefox is the child of Netscape, and children must bury their parents. Hail, Farewell, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.
Now I need one to wipe the beer I just spat all over my monitor. Thanks for that.
Thank you for commenting on slashdot! LOL! You'd love the zany TOTALLY NUDE shots from my webcam! All you have to do is CLICK MY LINK and you will see me totally exposed! This is not a hack or virus or any of that, I am just trying to increase my exposure (if you know what I mean) in !script=LOCAL_CITY!@user! so I thought I would hit you up personally, since you seem soooo kewl! I luv yer pix and maybe we can get a little more personal if you Czech out my pix on my sight. XOXOXO 3 --Bubbles.
I've said it before, and I'll
say
it
again!
CERTAINLY NOT THAT EDWARD MARKEY! Jeez, I bet Chris Soghoian thinks this is just special!
As a Hoosier (DEF: born and currently a resident of Indiana), I confidently assure you that they would gleefully pass the bill today. Anyone objecting would be branded a pi-denier. [insert boring local politics]
No politician wants to be the one refusing to give our poor and homeless their much needed pi.
I meant Nethack... In Family Guy they are playing WOW and I guess the "-craft" superimposed itself on my thoughts. Funny stuff though.
He blows himself up, ascends to heaven, and there are 72 slashdot users having a celestial lan party, playing netcraft and flaming Microsoft.
Dammit, now I have lost The Game too.
I absolutely agree regarding ephedrine. I always hate that 1984 moment when I hand over my ID for the decongestants I require. I used to buy the stay-awakes for their stay-breathing qualities, and while ephedrine is not for everyone, I had always found it to be extremely effective for my resilient sinus woes.
Regarding the lack of cash-receiving utility on gas pumps, there is a combination of factors here. An earlier post mentions the risk of retrieving the currency, and I refer you to the benefit of forcing many customers indoors, where the selling happens
I will now take this a step further. I would argue that people who use credit cards to purchase fuel are generally better with money than cash customers, because they are capable of saving and responsibly maintaining functional credit records by controlling expenditures. People who cannot acquire cards are less capable regarding saving money, and gas vendors find it worthwhile to exploit this weakness by forcing the weak saver into a spending environment.
As for whom the public blames for the lack of bill slots, I don't suspect they need to blame anyone. The status quo is accepted. The real event here is the shift to prepay--the customers have money in their hands, so the willingness to make a purchase is increased, thanks to the careful marketing I earlier described and the desire for convenience.
The customer considers the already enforced opportunity cost of leaving their vehicle, and would likely prefer to pay a higher price for a good than to repeat the cost of leaving their vehicle again (paying the same opportunity cost) to purchase something they now have convinced themselves they would have bought anyway.
Slow down there, space cowboy...
Your points are absolutely valid in your context, but I think we are dangerously placing the cart before our collective ass.
Just like the military, NASA has experienced declining general interest. This is not a SETI-esque venture to solve the great mysteries of space travel, nor is it some kind of "Last Starfighter" quest for an Alex Rogan. It is a valid, overdue tossing of kerosene onto a thirsty and faltering flame; a genuine attempt to generate interest among young people regarding space exploration, and we both can support something like that.
It's sort of a "hook em' while they're young" deal, and the casualty-to-mission rating of NASA is nothing like that of the Army. The excitement factor of NASA pales in comparison to that of the Army. Hopefully, this game lands where these demand curves intersect.
Last Starfighter kicks ass!
That's why there are video monitors on the pumps, to at least dangle the bait in front of you for a few minutes.
I would also add (to your letter) that you used to get your morning coffee, pack of cigarettes and package of decongestant there every morning as well. Profit margins on gasoline are actually surprisingly low; retail locations rely on those ridiculously marked-up impulse buys, mostly made by the morning/evening commuter. Prepay (pay inside, then pump) at gas stations was not instituted because a few jerk-offs gas-n-go. They want those cash customers in the selling environment! Either skip to the last paragraph for the point, or allow me to elaborate:
Mega chain retailers, gas stations included, rely on conformity to "plan-o-grams," actual required product placement blueprints, at which the minimum-wage dregs while away the hours in some attempt to conform. The aspirin goes near the coffee and next to the gum, because the hangover crowd will be there in the morning. Useless crap lead-containing toys are placed at knee-level next to the lines for the registers, because the little scamps will invariably demand the purchase of such items, just when impatient mommy has her wallet out--that is if the yuppie parents of said scamps have not left them in a still-running, unlocked car in an unattended parking lot. The tire gauges are near the motor oil, but just around the bend from the tampons; men buy them (both even), but single moms concerned about highway safety do as well. The expensive cigarette lighters are on the counter for easy theft, but the equally capable ones are behind it, hidden, where they are only stolen by employees. You practically trip over Red Bull and Coca-Cola on the way in, but god help you to find the generic cola. Just scratching the surface here, but you get my drift.
These plan-o-grams change frequently, as trends are explored and exploited. The monitors are another campaign in the impulse buy campaign, and I have only addressed gas (petrol) stations. I have multiple experiences as a retail manager, and as a gas station employee, and I am somewhat fascinated by these ploys.
Moving to other sellers, specifically electronics.... Next Christmas, or at any competitive sale time, closely examine the "loss leaders" employed by retailers. The idea is this: sell item X at near or below cost, knowing that it will trigger increased revenue from accessory items Y and Z, either instantly via the marketing miracle of "batteries not included" or continuously via "games sold separately." Barbies need outfits. Xboxen require games. My favorite, from my Radio $hack days, was to sell the remote control car at my cost exactly (which I revealed), so that I could easily demand that the poor sucker dad buy two rechargeable batteries (gotta have a spare, especially at well over 90% margin) and all the 9-volts he could carry (insane low cost, insane standard market price fixing), all the while coming out smelling like a rose. This is standard procedure, so you know the more devious schemes are way more insulting, such as video screens on your shopping cart.
As for grocery stores, we have always realized that kid cereal is on the bottom, bargain cereal is at waist level and receives limited shelf real estate, and that premium cereal is highlighted with "sale pricing" (also known as standard mark-up) and is at shoulder level, as far as the eye can see. Frankly, grocers endure painfully low profit margin percentages, but thankfully for them, humans cannot live without food (particularly for rural markets, the choke price for milk and bread can get pretty ridiculous). Closely examine the items in the advertisement from week to week. When ground beef is on sale, regularly priced hamburger buns are generously placed right in the meat market, with a slammin' pyramid of regularly priced ketchup and pickle slices opposing; lettuce and onions are not on special either. The same gas station methods are employed at the registers, and it is no accident that toys and school supplies come right after cereal, aisle-wise. You'll also notice t
Sun will use buzzwords to reduce its data center space and perceived energy usage by 50 percent by 2013, with a goal of moving it all to India two years later.
There, fixed that for Sun.
First, I would like to point out that providing anything over the internet requires that servers somewhere invariably consume electricity at that somewhere, so relinquishing web services to the cloud does not amount to a smaller overall energy consumption, it just eliminates the evident level of corporate consumption. Granted, they have migrated to more energy efficient equipment thus far, but that does not amount to a hill of soybeans because newer equipment is nearly always more efficient. Top marks for obfuscation.
The proverbial cloud seems more efficient because it consumes precious unused cycles (we recently discussed the value of these), but it could be argued that it: (a) artificially inflates perceived demand for traffic provision over certain ~tubes~ to the computing source, increasing necessary power supply for those paths, (b) increases power consumption incrementally at the point of the processing computer, and (c) via the law of diminishing returns, increases overall resource consumption thanks to the resource cost of transporting the information to less efficient equipment. The processing requirement is not diminished, only distributed and increased through that distribution. How many hops through these abominable "25-50% efficient" data centers before the relatively minuscule reduction in Sun's data centers is met? And what of the jobs lost? And what of the increased commute consumption of unemployed coders and hardware wonks to their stately new stations behind Burger King grills?
We now employ both centralized systems and massively distributed systems to host information we demand, and generally these are selected based on monetary capital versus willingness or incentive to participate, overall robustness being fairly equal. SETI and many other number-crunching projects rely on the generous support of willing software installers to participate in their projects, but if an already stable bandwidth-consuming entity is forced on nearly all consumers of a basic internet need (and their hosts), I think their piece of the system will collapse because the participants will not be so willing! The internet changes rapidly, as many players swiftly respond to changing conditions. We generally have a state of equilibrium, except where governmental players attempt rule changes. When a commercial entity (Microsoft, etc) prods around rule changes, we make major waves. If Sun chooses to put their whole school of thought into this particular sea, I think they'll have plenty of sharks to worry about.
Sun would like to cut the monetary cost of operating data centers, and their chosen method to shove it down our throats is to first douse it with the chocolate syrup of environmentalism. How insulting; do they really think we're that stupid? A forced migration to a new system is pretty retarded in itself, and the trifecta of security concerns, implementation nightmares, and environmental balderdash seems to be suicidal.
Protracting a bit, as a forced (college student) user of Sun products, I would be absolutely resistant to any such environmentally shrouded money grab, preferring the security and stability of normal centralized (particularly open source, mind you) not-for and for-profit entities. I would be very favorable to future competitors of Sun that oppose these vulnerabilities. Finally, I would like to clearly state that I believe this this to be a mere political statement to justify already existent a
Balderdash.
They don't give a rip about your collection of real media. A single exception is enough evidence to prosecute, and any difference between your physical collection and your digital one only strengthens their case--you clearly knew the difference! Packrat!
I have always felt that the only reason a citizen should ever point a firearm at another person or creature is to kill it. The known presence of firearms, however, makes a nice deterrent. When I leave my truck at a trail head for a weekend backpacking or hunting excursion, I always scatter a few shotgun shells on the dashboard. They can take their chances breaking in, but you never know when I may turn up.
Neither of us endeavored to discredit the University of Washington. Calm down.
It is alledged by some that there is no evidence that there is a government policy to screw with Wikipedia. Claiming that the US government is manipulating Wikipedia due to some IP numbers matching vandals is believed by some to be like claiming that the University of Washington is manipulating Wikipedia for the same reason. This of course does not disprove a relationship aimed at bringing harm to the United States.
There, the house of representatives fixed that for ya.
I would also like to point out the date on the edit linked in the article:
Revision as of 17:49, 12 August 2005
Heheheh, I can't wait until the first time some idiot decides to crack one of these babies open! The news channels will be running around like chickens with their heads cut off, speculating on which branch of which terrorist network the geeky white kid works for. Needle nose pliers of Damocles?