Well, they are using data from TomTom as far as I understand.
I have the TomTom app on my iPhone and it's a lot better than the iOS 6 maps though. It's expensive and takes a lot of storage space, but it's great, especially if you might find yourself without network/internet in a foreign country or just a remote location. I have literally crossed 3 continents with it. The quality of the app, POI and map data is very very good. I must have spent about $100 to get North America, Europe and Oceania, but its well worth it. It knows all speed cameras and speed limits, it must have saved me a multitude of my investment in speeding fines alone.
Given that Apple apparently uses the same data, I'm surprised at how much worse their results are.
I find that the TomTom apps for the iPhone have both very good POI and map data. I've literally crossed 3 continents with them and they're really really good. They're not free though and take a lot of storage space.
Apple has done much worse with the same data than TomTom itself. I was rather surprised and disappointed.
I have the TomTom apps on my iPhone for several continents. They take a lot of space, but work very very well. I've travelled in Europe, North America and Australia/New Zealand, it has been very accurate, has a very good points-of-interest database, voice navigation, lane assist, traffic assist and up to date and correct maps.
I am very surprised that the quality of the iOS map application is so much less. It's very not-Apple (maybe post Steve Jobs?) to release like this, and also I would not like to be TomTom at this moment, if must rub off on them a little as well.
The TomTom applications aren't cheap, and take many GB of space (about 5 GB per continent), but they allow you full offline navigation. Personally I haven't regretted spending the money one second, and several times it has saved me a lot of time and trouble, especially in rural areas of places like Nevada, Australia, Sweden if you need to find a fuel station, restaurant, place to sleep or get to one you one you booked earlier. But it also works in NYC or Paris.
You are very correct. the Middle East is a very different place than it was 30-40 years ago.
Most of this change seems to be fueled by oil money from Saudi-Arabia. Nearly all Qurans printed are using their version of interpretation of the texts. At least that's what I've heard.
The unresolved conflict between Israel and Palestina isn't helping either. Every time it errupts it reopens old wounds.
The USA has had a lot of advantages by being a largely immigrant country.
It's not just education, but also things like healthcare, age and health of the workforce, etc.
If you stop the immigration, you all of a sudden need to start caring for your own population much more. I think that in 50 years, America will look much more like Europe than today.
I got onto the BluRay bandwagon just over a year ago. It lasted for about 4 months.
The 6th or so disk I bought was for Avatar. I couldn't get it to play. When googling I found out that it probably required a software update to my Pioneer player. Due to some weird incompatibility with my TV, the software update menu doesn't work. I fiddled with it for an entire evening, over 3 hours.
In the end I downloaded the movie and watched it that way, despite having a legal copy.
I decided then and there never to buy a BluRay movie again, despite having paid good money for a decent player.
IBM, a participant in the market, gave us PCs. Before that, other participants in the market gave us 8-bit home microcomputers.
Of which Apple made the first one.
And the PC market exists mostly because of the deal Bill Gates made over MS-DOS. The PC hardware was nothing new, I have an ICL machine from 1979 with the same components as the first PC, it runs CP/M-86.
I don't agree with you. The success of the PC industry has been because of this high flexibility.
The problem I have with the Linux kernel, is that as a programmer, the abstraction isn't of a high enough level, so a lot of stuff needs to be done by the desktop environment. Maybe there should be a layer between the kernel and the desktop environment, or the level of abstraction should be much higher within the kernel itself.
My knowledge is somewhat dated, as I left Linux land about 5 years ago, but my problem was that often the abstraction stopped at the level of character/block device, while I wanted to talk to "scanner"/"modem"/"TVtuner"/"camera".
Without good abstraction at that level, there is no way for a device manufacturer to write a proper driver, and then I'm not even touching the binary/source debate.
There is no way to expand the interfaces, as the capabilities of a type of devices expand, if the kernel doesn't even have an abstraction at that level.
The numbers I've seen are 5-7% for rape and 3.5% for consensual intercourse. The explanation being that often rapists target the most fertile women in the 15-25% age bracket.
I wasn't logged in, but to repeat my question (which is sincere—I'm trying to understand the science, not defend Akin's claims):
I'm confused about the numbers in the paper's abstract. They say the pregnancy rate is 5%, and the number of resulting pregnancies annually in the U.S. is 32,000. That means the number of incidents of rape is 640,000.
Other sources claim the number of reported rapes in the U.S. is around 90,000. How do we reconcile these numbers? Surely the authors don't claim that 86% of rapes in the U.S. go unreported?
That sounds quite reasonable to me actually. Most crime goes unreported, and rape being a rather shameful one, I wouldn't be surprised it often went unreported.
I don't know the statistics, but the numbers you quote don't seem that odd to me. It's not statistical evidence, but there have been many cases in the news where a sex offended got caught on a few reported cases, only to have many more victims show up once the initial story hits the news. See for example the recent paedophilia scandals in the church.
If anything, the statistical evidence points to a higher chance of getting pregnant from rape (5-7%) than from consensual intercourse (3.5%). Most explanations I've seen suggest this is because rapists often select the most fertile women in the 15-25 age bracket.
I think religion plays an important role in cultural evolution. It's why the religions that preach "go forth and multiply" in general are the successful ones.
Religion has shown itself as a very good mechanism for cultures to survive (and keep those in power secure). The power of religion should not be underestimated, it's survival of the fittest at the cultural level, and religions have proven themselves very good at that.
It's still higher than the average chance to get pregnant (3.5%) from voluntary intercourse. The best explanation I've seen for the number for rape being higher than that is that rapists often target the most fertile women in the 15-25 age bracket.
If anything, most studies seem to find that there is a higher chance ( 5-7.5%) that a rape victim gets pregnant than the average chance to get pregnant (3.5%). The explanations I've seen is that rapists will usually target the most fertile women in the 15-25 age bracket.
I have a lot of experience with being uncircumcised. And I can tell you that it's one of the most sensitive parts of my body and a great source of "pleasure". I would never voluntarily have it removed unless it was to save my life or something similar.
You're right that I don't know how it is to be circumcised but I definitely don't want to find out.
My opinion is that unless there is compelling evidence, which seems to be lacking here, you should not do procedures like this.
There are cases that seem to demonstrate a much clearer health benefit, like removing breasts and prostates in women and men to prevent a large number of cancers. We don't do that, at least until a cancer is actually detected, when it might be too late, so I don't see why we should do this.
My experience is that the reason you have to choose between Gnome and KDE is the real problem: They need to do a lot of things that the OS should provide.
I think the problem is that there should be a common level between the kernel and the desktop so that the different widget toolkits have to do a lot less of the hardware abstraction. In my view this is where Linux has dropped the ball.
I find that in a lot of cases FOSS developers, and sometimes also MS developers confuse bling with usability. Apple is all about usability. As a side effect it often looks nice, but people confuse the message for the envelope it comes in.
If anything, the FOSS community is missing usability experts, or the people leading the projects listening to them.
The design of Apple products helps in selling the items and creating the image. The loyal user base ("fanboys") exists because Apple actually creates very useful products.
Apple plays for keeps, it wants to make sure it's existing customers are happy (and a bit locked in). I see that most clearly in the smartphone market, where my 3 year old iPhone 3GS is still being supported, while much newer phones aren't.
I ran Linux full-time from 1997-2007, so my experience is similar. Getting hardware to work reliably, especially if your company is tied to a certain vendor, is quite often a problem. And then it might break if you upgrade to a newer version of the distribution.
Next to that a Linux desktop lacks a lot of applications that are needed in a corporate environment. Things like a good groupware client. (Evolution is often broken). Most things are available for OSX nowadays, including MS Office.
And more than that, if you run into a problem installing a commercial application, you can usually get support if you're running on OSX. Linux support is often limited to one flavour of RedHat, if at all.
Phone, camera, mp3 player and data all in one device
Older Symbian s60 devices did the same for a much lower price and IIRC better battery life It wasnt a dream come true, it was a feature phone dressed up as a smartphone
I used a Nokia N70 for years. The experience was nothing like the iPhone. I even wrote applications for the Nokia and I think it was one of the best phones at the time I bought it. I used it a lot. I also owned a Windows Mobile PDA, the specs were good, but the user experience was bad. I used it less and less as the novelty wore off, which was a pity as it had been really expensive. I also owned the first iPod Video, although it took Apple 6 more years because I could actually buy videos on iTunes.
What Apple did was a real Paradigm shift. Making a normal browser useable on such a small screen was no small feat. Doing away with the keyboard and only having the touchscreen was the real winner though. It allowed to get away from seeing the smartphone as a very small PC to something more appliance like. No more menus to navigate to applications, music, pictures, phonebook and such. No more awkward small keys or tiny stylus. (And I don't have very big hands). But it was really the whole package, not just the device, but also things like the unlimited mobile internet, that made so much better.
I don't know where you live, but this is BS to me. I drive a Saab 9-3, so I'll use that to counter most of your arguments.
Oh God the idiotic answer of "Nobody needs an SUV except XYZ".
- They stopped making the Crown Vic, that means 3 child families must use SUVs and Vans.
I have no idea what a Crown Vic is, but I can fit 3 adults comfortably on the backseat of my Saab 9-3, and that's not even a very big car. Something like an Opel Zafira will seat 7.
- Modern cars are often rather small, making them worthless for big trips with young children (try to fit two decent strollers in the trunk of something that isn't a Crown Vic, I dare you).
I again quote the numbers of my Saab 9-3. It has 17.5 cu. feet trunk space, the station wagon variant has 30, and if you fold the rear seat down it goes to 73 cu. ft.
- The towing capacity of the average modern car is about 1000 lbs (many actually explicitly state NO towing WHATSOEVER). This means that families owning a house, where every couple of months you want to haul a large item home will need to oftentimes rent another vehicle for that purpose. Why not just buy a more versatile vehicle to start with?
Again, I just look at my Saab 9-3. It has a towing capacity of 1600 kg, or about 3300 lbs. It will tow anything smaller than a large boat or trailer home.
- Modern cars have small engines. This is great around the town, but on the highway, mileage suffers horribly. SUVs get much better highway mileage (not better than cars, but not all that far away) because they often put an appropriately sized engine in them.
My 9-3 has a 155 hp engine on 1315 kg of weight. I have driven 190 km/h (120 mph) on German autobahns with little effort. This is the smallest (1.9 litre) engine for this model. The diesel version is slightly less powerful but has much better mileage. I get about 30 miles/gallon on my daily commute (largely 60 km of highway @ 120 km/h (75 mph)) My car is from 2001, newer cars get even better mileage.
- Some modern cars (not all) do not support roof racks. So you can't even use it to bring a bicycle with you (since you can't tow with it, either) on a small fun trip.
If I have 1-2 bikes, I fold down the rear seat and put them inside. I have a bicycle rack for up to 4 bikes that goes on the tow hitch. I have no idea if I can have a roof rack, but I don't like them for aerodynamic reasons.
- If you like to do your own repair work, modern cars are hell on earth due to their cramped engine compartments, unibody construction, and independent suspension (of course, most SUVs have that nowadays too, but not *all* are terrible to work on the way it generally is with cars).
I think this is true for a lot of modern cars. Mine is quite good in this respect though although the A/C and turbo take up a lot of space.
- They quit making station wagons (give or take) so those customers bought SUVs (which are now being downsized to CUVs, which I guess is the modern day station wagon).
Huh. Nearly all car models I know have a sedan and a station wagon variant. Peugot 207/307/407, BMW 3/5 series, Mercedes C/E class, Ford focus, subaru legacy/impreza, Kia cee'd/rondo, volvo V40/V70 are just a few that come to mind. I think most car models have a station wagon version.
- It sucks ass getting a flat in a car on a long trip, since most modern cars have a toy tire, or worse, tire goop and an inflator ("clown shoes" as I like to call it). Many SUVs offer a full size spare--extremely handy!
This might be true. The spare in my car isn't full size and I know it isn't in many other cars. I'll give you this one. I think I've gotten a flat only twice in the last 10 years, so it's not a big concern for me. (I drive about 30k km/20k miles a year).
The point is that the "customer" isn't who you think it is. For most movies and TV series, it's the TV networks.
This way they can have TV series X unavailable in country A so the TV network Q-TV can show it exclusively on their network, even though it aired in it's original country years ago.
It's a business model that's starting to fail, but it's where still most of the money is, so Geo-IP is used to keep it alive.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, they are using data from TomTom as far as I understand.
I have the TomTom app on my iPhone and it's a lot better than the iOS 6 maps though. It's expensive and takes a lot of storage space, but it's great, especially if you might find yourself without network/internet in a foreign country or just a remote location. I have literally crossed 3 continents with it. The quality of the app, POI and map data is very very good. I must have spent about $100 to get North America, Europe and Oceania, but its well worth it. It knows all speed cameras and speed limits, it must have saved me a multitude of my investment in speeding fines alone.
Given that Apple apparently uses the same data, I'm surprised at how much worse their results are.
I find that the TomTom apps for the iPhone have both very good POI and map data. I've literally crossed 3 continents with them and they're really really good. They're not free though and take a lot of storage space.
Apple has done much worse with the same data than TomTom itself. I was rather surprised and disappointed.
I have the TomTom apps on my iPhone for several continents. They take a lot of space, but work very very well. I've travelled in Europe, North America and Australia/New Zealand, it has been very accurate, has a very good points-of-interest database, voice navigation, lane assist, traffic assist and up to date and correct maps.
I am very surprised that the quality of the iOS map application is so much less. It's very not-Apple (maybe post Steve Jobs?) to release like this, and also I would not like to be TomTom at this moment, if must rub off on them a little as well.
The TomTom applications aren't cheap, and take many GB of space (about 5 GB per continent), but they allow you full offline navigation. Personally I haven't regretted spending the money one second, and several times it has saved me a lot of time and trouble, especially in rural areas of places like Nevada, Australia, Sweden if you need to find a fuel station, restaurant, place to sleep or get to one you one you booked earlier. But it also works in NYC or Paris.
I'm just surprised.
I was under the impression that education at the university level was not job training but about concepts and understanding.
I would expect a new student at a university to already know these things.
You are very correct. the Middle East is a very different place than it was 30-40 years ago.
Most of this change seems to be fueled by oil money from Saudi-Arabia. Nearly all Qurans printed are using their version of interpretation of the texts. At least that's what I've heard.
The unresolved conflict between Israel and Palestina isn't helping either. Every time it errupts it reopens old wounds.
The USA has had a lot of advantages by being a largely immigrant country.
It's not just education, but also things like healthcare, age and health of the workforce, etc.
If you stop the immigration, you all of a sudden need to start caring for your own population much more. I think that in 50 years, America will look much more like Europe than today.
And that's assuming you live in the USA.
I can't watch movies onine legally anywhere. Not Netflix, Hulu, Amazon.com, iTunes, etc.
I got onto the BluRay bandwagon just over a year ago. It lasted for about 4 months.
The 6th or so disk I bought was for Avatar. I couldn't get it to play. When googling I found out that it probably required a software update to my Pioneer player. Due to some weird incompatibility with my TV, the software update menu doesn't work. I fiddled with it for an entire evening, over 3 hours.
In the end I downloaded the movie and watched it that way, despite having a legal copy.
I decided then and there never to buy a BluRay movie again, despite having paid good money for a decent player.
The market is not what gave us PCs
IBM, a participant in the market, gave us PCs. Before that, other participants in the market gave us 8-bit home microcomputers.
Of which Apple made the first one.
And the PC market exists mostly because of the deal Bill Gates made over MS-DOS. The PC hardware was nothing new, I have an ICL machine from 1979 with the same components as the first PC, it runs CP/M-86.
I don't agree with you. The success of the PC industry has been because of this high flexibility.
The problem I have with the Linux kernel, is that as a programmer, the abstraction isn't of a high enough level, so a lot of stuff needs to be done by the desktop environment. Maybe there should be a layer between the kernel and the desktop environment, or the level of abstraction should be much higher within the kernel itself.
My knowledge is somewhat dated, as I left Linux land about 5 years ago, but my problem was that often the abstraction stopped at the level of character/block device, while I wanted to talk to "scanner"/"modem"/"TVtuner"/"camera".
Without good abstraction at that level, there is no way for a device manufacturer to write a proper driver, and then I'm not even touching the binary/source debate.
There is no way to expand the interfaces, as the capabilities of a type of devices expand, if the kernel doesn't even have an abstraction at that level.
The numbers I've seen are 5-7% for rape and 3.5% for consensual intercourse. The explanation being that often rapists target the most fertile women in the 15-25% age bracket.
I wasn't logged in, but to repeat my question (which is sincere—I'm trying to understand the science, not defend Akin's claims):
I'm confused about the numbers in the paper's abstract. They say the pregnancy rate is 5%, and the number of resulting pregnancies annually in the U.S. is 32,000. That means the number of incidents of rape is 640,000.
Other sources claim the number of reported rapes in the U.S. is around 90,000. How do we reconcile these numbers? Surely the authors don't claim that 86% of rapes in the U.S. go unreported?
That sounds quite reasonable to me actually. Most crime goes unreported, and rape being a rather shameful one, I wouldn't be surprised it often went unreported.
I don't know the statistics, but the numbers you quote don't seem that odd to me. It's not statistical evidence, but there have been many cases in the news where a sex offended got caught on a few reported cases, only to have many more victims show up once the initial story hits the news. See for example the recent paedophilia scandals in the church.
If anything, the statistical evidence points to a higher chance of getting pregnant from rape (5-7%) than from consensual intercourse (3.5%). Most explanations I've seen suggest this is because rapists often select the most fertile women in the 15-25 age bracket.
I think religion plays an important role in cultural evolution. It's why the religions that preach "go forth and multiply" in general are the successful ones.
Religion has shown itself as a very good mechanism for cultures to survive (and keep those in power secure). The power of religion should not be underestimated, it's survival of the fittest at the cultural level, and religions have proven themselves very good at that.
It's still higher than the average chance to get pregnant (3.5%) from voluntary intercourse. The best explanation I've seen for the number for rape being higher than that is that rapists often target the most fertile women in the 15-25 age bracket.
If anything, most studies seem to find that there is a higher chance ( 5-7.5%) that a rape victim gets pregnant than the average chance to get pregnant (3.5%). The explanations I've seen is that rapists will usually target the most fertile women in the 15-25 age bracket.
I have a lot of experience with being uncircumcised. And I can tell you that it's one of the most sensitive parts of my body and a great source of "pleasure". I would never voluntarily have it removed unless it was to save my life or something similar.
You're right that I don't know how it is to be circumcised but I definitely don't want to find out.
My opinion is that unless there is compelling evidence, which seems to be lacking here, you should not do procedures like this.
There are cases that seem to demonstrate a much clearer health benefit, like removing breasts and prostates in women and men to prevent a large number of cancers. We don't do that, at least until a cancer is actually detected, when it might be too late, so I don't see why we should do this.
So, you're basically saying it's for the same kind of reason that in the USA a lot of teenage girls get breast implants?
My experience is that the reason you have to choose between Gnome and KDE is the real problem: They need to do a lot of things that the OS should provide.
I think the problem is that there should be a common level between the kernel and the desktop so that the different widget toolkits have to do a lot less of the hardware abstraction. In my view this is where Linux has dropped the ball.
I think in part this is where the Linux kernel dropped the ball. Such a common layer should not depend on what desktop you use.
I find that in a lot of cases FOSS developers, and sometimes also MS developers confuse bling with usability. Apple is all about usability. As a side effect it often looks nice, but people confuse the message for the envelope it comes in.
If anything, the FOSS community is missing usability experts, or the people leading the projects listening to them.
The design of Apple products helps in selling the items and creating the image. The loyal user base ("fanboys") exists because Apple actually creates very useful products.
Apple plays for keeps, it wants to make sure it's existing customers are happy (and a bit locked in). I see that most clearly in the smartphone market, where my 3 year old iPhone 3GS is still being supported, while much newer phones aren't.
I ran Linux full-time from 1997-2007, so my experience is similar. Getting hardware to work reliably, especially if your company is tied to a certain vendor, is quite often a problem. And then it might break if you upgrade to a newer version of the distribution.
Next to that a Linux desktop lacks a lot of applications that are needed in a corporate environment. Things like a good groupware client. (Evolution is often broken). Most things are available for OSX nowadays, including MS Office.
And more than that, if you run into a problem installing a commercial application, you can usually get support if you're running on OSX. Linux support is often limited to one flavour of RedHat, if at all.
Phone, camera, mp3 player and data all in one device
Older Symbian s60 devices did the same for a much lower price and IIRC better battery life
It wasnt a dream come true, it was a feature phone dressed up as a smartphone
I used a Nokia N70 for years. The experience was nothing like the iPhone. I even wrote applications for the Nokia and I think it was one of the best phones at the time I bought it. I used it a lot.
I also owned a Windows Mobile PDA, the specs were good, but the user experience was bad. I used it less and less as the novelty wore off, which was a pity as it had been really expensive. I also owned the first iPod Video, although it took Apple 6 more years because I could actually buy videos on iTunes.
What Apple did was a real Paradigm shift. Making a normal browser useable on such a small screen was no small feat. Doing away with the keyboard and only having the touchscreen was the real winner though. It allowed to get away from seeing the smartphone as a very small PC to something more appliance like. No more menus to navigate to applications, music, pictures, phonebook and such. No more awkward small keys or tiny stylus. (And I don't have very big hands). But it was really the whole package, not just the device, but also things like the unlimited mobile internet, that made so much better.
I don't know where you live, but this is BS to me. I drive a Saab 9-3, so I'll use that to counter most of your arguments.
Oh God the idiotic answer of "Nobody needs an SUV except XYZ".
- They stopped making the Crown Vic, that means 3 child families must use SUVs and Vans.
I have no idea what a Crown Vic is, but I can fit 3 adults comfortably on the backseat of my Saab 9-3, and that's not even a very big car. Something like an Opel Zafira will seat 7.
- Modern cars are often rather small, making them worthless for big trips with young children (try to fit two decent strollers in the trunk of something that isn't a Crown Vic, I dare you).
I again quote the numbers of my Saab 9-3. It has 17.5 cu. feet trunk space, the station wagon variant has 30, and if you fold the rear seat down it goes to 73 cu. ft.
- The towing capacity of the average modern car is about 1000 lbs (many actually explicitly state NO towing WHATSOEVER). This means that families owning a house, where every couple of months you want to haul a large item home will need to oftentimes rent another vehicle for that purpose. Why not just buy a more versatile vehicle to start with?
Again, I just look at my Saab 9-3. It has a towing capacity of 1600 kg, or about 3300 lbs. It will tow anything smaller than a large boat or trailer home.
- Modern cars have small engines. This is great around the town, but on the highway, mileage suffers horribly. SUVs get much better highway mileage (not better than cars, but not all that far away) because they often put an appropriately sized engine in them.
My 9-3 has a 155 hp engine on 1315 kg of weight. I have driven 190 km/h (120 mph) on German autobahns with little effort. This is the smallest (1.9 litre) engine for this model. The diesel version is slightly less powerful but has much better mileage. I get about 30 miles/gallon on my daily commute (largely 60 km of highway @ 120 km/h (75 mph)) My car is from 2001, newer cars get even better mileage.
- Some modern cars (not all) do not support roof racks. So you can't even use it to bring a bicycle with you (since you can't tow with it, either) on a small fun trip.
If I have 1-2 bikes, I fold down the rear seat and put them inside. I have a bicycle rack for up to 4 bikes that goes on the tow hitch. I have no idea if I can have a roof rack, but I don't like them for aerodynamic reasons.
- If you like to do your own repair work, modern cars are hell on earth due to their cramped engine compartments, unibody construction, and independent suspension (of course, most SUVs have that nowadays too, but not *all* are terrible to work on the way it generally is with cars).
I think this is true for a lot of modern cars. Mine is quite good in this respect though although the A/C and turbo take up a lot of space.
- They quit making station wagons (give or take) so those customers bought SUVs (which are now being downsized to CUVs, which I guess is the modern day station wagon).
Huh. Nearly all car models I know have a sedan and a station wagon variant. Peugot 207/307/407, BMW 3/5 series, Mercedes C/E class, Ford focus, subaru legacy/impreza, Kia cee'd/rondo, volvo V40/V70 are just a few that come to mind. I think most car models have a station wagon version.
- It sucks ass getting a flat in a car on a long trip, since most modern cars have a toy tire, or worse, tire goop and an inflator ("clown shoes" as I like to call it). Many SUVs offer a full size spare--extremely handy!
This might be true. The spare in my car isn't full size and I know it isn't in many other cars. I'll give you this one. I think I've gotten a flat only twice in the last 10 years, so it's not a big concern for me. (I drive about 30k km/20k miles a year).
The point is that the "customer" isn't who you think it is. For most movies and TV series, it's the TV networks.
This way they can have TV series X unavailable in country A so the TV network Q-TV can show it exclusively on their network, even though it aired in it's original country years ago.
It's a business model that's starting to fail, but it's where still most of the money is, so Geo-IP is used to keep it alive.