Is the Government Scaring Web Businesses Out of the US? 271
suraj.sun sends this quote from an article at Techdirt:
"The federal government has been paying lip service to the idea that it wants to encourage new businesses and startups in the U.S. And this is truly important to the economy, as studies have shown that almost all of the net job growth in this country is coming from internet startups. ... With the JotForm situation unfolding, where the U.S. government shut down an entire website with no notice or explanation, people are beginning to recognize that the U.S is not safe for internet startups. Lots of folks have been passing around [a] rather reasonable list of activities for U.S.-based websites."
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)
Not just you. Also all the users of your website have to follow it!
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
If you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to fear. Just make sure you follow the law.
That only holds true for law-based definitions of right and wrong.
Many would diverge rather sharply from the law in their personal ethical equations, so it's best not to confuse the two.
10 Year plan vs daily/weekly bullshit laws (Score:4, Insightful)
It's rather fuckin moot to try to plan ten years ahead when the laws change to being more and more draconian and unconstitutional every couple days/weeks.
This is full spectrum disruption. Who dare run a music blog when the lables don't even know what the current law is? Who dare hire employees when health-insurance, and tax is unstable and unpredictable, with a monetary system that is unregulated and corrupt to the fuckin core? Who dare take a loan in this depression/inflation enviornment? Who wants to pay for video bandwidth, when streaming a video is now a felony?
Who suffers? ebay, paypal, amazon, domain sellers, hosting, isp's, software developers, bloggers, bands, labels, video production, video promotion. You want real people to discuss fixes, better get rid of all this fascist, war on terrorism, cyberwar propaganda psychopathic bullshit.
Sorry to repeat myself but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Put hosting in countries where the RIAA hides its money from the tax man, Switzerland, Luxumbourg, etc... Being a bully to a country that has dirt on you is a line they won't cross. I think.
The open source community is just maturing. (Score:5, Insightful)
What we're actually seeing is the open source community maturing. Since Slashdot was one of the first major gathering points for open source advocates, we're seeing this maturation happen here first.
While open source software had its roots in the political upheaval of the 1960s and 1970s, the number of true old-timers ("neckbeards", if you will) pales in comparison to the younger generation who really made open source software take off. I'm talking about the Linuses and the Alan Coxes and now even those open source advocates born after 1990.
These younger people are finally seeing how important politics is in any movement. They're now seeing that the technology is one part of the pie, but playing the political game is another big chunk. You're damn right that politics is becoming more important to these people!
Technology is so intertwined with politics these days that you can't unwind them. You get them both, and you need to learn to enjoy it this way.
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Not sure if you're a troll or an idiot. JotForm and Dajaz1 both had their sites returned after the feds admitted that there had been no wrongdoing
Oh, how kind of them! Were the companies compensated for their losses? Did they issue a formal apology so the businesses could demonstrate to customers that they had been wrongly accused?
What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? This seems like the opposite. How about "prior restraint" of speech and trade? That's supposed to be illegal in the US.
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
...until they change the law to make what you're doing illegal. And these days it's "the competition" writing the law through the use of their lobbyists and contributions. It's not like they are even trying to hide this fact. It's right in front of your face.
Re:The open source community is just maturing. (Score:5, Insightful)
"Technology is so intertwined with politics these days that you can't unwind them."
Great post. Lawrence Lessig says in his book "Code 2.0" that there are at least four ways to influence behavior (a key issue in politics). The are rules, norms, prices, and (computer and other) architecture.
http://codev2.cc/ [codev2.cc]
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
This "political BS" effects the livelihoods of many of the people that read /..
Honestly, I come here to read stories like this more than anything, because lord knows that the Mainstream Media doesn't give a fuck about covering this shit. We didn't even hear a peep about SOPA in the media until the fucking boycotts, months after it was making waves through the tech sites.
It's "legislation for rent" that costs jobs (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies will always try to invest as little as necessary to keep their revenue high. For most companies, the best of all changes would be exactly none. ANY change means having to adapt to it, and adapting costs money.
Now that the last of the big corps has caught on that it's cheaper to buy laws than to change strategies, the "new" (ok, not soooo new, but think of it in terms of magnitude) way to increase or at least keep revenues high is not to adapt, innovate and improve past the competition, the strategy is to buy laws to eliminate the competition.
And the biggest competition for big (and hence wealthy, and thus able to buy said laws) companies is "the internet". Face it, few of the big ol' ones really benefited from the internet's success. New competition arose and they have an edge. Faster to respond, easier to use for their customers, there's just very little big old ones can do against that directly.
So what they can do is change the rules of the game.
Changing those rules, though, means that the power stays in the hands of old companies and new startups get squashed, not by superior products or better service, but simply by the monetary power to change the rules.
And that's pretty much anathema to capitalism, folks. What we're getting here is the worst kind of socialism. Remember why the USSR fell? Outdated production means that were artificially kept alive while the rest of the world passed them, which made them completely uncompetitive on the global market.
Welcome to the future USSA.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
If you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to fear.
Yeah, right. That's about as stupid as the "If you have nothing to hide..." bullshit.
The government doesn't even need to prove that you (or your users) did anything wrong before they punish you. Look at the Jotform crap for proof of that. That business is more than likely ruined now; who's gonna trust a cloud storage site that could get nuked off the face of the internet again because some random asshole posted something that violates IP somewhere on it?
I really hope to God you were being sarcastic, and if so, will gladly accept my "WOOOOOOSH".
Re:JotForm takedown (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds like a good reason to leave GoDaddy, IMO.
How many more do people fucking need?
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
That only holds true for law-based definitions of right and wrong
except when it comes to JotForm the law wasn't followed, so they had noting to fear, had done nothing wrong, and still the law enforcement agencies stomped on them.
Need to end censorship and survellience (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course the US governments attitude to websites is going to have an affect on the confidence of website operators to be able to locate there and may make many look at other countries to host it instead. The prosecution of the web site owners for the actions of their users, which they cannot control, most stop, as well as the PIPA and SOPA nonsense, and the country needs to implement full Network Nuetrality. That is a recipe for creating a truly pro-consumer, pro-jobs environment that is also good for website operators.
The fact is that the GOP pretty much is an enemy of freedom, and has for years been the paid agent of the large media corporations which seems to want to trample over free speech turn the webpage in to a one way TV MTV equivalent. Another concerning thing is the fact that the conservatives are regressives and often driven by extreme theocratic tendancies, ready to force their religious ideas and moralities on others and trample over freedom of speech as a result.The high levels of income inequality that the GOP has caused through our low taxes on the wealthy has also been detrimental to other businesses, by draining money out of the pockets of the middle class, and shrinking the middle class significantly. if we really wanted to live in a country that was healthy we would restore the millionaire tax bracket to what it was in the 50s and 60s and elect liberals to office that will respect our freedoms, are not religious whackjobs, who will eliminate ridiculous laws that conservatives try to pass that lead to censorship and try to force the government into deciding what is "indecent", the government has no right to decide such a thing and things which are indecent cannot be censored, but we have social conservatives in the GOP who are basically totalitarian theocrats who would like to destroy free speech and force their religious moralities on everyone. We dont need a bigoted, theocratic religious whackjob religious nutjobs banning harmless and consensual activities such as pornography and other harmless, indecent things.
There needs to be a internet bill of rights that would also ban any censorship, that would prohibit ISPs or government from storing any information on traffic that can be used to monitor individual users such as source and destination IPs and so on, would stop ISPs from discriminating against certain traffic and so on. The fear based tactic they so often used exploits anxieties, and obscure the fact that any action or policy is not justifiable to prevent crime, such as survellience, tracking and monitoring without warrant are unacceptable in a free society and these things cannot be justified in order to prevent crime. If we allow these activities we open the door as well to their abuse by corporations and governments, they are perfect tools for trying to keep track of people who have unpopular views and opinons, and use that information against them. The less right to privacy people have, the less safe they are.
Many large corporations , such as the major record labels, have interests opposite that of small businesses and common people. Their goal is to maintain and consolidate wealth and that means hoarding and consolidating wealthy by suppressing the wages of other workers and using their control over large parts of the money to basically consolidate wealthy. We need common, average people to have a lot of money in their pocket and to avoid having certain corporations dominating much of that, through suppression of wages, thus crowding out small businesses as well as impoversiing common workers. The policies that the wealthy elite hate the most, a high income and corporate tax on the wealthy, is exactly what the country needs to put more money back into average peoples pockets and to give workers more power such as through unions, all things that will give common people more spending power, money to buy things other than to shop at wal mart. The attacks on unions and the demands for more tax cuts for the rich are ultimately unhealthy, they allow a few corporations t
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?
Oh, that takes far too long for the MAFIAA's tastes. "Better that ten innocent persons suffer than that one guilty person escape" should be their new motto.
Re:Bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
You completely missed the point of his rant. He was arguing for your point.
Re:They got it wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
and they are going to lose.
The thing is in order to expand and grow you need new ideas. tougher IP laws actually restrict new ideas and slow down development. That is why China and India have or ignore IP laws. It is why after WWII the USA ignored IP laws for 30 plus years.
however when you get complacent you make tougher IP laws, which prevents someone else from taking a good idea and moving it in another direction. Think of the number of Patents in a cell phone or even worse a smart phone and realize that those patents are from the 1990's.
The tighter you grip on imaginary property the less you are likely to dream up something new.
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you ever done IT in a professional environment or worked outside a university or small business?
Here is a lesson for you. Rule #1 these systems absolutely, positively, can not go down. Why? Because you are talking tens to hundres of thousands an hour of lost productivity for their customers. Technology is so integrated in corporate America today that the workers will just sit there and chat and browse slashdot and Yahoo news if their work is on JotForm. Business customers can go out of business if they can't work in a day. Razor thin 5% profit margins and uptight customers who need work done YESTERDAY will refuse to do business with them if they fail to meet a deadline. A day or two downtime can cost millions of lost business and productivity to US businesses and JotForm itself.
JotForm is doomed.
For JotForm this means lost customers and a bankruptacy.I sure as hell would not do business with them. If I owned a business I would jump ship and look for a foreign rival in a friendly country like India or Communist China where I do not have to lose all my money I saved going to the cloud that was lost by the US Government. Go read the comments in Jotform? The users do not give a shit and are furious! I would be too if I invested tens of thousands and lost up to millions the past 2 days while this has been sorted out.
Infact if I ever move up the corporate ladder or own a business I will stipulate in my contract that it has to be done overseas or have a backup there if something happens to the US servers. I know I angered some slashdotters who work in IT or are looking for work at cloud providers but tough shit. I have a business to run and sorry but vote for people who wont scare us away from US investments. Yes this is bad as I feel like an asshole for even stating that but with jobs on the line and hundreds of thousands of dollars and hour in lost productivity all risks need to be analyized. People get fired for picking solution providers who fail and yes these customers need to protect themselves.
This and the fact that the FBI just raids ISPs offices and takes servers with hundreds of domains awya with them is scary as hell. It doens't matter Chrylis if they are later found innocent. If you owned the hosting company you are done.
Sweden? That toadie nation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Isn't Sweden that is prosecuting Assange on behalve of its American masters? Or went after the pirate bay which wasn't breaking its own local laws on behalve of its Amercan masters?
At least Americans can vote out their leaders, Swedes can only vote for which puppet is stuck on the hand.
Re:Developers Still Read Slashdot? Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not just web businesses. (Score:4, Insightful)
USA is very dangerous to start ANY business, not just a web business. With all of the taxes, regulations, inflation caused by counterfeiting operation at the Fed and the government banks. The confiscation of private property that was clearly displayed in GM and Chrysler case and just a couple of months ago with MF Global [slashdot.org] - where cooperation between financial institution (JP Morgan) and government agencies allowed for customer funds to be stolen, in fact gold bars with serial numbers assigned to specific holders of account at MF Global (which is basically an insurance company for farmers - future trading is used to insure against uncertainty of future crop prices) went "MISSING" and nobody is being held accountable for it and apparently everybody is aware that JP Morgan and the feds have agreed on something, which is pretty damning - the bankruptcy court was instructed to run the bankruptcy as if MF Global was an 'investment' company, which makes their counter-parties to be first in line to receive collateral, while actually MF Global wasn't an investment company, it was an insurance company, and under those conditions it would have been the CLIENTS who would be first in line to get their money out.
But this is just an example why it is dangerous to deal in USA now, other things are of-course all of the regulations, all of the executive branch departments acting as if they are the Congress and as if they can pass laws, the fact that US courts are on the side of the government in all of this.
Again, it's not just about web businesses. Don't forget, as Steve Jobs told Obama - those jobs, they are not coming back.
Re:Bullshit (Score:2, Insightful)
For JotForm this means lost customers and a bankruptacy.I sure as hell would not do business with them. If I owned a business I would jump ship and look for a foreign rival in a friendly country like India or Communist China where I do not have to lose all my money I saved going to the cloud that was lost by the US Government. Go read the comments in Jotform? The users do not give a shit and are furious! I would be too if I invested tens of thousands and lost up to millions the past 2 days while this has been sorted out.
Exactly, the FBI pretty much signed JotForm's "death warrant" by "oops, we didn't really have a reason to shut them down".
There's no longer a rule of law where you are "innocent until *proven* guilty", they don't need to go to a judge with *proof* of some wrongdoing, they can just shut you down at a whim and kill your business. As long as that continues, it makes sense for business to flee the country.
Much the same idea as the whole MF Global thing - they blatantly *steal* customer money, the big banks collude with the regulators to get placed "1st on the list" in the bankruptcy so the customers who's money was "safely segregated" get screwed - and NOBODY GOES TO JAIL. Money has been fleeing the CME since... gee, wonder why? They've basically said "we can f**k you, and there's nothing you can do about it"... well, yeah, there is - take your money and go elsewhere.
Re:Really? (Score:4, Insightful)
There is nothing fair about majority vote using government violence as a proxy to steal money from individuals who are more successful than others.
Also there is nothing fair about some individuals gaming the system by buying access to politicians, who then steal and sell power of government violence.
Both of the above are wrong, that's why your argument is nonsense.
Under a system where government is actively prohibited from stealing from anybody to give to anybody else under any and all circumstances, the freedom of everybody who is not being stolen from is maximised, and the market increases the wealth of all people by allowing some to make it big by inventing and bringing to the market products that make ALL people wealthier.
That's why Steve Jobs and his wealth usually was not bemoaned by people - because everybody got WEALTHIER off Steve Jobs, who himself got extraordinary wealthy.
Of-course Marxists like you, are happy to use any amount of collective government violence to ensure that the wealth is "distributed equally", which means unproductively from people who CREATE wealth, to those who WANT it. Thus eventually you descend into totalitarianism and dictatorship, and you call THAT justice.
No. Justice is about freedom. The only justice is FREEDOM. It's freedom to do what you can as you can do it without hurting others (that's the only main condition), and in the process of helping yourself you help others not as an intention, but as a consequence of your actions.
Nobody can become rich and wealthy without either:
1. Theft based on power of government force.
2. Creation of wealth by selling products to people that they are voluntarily willing to buy and pay enough that there is a profit premium in it.
There is nothing just about "universal" healthcare or any other government forced "universal" thing, because it will create poverty and will bring about totalitarian regime and there is nothing just about such a regime, and I should know I was born in a system like that, and you'll find out, you apparently want to go there.
Re:Really? (Score:4, Insightful)
If the value of something depends on government action, or governmental granted monopolies, then don't talk about it being unfair for the government to "steal" it. Unless you enjoy looking like a hypocrit.
Re:It's "legislation for rent" that costs jobs (Score:5, Insightful)
Bottom line is that most corporations, especially large, established ones, are not in favor of free-market capitalism. What they want is crony capitalism - they keep doing exactly the same thing, and the Government makes sure no pesky upstarts who actually do things better or other market changes get in the way. That way, they don't ever have to do anything hard or risky like actually work to continuously improve or anticipate market changes and try to get out in front of them. Relying on Government cheese is much easier (at least until the Government changes...)
Only small businesses actually want free markets, because it means they have a shot at getting to the top if they come up with the right good idea at the right time. And individuals, because it means we keep getting better stuff.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
there are plenty of people who are poor in this world through their own character failures
there are plenty of people who are rich because of hard work
but you seem unable to understand why some are rich: not because of hard work. but through a power structure that rewards them for doing nothing but knowing the right people
and some are poor even though they have the right character, but they exist in a society that is structured in such a way they have no avenue to better themselves
and, more ominously, why some are rich and some are poor is more and more because of the latter reasons than the former reasons
where you fail in your ideology is that the world is not the cold war world anymore. you have a perception in your judgments of a society that seems fix on 1962 in a certain place that does exist anymore. your thinking is antiquated
Re:Really? (Score:3, Insightful)
My thinking is not antiquated, your thinking is antiquated, it's all rotten to the core and it is what is destroying the economies of Europe and US right now, whether you understand it or not.
The only way to fix the problem of overall poverty is to allow markets to work it out, that's what Chinese are mostly doing - allowing capital to come in and create whatever it creates thus improving people's circumstance.
The people can either be left alone and let the market create all the things that they need and set all the prices, and market eventually finds the equilibrium, prices go down so that majority of people can afford everything they need and even most of what they want. Or you can try and enforce some weird notion of 'fairness' (which I completely disagree with you on, I don't believe for a second that robbing anybody to give anybody else anything is fair, so all the Robin Hood stories to me are completely anathema) and you can observe everybody being miserable and only people in government sitting sort of nice, warm and fed on top of that giant shit pyramid.
Re:10 Year plan vs daily/weekly bullshit laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Your post is very selective about the "facts". If enough people keep thinking your way, we are probably doomed for sure in an age where any disgruntled person can download a plague off the internet and feel justified using it out of either retribution or to achieve some objective that they think will make them "secure" by wiping out most everyone else who might in theory be a threat. Maybe we could try being nice to each other for a change and see how that works out for a while?
http://www.share-international.org/archives/cooperation/co_nocontest.htm [share-international.org]
Or:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker's_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#Prologue [wikiquote.org]
" Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place. And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans.
And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, a girl sitting on her own in a small cafe in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything.
Sadly, however, before she could get to a phone to tell anyone about it, the Earth was unexpectedly demolished to make way for a new hyperspace bypass, and so the idea was lost, seemingly for ever.
This is her story."
Were you one of the protesters against the supposedly justified war against Iraq over non-existent weapons of mass destruction. If not, then what moral authority do you speak from? Who was the aggressor there? Hard to accept the implications. Based on your philosophy, how should the USA be labelled for that endeavor, and what should other countries do about that? Can you explain why most other countries consider the USA a far greater threat to world peace than most of the countries it invades?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jun/15/usa.iran [guardian.co.uk]
Terrorist attacks have happened many times on US soil, including the US Capitol.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States [wikipedia.org]
They have also happened in other countries without those countries losing their democracies.
But sadly, the article suggests the worst terrorism these days seems to be coming *out* of the US Capitol and destroying the fabric of US society both economically and socially. See also:
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ [umanitoba.ca]
"OK, what's this book about? It's about what's happened to the American government lately. It's about the disastrous decisions that government has made. It's about the corruption that rotted the Congress. It's about how traditional conservatism has nearly been destroyed by authoritarianism. It's about how the "Religious Right" teamed up with amoral authoritarian leaders to push its un-democratic agenda onto the country. It's about the United States standing at the crossroads as the next federal election approaches."
Just think about whether you are helping the terrorists win?
Re:Really? (Score:3, Insightful)
you have this odd, bizarre belief that natural market forces create wealth distribution is somehow fair
- of-course.
that's because I completely reject your version of 'fair' - take from somebody who has and give it to somebody who does not simply because one of them is suffering more. I denounce and reject this type of social entropy, it does not work and it is absolutely unfair, unproductive and dictatorial in nature. How can any amount of violence be fair?
You are defining something as FAIR and you are using VIOLENCE to define it. You want 'fair'? How about you examine your premises first and realise that what you want is violence against the individual, and individual is always above the collective, because there is no reason to have the collective, the entire human population can burn in acidic fiery hell if it defines use of violence as fairness.
and more bizarrely, you believe government, rather than the reality of a rotten institution that does the deeds of those with the money, is somehow an evil tool that steals from the middle class to do the bidding of poor people with low character who don't deserve anything
- ha ha ha, naive.
The government is always a force of evil, that uses the pretence of 'helping the poor', does it by stealing from those who actually work and rewards with it those who are parasitic enough, that they are part of the government trough system. The poor are used as coinage, pawns.
But it's funny, you think there is MORALITY in stealing from some to give to others to equalise their suffering. But how do you measure suffering? If some are fed and clothed because the government system is providing to them while stealing from those who actually work, and have to suffer in fact, through all the nonsense that the system sets in front of them, then even by your definition this cannot work. You can't measure suffering.
You take the edge cases and build your entire system on it. You take the top 0.001% who can STEAL money from people by using government force, then you take the bottom 20% or so who are in worst conditions out of the entire population, and then you say: because there are these people, at the bottom, somebody else must pay for them. But you think you are going to use government to take from the top 0.001%?
No. You are going to steal from the middle, from everybody who actually works and produces and suffers while working and producing. You won't TOUCH those who are on top, you can't, it is absolutely impossible.
You will never help those on the bottom by doing any of it, but you will worsen the situation for the middle, and it's the middle that makes the machine go, and then the machine breaks (one manifestation was the thirties, one was the seventies, one was the nineties and one started around 2008) and then what? You think you can tax your way out of the broken machine?
No, you can push and push all the people, until majority have nothing and some simply escape somewhere else (and that's principally what happened in 1917 to 1923 in Russia as well, and it's been happening for a few decades on a slower scale in US and Europe, because it wasn't an immediate bloody revolution, but it was a slower process of continuous deterioration.)
your understanding of the world and how power and money actually works is completely nonsensical
- oh well, if you established that much, you don't need to reply to me.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
if a society does not function fairly, the lessons of history are clear: revolution
it is a shame that societies often have to go through violent, bloody revolution, rather than merely make rules to make wealth distribution more fair, simply because of the existence of blind ignorant fools such as yourself
Re:Really? (Score:4, Insightful)
May because these days there's less tech and more patents/intellectual-property...
Not that there's not a lot of cool stuff that people seem to work on, but a lot of it seems to get sliced off at the knees because of the toxic legal environment...
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Kindergarten kids chose that?
People laid off during the downturn chose that?
If you think one in 6 Americans chose poverty, then you are seriously deluded. Your country has a problem. The rich have commandeered all the resources of the country, and realistically, those 50 million people have to work for them or not work at all. They do not have land (they were born without it), they do not have access to the means of production, and they do not have capital, or access to capital to be able to work themselves out of the mess they are in. Even access to education, the key tool by which the poor could lift themselves out of poverty, is now dependent on money. So basically, they have no realistic hope of competing with the haves.
The American economy is now dominated by super large corporations and there is no way for most small businesses to compete.Yes, a few thousands out of the 50 million may be able to pick themselves out of
I don't think anyone is advocating getting rid of capitalism, but its excesses must surely be tempered. There are many examples of countries that are fantastically wealthy, and yet seem to have a much better balance between wealth and poverty than the USA. Countries were pretty much no one can be bankrupted by medical bills, where access to quality education is based on ability and hard work, rather than whether or not an 18 year old can afford it. America seems to believe it is OK to punish children for the sins of their parents.