Posts by bombastic bob 10841 publicly visible posts • joined 1 May 2015
"so there's your impressive growth."
yeah like buying a computer with Win-10-nic on it and either installing an existing 7 license on there or putting Linux or FreeBSD on it *STILL* counts as "Windows 10" for their marketeers.
There's Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. And Marketing Stats.
icon for the facepalm!
How about 'make in Mexico' instead of 'made in China'?
There was an El Reg article some time ago that suggested that if you want labor intensive to be done at a lower cost, Mexico would be a better alternative than China. Just sayin'. The writing has been on the wall for some time now.
/me supports what Trump is doing. watch, you'll see what _really_ happens!
Origin of left/right
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-right_political_spectrum
Although in the USA 'left wing' is generally socialist or communist, whereas 'right wing' is conservative. However, more recently you can see a shift where 'left wing' seeks more government control on economics, and 'right wing' seeks more government control on social issues. Conservatives are typically right of center and don't seek more government control of ANYTHING, nor do they push a social agenda.
Something like that. left-wing moderates are usually social libertarians, and right-wing moderates are typically conservative libertarians. but not always. there's a lot of 'grey' towards the middle.
What is totally wrong in politics happens when you go too far to the right or left, in which case you end up at some form of FASCISM or COMMUNISM, where everyone (except those more equal than others) are FORCED into 'whatever'. It's the FORCING that shows when it's "gone wrong".
You cannot equalize outcomes - those who 'feel' you can (those who think would not think this way) do NOT understand human nature. 'Feeling' you can means you are a far-left liberal. And you are WRONG. The only equalized outcomes will be EQUALLY MEDIOCRE [except for those 'more equal' than others - see Venezuela]
"hate speech detection algorithms"
so being pro-Trump, a Republican, a Conservative, or a non-Democrat non-liberal gets your content BANNED, right? because EVERYONE that disagrees with a Demo[n][c,r]at politician is a [insert pejorative ending in 'phobe'], right?
Seriously, I think their definition of what 'hate speech' is can ONLY be flawed. And that goes TRIPLE if "an algorithm" is involved. I happen to hate what SJW's are doing on college campuses and in the media, and every ELSE for that matter. So is THAT hate speech? I also disagree with pretty much EVERYTHING Obama did and stood for. Is THAT hate speech? It seems that according to some, it is. And that's my point.
I say let the 'hate groups' say what they want. At least that way you know where they are, what they're up to. When the 'shock factor' wears off, they'll just dwindle into a very small number of fringe kooks, unable to accomplish anything because nobody pays attention to them any more.
but that's not "the agenda" to let them speak so that their folly will be known - instead they, meaning anyone NOT agreeing with 'the left', must be CONTROLLED, or SILENCED, or something similar. This is why censorship is bad. The censors get to JUDGE.
This reminds me of a scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, the prince who didn't want "all that" and instead wanted to sing...
So Micro-shaft just continues to CRAM Win-10-nic at us, because we don't really want "all that", so they have to CRAM and CRAM and CRAM some more, maybe (at some point) hire some knight to "re-educate" us into 'wanting it' or whatever.
And not only is it cloud-based, it has the potential of being A SUBSCRIPTION, which is where we *ALL* *KNOW* Micro-shaft is headed with Win-10-nic (even though they don't admit it, and are doing it with office). It's easier to monetize light-client heavy-server subscription based models... like CompuServe and AOL were (and also MSN, to some extent), back in the day... [although I admit that MSN had a much better gateway to 'teh intarwebs' than any of the others].
Seriously, this is just more lipstick on the non-oinky end of the boar.
They should be focusing on giving CUSTOMERS what they want, instead of CRAMMING UP OUR ASSES what MICRO-SHAFT wants us to have.
icon, because, BIG facepalm at Microsoft. yeah, I'm a disgruntled FORMER windows fan.
snipping tool - is that anything like irfanview? Some people used to swear by that application...
As for "removing features" - wait until Win32API is removed and then EVERYTHING MUST BE *UWP*!!!
"Because, We're Microsoft and *WE* *CAN*!"
(what, you think they don't WANT to do this? And aren't waiting for an opportunity to LOCK EVERYONE IN to the UWP 'new, shiny' [slurp, track, ad] model? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!)
at the heart of it all is 'OAuth' and subscribing to Google or Microsoft's services, such that if you're already logged in via google, or 'Microsoft Login' then oauth can silently track you without your knowledge. This article talks about doing this with 'Bing Ads':
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/bingads/guides/authentication-oauth?view=bingads-12
It may be 'bending the rules' a bit (to heavily track you without ANY consent) but I doubt they'd get CAUGHT doing it if they did...
The problem isn't the "google slurp" alone. If you log into Google and those cookies are available, then ANY web site that has a 'tracker bug' on it can load the cookies. You know, "3rd party cookies", or maybe just some iframe that collects the data ON THEIR BEHALF (and then 'phones home' or allows direct access at a later time). So WHO is to say you're "not being tracked", when you can EASILY be tracked, just because YOU are "identified" by your GOOGLE LOGIN!
I've had the SAME complaint about the 'Micro-shaft CLOUDY Logon'. ABusing this would be TRIVIALLY EASY, and most likely very easy to TRACK IT BACK TO YOU, perhaps your e-mail address, cell phone number, physical address, and ANY OTHER information that can be purchased from Google based on your "unique identity" in their system.
So maybe Google doesn't track you SPECIFICALLY. But the sites you visit... I bet _THEY_ do!
[and once your IP address for a given block of time can be correlated to your google e-mail address and other such info, I _GUARANTEE_ this information will become available 'as a service' to those who don't deal directly with Google; they'll just be able to plug in YOUR IP and the date/time of access and get YOU and correlate it and track behind the scenes, etc. etc. etc.]
Yeah, this would be EASY to set up. Really. And with all of the IT pros who visit EL Reg, it should be obvious to most of YOU, too.
When they went into "the Store" and actually became CRAPP...
actually Micro-shaft has been using the term 'app' since before XP. I forget when it started, maybe around the Windows '98 time frame. They just haven't forced the REST of us to call it that until Apple's iPhone and Google's Android and their associated 'app stores' became 'a thing'.
Then it's all 'hip' and 'cool' and 'new' and 'shiny' and sounds like your dad trying to use teen lingo when you're 15.
well, aside from simply ABANDONING every "new, shiny" concept that came with either 'Ape' or Win-10-nic, here's what I'd do:
a) go back to the simplest method of doing everything;
b) make sure that all window decorations are 'owner draw' and FORCE them to look like 7 or XP;
c) make sure all control windows draw themselves like XP or 7;
d) make sure it uses a TRADITIONAL MENU [no ribbon, no fat-finger-burger]
e) make sure it reminds people of how good Windows *USED* to be at one time, before the arrogant millenial "2D FLATSO" "UWP" "we will SOCK IT TO YOU with ADS" crowd got ahold of it
What sold windows 3.0 in the early 90's: It looked nicer than the 2D FLAT stuff that preceded it, had useful applications _LIKE_ notepad and calc, had some built-in games like solitaire [which probably sold MORE copies of windows than ANY other single application], didn't take forever to load or install (on a 386 SX processor with 4M or RAM!!!) and...
MADE! THE! THINGS! YOU! DID! WITH! A! COMPUTER! MUCH! EASIER! THAN! BEFORE!!!
Now, let's compare Win XP or 7 to Win-10-nic and see if ANY of that is actually TRUE...
SO, ultimately, I'd leverage these applications to *DEMONSTRATE* beyond a shadow of a doubt, so that even the most casual observer could see it, that WIndows 'Ape' and Win-10-nic are ABSOLUTELY GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION, and people can *EASILY* *REBEL* against the ribbon, 2D FLATSO, fat-finger-burger UI by RETURNING to these simple yet elegantly useful applications (like notepad) with only the most MINOR of updates (to handle things like lines ending in LF or CR, or optionally being a fully functional scientific calculator with a choice between RPN and algebraic), and NOT looking like it was designed by the ANIMATORS OF 'SOUTH PARK' [which is DELIBERATELY done poorly, and lampshaded in the starting sequence].
years ago the source for notepad (and maybe calc) were included in the SDK. One time I compiled an MDI version of notepad that actually worked, using that source, and quite possibly uploaded the binary to an online service with all necessary credit to MS for having written it. (re-distributing binaries derived from the SDK was simpler back then)
These applications are SO trivial I'm surprised nobody has cloned them as some kind of open source "retro looking" versions NOT in the store. Otherwise, we'll have to haul in some gtk or qt-based version, built with cygwin [and distributed with the DLL], etc. etc..
The days of *NON* *BLOATWARE* applications may soon be over...
"How can it be in anyone's interest to remove apps like this from the OS "
For Micro-shaft, it's all about LOCKING YOU IN TO SOME SUBSCRIPTION-BASED BLOATWARE for *EVERYTHING*. And with UWP/FLATSO for that "new, shiny" effect.
For the end-user, not such a good thing at all.
/me reaches for the pink liquid
It does say one thing: if you're going to flaunt the law or an order of the court, because you're some kind of activist, don't make yourself an even BIGGER target by engaging in other more heinous illegal activities, like having sex with minors. And don't claim "they're just after me" either, because it's pretty obvious to the rest of us what's going on.
who cares about carbon. if it's cost effective, make nuclear reactors. if it's not, don't.
in the case of submarines, a sub's nuclear reactor is a bit different than a civilian one that's designed only to make electricity. One is the cost of refueling. Whereas a civilian reactor a) doesn't have to change power levels radically in a short period of time, b) doesn't have to take odd 'angles and dangles', and c) doesn't have to have "that kind of power density", a civilian reactor can ALSO typically take a MUCH higher fuel load with less enrichment and is a LOT easier/cheaper to refuel because of it. Submarine reactors are typically constructed in a way that's more reliable, but relatively difficult to refuel. however, a sub ALSO may go its entire life without refueling (so it's not really a problem so much).
Anyway, just my $.10 worth.
just saying, why do we need China for 5G anyway? After all, if they're not giong to honor OUR patents, why should we honor THEIRS?
Seems to me that if they're effectively tarriff'd out of business, we can do pretty much anything we want to, in the USA, without them.
I believe OUR engineers are actually BETTER than their engineers [it has to do with the downsides of living under communism and other oppressive gummints], so if they want a techno-war to see who "gets there" first, LET THEM, *especially* given the extra costs involved with having China do it vs having a U.S. company do it. Things might just favor the U.S. companies in the long run. Or UK or any EU companies for that matter.
And why do we need China to build things anyway? 'Lights out' U.S. factories and maquiladoras have a better chance of being profitable solutions as compared to trusting those behind 'the great firewall' not to try and control us at some point, or drive domestic businesses out of existence with 'dumping' tactics.
I like doing things with China when they're operating on the same level. However, when they continue to pay slave-wages to their employees, while a small number of people become super-rich by allowing their gummint to control things, and they ALSO use their market share to leverage the situation internationally, dictate terms, drive others out of business, own nearly all of the supply chains, and ALSO not honor intellectual property and charge unnecessary tariffs on imported goods [while expecting NO tariffs on their exports], I say it's best NOT to involve them at all until they decide to play by the rules.
And if they want to play nice again, I'm sure the import tariffs will go away. But not before.
So: WHY do we need China to develop 5G? I say we do NOT!
ack on the 'experts'.
Ex = "has been"
spurt = "big drip"
I bet none of them know what their expected yearly dose of ionizing radiation is, just for being on the surface of the planet, and where it might be higher, and under what circumstances, yotta yotta yotta...
[when I was in the navy, it was measured at 80-100mrem per year for just being on the surface of the earth, and always lower than that while on the sub EVEN WHILE THE REACTOR WAS RUNNING. That's right, on a NUCLEAR sub, while underway, ionizing radiation levels were LOWER than what you normally get from Mr. Sun. I forget how to convert that to the new measurements, but who cares. it's like 100REM=1S or something like that]
" by using a nuclear thermal rocket or an electric plasma drive using a nuclear reactor for power."
science fiction has made this kind of assumption for quite some time. chemical rockets just aren't efficient enough to do it.
The nuclear engine (fission) is probably the best bet at this time. You could use liquid water or liquid H2 to 'fuel' it (i.e. the mass that must be accelerated out the back end to provide impulse). Existing designs could be used or at least modified to fit the purpose. It would be restartable in space and efficient.
I would prefer to see a fusion reactor, one that uses the H2 naturally occurring in water for propulsion and electricity. H2 could also be in a separate tank, but I think having a series of water tanks (where you separate out the H2 as needed) would be a kind of insurance against tank leakage or meteor damage. So yeah you bring extra fuel. In any case, a linear fusion reactor doesn't exist. It could exist, but nobody's trying to build one as far as I know. You just need a way of confining the hydrogen such that at least SOME of it fuses and heats the water to super-hot steam. Ideally you would want to accelerate only the fusion products to near light speed, but that makes a poor efficiency rocket. Better to have an ideal fuel mass instead, accelerated to a much lower speed, but maximizing the impulse. So yeah some kind of fuel (like water) would be ideal for that. And maybe SALT water would be even better... suck it up directly from the ocean. Very cheap that way on earth.
you don't need to surround the people-tank with shielding. the vast majority of cosmic radiation (outside of the van allen belts) is coming directly from the sun. so you just need to shield against solar flares and more generally against the solar output. I've heard of a 'safe room' concept for solar flare shielding. That may not even be needed in the region between earth and mars, depending on the nature of the ejected particles.
"The nuclear industry doses are ludicrously low"
Uh, no. The 'low' limits are intended to prevent your life expectancy from being significantly reduced due to a known occupational hazard. It's about safety.
I don't think radiation limits are the problem, here. The problem in the nuclear industry is an UNINFORMED PUBLIC being manipulated by a HANDFUL OF ACTIVISTS, whose agenda may or may not have anything to do with nuclear power in and of itself. THAT is what is so "expensive" about nuclear power.
Take the San Onofre nuclear power plant out in California for an example. After doing a refit on both working reactors [new boilers], that was approved by the various agencies, they discovered a design flaw caused by vibration, causing tube leakage [radioactive primary coolant getting into the steam]. Rather than shut down both plants and do an expensive refit, they wanted to run one at reduced power while fixing the other one, to stay marginally profitable. Regulators (during Obaka administration) said *NO*. So what did they do? They SHUT DOWN BOTH PLANTS and LAID OFF HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE. Now it's just sitting there as a place to store nuclear waste. And ELECTRICITY RATE PAYERS are footing THE BILL!
Looks like the "no nukes" crowd WON on that one. wheee...
It's not the radiation dose limits being too low. It's the POLITICS and the LAWSUITS and the LEGAL OBSTRUCTION by "special interests" who, for whatever is their motivation, don't like nuclear power.
the radiation problem is easier to solve than that.
Keep in mind that your average space ship requires FUEL for deceleration once it arrives. Put the fuel, tanks, engine, etc. between you and Mr. Sun and you get excellent radiation shielding! This assumes that the ship CAN be oriented "this way" for most of the trip.
Additionally you'd probably want some kind of artificial gravity in the people-sphere, so the design would have to accommodate 'all of that' while also keeping a large amount of mass [and hydrogen, for neutron moderation] between you and the sun.
/me would go to Mars as long as it's the "wild west" there, not some politically correct "utopia"
this reminds me of something I learned in biology:
a) all living things eat
b) all living things excrete (even dolphins)
c) all living things make copies of themselves (especially bunnies)
'b' is something that goes with being alive. Yes, we're CRAPPING IN SPACE, too.
What's different about humans: we generally clean up OUR crap, and the crap of OTHER living things...
(none of the OTHER animals are willing to do this, except maybe dung beetles)
having private gitlab servers, ones that do everything either github or gitlab would do, would be a good thing. Not everything belongs "in the cloud".
If GitLab requires that they be licensed for their revenue model, I'm not opposed to that at all. Assuming GitLab uses private repos for their revenue model, they could just add "licensed servers" as part of that, too, along with the usual support (and maybe private offsite mirroring?) that local repo owners are likely to want.
"Yes, women are the overwhelming majority of sexual harassment complainants because of a small but significant minority of men behave like pigs."
And they NEVER lie about it, right?
It seems there's a certain allegation running around Washington D.C. at the moment, where a certain accusing female is being invited to testify under oath, and lots of backpedaling going on.
The truth is, such allegations can be used as a form of leverage [particularly if false], to either get rid of someone you don't like, or to maneuver up the career ladder. These risks are REAL, and I think the truth of the matter is that the ABUSE of such allegations does more disservice to actual VICTIMS than anything else. It motivates people to NOT hire them, because of the expensive risks involved.
There's almost an implied "You don't DARE *FIRE* a woman" policy demanded of you, if you're a male, and in a management position. Fire a woman without miles of documentation to cover your ass, and it's EXPENSIVE lawsuits where settling is the only option. Whereas, to fire a man, all you need is an 'allegation', right?
And when back-stabbing is done by a woman, and you complain about it, or try to correct it, you're "just being mean" "to the girl". It's a hypocrisy held by both men AND women, though I think women managers are less likely to tolerate it (the 'tears of sympathy' shed over stupid things while being caught back-stabbing or undermining others, that is).
How can you run a company in THIS kind of environment? You can't. Therefore, managers may be quietly 'hesitant' to hire women, not because they don't do the job as well, but because they MIGHT SUE YOU INTO BANKRUPTCY! You have to be EXTRA careful. And this "me too" nonsense is JUST FUEL FOR THE FIRE. Were it not the case, I doubt any kind of 'silent discrimination' would be happening. But I bet you'll find it, and it will be VERY hard to prove.
Of course, in cases where the allegations are REAL, let the perpetrator have both barrels. In this day and age, it is no surprise that it makes HEADLINES when it DOES happen. [and that's not very often, now is it?]
by the time 2024 rolls around, there won't be a whole lot of engineers out there that understand vacuum tubes [aka 'valves'] very well, at least not well enough to appreciate the process of trying to rapidly determine matched sets from a pile of contenders. Well, maybe some guitar amp and tube-audio enthusiasts might, but that's about it.
Also have to appreciate the level of hacking done back then, because the war demanded results, NOW, and there was no time to waste.
"a constant target for cyber attacks" - especially if they're using Outlook or a Microsoft server.
Gotta stop letting people preview attachments inline (or worse, CLICKING on them!) and clicking on links in HTML mail. "Must install this application to view content" - "OK".
/me sees a solution involving a clue bat and a cat5 o' nine tails.
"I never really understood wtf .NET was meant to achieve."
Back in history to the 'dot-bomb' era of the early 21st century... around 2002-ish as I recall.
Ballmer announced this ".Net" (aka '.Not') initiative, in which this web server backend would be magically developed, and everybody would use IIS on a Windows server instead of Apache with PHP on Linux, just to get this new wonderful "new, shiny" thing. Hop on the bandwagon, because THEN you'll have:
a) Microsoft 'Passport' - a one-login for the ENTIRE internet! [didn't happen, still not even with Win-10-nic's cloudy login]. In truth Amazon and others refused to pay the 'Microsoft tax' and wouldn't use it. DOA.
b) pre-made back-end services and that new programming lingo, "C#" (aka 'C-pound'). I have yet to see it go above 10% on the TIOBE index. Seriously, it's as bad as NodeJS and people are using NodeJS instead, from what I can tell.
c) and the implied lock-in to MICROSOFT PLATFORMS as "solutions". 'take over the world'.
well, it was probably an improvement over IIS in a lot of ways, except IIS was coded in NATIVE INSTRUCTIONS and didn't require some stupid P-code or interpreter. Later on, that part diminished.
After this, some "dim bulb" at Micro-shaft "decided" that ".Not" should be on DESKTOPS, too. And so it was expanded (read: bloated) to include ALL KINDS of 'GUI things' for C-pound's benefit.
THEN some independent people invented 'mono' and got "the blessings" of Micro-shaft, which culminated into the release of (you guessed it) ".Net Core". All of this over a period of more than 15 years in which as much bloat as you can imagine (and then a whole lot more) was injected into ".Not" until it became the monolithic cluster-pile of FAIL that it is TODAY.
Meanwhle, REAL developers of Windows and cross-platform software are either using C, C++, or Java to do so. C-pound is a *WANNABE* at best. I've seen attempts at writing Mono cross-platform applications in the past. Usually C-pound only gets the least common denominator of support on "anything that isn't Windows running the latest new, shiny version of '.Not'".
And so, I hope, there's more understanding of ".Not" now... and I really would NOT recommend tying YOUR success into one of Micro-shaft's control mechanisms.
only anarchists are against ALL regulations. My point of de-regulation is that if it works WITHOUT new regulations, why add them NOW except for fulfilling some kind of ULTERIOR MOTIVE...
I have as yet to see a compelling argument about what "net neutrailty" is attempting to FIX. Rather, this mis-named concept is ACTUALLY attempting to DESTROY FREEDOM, one step at a time. Froggy in a pot of water on the stove, perhaps? When it hits a certain temperature, it's TOO LATE.
"priority given just because of ISP deals doesn't look fair at all."
SEE? SEE? SEE? It _IS_ about "envy" of "they get that and I do not" (even though they paid for it).
So why don't YOU make a deal yourself? Oh you don't have the money? Well I guess there's an actual BENEFIT to working hard and doing the right things so that you can AFFORD better!
And that's been my point all along. "net neutrality" (which is nothing about 'neutrality' but about "equalizing outcomes") is about, well, EQUALIZING OUTCOMES and _PREVENTING_ one party [whether individual or corporation] from BUYING BETTER SERVICE LEVEL, because it's - *ahem* - **NOT** **FAIR** [waaaah, waaaah, I'm a snowflake, waaaah waaaah].
OK that last part was uncalled for but I did it anyway, because it was *FUNNY*.
icon, because, facepalm
"Life _is_ pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something." - Dread Pirate Roberts, 'Princess Bride'
"I prefer a wild west internet to a potemkin village internet."
then you should study what 'Net Neutrality' is REALLY about, because 'potemkin village' is what you'd actually GET.
'Wild west' is the internet WITHOUT 'net neutrality' [which again, has NOTHING to do with protecting freedom nor free speech, it's about keeping everyone 'the same' when it comes to service level, *AND* setting the precedent of CONTROLLING INTERNET CONTENT - that last part SHOULD frighten you, yes].
Think about it: What was the internet like BEFORE Obaka's FCC decided to REGULATE it? And is it STILL that now, with Trump DE-regulating it back to what it was? What makes you *FEEL* [not think, obviously] that this will create "a potemkin village" ? It's "wild west" now, and will remain so, as long as it's kept DE-regulated!!!
Yes. the potemkin village deception is FROM THE LEFT. Liberty = 'wild west' = de-regulation, not MORE regulation. See?
the U.S. Constitution is clear when it comes to interstate commerce. Long ago the decision was made that communications networks are (by definition) a form of 'interstate commerce', beginning with telegraph and telephone services. Even 'last mile' is under FCC jurisdiction, and this is where Cali-fornicate-you law would be superseded by Federal law. That's generally how it's done.
Besides, "net neutrality" is such a MISNOMER anyway, it doesn't describe what 'they' are really trying to do with it. The single biggest thing seems to be prioritization of some packets over others, particularly when it's paid prioritization. The end result is that everyone ends up having the same mediocre level of service, despite what you can afford to get. And so the "everyone is just another brick in the wall" militant-gummint-control-freak-socialist-types, who *FEEL* that *NOBODY* should *EVER* be able to "get something better for more money", want to PUNISH achievers by essentially DENYING them "the better level of service" that THEY can afford!
That's all it is. ENVY, and 'equalizing outcomes' on the backs of the achievers... with the notable exception, of course, of EXEMPTING those who MAKE the laws and their crony friends and contributors, because *THEY* will *ALWAYS* have *THEIRS* through special favors and exceptions, whereas 'the rest of us' must LIVE with that crap. It's _ALWAYS_ "the masses" aka "just another brick in the wall" minions, regular folk, who will pay for it somehow.
well, couple that with *NO* 'Management Engine' [or its equivalent] and I'll be wanting one for my desktop.
It'll need to run FreeBSD though... maybe I'd have to wait longer for that one
(nobody said - IS IT infected with a 'management engine' like Intel and AMD? Or were the designers security conscious enough to AVOID that trap?)
I happen to _LIKE_ OSS, thanks. It's the driver model on FreeBSD. Not sure why Linux didn't just adopt it, too. Ah, well...
As for running things on WSL, maybe there should be a LSW or BSDSW i.e. something Microsoft writes and supports such that Windows software can run with Linux or *BSD as the OS. I'd even PAY MONEY for it.
And yes, this means a PROPER GUI that layers itself onto X11 and does _NOT_ require Wayland!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
