..:: etc ::..


etc sections are nice because you can put whatever you might like without being off-topic.

i've planned a thousand things to include, but then, either forgot or thought that they were not suitable.

so, i decided to do what one do most of the times when has nothing planned but has to have something, improvise.

i know that's not that correct, but what da heck (ouch, sorry, i shouldn't be using that language here), it's my homepage, so if i feel like improvising... well, i guess that's okay.

now, seriously, i will try to include here something like an editorial, or just a column a week about anything i consider important to discuss. be it about technology, ecology, my life, my circle of people, or whatever i consider important enough to write about.

as i write this second essay i realize that it has tight connections with the previous one. sorry, it was not on pourpose, but, the subject is now more and more current as this mad bloodshed gets more and more intense... please, do keep on readin and don't hesitate to share your thoughts with me.



schiller

what the heck is schiller you might ask.

well, in a few words, schiller is the «alias» (or, to say it correctly, the main project) for german musician christopher von deylenb.

actually schiller is much more than that. to me, at least, schiller changed, not only the pereception i had on music, but, up to certain extent, schiller changed my life.

you know, for me, there are just two kinds (or genres) of music: the music i like, and the music i don't like at all. i like music a lot, and i like a lot of music, so, you might think that it's not strange that i'd like schiller.

sorry to tell you, but you are wrong. i don't like schiller as i might like the beatles, i like schiller a lot more than that. i like schiller as much as i like, to name just one artist, vangelis.

schiller produces (deep inside of me) unique soundscapes. musical panoramas that no other artist can produce. i do like a lot of artists and music, but, schiller has the particular power of fitting any mood. i mean, if i am happy, then schiller is appropriate. if i'm sad, schiller will make me feel better, if i am sick, well, schiller might heal me.

i can't express with words what listening to «dream of you» or «leben... i feel you» produces me. i don't know why, but schiller is one of those few artists from whom i like all cds, and moreover, all tracks on those cds.

it's funny, because i've planned a great essay in my mind and now that iím actually writing it, the ideas seemed to have gone away to somewhere else...

i'm trying to be as «neutral» and objective as i can, but i can't be «neutral» or objective when i'm listening to leben as i write this.

i don't know why (or yes, i do know) but when i heard the magical words «guten abend! herzlich willkommen in der welt von schiller...» all my body starts feeling weird -in the good sense of the word- and my mind starts flying to some other dimension. it might seem stupid to you, but i do like this music so much.

most of the occasional schiller listeners -i.e. friends who listen him by chance, etc.- would immediately ask you: «what's that music?». they like schiller from the first time. like me, and like most of the people who listened to schiller.

i do know that some of you might think i'm crazy and that schiller sucks and, obviously, i do respect that opinion, but you must reckon that, even though you don't like it at all, schiller is good music.

something peculiar is that music aficionados and total amateurs alike would enjoy schiller music and, even with the knowledge that they both may appreciate different things, they both appreciate the music.

«true house music has the power to heal» says ivano bellini in the intro of «the real miami house sessions», i guess, he's totally right, but, i will change the phrase: «schiller as well as true house music, has the power to heal». in fact, i do believe all music has that power, but not much music do actually uses that power. well, imho, schiller do uses that power.

«this is where i heal my hurts», as faithless would say. schiller for me is more than just music, it has the power to make me travel to places where i can just be happy...

again, sorry for being so poor on this essay, but today's not my best day. a cold is killing me -let's hope it's not n1h5 (which i believe isn't such a big thing and instead is roche pharma's -and others- well orchestrated act to sell even more tamiflu)-, i feel like shit, my head is spinning, my body is tired, and i had my head in 2 million things at the same time.

but, anyway, if you want to understand me, just get everything you can from schiller and then you'll see how good it is. then you'll understand what i feel when i listen to this wonderful music.

keep it cool, «beware of the chicken flu» (as «you know who» would tell me) and, please, do yourself a favor and get schiller into your life...

/martŪn alejandro carmona selva
barcelona, 24 feb. 2006 a.d.

to know more about schiller: http://www.schiller-musik.de






how high is high definition?

as the specs says, hd or high definition has a resolution of 1920x1080px. it has two flavors, 1080i for interlaced and 1080p for progressive. the best of the two is the second one, but i won't analyze that since it's not the point of this essay.

there is another (sub)hd spec that refers to 1280x720p as hd. well, that's not completely hd, but that's a valid spec. i mean, if you have a 15 inch screen, that's more than enough. even with a 17" screen it would do pretty well, but, when you talk about, let's say 40 inches, well, at that size 720p is not enough.

the problem is not with these two specs, the problem is that they told you that you are getting an hd (ready) screen while what you are getting -at best- is an ed (enhanced definition) screen. that's to say the less, lying, and stealing.

it's not uncommon to see 1024x768 screens presented as hd ones. that's a terrible lie. i have a 17" monitor at 1600x1200 so, i won't buy a 40" (not to say 50", or 60") screen that has way less resolution than my current one. that's stupid, but, most people know nothing about pixels, resolutions, and specs, so they fall victims of the trap. they buy something that's useless.

hdtv (1080) is round the corner, and so, what will happen is that the one who today bought a «cheap» false hd screen won't be able to experience it (at least at it fullest). they would, probably regret when they understand what they are loosing, or, when they watch actual hd. then they would want to kill themselves for being such fools. that's not their fault, you can't be a savvy in all aspects of life and, perhaps technology, or this technology, is not your best point, so, you missed something.

the problem is that people at shops (and screen makers in their ads) won't tell you that you are being fooled. unless you ask them for 1080, they would tell you that you are getting an hd (ready) screen. (i did the exercise in, at least, three different shops).

they would tell you, at most, that the screen is hd ready. what? hd ready? does it means that it's hd? no, not at all. if you still experienced good old b&w televisions you'll noticed that you were still able to watch tv when color television appeared. they were color ready, if you want, but you would still watch only in black and white, no single color would magically appear.

the same happens here you can watch hd signals on those hd ready screens, but it won't be hd, it would be downsampled hd into standard resolution and so, you'll be seeing almost exactly the same that you are watching now, but, with less bucks on your pockets since you'll spend them to buy your new hd ready screen.

you might wonder why the hell would you care about hd in first place. well, some of my friends told me the same, until they watched 1080i at an expo we went. they got amazed, they couldn't believe their eyes.

but, don't believe me, do a try yourself. go to www.wmvhd.com (yup, i don't like wmv at all, but that's the best place for easy hd samples) and try it for yourself, you won't believe your eyes either. and, please, do ask (a lot) before you bought anything new. if it's «too much too cheap» -as plasmas and lcds are getting right now- do question yourself if it can be a scam...

as i'm writting this, i saw that uhdv (or ultra hight definition video) is just round the corner too, but since it's experimental and just in japan, i'll let it for another time..


/martín alejandro carmona selva
barcelona, 14 december 2005 a.d.






some reasons for the israeli-palestinian problem
[please note that although i'm just giving facts and telling no more than the -awful- truth -or perhaps just for those reasons- it may be hard to read, so, be warned!]


back in 1948 the un decided to create two states in the middle east. or, to say it better, they decided to create one new state inside one that already existed -almost- forever. in their statement they regulated that israel, the new state should compensate the palestinians that were living there or, they must allow them to live there -that, by the way, was the place they lived since ever-.

the fact is that nothing of this happened. the two states were -always by force, of course- melting into one: israel and, palestine started to become one "alien space" where people living there were treated like criminals. it became the place to escape of. i don't know what might have happened if palestinian people would have been able to afford such an escape, but i guess they would have been better somewhere else, even if that place was far away from their home.

neither the un nor the usa, or any other international body said anything about the matter. they forgot about the issue forever. as time passed, and not happy with what they have been awarded -remember that they had nothing prior to 1948 agreements-, israel started to take more and more land. they started to push palestinians even further into poverty, hunger, and, obviously, into less space.

they lost their land, their jobs, families got broken by borders they couldn't cross no longer. they lost their dignity. without weapons to fight against their oppressor -one of the most powerful armies in the world-, and with the world, surprisingly, against them -the victims- and not against israel -the victimizer- they gradually started to loss the faith in any possible solution.

since they have no possible solution at all, or at least this is what they were carried to think- they had nothing to loose. there were no possible way they can be worst, so, they started to "fight" their oppressor. since they don't have the weaponry -nor the money*- to buy any, they decided to be their own weapons. they offered themselves as weapons. so, they blasted themselves against their oppressors.

then the whole world started to look at them even worse. they are terrorist, they are killing innocent jews, they... the fact is that, once again, they whole world looked at them as victimizer while they are the only victims of all this situation.

first of all, i do know that killing innocent jews is not something good, or something to promote. in fact killing anyone -innocent or not- is something bad, since we are not god to determine when a person should die. but i also know that killing palestinians is as bad as killing jews. we are all human and we all deserve to live.

i am not saying that violence is good, don't tend to misunderstand me, that would be the easiest thing to do. instead try to understand what i'm telling you here.

when someone gives his/her version of something you can agree or disagree, but, when someone gives you facts, you just can't. facts are always true, because, like it or not, they actually happened. i can't say that it isn't true that there's ice in antarctica since it's a fact, antarctica has ice. so, you can't tell that the things i'm telling here didn't happen since they do occurred. perhaps they vary a little from what i'm telling you, but not too much to say that this is not true.

but, let's forget about israel and palestine. let's do some exercise instead:

suppose that un realizes that tibetans have suffered enough from extradition, from inhuman killings and all that that was said back in 1948 (something that, perhaps not exactly in the same way, do happened to people from tibet). so, the un decides to give them the territory that's now the usa. (ok, ok, ok, that's a mental exercise, i know un would never do that, and that usa would never approve it and that they will make the whole un and all tibetans to disappear from the face of the earth if they even decide to pronounce something like this. but let's forget about that for this exercise, ok?).

so, they decided that all usa habitants -that are not tibetans- should now live in dakota -i choose dakota for no particular reason, change it to texas, colorado, or whatever you want-. so, all tibetans that are living all around the world move in to the states. they made high fences around dakota and forbid the americans from crossing the borders. they get a lot of weapons from around the globe and they start to live a life in the states like if it was their home since ever.

after a while, they decided that they need even more space, so they divide dakota into two separated lands, and since, the land between the two dakotas is part of the new tibet, they forbid the americans from trespassing. so, american families got broken, people stays isolated from their loved ones. the have no money and they can't do much to produce money since they don't have enough land or elements to do so.

what do you think the american people reaction would be? would you blame them for that? -again, please, let's forget they are the most powerful army in the world-.

so, why do you blame palestinian people? just because they have no voice and live far away from home? come on! let's use some common sense just once! please, do question things before speaking with such a certainty about them.


/martín alejandro carmona selva
barcelona, 11 december 2005 a.d.


* do not forget that us gives israel away -it's not a credit, since they don't have to pay it back- important quantities of money year after year -why don't they use that money to fight aids in africa, instead?, i wonder the same-





why mp3s are for everyone and not against anyone

the riia (and mpaa) want us to believe that mp3 (and divx) are evil. they want us to think that it's wrong to share files and to copy cds and dvds. in this essay i will try to prove they are, not only stealing us, but completely wrong about the subject.

to start with, i started to buy less albums not because of mp3, but because of economical problems. as our home income started to decrease, cds started to rise its price. so, as you can imagine, one of the areas to cut expenses was cds. i've never ever bought a movie before i started to download them so, i won't talk about them right now.

in good old days, i used to buy one or two cds per month, but then i started to notice i wasn't buying almost any cd for six month or so. it was 1999 and a friend of mine point me to something called napster. a piece of software that allowed you to share mp3s with others. i thought this was great and gave it a chance. i felt in love with the product and, even though i had no broadband in those days, i used it a lot.

i downloaded lots of songs, but, the more i downloaded, the more cds i would buy. if downloaded some songs and liked them, i started to save and finally bought the cd. if i don't dig them, i just erased them.

in fact, i knew schiller existed because another friend gave me weltreise in mp3. after hearing for a hundred of times, i started to look after the cd, only to notice that i wasn't published in argentina. so, as i usually did, entered amazon.com, just to noticed they hadn't it either.

so, i had to content myself with some mp3s. after a wile a colleague a work traveled to germany, so i asked him for the cd.

then, when enigma's voyageur came out -well one month earlier or so- i had the hq mp3s, but, as usual, the day it was released in buenos aires, i was at the nearest musimundo to buy it. why? well, because i do like cds better. they are cute, they are nice, they sound better, and, there's nothing like the real thing. so, another one against their argument.

one month ago or so, i got ten tracks from schiller's tag und nacht. two weeks ago, i had the complete cd in mp3. but, the very day i listened to the whole cd, i went to amazon.de and i bought it (even though the site was in german, which i can't speak or write, read and which i almost can't understand). so, another time i actually bought a cd because of mp3s. the day before yesterday i got jam and spoon's tripomatic fairy tales (2003). i liked it so much that i bought the cd!

it's true that i have some mp3 for which i didn't bought the cd, but, wanna know something? i wouldn't have bought the cds in the first place, with or without mp3. what would have happened was that i wouldn't have heard it, but i would never have bought them anyway.

so, what's the difference? yes, i know, the artists aren't making any profit with the mp3s i downloaded without buying the album. but since i wouldn't have bought the album even without mp3s, they are gaining that i listen to them, and, perhaps i would buy other cds from them. think that would never happened if i wouldn't have mp3s at all.

i am against massive piracy, since, well, they do deserve to earn some money for the work they are doing, but, i do believe that isn't mp3 what's killing them. perhaps what's killing them, and thus, killing music, is riia and recording companies who steal us by earning 2000% (yup, you read ok two thousand percent) by each cd they sell us, and by using techniques to ban us from making backup copies -which you can easily skip, even new ones- [i won't tell you how here to avoid trouble from you know who]. they are killing music by paying almost nothing to an artist and selling records more expensive time after time. they are killing their business by forcing artist to release as much as they can, without taking care of the quality of what is being released. they are killing music by not releasing good artists worldwide -if one can't buy it, will try to get it in any other way-.

i won't blame mp3s or kazaa for the end of their business as they knew it, i will blame themselves. they should have reacted faster by, for example, lowering their extremely high prices.

so, and to sum it up, i wouldn't have bought much of the cds i bought lately if i wouldn't have been able to download them as mp3s, previously.

if they sold cds at, let's say $10, i would always buy them, because as i've told you they are cutter, nicer, and all that. but, while they keep charging us so much for them, i guess piracy won't stop. no matter how much effort they make, there always be ways to cheat their protections and to make illegal copies. it's their decision to stop piracy, and that's not implies banning internet use at all, nor burning all cdrs, it's just about how is the recording industry ready to compete in the world we are living in. either they change their stealing, err, selling model, or they are going to the very deep of the abbys.

(on regards to movies, the same may apply, since i have never ever bought a movie -i would just rent it- until i was able to download them).


/martín alejandro carmona selva
barcelona, 30 october 2005 a.d.


p.s.: believe it or not this essay is not that political. i don't know what might be happening to me. perhaps i'm getting too much too old altogether.





anti anti-americanism

today, as i finished my vsit to artfurura i decided that i won't be cooking but rather going to some place to eat something. it's weekend and i can take some extra € by eating outside.

i decided to go to mcdonald's in gràcia. i love mcrib -but, to my surprise it's no more available even here, but that's another story- i took the metro until fontana rather than until placça de catalunya, to be closer -two blocks actually- from the place.

when i was in the place, went to the restroom and then, i was ready to order. don't ask me why, but in that exact moment i look behind me. i saw some youngsters -both sexes- like a gang, with their digital cameras and hd-tv cameras. i guessed they were filming some kind of independent documentary or something, but no, they were just jerking around in the american fast food restaurant.

as one of them approached to the cashiers area, the lady gently told him to put on his t-shirt that he cannot be with the naked torso in the place. like it or not, if these are the rules you have to play by them. or defeat them, but then, be prepared to whatever it might happen to those who doesn't respect the rules of engagement.

the fact is that the boy told the lady -who was, by chance, the one who was taking my order- something like “fuck off you ugly bitch, i'll do it in a moment” -something i can't argue is that he wasn't right, she was so ugly- so, he went where the others were and cried something like “fuck off you all, fuck america” and jumping over a table and throwing no less than two more tables and a lot of chairs they finally went away.

that's what i call stupid anti-americanism, or anti anti-americanism. why? well, simply because they are not helping they are just causing more damage. if you navigated and read my site you know that i'm not what you can call a “pro-american” or anything like that, in fact i'm, perhaps, a lot more anti-american that those stupid rioting youngsters.

as alejandro dolina, one is not pro-american because one eats some burgers at mcdonald's or because one buys at wall-mart (well, i'm anti wall-mart but for other reasons that would make another essay). so, those who rioted mcdonald's today were not anti-american, they were anti society, but in the worse way. it's easy to be anti society when you have an hdtv camera, when you live in barcelona and when you sleep in a cozy bed in a cozy wealthy house somewhere in sarrià-sant gervasi.

that's like being anarchist, but not proposing anything. those are not for anything, they are just against everything that happens to be in their way, specially job, law and order. not that i'm a fucking right wing conservative -that i found that i am in some aspects of life, as much as i'm left wing revolutionary in others- but, come on, you can't go by the street destroying everything. there's nothing you might earn, and a lot you will certainly loose. why? well, it's simple, they will fix it but with your money.

so, i'm against vandalism in frenetic way, and i do think that you must think before you act -something that i can't always do- and that you must always try to impose reason before the angriness. you will achieve a lot more if you shoot one shot in the right place than if you shoot one thousand in the wrong places.

i felt the need of writing this right now since i can't stand that stupid anti anti-americanism any longer. and i just hate those stupid [spanish] youngsters that go by life like if nothing will ever happen, doing what they dig, without ever taking care of the others.

i know that when you are young you do things that then, when looking back with some springs more on your shoulders you say “how stupid i was” but, nonetheless i can't recall me or my friends doing such things. not in that scale at least.

i don't know what it might be, but there's something wrong with today boys and girls. i don't know what it is, but i do know this world is not going any place good if we don't do anything to change the way young people are nowadays...

thank you for reading this stupid essay, hope you'll be doing fine, i leave you now, i had some places to destroy -just kidding-


/martín alejandro carmona selva
barcelona, 30 october 2005 a.d.


p.s.: believe it or not this essay is not that political. i don't know what might be happening to me. perhaps i'm getting too much too old altogether.





why we actually need another 9/11

it might seem that i'm a terrorist, a bombardier, a pro-war, or, just plain, a motherf*cker (sorry for the slang).

but no i'm no cracker. instead i'm just a guy who realized why thing are the way they are. let me explain all this a little more:

first of all i'm not the first person on this world wondering these questions, and, moreover, i'm totally sure that i'm not the only one who's arrived to these answers, but i feel like writing this brief essay anyway.

what i realized, basically, is that most americans feel that this (and any other) war is okay just because they have never felt a war on their own bodies.

what do i want to mean by this? do i want to mean that they don't feel vietnam veterans, gulf war -volume one- veterans, etc.? no! what i want to mean is that they just cannot tell what's good or bad since they have never, ever, felt war over their own soil.

i've never felt it, you might argue, and thatís true, but thatís not the point here, since iím not for war. what i want to mean is that they can't think in iraqi (or somali, or...) kids starving or dieing from bombs since they never felt bombs or starvation on they own soil.

9/11 changed all this. it put the world upside-down, for once, americans had experienced their own medicine -not to say poison- in their own land, in their own soil, in the heart of their nation. but it seems that it wasnít enough to let them notice what they do to others.

they cried -not without reasons- for the victims, everyone was mad about it, how can they be attacked... the point is that, it wasnít enough to make them realize... sadly, it wasnít enough... itís the only way i can explain why they -well, most of them, anyway- are still for (this) war...

so, if we have another 9/11 (or many of them, in different parts of the usa) they will, perhaps, feel what they are doing abroad, and, will, perhaps, reckon that it's nothing good. and so, hopefully, they'll stop it.

it's easy to give advice when you haven't suffered the same. it's easy to tell how to behave when you haven't experienced the pressure and suffering that the others are feeling. it's so easy to tell that what you are doing is okay when you haven't tasted your own poison. it's just so easy...

so, i'm for another 9/11 bloodshed? no, plain and simple! do i want americans suffering? no, plain and simple!

what i am saying is that, perhaps, if they feel it on their own blood they will realize of how painful it is.

to be honest with you all, on 9/11 i was working at an american company and i felt truly bad for the victims -and even more for the families- but, at the same time, i felt a little estrange since i thought that it was the only way they could experience they own poison for a while.

i don't know if you get what i'm trying to say. in fact, i don't even know if i'm actually explaining what i want to say but, the general idea would be that, while i'm not for violence -on any side- i'd like that fellow americans would think about what they are doing to others and would realize that's no good for anyone.

so, if the only way is another 9/11, well, perhaps that's not as bad as more and more iraqi children -to name some- dieing form starvation everyday...

anyway don't take this as anything worth considering, those are just my thoughts, which, in fact, may be wrong, or not clear enough explained, but since my mother language is spanish... though i'm actually thinking in english, well, i might think the wrong way...

if you agree with me, please, let me know, if you don't please, let me know too.

thank you and, please, do not take this as an attack to the americans (in fact, i'm writing this on their language, and in fact, most of my day happens to be their english).

iím not against anyone, but for everone...





WORLD COPS: we are god, we can tell what's right and what's wrong.

it's not the first time we all hear president of the united states of america talking about war against evil.

as far as i know, vietnam wasn't usa war, but vientnam's war. then so many others, more than i can remember perhaps.

then, in 1992, it was the gulf. or, should i say, petroleum, crude. so president george bush decided that he has to fight against iraq and, while american enterprises armed iraq (see hbo's doomday's gun), he bombarded iraq, killing innocent people, and, moreover, empowering the supposed enemy: saddam hussein.

then, president clinton took power and, he decided to bombard baghdad, just to escape from monica lewinsky's accusations.

now, another bush is the president, and he had to bombard afghanistan because some commercial partner (usama bin laden) who was probably there, had doomed wtc's twin towers.

please do not tend to think the easy way, i am not for the attacks (on either side). i do believe that wtc shouldn't have been attacked. what i am saying here is something totally different. i'm saying that as payback to one crime, he's committing another one, which is, perhaps, worse than the original one.

c'mon! not even a single bit of osama's network suffered anything. but innocent afghan people suffered a lot. (they even, by mistake, bombarded a red cross facility). i am not saying that usama bin laden is a good person, or that he didn't committed crimes, because i just don't know, but i do know that usa committed more crimes than what i can count.

now, they are against the evil saddam (i'm not saying he's a saint, either) for not fulfilling un resolutions (which is wrong, if we recognize un as the world's supreme tribunal).

has iraq failed to comply those resolutions? may be (i don't know), but that's not the point here. israel (and please, do not start sending me messages saying that i am anti-semite, because that's the most stupid and easiest thing to think), haven't fulfilled any of the un resolutions and nobody seems to care about. moreover, when they have to blame somebody, they blame palestinians or, more specifically, yasser arafat.

why? simple, it's easier to blame the weak. most of the people who actually rule the world, are of jewish origin (i guess i once heard about the 300 families).

but again, innocent people are suffering. there are refugee camps all over palestine, with people starving, but nobody seems to care about. un made a resolution, when creating israeli state, saying that they must either pay or let them (palestinians) go back to their homes. they didn't do either, but, again, nobody seemed to care about. nobody seemed to care about.

i don't want you to come the wrong idea that i'm just another anti-imperialist, trotskyite guy who goes throwing bombs at any white collar pal he sees. beause that's a coarse simplification. please do think what i have exposed so far (most of it, facts, not opinions) and you'll see that i am not that wrong.

so, what is all this about? what is it for? well, i know i cannot change the world, but i'm just contributing my two cents in what i think is not a trivial subject.

i do believe that the president of the united states of america has the best will as most fellow americans, but sometimes that's not enough. we are all human beings (and being the president of the most influent country on earth does not exclude the person from being a common human), and, as human beings we are not perfect, we all commit mistakes. we are subject to our kind's weakness and failures.

so, on that imperfection basis of all human beings, no one, and i repeat it, no one can believe he/she is the world cop. not even a whole nation can. nobody in this world can tell for sure what's good and what's bad, what's right and was wrong. nobody. not even the president of the united states of america.

no one in this world can tell what's wrong and what's right, no one.

so, i don't care if there's a new world order, or if there's a globalization or whatever, i just see that while we lost time and money talking about war, more and more innocent people actually dies from starvation.

so, if you can consider yourself with the power to tell, please, do try to solve more important things first (as hunger, for example), and if you can't tell, well, then jujst stop acting like you do.



DISCLAIMER: all this was written on the fly without much thinking. do not take all opinions as a personal attack to anyone. i was just hearing the news and, started thinking about how unfair this world is, and so, all this came to my mind. i'm not a criminal, not a terrorist. i don't live in a bunker. i'm not even muslim (which will be no crime, but just in case). i'm just a concerned world citizen.