No, the Irish declared income is small. APple are using a Dutch Irish trick so most of their income has zero corporate tax.
That means they paid zero UK and German tax instead of 21% and 30% respectively.
It would be sensible for the EU to more than claw this back on behalf of the countries concerned.
Why, there are still many tax heavens in Europe: Luxembourg and Netherlands to name just two.
Germany and France have been subsidizing Airbus heavily to make it competitive to Boeing. And the European phone industry went down the toilet because of sh*tty products not because of tax laws!
The EU should get their own house in order before blaming any one company
No, the Irish declared income is small. APple are using a Dutch Irish trick so most of their income has zero corporate tax.
That means they paid zero UK and German tax instead of 21% and 30% respectively.
It would be sensible for the EU to more than claw this back on behalf of the countries concerned.
At least in Germany, that's not possible.
All purchases within Germany and with a proper receipt is calculated and remitted monthly against Mehrwertsteuer paid vs. received. No company gets to keep MwSt, unless the paid amount is more than they collected. In general, you will not receive any money in return, bit will have a remittance of zero... and I believe it's carried over in some instances. I have an accountant for good reason(!)
@asdad: you're right, that region is called Champagne. But I agree with you. We should all be allowed to make cheap knock-offs. I'm sure Samsung will be delighted to sell the SApple iPhone. I'm going to call my company yard "California', create an Apple B.V. and start selling "Designed by Apple in California" hardware, maybe? /s
I don't quite agree with retroactive tax/laws (it's just retarded), but basically blaming countries on defending their cultural, industrial and artistic specificities is equally retarded. Seriously, champagne, made in the region of Champagne, is called Champagne for a good reason. Only someone who doesn't get wine could use such a bad argument, in that it's exactly the Samsung-troll argument that iPhone hasn't copyrighted rounded corners...
Champagne is not just fizzy wine anymore than the iPhone is just a phone with rounded corners.
They could invent their own currency: 100 pips to the Apple.
For clarity... you mean "seeds"... correct? Jony Apple Seeds then by any chance? People can already start to bitch about the rounded, flat corners and color... sorry... colour choices.
Edit: and would they be out of Aluminium, LiquidMetal, sapphire, or unapologetic plastic? Or all of the above?
Pips=seeds, yes.
I would suggest that they are made from all the unused aluminium alloy that will have been discarded from all the unsold 6 Pluses.
BTW: you brought up the point a while back that Google assigned the PageRank patent to Stanford for an exclusive license. That's verifiable, but i was unable to find the date when the patent would expire, if it even will, and if it would become available then for any other company to use.
Note: Hierarchical search is officially dead. Yahoo killed the last categorized search page over the weekend. Long live metadata search and file organization...:p
It's already available for anyone to license.
Google hasn't had exclusive right to the original PageRank patent for a couple of years now, the rights having expired at the end of 2011. Anyone is free to get a license from Stanford for it just as Google does. It is set to become public domain in two more years IIRC so its value is greatly diminished.
Somewhat recently (2012) there has been at least one and I think two new "PageRank" patents granted to Larry Page and again assigned to Stanford. It will be a long time before those expire.
EDIT: There are two, US Patent 8,131,717, filed January 19, 2010, granted March 6, 2012, and assigned to The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University and US Patent 8,131,715, filed January 19, 2010, granted March 6, 2012, same assignment.
@asdad: you're right, that region is called Champagne. But I agree with you. We should all be allowed to make cheap knock-offs. I'm sure Samsung will be delighted to sell the SApple iPhone. I'm going to call my company yard "California', create an Apple B.V. and start selling "Designed by Apple in California" hardware, maybe? /s
I don't quite agree with retroactive tax/laws (it's just retarded), but basically blaming countries on defending their cultural, industrial and artistic specificities is equally retarded. Seriously, champagne, made in the region of Champagne, is called Champagne for a good reason. Only someone who doesn't get wine could use such a bad argument, in that it's exactly the Samsung-troll argument that iPhone hasn't copyrighted rounded corners...
Champagne is not just fizzy wine anymore than the iPhone is just a phone with rounded corners.
What's odd to me is comparing a brand and IP to an area. I am sure that some fizzy wine tasters convince themselves that there are differences between wine from champagne and other wines but most blind tests show sommeliers can't really tell any difference between anything. In any case there is no intellectual property here. It's just a region.
And France gets a lot more if this than anywhere else. Cheddar is not protected.
What's odd to me is comparing a brand and IP to an area. I am sure that some fizzy wine tasters convince themselves that there are differences between wine from champagne and other wines but most blind tests show sommeliers can't really tell any difference between anything. In any case there is no intellectual property here. It's just a region.
And France gets a lot more if this than anywhere else. Cheddar is not protected.
Well, seems we can't come to an agreement here. "Apple and iPhone are just a name", why should that be protected? Come to that, why should Intellectual Property be protected, or even Property while we're at it. It's just objects made of matter, or ideas, and everyone has a plain right to that matter by virtue of being born.
This reasoning does make sense, as much as "it is just a region", I'll admit it. However, in order to have capitalism and civilization AS WE KNOW IT work, we need to protect "just a region", "IP" and, overall, the concept of "Property". Yes, if we change the model and find a different one that work, you can say "it's just a region" and "it's just an idea" and "it's just a lump of electronics". However, that model is yet to be found, and to be honest, I'd rather keep my real champagne and my real Californian-designed Chinese-assembled iPhone (soon to be 6).
With that, my dear Sir, I bid you a good night, as it is here getting late ^^
PS: also, re-reading my prose, I realize you might have taken my sentence as saying you are retarded, which is not how I mean it, and I apologize flatly if you did.
You are deliberately conflating IP and other property rights with deliberate restricted trade based on the region in which something comes from. I agree with the former and not the latter.
@asdad: you're right, that region is called Champagne. But I agree with you. We should all be allowed to make cheap knock-offs. I'm sure Samsung will be delighted to sell the SApple iPhone. I'm going to call my company yard "California', create an Apple B.V. and start selling "Designed by Apple in California" hardware, maybe? /s
I don't quite agree with retroactive tax/laws (it's just retarded), but basically blaming countries on defending their cultural, industrial and artistic specificities is equally retarded. Seriously, champagne, made in the region of Champagne, is called Champagne for a good reason. Only someone who doesn't get wine could use such a bad argument, in that it's exactly the Samsung-troll argument that iPhone hasn't copyrighted rounded corners...
Champagne is not just fizzy wine anymore than the iPhone is just a phone with rounded corners.
What's odd to me is comparing a brand and IP to an area. I am sure that some fizzy wine tasters convince themselves that there are differences between wine from champagne and other wines but most blind tests show sommeliers can't really tell any difference between anything. In any case there is no intellectual property here. It's just a region.
And France gets a lot more if this than anywhere else. Cheddar is not protected.
Your point about Champagne is misguided. It's not a question of what it tastes like, it's about where it comes from, what it's called and the historic association of the name. Cheddar should be protected.
The BBC here are very pedantic in not mentioning product names on tv in the interests of impartiality. Load of old cobblers, if you ask me. So they refer to sellotape (which everyone in the UK calls it) as sticky tape, because Sellotape is, in fact, trademarked and sold by one company. And Apple logos get covered up on laptops, but of course when they show a screenshot, you can see that it's Mac OS X if you haven't already recognised the design of the laptop; all very silly. I'd love Apple to design a laptop in the shape of an Apple and see how the BBC get round that one.
Google hasn't had exclusive right to the original PageRank patent for a couple of years now. Anyone is free to get a license from Stanford for it. It is set to become public domain in two more years IIRC so its value is greatly diminished.
Under "Other Uses" on the Wikipedia entry, it appears that the PageRank algorithm is in use without a license. That's where I'm confused.
Note: I've been researching if there's a way to make comments in forums or comment sections, be "graded" automatically or based on tags to flag "trolling", false answers, FUD... as well as pushing pertinent, verifiable facts or commentary to the front for civil discourse and continued discussion.
Just a curiosity "project" coming from my frustration with multiple stories of the last couple of weeks, and how so much time and effort is wasted continually sifting through the ever-growing BS and "trying" to correct the most blatantly false information.
I feel a lot of people with good ideas... even contrary/differing opinions... are being drowned out of participating and giving up due to time constraints, vicious trolling, and the same stupid questions, opinions and answers being repeated ad nauseum.
We're not communicating any better than 50, maybe 100's of years ago with the technology literally in our hands... just getting our brain farts out to the masses faster. (me included!)
We've see this here quite often over the last few weeks... let alone if anyone has been following Apple before and after the Event, or any other current international subjects.
Anyway... short story... long post as always: I'm curious if there's anyone*** that has considered utilizing PageRank or similar to cut through the proverbial crap.
*** outside of the media concerns and bloggers that of course benefit from page views by stoking the fires with click-bait.
Punishing the successful is never a good idea, as it disincentivises progress and innovation and ends up hurting consumers.
They aren't punishing them, Apple knew the expected tax rates when they started doing business. The people setting the rates knew their deficit and what they needed to recoup. They didn't get what they expected from some people so they need to reassess it.
It's like if there's a toll gate across a bridge that someone built. They (public or private body) invested the money to build it and want people to pay for its use. There's a footpath at the side of the toll gate and someone decides to run their motorcycle through it every day for a year to avoid the toll. If the motorcyclist is caught on camera, should he be made to pay for using the bridge without paying for it? He was acting against the intent of the bridge builder. Circumventing rules for your own benefit and leaving the costs for everyone else is nothing to be proud of. If you don't want to pay for the bridge, don't use the bridge. If Apple doesn't want to pay for the roads, hospitals, emergency services, schools, legal services and so on then they should remove their employees and buildings from the countries they are profiting in.
Google hasn't had exclusive right to the original PageRank patent for a couple of years now. Anyone is free to get a license from Stanford for it. It is set to become public domain in two more years IIRC so its value is greatly diminished.
Under "Other Uses" on the Wikipedia entry, it appears that the PageRank algorithm is in use without a license. That's where I'm confused.
Note: I've been researching if there's a way to make comments in forums or comment sections, be "graded" automatically or based on tags to flag "trolling", false answers, FUD... as well as pushing pertinent, verifiable facts or commentary to the front for civil discourse and continued discussion.
Just a curiosity "project" coming from my frustration with multiple stories of the last couple of weeks, and how so much time and effort is wasted continually sifting through the ever-growing BS and "trying" to correct the most blatantly false information.
I feel a lot of people with good ideas... even contrary/differing opinions... are being drowned out of participating and giving up due to time constraints, vicious trolling, and the same stupid questions, opinions and answers being repeated ad nauseum.
We're not communicating any better than 50, maybe 100's of years ago with the technology literally in our hands... just getting our brain farts out to the masses faster. (me included!)
We've see this here quite often over the last few weeks... let alone if anyone has been following Apple before and after the Event, or any other current international subjects.
Anyway... short story... long post as always: I'm curious if there's anyone*** that has considered utilizing PageRank or similar to cut through the proverbial crap.
*** outside of the media concerns and bloggers that of course benefit from page views by stoking the fires with click-bait.
I agree.
One has been having to wade through piles of Appolytes blindly defending the integrity of the 6 Plus in order to reach the few gems of substance.
Anyway... short story... long post as always: I'm curious if there's anyone*** that has considered utilizing PageRank or similar to cut through the proverbial crap.
*** outside of the media concerns and bloggers that of course benefit from page views by stoking the fires with click-bait.
There's been some suggestions that the Univ. of Washington has licensed it for a search project they're doing. Otherwise I don't know if anyone else has shown an interest.
I'd love Apple to design a laptop in the shape of an Apple and see how the BBC get round that one.
Agreed for cheddar, would avoid some "interesting" Dutch imitations (even though, I recently bought Camembert made in the NL. I was wondering what was so wrong until I figured out it only had the name).
You are deliberately conflating IP and other property rights with deliberate restricted trade based on the region in which something comes from. I agree with the former and not the latter.
I am, indeed, conflating both these agreed-rules-of-trade-and commerce. It is exactly where we have different opinions, and to my opinions they are all the more valid debates that even Benjamin F. (Franklin, not Frost) himself was first in favor of not defending IP in order to further free spirit of enterprise, as I understand historical evidence. Regional savoir-faire implies understanding the local weather, soil, and techniques.This is valuable IP in itself, but on top of it, I do believe that if you make wonderful fizzy wine in say, California, it will sell under it's own Irvine (or whatever) name after a few years.
Tokaj is a remarkable Slovakian wine, Lachryma Christi Del Vesuvio comes from Napoli, Champagne comes from Champagne. It just makes sense to me, and I think that people who want to sell their own wines under the "Champagne" or "Tokaj" brand just want a free ride on a world famous IP. If their offerings are valuable, they will sell by their own quality. If they aren't they won't.
Another point: in France or Italy, you buy wine based on their DOP/AOC (a guarantee of regional quality). America and more generally non-wine producing countries, or younger wine-producing countries, tend to sell wine by "cépage", which is the type of grapes used. This already shows the fundamental difference of understanding here, which I believe is the main cause of disagreement on name protection.
Well, a wrong and a right would cancel themselves out, so I’ll stick with the latter, thanks. ????
But you'd definitely need at least ONE to stick to the latter.
Get both and at the very least you could chase your personal Pavlovian Dog's tail and make it interesting for us... or at least avail yourself to the advancement of science...
Well, a wrong and a right would cancel themselves out, so I’ll stick with the latter, thanks. ????
But you'd definitely need at least ONE to stick to the latter.
Get both and at the very least you could chase your personal Pavlovian Dog's tail and make it interesting for us... or at least avail yourself to the advancement of science...
Seems the right time for this quote:
"Science isn’t a catalogue of known facts; it is the discovery of new forms of ignorance."
Comments
LOL! No.
Well said.
All purchases within Germany and with a proper receipt is calculated and remitted monthly against Mehrwertsteuer paid vs. received. No company gets to keep MwSt, unless the paid amount is more than they collected. In general, you will not receive any money in return, bit will have a remittance of zero... and I believe it's carried over in some instances. I have an accountant for good reason(!)
That made me chuckle.
I don't quite agree with retroactive tax/laws (it's just retarded), but basically blaming countries on defending their cultural, industrial and artistic specificities is equally retarded. Seriously, champagne, made in the region of Champagne, is called Champagne for a good reason. Only someone who doesn't get wine could use such a bad argument, in that it's exactly the Samsung-troll argument that iPhone hasn't copyrighted rounded corners...
Champagne is not just fizzy wine anymore than the iPhone is just a phone with rounded corners.
They could invent their own currency: 100 pips to the Apple.
For clarity... you mean "seeds"... correct? Jony Apple Seeds then by any chance? People can already start to bitch about the rounded, flat corners and color... sorry... colour choices.
Edit: and would they be out of Aluminium, LiquidMetal, sapphire, or unapologetic plastic? Or all of the above?
Pips=seeds, yes.
I would suggest that they are made from all the unused aluminium alloy that will have been discarded from all the unsold 6 Pluses.
Well a perfectly good iPhone 6+ is a shame to waste... much like a brain. So go get one of both... :smokey:
It's already available for anyone to license.
Google hasn't had exclusive right to the original PageRank patent for a couple of years now, the rights having expired at the end of 2011. Anyone is free to get a license from Stanford for it just as Google does. It is set to become public domain in two more years IIRC so its value is greatly diminished.
Somewhat recently (2012) there has been at least one and I think two new "PageRank" patents granted to Larry Page and again assigned to Stanford. It will be a long time before those expire.
EDIT: There are two, US Patent 8,131,717, filed January 19, 2010, granted March 6, 2012, and assigned to The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University and US Patent 8,131,715, filed January 19, 2010, granted March 6, 2012, same assignment.
Pips=seeds, yes.
I would suggest that they are made from all the unused aluminium alloy that will have been discarded from all the unsold 6 Pluses.
Well a perfectly good iPhone 6+ is a shame to waste... much like a brain. So go get one of both...
Well, a wrong and a right would cancel themselves out, so I’ll stick with the latter, thanks. ????
What's odd to me is comparing a brand and IP to an area. I am sure that some fizzy wine tasters convince themselves that there are differences between wine from champagne and other wines but most blind tests show sommeliers can't really tell any difference between anything. In any case there is no intellectual property here. It's just a region.
And France gets a lot more if this than anywhere else. Cheddar is not protected.
What's odd to me is comparing a brand and IP to an area. I am sure that some fizzy wine tasters convince themselves that there are differences between wine from champagne and other wines but most blind tests show sommeliers can't really tell any difference between anything. In any case there is no intellectual property here. It's just a region.
And France gets a lot more if this than anywhere else. Cheddar is not protected.
Well, seems we can't come to an agreement here. "Apple and iPhone are just a name", why should that be protected? Come to that, why should Intellectual Property be protected, or even Property while we're at it. It's just objects made of matter, or ideas, and everyone has a plain right to that matter by virtue of being born.
This reasoning does make sense, as much as "it is just a region", I'll admit it. However, in order to have capitalism and civilization AS WE KNOW IT work, we need to protect "just a region", "IP" and, overall, the concept of "Property". Yes, if we change the model and find a different one that work, you can say "it's just a region" and "it's just an idea" and "it's just a lump of electronics". However, that model is yet to be found, and to be honest, I'd rather keep my real champagne and my real Californian-designed Chinese-assembled iPhone (soon to be 6).
With that, my dear Sir, I bid you a good night, as it is here getting late ^^
PS: also, re-reading my prose, I realize you might have taken my sentence as saying you are retarded, which is not how I mean it, and I apologize flatly if you did.
You are deliberately conflating IP and other property rights with deliberate restricted trade based on the region in which something comes from. I agree with the former and not the latter.
@asdad: you're right, that region is called Champagne. But I agree with you. We should all be allowed to make cheap knock-offs. I'm sure Samsung will be delighted to sell the SApple iPhone. I'm going to call my company yard "California', create an Apple B.V. and start selling "Designed by Apple in California" hardware, maybe? /s
I don't quite agree with retroactive tax/laws (it's just retarded), but basically blaming countries on defending their cultural, industrial and artistic specificities is equally retarded. Seriously, champagne, made in the region of Champagne, is called Champagne for a good reason. Only someone who doesn't get wine could use such a bad argument, in that it's exactly the Samsung-troll argument that iPhone hasn't copyrighted rounded corners...
Champagne is not just fizzy wine anymore than the iPhone is just a phone with rounded corners.
What's odd to me is comparing a brand and IP to an area. I am sure that some fizzy wine tasters convince themselves that there are differences between wine from champagne and other wines but most blind tests show sommeliers can't really tell any difference between anything. In any case there is no intellectual property here. It's just a region.
And France gets a lot more if this than anywhere else. Cheddar is not protected.
Your point about Champagne is misguided. It's not a question of what it tastes like, it's about where it comes from, what it's called and the historic association of the name. Cheddar should be protected.
The BBC here are very pedantic in not mentioning product names on tv in the interests of impartiality. Load of old cobblers, if you ask me. So they refer to sellotape (which everyone in the UK calls it) as sticky tape, because Sellotape is, in fact, trademarked and sold by one company. And Apple logos get covered up on laptops, but of course when they show a screenshot, you can see that it's Mac OS X if you haven't already recognised the design of the laptop; all very silly. I'd love Apple to design a laptop in the shape of an Apple and see how the BBC get round that one.
Under "Other Uses" on the Wikipedia entry, it appears that the PageRank algorithm is in use without a license. That's where I'm confused.
Note: I've been researching if there's a way to make comments in forums or comment sections, be "graded" automatically or based on tags to flag "trolling", false answers, FUD... as well as pushing pertinent, verifiable facts or commentary to the front for civil discourse and continued discussion.
Just a curiosity "project" coming from my frustration with multiple stories of the last couple of weeks, and how so much time and effort is wasted continually sifting through the ever-growing BS and "trying" to correct the most blatantly false information.
I feel a lot of people with good ideas... even contrary/differing opinions... are being drowned out of participating and giving up due to time constraints, vicious trolling, and the same stupid questions, opinions and answers being repeated ad nauseum.
We're not communicating any better than 50, maybe 100's of years ago with the technology literally in our hands... just getting our brain farts out to the masses faster. (me included!)
We've see this here quite often over the last few weeks... let alone if anyone has been following Apple before and after the Event, or any other current international subjects.
Anyway... short story... long post as always: I'm curious if there's anyone*** that has considered utilizing PageRank or similar to cut through the proverbial crap.
*** outside of the media concerns and bloggers that of course benefit from page views by stoking the fires with click-bait.
They aren't punishing them, Apple knew the expected tax rates when they started doing business. The people setting the rates knew their deficit and what they needed to recoup. They didn't get what they expected from some people so they need to reassess it.
It's like if there's a toll gate across a bridge that someone built. They (public or private body) invested the money to build it and want people to pay for its use. There's a footpath at the side of the toll gate and someone decides to run their motorcycle through it every day for a year to avoid the toll. If the motorcyclist is caught on camera, should he be made to pay for using the bridge without paying for it? He was acting against the intent of the bridge builder. Circumventing rules for your own benefit and leaving the costs for everyone else is nothing to be proud of. If you don't want to pay for the bridge, don't use the bridge. If Apple doesn't want to pay for the roads, hospitals, emergency services, schools, legal services and so on then they should remove their employees and buildings from the countries they are profiting in.
Correct but they have to start somewhere.
Canada isn't part of the EU.
It's already available for anyone to license.
Google hasn't had exclusive right to the original PageRank patent for a couple of years now. Anyone is free to get a license from Stanford for it. It is set to become public domain in two more years IIRC so its value is greatly diminished.
Under "Other Uses" on the Wikipedia entry, it appears that the PageRank algorithm is in use without a license. That's where I'm confused.
Note: I've been researching if there's a way to make comments in forums or comment sections, be "graded" automatically or based on tags to flag "trolling", false answers, FUD... as well as pushing pertinent, verifiable facts or commentary to the front for civil discourse and continued discussion.
Just a curiosity "project" coming from my frustration with multiple stories of the last couple of weeks, and how so much time and effort is wasted continually sifting through the ever-growing BS and "trying" to correct the most blatantly false information.
I feel a lot of people with good ideas... even contrary/differing opinions... are being drowned out of participating and giving up due to time constraints, vicious trolling, and the same stupid questions, opinions and answers being repeated ad nauseum.
We're not communicating any better than 50, maybe 100's of years ago with the technology literally in our hands... just getting our brain farts out to the masses faster. (me included!)
We've see this here quite often over the last few weeks... let alone if anyone has been following Apple before and after the Event, or any other current international subjects.
Anyway... short story... long post as always: I'm curious if there's anyone*** that has considered utilizing PageRank or similar to cut through the proverbial crap.
*** outside of the media concerns and bloggers that of course benefit from page views by stoking the fires with click-bait.
I agree.
One has been having to wade through piles of Appolytes blindly defending the integrity of the 6 Plus in order to reach the few gems of substance.
There's been some suggestions that the Univ. of Washington has licensed it for a search project they're doing. Otherwise I don't know if anyone else has shown an interest.
Cheddar should be protected.
I'd love Apple to design a laptop in the shape of an Apple and see how the BBC get round that one.
Agreed for cheddar, would avoid some "interesting" Dutch imitations (even though, I recently bought Camembert made in the NL. I was wondering what was so wrong until I figured out it only had the name).
BBC makes Apples round
@lightknight
You are deliberately conflating IP and other property rights with deliberate restricted trade based on the region in which something comes from. I agree with the former and not the latter.
I am, indeed, conflating both these agreed-rules-of-trade-and commerce. It is exactly where we have different opinions, and to my opinions they are all the more valid debates that even Benjamin F. (Franklin, not Frost) himself was first in favor of not defending IP in order to further free spirit of enterprise, as I understand historical evidence. Regional savoir-faire implies understanding the local weather, soil, and techniques.This is valuable IP in itself, but on top of it, I do believe that if you make wonderful fizzy wine in say, California, it will sell under it's own Irvine (or whatever) name after a few years.
Tokaj is a remarkable Slovakian wine, Lachryma Christi Del Vesuvio comes from Napoli, Champagne comes from Champagne. It just makes sense to me, and I think that people who want to sell their own wines under the "Champagne" or "Tokaj" brand just want a free ride on a world famous IP. If their offerings are valuable, they will sell by their own quality. If they aren't they won't.
Another point: in France or Italy, you buy wine based on their DOP/AOC (a guarantee of regional quality). America and more generally non-wine producing countries, or younger wine-producing countries, tend to sell wine by "cépage", which is the type of grapes used. This already shows the fundamental difference of understanding here, which I believe is the main cause of disagreement on name protection.
Now, I really leave, night!
But you'd definitely need at least ONE to stick to the latter.
Get both and at the very least you could chase your personal Pavlovian Dog's tail and make it interesting for us... or at least avail yourself to the advancement of science...
Well, a wrong and a right would cancel themselves out, so I’ll stick with the latter, thanks. ????
But you'd definitely need at least ONE to stick to the latter.
Get both and at the very least you could chase your personal Pavlovian Dog's tail and make it interesting for us... or at least avail yourself to the advancement of science...
Seems the right time for this quote: