[HN Gopher] Apple sends DSID with iPhone analytics data, tests show ___________________________________________________________________ Apple sends DSID with iPhone analytics data, tests show Author : kelthuzad Score : 231 points Date : 2022-11-21 18:21 UTC (4 hours ago) (HTM) web link (gizmodo.com) (TXT) w3m dump (gizmodo.com) | judge2020 wrote: | The actual claims via Twitter: | https://twitter.com/mysk_co/status/1594515229915979776 | | I wonder what log they got this from; i'm scrubbing through both | my latest `Analytics-X.ips.ca.synced` files and `AppStore-X.ips` | file and can't find dsId. This is even with every 'Share | Analytics' checkbox ticked in settings, besides Improve Health | Records. Unfortunately the name of that log file is cropped out. | diebeforei485 wrote: | They might be in an experiment that most people are not in. | antipaul wrote: | Yea, wasn't this experiment ran on jailbroken devices? | askafriend wrote: | Isn't it odd that no one else has been able to replicate this | researcher's findings? I'd imagine a bunch of others would run | similar tests and come out in support of these findings. | | I highly suspect there's something off about this and I will | wait for others to corroborate these findings (should be easy | if there's actually substance here). | [deleted] | xrayarx wrote: | It is right in the article: the phones are jailbroken and so | the encrypted connections can be broken. | | The function he is talking about is undocumented, encrypted, | can't be turned off and uses different servers. | | The whole thing might be illegal too, at least in the EU | judge2020 wrote: | If this telemetry file they're showing is undocumented and | Apple is intentionally hiding this analytics upload from | Settings -> Privacy & Security -> Analytics & Improvements | -> Analytics Data (which allows you to export the json | files it uploads), then I feel like that'd be a much bigger | story and would at least be mentioned here. | derefr wrote: | I've always been suspicious that there's extra, "latent" | first-party instrumentation code in consumer OSes that, when | activated, does some additional "innocuous-seeming" metrics- | collection, along existing metrics-collection channels, but | that is actually just barely enough to be identifiable (in a | way that's only apparent if you're a security researcher and | you think really hard about it); where this switch is either | activated per-device during system updates or virus hot-scan | pushes, or per user for cloud-connected user accounts by | monitoring a policy flag on your cloud account; and where | these mechanisms in turn are activated by state actors | telling the OS manufacturer to do so, to then collect the | resulting metrics and de-anonymize the device owner. | | I mean, it's what I'd do if I were Apple and/or Microsoft, | and I knew that the US government was constantly compelling | my employees through National Security Letters to do a bunch | of extra off-the-books work to enable transparent one-off | device-specific wiretaps. I'd productize that wiretap | process, to get my employees' time back. | bilboa wrote: | It seems too early to say "no one else is able to replicate | it", given that the claim was only posted to Twitter | yesterday, and the Gizmodo article linked to here was only | posted 4 hours ago. | askafriend wrote: | It's been a couple weeks. Gizmodo's article says 4hrs ago | because they're just spamming it and making it seem like | new content (another red flag IMO) | | Here's a Gizmodo article from 2 weeks ago talking about the | same exact researcher: https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone- | analytics-tracking-even-whe... | godelski wrote: | I'm honestly surprised we aren't seeing these big tech companies | have an arms race with respect to homomorphic encryption. Since | you can perform computations on the encrypted data itself this | appears to be the best of both worlds: anonymous and still able | to pull big data. Probably won't be able to serve as personalized | ads, but from what I'm aware, the big data is far more important | than the direct targeting. | | I know Meta is betting big on the Metaverse, but it's also wild | to me that they similarly don't bet big here and keep their ad | infrastructure. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32987155 | Terretta wrote: | If it the concept that counts, not just that particular tech, | some do "race" to get big data without compromising privacy, | even when they don't have to (because no competitors are racing | on the privacy dimension). | | For a survey, check out what firms are doing on "differential | privacy" not just "homomorphic encryption". As a for instance, | Apple -- since the OP is about them -- spent significant extra | effort to make Maps anonymized. | | Concept: | https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/Differential_Privacy_Over... | | In Apple Maps: https://www.idownloadblog.com/2019/03/13/apple- | maps-navigati... | myaccount9786 wrote: | Apart from the fact that they have no incentive to, there are | technical downsides, even assuming you could get a useful | homomorphic scheme to work in practice. | | For example, encrypted data can't be compressed. Columnar big | data systems rely heavily on that to be performant. | godelski wrote: | > Apart from the fact that they have no incentive to | | They have huge incentives. Apple is positioning themselves as | the privacy king. Meta has suffered huge losses because of | their privacy abuses. Neither of these suggest no incentives. | I'd argue that they suggest large incentives. | | The technical downsides are a fair critique though. But this | also is where competition excels. Our machines are getting | faster. Other algorithms have also gotten extremely faster | and it would be naive to assume that homormorphic algorithms | similarly don't. This is why I say an arms race. | rocketbop wrote: | I wonder if there's new feature or improvement Apple could | introduce that would actually increase their sales. It | seems like at the moment people buy the new iPhone because | 1/ they need/want a new phone, 2/ they want an iPhone, and | 3/ they want the new iPhone. | | Apple know what they need to do to be successful, and | that's continue to release updates to the iPhone that in a | few small ways make it slightly better than the previous | one. | wongarsu wrote: | Not to mention being able to keep processing data, while | your competition gets squeezed by tightening regulations | around the world. | godelski wrote: | The other thing is you could likely squeeze your | competition out of the market. Countries are waking up to | the implications of data harvesting and that it isn't | only being used by themselves but their adversaries. So | if a big company, like Apple, got it working, it would be | much easier to lobby legislation that would harm (or | kill) your competitors. (While I think we would all be | better off if this happened, I do recognize that this | same power can be abused and cause a significant | disruption in the ecosystem. But I think it would also be | extremely difficult to impossible to gain such an edge | that others couldn't quickly adapt. Even if they drag | their feet) | YetAnotherNick wrote: | > They have huge incentives. Apple is positioning | themselves as the privacy king | | I am willing to bet that it is a deal breaker only for very | small minority of users. I would argue that search engine | data is of much bigger privacy concern than OS, as compared | to search history no OS action comes close in disclosing | personal action, and google/bing almost has universal | market presence even for Apple users. | | > Meta has suffered huge losses because of their privacy | abuses. | | They had their revenue reduced, true. But it is not loss. | They wouldn't be in any better position if they didn't used | extra data when it was available. | AndriyKunitsyn wrote: | Apple has done plenty of major screwups that each put a big | doubt on whether "Apple loves your privacy" is something | more than PR BS, but for some reason, they all got | memoryholed. | | An iphone user is _probably_ tracked by less ad agencies | than a stock android user, but that's it. | NBJack wrote: | Ads targeting is actually a huge motivation for ads platforms, | IIRC; customers buying ads want to know if they work. | intelVISA wrote: | Main reason QUIC was created iirc. | godelski wrote: | Ad targeting is much broader than that though. Even with | encrypted data you can match keys to profiles. You just don't | know who that profile belongs to and you don't even need to | know the contents of that profile. The whole point here is | that you can treat the system like a black box but still work | with it in a useful way. | NayamAmarshe wrote: | Brave has proven that targeting is not always the best | answer. They did an analysis on their own platform, their CTR | is very very good and they do not compromise privacy in any | way and still deliver ads (opt-in). | smoldesu wrote: | > They did an analysis on their own platform | | That's always how good studies start. | 8note wrote: | I assume brave shows mostly crypto adds? If so, the | targeting is baked in | eyakubovich wrote: | It's unclear when homomorphic encryption will be ready for | prime time, especially at big tech scale. It's easier to give | up the data under assurances of how exactly that data will be | used. Secure enclaves (e.g. AWS nitro enclaves) can be used to | offer cryptographic attestations as to what the code is doing | with the user data. Practically speaking, an average user won't | inspect the code, of course. But it does allow for other | companies to audit and vouch for the usage. | fragmede wrote: | as the a fan of homomorphic encryption I very much hear what | you are saying (two examples I thought up | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32993163). But at the end | of the day, there's no way to prove that Bob's Homomorphic | Encryption SaaS company isn't "backing up" all your data into a | regular database as well. And that's assuming Bob never gets | hacked, too. | | At the end of the day, even with HE, we have to trust Bob to be | trustworthy, and to have designed and implemented it totally | correctly (or else data will leak in the clear). | | If it was Bob's small company then having a 3rd-party external | auditor review the system would go a long way to gaining the | public's trust, but unfortunately Meta has no such luxury. They | could say they can't see your data until they were blue in the | face, and they could even be telling the trust, but people | don't _currently_ believe they haven 't sold your data (or the | specific nuance there), so I'm not surprised they haven't made | a large investment in HE. HE is also not quite there yet. It's | ridiculously slow for anything but the most simple operations | and Meta's data needs are far from simple. | godelski wrote: | Yeah you make a really good point (especially with those two | examples, which the latter might not even require data | collection at all). But I do think that an arms race in this | direction would change the public view. You'd sure have a lot | fewer nerds like us arguing about privacy. Though we'd | probably be arguing more for open source to lessen the trust | issue. | | I don't think we'll ever have fully trust-less systems. But I | do think there's a big difference between saying "trust us, | we don't look at the data" vs "we encrypted the data and use | this method, trust us that we aren't decrypting it". The | former method is worse because there's a lot of people that | have clear access to the data. The latter is better because | there are more speed bumps and the argument is more sound. A | lot of trust is built from demonstrating good faith efforts. | resfirestar wrote: | This is about a request used to report a click in the app store, | which is technically specified in the privacy policy [1] and you | can get a CSV of it from Apple in data requests. This is the | subject of a class action filed earlier this month [2]. | | While I think Apple's data collection within its apps is | excessive, the only thing the researchers achieve by conflating | it with device analytics is giving tech media an "Apple Lies!" | headline cycle. People should be informed about how these | analytics/surveillance systems work and how to effectively | navigate and counter them, not be sold paranoia and the idea that | the settings are always lying. They're misleading you with | marketing, sure, but the truth in this case is written plainly in | the prompt that pops up the first time you open the app store. | | [1] https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/data/en/app-store/, "We | use information about your browsing, purchases, searches, and | downloads. These records are stored with IP address, a random | unique identifier (where that arises), and Apple ID" | | [2] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/apple-hit-with- | clas... | [deleted] | fassssst wrote: | Would people feel differently if we were talking about web | apps, where nearly every click is sent to a server? Why is it | egregious for a store to do analytics? | resfirestar wrote: | For one, because as another comment mentioned Apple's app | store is the only option on iOS, so you can't opt out of it | even if you really wanted to. I also find what Apple is doing | particularly bad because the click data is associated with | your account for a period of time decided by Apple (Edit: I | said "permanently" before but that was wrong, it does expire | but the privacy policy doesn't specify the exact retention | period) and can't be deleted short of terminating the | account. Compare how Google lets you disable or delete that | kind of granular data from your account with the "Web and App | Activity" switch. | askafriend wrote: | 1. "App Store browsing activity includes information like | the content and apps you tap and view while browsing the | App Store. This information is aggregated across users so | that it does not identify you. We may also use local, on- | device processing to select which ad to display, using | information stored on your device, such as the apps you | frequently open." | | 2. "To protect your privacy, targeted ads are delivered | only if more than 5,000 people meet the targeting criteria. | The information used to determine which ads are relevant to | you is tied to random identifiers and not tied to your | Apple ID." | | 3. "Apple's advertising platform receives information about | the ads you tap and view against a random identifier not | tied to your Apple ID." | | 4. It's also possible to reset this random, unique | identifier or turn off personalization entirely. | | Source: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/data/en/app- | store/ | resfirestar wrote: | I think that section is about how the advertising system | uses browsing activity, not how it's collected and | stored. Even with ad personalization turned off on my | iPad, my data export has click records going back to 2020 | (when I created this Apple ID). | shkkmo wrote: | > While I think Apple's data collection within its apps is | excessive, the only thing the researchers achieve by conflating | it with device analytics | | The app store is the only way to install software... trying to | pass it off as just another App with a separate policy seems | disingenuous at best. | pbhjpbhj wrote: | >not be sold paranoia and the idea that the settings are always | lying // | | Yeah, um, so if Apple et al. cared like you seem to, perhaps | enough to stop lying, then that might be a first step towards | people trusting them? You expect the weaker party to trust | first before the stronger party even proves they're | trustworthy!? | | >They're misleading you with marketing, sure [...] // | | They have no obligation to mislead. You want us to treat liars | like they're angels. | resfirestar wrote: | I don't think it's about trust. The easy availability of | short-form privacy policies and data export requests are the | result of legal requirements, ideally you should be able to | rely on those disclosures even if you don't know enough about | the company to trust or distrust it. In this case, the | disclosures correctly showed that this kind of click data was | being collected. | shkkmo wrote: | Why was the title changed away from the article headline? Few | people know what a DSID is before reading the article so this | seems designed to deliberately bury the lead. | oneplane wrote: | I wouldn't be surprised if regardless of the methods users it | can't truly be anonymous since that defeats the purpose. Even | just compliance would result in resolvable data since you need to | be able to request a copy of the data. | boplicity wrote: | Apple is fundamentally transforming into an advertising company. | The difference between them and ad companies such as Google is | that, with Apple, advertising is baked into almost every single | product. | | Every time you open the App store, you're opening a giant garden | of advertisements. These ads are extremely lucrative to Apple. | Every time you update the OS, it prompts you with ads to sign up | with more services. Every time you open Apple News, the same | thing happens: you're bombarded with ads to sign up for a premium | subscription. When I still had an Apple laptop, it would | constantly give me a popup asking me to signup for iCloud, even | though I hadn't consciously ever used it. | | At nearly every turn, engaging with Apple software leads to | profitable ads for Apple. (Usually in the form of direct | subscriptions, or commission based advertising.) | | What do ad companies love? User data! This is as true for Apple | as it is for Google. The difference: Apple has an _iron grip_ on | their advertisements like no other company in the world. This | gives them the tools that let them _pretend_ they 're not an ad | company. They are. | snowwrestler wrote: | You're really stretching here. Ad companies make their money by | selling ads; compare how much of Apple's revenue comes from | selling ads (very small %) vs how much of Google's revenue | comes from selling ads (almost all of it). | | Prompts to buy additional products do not make a company an | advertising company. If it did, every restaurant in the world | would be an "advertising company" because wait staff, cashiers, | and menus encourage customers to order additional food. | rexf wrote: | While Apple is not considered an advertising company today, | they have been growing services revenue for the past several | years. Part of that is growth in ads (3rd party ads in app | store, 1st party ads in the OS, iAd [discontinued], etc). | | Even if rank and file Apple employees do not want to grow ads | in iOS/App Store, clearly Apple leadership wants to sell more | ads (and increase their services revenue). At App Store | scale, their volume of ads is not trivial. | gigel82 wrote: | Curious if you'd say the same about Microsoft Windows. They | never show banner ads anywhere in the product but they do | advertise their own apps and services (and like the App Store | on iPhone, they advertise apps you can install from their | Microsoft Store). | | IMO, both Microsoft and Apple are showing me ads I don't want | to be shown. | boplicity wrote: | The App Store is a list of ads, on which Apple earns a | commission. I don't think it's a stretch to see it as an | advertising platform. | | 1. Apple Displays ads (Sales content for products.) | | 2. Apple gets paid when those ads convert into sales. | | If Apple didn't get paid when Apps were sold through the app | store, then I could see how it isn't an ad platform for them. | Yet, the _only_ option, if you want to sell a product listed | on the app store is to pay Apple their cut, which | fundamentally turns it into a paid advertising platform | controlled by Apple. | threeseed wrote: | You can distort the meaning of words and call it whatever | you like. | | But it's a channel cost not an advertising one. | | Apple still gets their cut when an in-app purchase is made | hence it's not tied to the App Store list. | scyzoryk_xyz wrote: | What was it lately about Apple now being valued at more than | all the other SV giants _combined_? Insane. | | [edit: not true at all, apologies] | | Like countless others I've always been very sympathetic to the | entire philosophy of the company - like how they've mostly kept | to the high road in many important ways. It is going to be a | huge shame when they go down that AD road. | | But on the bright side - it might turn out that Apple will just | have to be the first/main for anti-monopoly regulation. | lotsofpulp wrote: | > What was it lately about Apple now being valued at more | than all the other SV giants combined? | | That it is not true. | | https://companiesmarketcap.com/ | nemothekid wrote: | Maybe it's true if you only consider tech companies in the | bay area (silicon valley)? Apple is 2.3T. | | GOOG (1.2T) + NVDA (.38T) + META (.29T) + ADBE (.14T) + CRM | (.14T) + NFLX (.12T) = 2.27T | | Oracle makes or breaks this if you still want to consider | them a Silicon Valley company (the headquarters was moved | to Austin last year) | lotsofpulp wrote: | I assumed SV giants meant tech giants meant Apple, | Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, and Meta. | happyopossum wrote: | Neither MS or Amazon are SV companies... | [deleted] | scyzoryk_xyz wrote: | I assumed the same while writing the comment above. | | Perhaps the source I was remembering was also referring | to SV companies, and I thought it meant the big ones | above. | smoldesu wrote: | > It is going to be a huge shame when they go down that AD | road. | | Bigger or smaller of a shame than the time they went down the | surveillance road? | [deleted] | cbsmith wrote: | > Apple is fundamentally transforming into an advertising | company. The difference between them and ad companies such as | Google is that, with Apple, advertising is baked into almost | every single product. | | It's nice to think this is part of a transformation taking | place at Apple. In truth, what is transforming is our | perception of Apple. It's not like Analytics has recently | changed how it operates. | antipaul wrote: | Everyone uses data they collect to "improve" their own | offerings. | | But the others then make money by sharing/selling the data _to | third parties_(incentive). | | Does Apple use this data only for internal use, or do they also | share (sell) it to third parties? With or without privacy? | deadmutex wrote: | Who are the others you are referring to here? Can you be more | specific? Because it matters in this case | quonn wrote: | So you think they need user data to display the ad for Apple | Care+ and Apple TV? which they unconditionally display to | anyone anyway? Those are the only two ads I have seen. | | Calling the app store an ad is really stretching the truth. | It's a store, of course it displays the products that are for | sale. | judge2020 wrote: | The App Store itself has ads[0], but some changes might be in | preparation for deeper ad integrations[1]. | | 0: https://searchads.apple.com/advanced | | 1: https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/11/14/apples-4b-ad- | busi... | askafriend wrote: | > Every time you open the App store, you're opening a giant | garden of advertisements. | | Curation and Ads are very different. When you walk into a | Target and see a curated set of products like bath towels, | they're not Ads. In fact, customers pay more to shop at Target | because of Target's ability to curate quality products | consistently. | | Now the App Store _does_ have Ads (mainly in search - one slot | at the top). But it 's far from a "giant garden every time you | open it". | _aavaa_ wrote: | Idk about your region, but the App Store in my region | features actual advertisements on the front page. | | The first showcase is an actual showcase, but the second item | is very much ads. And the way it's set up is to have | something like 1/2 the image visible without the user | scrolling, but the part that says is that it's an ad is not | visible without scrolling. So the idea I guess is to have the | user click on it to find out more based on 1/2 the image | without them knowing that it was an ad. | eikenberry wrote: | Does Apple charge for the curation? | situationista wrote: | Arguably yes, since that curation is paid for with the cut | Apple takes on sales in the Apple store. | Cenk wrote: | No | smoldesu wrote: | They charge you $99/year to qualify, so yes. | dewey wrote: | Did you follow the latest changes where they slapped casino | and gambling ads everywhere? | https://www.macrumors.com/2022/10/26/app-store-gambling- | ads-... | firefoxkekw wrote: | It wasn't true even without the unique identifier, Apple can | always correlated all the other data they sent to their servers | to identified you. | | Most people thing of anonymity like a boolean when is most like a | gradient, for example, Tor not only needs onion routing, it also | need to to present each user to the net alike, that is why they | configure their version of firefox in a specific way and even a | simple thing like changing the resolution of the window make you | less anonymous. Even in perfect conditions you still vulnerable | to correlation attacks and if you are the US, you can probably | just use network flow data to deanonymize an user, obviously to | do it the resources and implications would be enormous. | | In the end is just a gradient of being anonymous to who? The ad | conglomerate? A big state? | | It would be literally impossible with a standard iphone to be | anonymous to Apple, is just PR by Apple. | jjtheblunt wrote: | I wish i could filter {url} out of my HN rankings, for url in { | Gizmodo, ... }. | smoldesu wrote: | I agree, the Bloomberg article is much more thorough: | https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/apple-hit-with-clas... | therealmarv wrote: | Why the ... I need to buy a pixel and install a niche operating | system like GrapheneOS or CalyxOS to be at least a little safe | with my privacy :/ | | btw. GrapheneOS is great! | nayuki wrote: | [2022-11-15] Louis Rossman - "Apple SUED for privacy violations; | iOS collects invasive analytics even if you opt out." - | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=016QGxOsjQY [11 min] | kornhole wrote: | When people realize they have been lied to, they will break up | with a lover unless they are trapped in an abusive relationship. | system2 wrote: | There is no better alternative unfortunately. | lern_too_spel wrote: | Even on Google-flavored Android devices, you don't have to | use the Play Store if you don't want to. You don't have to | use Google Maps if you don't want to. You don't have to send | your location to Google if you don't want to. iOS is strictly | worse than all the other alternatives I know of. | fsflover wrote: | It depends on what is "better" for you. I'm happy with my | Pinephone and waiting for my preordered Librem 5. | reaperducer wrote: | Unless the only option when you break up with your high class | lover is to go back to the herpes-infected skag in the alley | behind CGBG's. | | I'll go rotary before I go Android. | mymacbook wrote: | Rotary? Otherwise loved this. | valleyer wrote: | Refers to this: | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_dial | mathstuf wrote: | That does exist: | https://skysedge.com/unsmartphones/RUSP/index.html | superkuh wrote: | It's entirely possible to use a computer for computing and a | phone for voice/text. There's no need for combining them into | one device with the worst aspects of them all. | falcolas wrote: | While technically correct, this point of view is about a | decade behind reality. Mobile devices are the de-facto | computation device for most people. Fewer and fewer people | have dedicated computation devices; there's no need for | them if you have a smartphone. | | It does mean being beholden to one of two smartphone OS | makers unless you're in the technically capable 5%. | postalrat wrote: | No mouse or keyboard? No thanks. | MichaelCollins wrote: | That's a choice they make, not some sort of immutable | "reality". | falcolas wrote: | To use a smartphone, arguably. It's now how it's shaping | out though. The power of chat apps (telegram, whatsapp, | etc) alone makes it hard to be part of a social circle | without one. | | Peer pressure's an incredibly strong force, as is the | stigma of being an outsider. | bellinom wrote: | CalyxOS and GrapheneOS are really great alternatives to | stock/OEM Android. A lot more apps than rotary too. | dang wrote: | Related: | | _Proposed class action alleges that Apple tracks users despite | privacy assurances_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33593455 - Nov 2022 (191 | comments) | | _App Store on iOS 14.6 sends every tap you make in the app to | Apple_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33520775 - Nov 2022 | (190 comments) | [deleted] | Mattish wrote: | I'm not one to jump infront of a bus for the big company, but the | "testing" being reported on here is so incredibly lacking. | | - Single proof via a single device on a single OS version from a | single API response. | | - Claim on the latest version it is doing the same, but can't | prove it. Just that requests are being sent when you interact | with the application(ok?) | | ...And that's it. | | I don't know the state of the jailbreaking scene, but a quick | search seems to indicate that throughout 14.X and 15.X could have | been checked, but they haven't. Would happily take this more | seriously when reporting of issues is more sufficent. (or others | proving more proof) | tsuujin wrote: | This is totally unrelated to the content of the article, but is | anyone else sick to death of mobile site design on these kind of | websites? | | Trying to read the article and as I scroll down, a full third of | my screen gets occupied by a video locked to the top of the | screen, and every other paragraph is an ad that takes up the rest | of the screen, plus any banners they choose to take up the bottom | sixth of the screen. | | It's so distracting that I can't focus on the actual article; | reader view becomes mandatory. This is the pattern on so many | sites now and it's infuriating. | [deleted] | pvg wrote: | _is anyone else sick to death_ | | Statistically everybody is which is why it's a topic boring | enough to be avoided - from | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html | | _Please don 't complain about tangential annoyances--e.g. | article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button | breakage. They're too common to be interesting._ ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-11-21 23:01 UTC)