[HN Gopher] Show HN: Explore Wikipedia edits made by institution...
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Explore Wikipedia edits made by institutions, companies
and governments
Hi HN! Wikiwho is a tool that scans Wikipedia edits and extracts
those coming from specific IP ranges associated to known
organizations. I've made this as a for-fun side project two years
ago. If you want to read more on how it works I've written a short
blog article about it here:
https://ailef.tech/2020/04/18/discovering-wikipedia-edits-ma... I
had already posted it here at the time (previous discussion:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22907200) but I've now decided
to release the code openly, hence the repost. If you're
insterested, you can check the repo here:
https://github.com/aileftech/wikiwho (disclaimer: the code is a bit
clumsy). Cheers!
Author : ailef
Score : 244 points
Date : 2022-12-03 10:32 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (wikiwho.ailef.tech)
(TXT) w3m dump (wikiwho.ailef.tech)
| thedudeabides5 wrote:
| Org/Page Search not working here fwi.
|
| Great transparency, now where are the foreign service firm and
| their proxies.
|
| You are telling me the FSB and the United Front aren't editing
| Wiki?
|
| I've had them edit my stuff, so know it's happening. Just not
| sure the scale.
| elashri wrote:
| You said their proxies, which is not providing an easy to
| identify method. No one is going to do this in russia on a
| kermlin computer. They will let their boys do that.
| ailef wrote:
| > Org/Page Search not working here fwi.
|
| I think it was because the server was overloaded due to it
| being on the front page. It seems to be working for me now (you
| need to enter at least two characters for suggestions to
| appear).
|
| As for the rest, I just collected some IP ranges on the
| internet. The might include foreign service firms or not, it
| wasn't feasible to check them manually. If you know about any
| IP range though I'll be glad to merge it into the repo.
| karaterobot wrote:
| This tool is interesting and useful, but it's important to
| remember that it is constrained by the lists of mapped IP
| addresses. It will only show edits made by these specific
| sources, and no others:
|
| https://github.com/ruebot/gccaedits-ip-address-ranges/blob/m...
|
| https://gist.github.com/artfulhacker/a6eb800e58f2eb6f9231
|
| It would be a very basic mistake conclude that these are the only
| groups editing Wikipedia articles to control the narrative, just
| because they're the only ones being sampled.
| ailef wrote:
| One amusing edit:
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diff/7d674d710c8d1328f0f74f6b351ff...
|
| IPs from the European Parliament editing out connections to
| Cambridge Analytica from Alex Phillips' (member of the European
| Parliament) page:
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diff/584f4588ec12334300a448f39ae4c...
| erie wrote:
| Virgil Griffith had earlier done a similar tool and paid dearly
| for it after exposing CIA and FBI edits" 16 Aug 2007 -- CIA and
| FBI computers used for Wikipedia edits ... The program,
| WikiScanner, was developed by Virgil Griffith of the Santa Fe
| Institute https://www.reuters.com/article/oukin-uk-security-
| wikipedia-...
| loxias wrote:
| Came here to mention Virgil, glad someone beat me to it. =)
|
| It's truly amazing how much can be gleaned from a perusal of
| the edit history for a page from the beginning. I assume much
| goes undetected.
| ailef wrote:
| Yes, I've mentioned it also in my original blog post. What do
| you mean though by "paid dearly for it"? I was not aware of
| anything particular happening.
| whythre wrote:
| Maybe pertaining to persecution like this:
| https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2020/12/11/virgil-
| griffith-s...
| ailef wrote:
| It's possible, but as much as I dislike what's happened
| to him I think it seems a bit far-fetched to see it as
| retribution for creating WikiScanner.
| nonameiguess wrote:
| My wife's best friend used to work for Wikipedia and said they
| had to block any edits made from the IP range belonging to the
| US capitol building. Maybe they need to just do this for all
| legislative offices of all countries.
|
| Not that it stops the same people from just making these edits
| from home or learning to use a VPN.
| layer8 wrote:
| It seems that such blocks would mostly just reduce
| transparency.
| jl6 wrote:
| Good to see that the latter was reverted within 5 minutes, and
| the removed content remains there to this day.
| SmileyJames wrote:
| Hugged to death?
| ailef wrote:
| Yes, indeed. It should be working fine now, though.
| aussieguy1234 wrote:
| You might want to consider using a CDN like CloudFlare. The
| information on your site looks very cacheable.
|
| That would reduce load because requests for the same content
| would get served by them rather than hitting your server
| directly.
| ailef wrote:
| It seems my poor VM was hugged to death! I just resized it to
| hopefully sustain the load.
| sushiburps wrote:
| This is an amazing tool, but I'd caution it's using IP lists for
| groups of specific organizations. One of the 2 IP lists provided
| by the author is just the US military:
| https://gist.github.com/artfulhacker/a6eb800e58f2eb6f9231
|
| The section "MOST ACTIVE ORGANIZATIONS" shouldn't be taken as a
| list of the most active organizations in the world editing
| Wikipedia, just the most active organizations that made an IP
| list the tool is using.
|
| Anyone using the very large number of static IP addresses on
| these lists will be pooled as an edit by the organization that
| maintains that IP range. This means a seaman in the Navy editing
| a TV show article on their free time may be pooled into the "Navy
| Network Information Center (NNIC)". It doesn't necessary mean the
| NNIC has a special interest in editing 'Breaking Bad' episode
| synopses.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| LastPass are very good at deleting their security incidents
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15756044
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| Apologies - the references are now outdated and I'm too lazy to
| find them again
| ibejoeb wrote:
| This is a great idea. Thanks for making and sharing.
| grensley wrote:
| I think I'm most puzzled why the Navy is making so many edits on
| Boys II Men founding member Marc Nelson. The read I'm getting is
| they are by Marc Nelson himself since a lot of them seem to
| reflect his personal regrets about leaving right before they blew
| up.
|
| Incredibly odd.
| mlindner wrote:
| I'm not sure why people are so downhearted by this kind of thing.
| It's well known that anything controversial on Wikipedia is going
| to have a lot of edit warring and people trying to control a
| narrative. What Wikipedia is best at is non-controversial topics.
| And that has always been the case. Even for controversial topics
| it's honestly surprising how more or less correct the articles
| tend to be.
|
| Wikipedia is not where you read up on the war crimes that may
| have or may not have been committed by some country or the views
| of a politician on immigration. Wikipedia is where you read up on
| Mars's atmosphere or how solar wind works.
| totalZero wrote:
| When it comes to current events, I think the advantage that
| Wikipedia has over traditional encyclopedias is not
| authoritative but rather referential. With most articles (such
| as historical events or scientific breakthroughs), Wikipedia
| converges to a pretty authoritative treatment of the subject
| and can be more accurate than a singe-source encyclopedia. With
| current events articles, Wikipedia provides a starting point
| for further reading (including via the citation pointers)
| whereas a single-source encyclopedia may be out of date and
| completely devoid of content on the subject.
| slackfan wrote:
| Remember when Wikipedia was never to be used as an authoritative
| source on any subject? Pepperidge Farms remembers.
|
| Interesting how that suddenly changes around the time that smith-
| mundt was repealed.
|
| But don't listen to me, I suffer from realistic dreams and an
| imperfect memory, that never happened, we have always been at war
| with eastasia.
| anyfactor wrote:
| This is really a hobby of mine. I will sometimes go through
| articles and see if I can find suspicious edits. It grew out from
| this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30840671
|
| But now, I realized I can 10x this stupid hobby with ipinfo.io
|
| You can get company name and VPN detection from IP address. I
| work for IPinfo, so not plugging the API service. Use the search
| box on the homepage to check individual IPs for free.
| anyfactor wrote:
| Posted this on our Slack. If OP needs a company database or
| something, I can ask my team. I heard that we collaborated with
| Wikipedia on a project like this before.
| arminiusreturns wrote:
| In the conspiracy community, wikipedia articles relevant to
| conspiracy theories often have extremely revealing edits and have
| been known as a source of checking for coverup for a while. The
| truth, I've found, is often so shocking that many if not most
| people, would rather reject it (attack the messenger, bury head
| in sand, etc) than admit their worldview has been so wrong for so
| long.
|
| I've even seen sections in the edits go poof for very big stuff.
| throwaway290 wrote:
| What do you mean by 'revealing edit'? Is that an edit that goes
| against a conspiracy theory? Do you have grounds for suspecting
| those edits originate on behalf of affiliated persons instead
| of someone trying to present a balanced viewpoint but whom you
| happen to disagree with?
|
| I used to look only occasionally at edit sections for sensitive
| articles involving crimes by powerful players but stopped
| because I never spotted any suspicious changes.
|
| (Also, if removing edits from page history on Wikipedia was
| actually common I don't believe no one in the editor community
| blew the whistle yet. Of course some people would claim such
| whistleblowers are tracked and eliminated by omnipresent evil
| illuminati before they go public... and at that point I can't
| take this line of argument seriously)
| iso1631 wrote:
| How is "institutiion" or "company" defined? I couldn't find any
| international news providers for example, Newscorp, BBC, Daily
| Mail
|
| Probably not a major issue though. As companies move more to
| remote and/or cloud based access from service providers - zscaler
| etc - that IP data is lost (or rather hidden by the provider), it
| certainly becomes easier to be anonymous to sites like wikipedia.
| Sujeto wrote:
| Right now the site is not loading.
| culi wrote:
| One of the Navy Network Information Center (NNIC)'s top edits is
| the Subic rape case.[0] Predictably and, unfortunately, it's
| essentially all edits trying to play down the case or cast doubt
|
| I've been a Wikipedia editor for a few years now (mostly botany-
| related pages) and I've been quite the pessimist about the
| platform for almost as long. But browsing this website has gotten
| me really demoralized to be honest. Many of these edits seem like
| individual contributors, but some of these look downright
| coordinated
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subic_rape_case
| elgar1212 wrote:
| > One of the Navy Network Information Center (NNIC)'s top edits
| is the Subic rape case.
|
| What's the tl;dr of what happened here? It looks to me like
| someone in the US military raped a Filipino girl, and then
| either blackmailed her family or did something shady in order
| to get her to recant. Meanwhile there were edits on the page to
| disregard her initial allegations[0]
|
| [0]
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diffs/c5885fe11dbfd31923f7554cf41c...
| pastacacioepepe wrote:
| I completely lost trust in Wikipedia once I realized recent
| history is literally being rewritten by biased editors.
|
| For one, check the edit history of anything Russia/Ukraine war
| related, it's a complete shitshow.
| spookthesunset wrote:
| Of course it is gonna be a shitshow. It's still happening!
| Everybody has a vested interest in making those pages reflect
| their version of reality. And the non-cynic part of me says
| that is fine and to be expected. In the fog of war there is
| no true, objective reality yet. It takes a good long while
| for humanity to settle down and cooler heads can then piece
| together an accurate view of events.
|
| There is plenty of good content on Wikipedia... you just
| won't find it for highly potent current events unfolding
| right this instant.
| krisoft wrote:
| > For one, check the edit history of anything Russia/Ukraine
| war related, it's a complete shitshow.
|
| I went and checked randomly a few edits. I'm not seeing
| anything I would describe as a "complete shitshow". Can you
| please provide examples and tell us what you find
| objectionable?
| prox wrote:
| History was always written by the victors, we only see it
| happen in real time now.
| pessimizer wrote:
| A simpler way to describe history that is happening in real
| time is _things that are happening now_. This is not a case
| of "history being written by the victors," this is an
| example of populations being propagandized by their
| governments and oligarchs about the things those
| governments and oligarchs are currently doing.
|
| The sense of alienation is overwhelming here. We're not
| reading stories about something that once happened to
| someone, we're being sold stories about what is happening
| to us, and what we are doing, right now.
|
| -----
|
| edit: Walter Lippmann did this stuff for a living, and
| wrote a lot about it and the political implications of
| imbalances of information. I don't think it's such a huge
| difference that people 100 years ago only got two
| newspapers a day worth of information (early and late
| editions), and we now get our information rations in
| smaller portions.
| prox wrote:
| What's a pivotal work of Walter Lippmann one could read?
| trasz2 wrote:
| And with revision log.
| 411111111111111 wrote:
| ...and to a much greater degree then people realize,
| really. As a simple example, WW2. There where several polls
| over the decades in Germany which country contributed the
| most to the fall of Nazi Germany.
|
| In the beginning, it was mostly attributed to Russia
| (something like 80%) with the USA mostly protecting Europe
| from getting integrated into Russia after the fall. But
| over time this opinion has been overturned to being mostly
| the USA with Russia playing a minor role... And the fact
| that Russia could've likely just taken over Europe
| completely has been forgotten entirely.
| sheepz wrote:
| s/Russia/Soviet Union/g.
|
| The huge role of Soviet Union was pushed by the Soviet
| Union as part of its Great Patriotic War narrative is
| continued to this day by Russia's propaganda. Without the
| US Lend-Lease, the situation could have turned out much
| differently for the soviets (as even Stalin himself
| admitted).
| hardlianotion wrote:
| And the Royal Merchant Marine making huge efforts at
| resupply, and the UK's own material response.
| 411111111111111 wrote:
| I wasn't trying to claim that the USSR was the sole
| contributor to the defeat of the fascists, sorry if it
| sounded like that.
|
| I just wanted to make a pretty strong example of the
| winners rewriting history and how this propaganda becomes
| fact for the society.
|
| I'm sure everyone here agrees that it's good that the
| fascists lost the war and that the USA enabled Europe to
| stay democratic. It was a very brutal period of time in
| which human life was sadly undervalued.
| sheepz wrote:
| Ironically a better example of this would your own claim
| that focuses solely on the crimes of Nazism without any
| mention of Communist crimes. Since USSR was on the Allied
| side, Communism never quite turned into the embodiment of
| evil that Nazism has become. Due to this, today many
| academics are proud to call themselves Communists,
| whereas you would be hard-pressed to find any self-
| proclaimed nazis, at least in the mainstream of academia.
| All because history is written by the victors.
| prox wrote:
| I like to add a bit of historical context and that is
| that communism as an ideology,field of study and it's
| ideas were quite spread out over Europe and beyond (Way
| before the Russian revolution and after)
|
| Karl Marx ideas were very revolutionary for its time (a
| good primer can be found in the book The Value of
| Everything) and set a lot of ideas in motion. And there
| was also debate in that regard on how to institute
| communism. So communism could never reach the "evil"
| moniker like Nazism, even though it was apparent the
| Soviet Union was quite a brute. So the ideology was kind
| of separated cognitively from its implementation by the
| Soviet Union.
|
| In the Cold War period, the SU was definitely seen as
| something that had to be defeated. There was a lot of
| fear of nuclear escalation between the superpowers. The
| Soviet Union was seen as different at best, and something
| to be defeated in all cases. And yes, also evil. Just
| watch some action movies from that time to get a general
| idea.
| phkahler wrote:
| >> And the fact that Russia could've likely just taken
| over Europe completely has been forgotten entirely.
|
| Well, seeing how Russia can't even take over Russia
| _today_ , people have doubts! That's a joke, don't get
| all serious ;-)
| elgar1212 wrote:
| > History was always written by the victors, we only see it
| happen in real time now.
|
| A modern spin on this: history is no longer written by the
| victors, but by people with literally no life outside of
| writing crap on the internet
| totalZero wrote:
| Not sure how that links to the article considering that
| these IP ranges are linked to professional institutions.
| californiadreem wrote:
| This was true of medieval clerics and Enlightenment
| historians as well. It's almost always the idle writing
| history because everyone else is too busy working or
| living their own lives. The exception to this rule is
| patronage history (e.g. paying others to write flattering
| histories) but that's exactly what this kind of
| astroturfing on Wikipedia is.
| newsclues wrote:
| I am convinced the military has teams dedicated to maintaining
| their wikipedia information.
|
| And that isn't including a high ranking commander having their
| subordinates do something for them unofficially.
| kube-system wrote:
| I am surprised how many people goof off at work writing wikipedia
| pages about their favorite TV shows.
|
| Especially you, Canadians... lol:
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/organization/46a20a0820d609f90314e...
| jraph wrote:
| Someone is a fan of Madonna in there.
| logicalmonster wrote:
| It might be the case that government employees are mostly just
| goofing off at work on Wikipedia. That's a perfectly normal,
| likely, and very plausible explanation of reality.
|
| Another potential explanation is a practice of obfuscation.
| There might be one critical edit of some government corruption
| or something else buried in a list that looks like 99% tv
| shows. Those TV shows might have been edited solely to bury the
| 1 critical edit they needed to make that will be ignored
| because it's surrounded by hundreds of other benign looking
| edits. Without examining each and every edit, it's hard to
| completely dismiss this kind of explanation.
| spookthesunset wrote:
| It's a good thing to remember... just because it comes from a
| corporate IP doesn't mean much. It is highly likely most of
| these edits were done by employees goofing around on Wikipedia
| while on their employer's network.
|
| If you broke down comments on HN by IP, I bet the distribution
| would be highly concentrated to tech companies IP ranges.
| Assuming that every comment was posted for nefarious reason
| would be flawed. The truth is much less exciting. It's just
| dudes goofing around at work...
| elgar1212 wrote:
| Some interesting ones:
|
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diffs/c5885fe11dbfd31923f7554cf41c...
|
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diffs/c5885fe11dbfd31923f7554cf41c...
|
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diffs/ca44a9a42489ede43a5f58ccbd0d...
| Helmut10001 wrote:
| Crazy (your last link):
|
| > The reality is that waterboarding is not a form of torture
| and is in fact used in the training of US forces. Much of the
| debate surrounding the use of torture stems from politically
| motivated individuals who do not understand the techniques
| themselves or the complex nature of military operations.
| hardlianotion wrote:
| You have to check out the malcontents who made edits to the USAF
| base at Alconbury:
|
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diffs/0db36f4f426c89e6fb7d41e00747...
| bad416f1f5a2 wrote:
| The US Army has made six hundred contributions to a list of
| ethnic slurs:
|
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/page/11014515
|
| They appear as "PEO STAMIS" here, which appears to be an IT
| group?
| [deleted]
| the-printer wrote:
| When I think about it, a lot of ethnic slurs that were
| introduced to me were in a context that was militarily
| adjacent.
| gibspaulding wrote:
| I suppose that makes sense considering most conflicts involve
| groups who (accurately or not) wouldn't consider their
| enemies members of their own race.
| akolbe wrote:
| Of course, this only catches the relative "amateurs". Proper
| professionals change IP address before making their edits, or
| they register a "volunteer" account (this also prevents routine
| disclosure of the IP address, but still makes the IP address
| potentially discoverable by higher-ranking Wikipedia
| functionaries).
| ailef wrote:
| Yes, this is unfortunately a very big issue and one of the
| reasons I didn't develop it further.
| layer8 wrote:
| Why are you posting it again then?
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| In case you don't realize, I want to let you know that your
| post comes off as entitled and hostile.
|
| It might not be a perfect tool, but it is interesting and
| freely given. Tools need not be perfect to be shared freely
| skilled wrote:
| I have to say, this is depressing to see just how corrupt brands
| and institutions are to protect their own bullshit.
|
| Nevertheless, great work and a very useful project.
| SapporoChris wrote:
| A more charitable conclusion would be that brands and
| institutions want to ensure that accurate information is
| available. If a company is 5th largest yet they're shown as 6th
| then of course they want to correct the entry. However, I agree
| it's probably abused to remove any unflattering information.
|
| Wikipedia does have a number of editing guidelines, dispute
| resolutions, etc. It appears they have tried to combat abuse,
| but I'm sure HN readers can find many failures :)
| passwordoops wrote:
| You really want to feel depressed? Look up Unusual Whales [1],
| a day trading app focusing on investment flows in the markets
| who does an annual report on insider trading by US officials,
| including Congress and SCOTUS. Even went so far as to create a
| congressional ETF. The focus is US pols, but no reason to
| suspect other jurisdictions are any better.
|
| There's a reason both parties put a HUUGE emphasis on culture
| war - it distracts us from their true crimes that just happen
| to transcend party lines.
|
| [1] https://unusualwhales.com/politics
| hardlianotion wrote:
| Their collection of ETFs has a standout in their anti Jim
| Cramer ETF
|
| https://unusualwhales.com/etfs
| hackernewds wrote:
| What is one to infer from these? That congresspeople, like
| others that are afforded the right, also execute trades?
| reallydontask wrote:
| The inference is that they use insider information
| passwordoops wrote:
| That congresspeople use insider information gained from
| sitting on various committees to execute suspiciously-timed
| trades [1], such as:
|
| -heavy buying of semiconductors in the lead up to passage
| of the CHIPS act
|
| -mass sell-off by members and their families within the day
| of the first briefing on the coming COVID policy mandates
|
| -purchase of defense stocks by members who were briefed on
| the Russian invasion of Ukraine. One member was
| particularly brazen, purchasing Lockheed Martin a day
| before the invasion, then tweeting "War can be profitable"
| in an attempted swipe at media [2]
|
| -regular returns exceeding 100% on companies that directly
| stand to benefit from policy decisions made by Congress
| people, on purchases usually executed shortly before public
| policy votes are held
|
| This is not normal
|
| [1] https://unusualwhales.com/politics/article/conflicts
|
| [2] https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-bought-
| defen...
| uejfiweun wrote:
| Is this data immediately accessible? What's to stop me
| from just following this data and copying their trades
| 1:1?
| passwordoops wrote:
| Public officials in the US need to file their financial
| activities within a certain time limit, and and this is
| accessible to anyone with a Bloomberg Terminal.
|
| Usually by the time this info is made public the best
| profits would already have been made. There are also
| plenty of examples of members not filing at all. Of
| course nothing happens to them...
|
| This was a bit of a scandal when Pelosi's activities
| became a bit too obvious (e.g [1] - and I'm not saying
| this is just a Democrat issue, they all do it), but the
| furor very quickly died down after democracy came under
| threat during the midterms because the other party are
| neo-fascists or communists, depending on which
| billionaire-owned news source you follow.
|
| [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/09/congress-moves-
| towards-banni...
| mhitza wrote:
| Pretty cool, please make it run under HTTPS
| 11235813213455 wrote:
| You could link to the wikipedia article in each page
| Sujeto wrote:
| Why did Pfizer do all these edits on a musical?
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diffs/c1b9f1c2d5cc1361ccf28b0108bd...
| cortesoft wrote:
| Because people do non-work things on their work computers.
|
| This is one of the reasons I think the statement "edits made by
| companies" is a bit too strong... these are edits made from
| company owned IPs, but we have no idea if these were made based
| on direction from the company leadership or just by employees
| doing non-work related things from work computers.
| TobTobXX wrote:
| It probably was an employee working for Pfizer.
| Sophira wrote:
| This is amazing. Thank you for making this!
|
| I want to highlight one part from the About page[0], as it's
| important enough to bear repeating:
|
| > Any information that you find with this tool must be
| independently verified. The mapping between IP ranges and
| organizations has been compiled from multiple sources and has not
| been manually verified so it is certain that it contains
| inaccuracies.
|
| I do have a question about this tool. Is there a page that lists
| all the organizations in the dataset?
|
| [0] http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/about.html
|
| [edited to ask a question]
| ailef wrote:
| Thanks, I'm glad you liked this!
|
| It's not exactly a page but there's this JSON file in the repo
| https://github.com/aileftech/wikiwho/blob/master/resources/r...
| rainbowdash wrote:
| There was fun time when Ed Summers made a tool to monitor
| Wikipedia edits from some IPs pool realtime, and it turned into
| worldwide effort with Twitter bots monitoring many governments
| and big corporations, highlighting a lot of cringe edits and poor
| attempts to remove some info from Wikipedia. Many bots are still
| active, you can find source code and list of bots here
| https://github.com/edsu/anon
|
| Also there is analysis of old edits (2002-2014) using IP ranges
| collected for bots https://jarib.github.io/anon-history/, source
| code: https://github.com/jarib/anon-history
| v0idptrptr wrote:
| My favourite would have to be Eli Lilly bullying some random
| American school.
| http://wikiwho.ailef.tech/diff/6209781691e7fdc225681c7848504...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-03 23:02 UTC)