
Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics  - cloudant
http://blog.cloudant.com/monsanto-chooses-cloudant/
======
oldstrangers
Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant.

"We’ve been working with them for a few weeks now and we couldn’t be more
thrilled with the partnership."

Thrilled? I guess money is thrilling.

"The data & reporting interfaces will be used across Monsanto and should be
instrumental in the making of key business decisions."

Key business decisions like which small farmer to sue into oblivion? Or what
third world nation's crops to take financially hostage? Thrilling work guys.
Really.

~~~
pg
It's an unfortunate sign for HN when the top comment on a thread is such a
content-free rant.

If the rule is, if x sells something to Monsanto, fuck x, then what you're
saying is fuck the entire corporate world, because I'm sure Monsanto buys
Apple computers and Chevrolets and Clorox too. It's sort of ridiculous to hold
Cloudant to a standard that essentially zero other companies meet.

There are frequently inane comments of this type at the bottom of HN threads.
What's alarming is to see them at the top.

~~~
nirvana
I'm not alarmed because there seems to be two very distinct crowds of people
who hang out on hacker news. "Startup people", like yourself, who are across
the political spectrum, with probably a disproportionate number of
libertarians (as compared to the broader population) and the /r/politics crowd
which are very anti-capitalist, anti-innovation, pro-taxes, etc.

Some threads attract one crowd and the comments go one way, other threads
attract the other crowd and the comments go the other way.

I really wish Hacker News was about startups, and if there was any debate, we
were all capitalists debating it. I'm tired of the seemingly endless stream of
leftist propaganda that gets promoted to the front page (e.g.: anything by
Krugman, for example.) I'd hate this just as much if it were all rightest
propaganda. IF it was balanced, I wouldn't like it, but it wouldn't be
irritating.

When almost all the discussions are of one mindset, and posting something
outside that mindset gets you down voted to oblivion, I feel like intellectual
discussion is much more difficult. This isn't always the case here, obviously,
but sometimes it is.

I don't really care for Amazon, but at least when Amazon is on the front page
its because they did something relevant to the site. I can just ignore those
threads. Amazon' announcing that they've got a new finger service in AWS
doesn't add anything for me, but it doesn't detract like the political topics
do.

Cloudant, a company that takes CouchDB and turns it into a dynamo style ring,
has produced something significant in their platform. We should be talking
about this.

Cloudant provides a very useful tool that should be very highly relevant to
people who are doing startups.

The thing is, I suspect a major population of HN commenters aren't really
doing startups or planning to.

~~~
pg
I don't think there are two separate crowds. I think HN's initial population
of smart, mostly apolitical nerds has been diluted by the arrival of a lot of
new users who are not as smart, and are thus more excited by shallow
controversies.

Politics happens to be a big source of shallow controversies. But I don't
think most people who upvote comments saying "Fuck Monsanto" do it because
they have a deep interest in politics, any more than most people who rail
against "Obamacare" do it because they have a deep interest in politics. They
do it because they're dumb. It's the shape of this sort of idea that excites
them, not its content.

~~~
run4yourlives
> I think HN's initial population of smart, mostly apolitical nerds has been
> diluted by the arrival of a lot of new users who are not as smart, and are
> thus more excited by shallow controversies.

Or: I disagree with you, therefore you are dumb.

Outstanding.

I up-voted the parent comment. I have been here for years. I consider myself
to be a free market supporting, fiscally conservative and independent thinker.

I have major issues with the methods Monsanto uses to conduct itself in the
marketplace. In everything from the products they produce, their influence of
the legal and regulatory systems, their seeming inability to factor in a basic
responsibility to those that consume their products and even the way they
distribute the surpluses in their pension funds (i.e. they steal them, when
allowed).

I believe they act this way mainly due to a void of ethical behaviour at their
highest levels, and because of this, I will look at them, and individuals that
_fail to recognize these actions as being a problem_ with a certain level of
suspicion.

If you think I am _not as smart_ as you because of this so be it.

~~~
csallen
You're arguing against a strawman. Nobody said that taking a particular side
of a debate makes you dumb. This isn't about what side you take, it's about
_how you choose to debate_.

HN used to be a place that cared deeply about conversing in a civil,
responsible, and educational manner. Whether or not you agree with the
sentiments expressed in the parent comment, the fact is that it doesn't meet
those standards. Even if the logic wasn't childish ("fuck X by association",
really?), the comment does little to substantiate its opinions, or to educate
those who aren't aware of the issue. In other words, it's a populist comment
expressly made to pander to those who are already in agreement.

Upvoting said comment means either (a) you haven't even considered the
importance of having a quality discussion, (b) you've considered it but in
this case you don't care, or (c) you actually think it's a high quality
comment. The fact that the comment is sitting pretty at the top of the page
means that people have, en masse, fallen into one of these categories. Like it
or not, A and C are simply dumber than the HN of old, and B is more
confrontational.

~~~
abbasmehdi
"Even if the logic wasn't childish ("fuck X by association", really?)" <\-- I
am failing to grasp how this logic is childish? Have thousands of corporations
not apologized and often paid money for partnering with organizations with
dubious pasts? An extreme case example to highlight my point: do you think
Hugo Boss apologizing for being a partner of the Nazi party in WW2 Germany was
just a PR move?

My point is, aiding x in its mission makes you an accomplice. You can argue
that x is not bad or as bad is it is being made out to be, but being a partner
makes you exactly that, a partner.

~~~
csallen
_> My point is, aiding x in its mission makes you an accomplice. You can argue
that x is not bad or as bad is it is being made out to be, but being a partner
makes you exactly that, a partner._

This is an overly-idealistic way to look at a complex world, and taking such a
stance would surely make you a hypocrite. As I asked another commenter: Do you
not use a bank? Pay taxes to a government? Buy food, shelter, and other
products? Well then, you've undoubtedly patronized at least a few entities who
have committed horrible atrocities. So, by your own logic, fuck you.

~~~
abbasmehdi
First off, I never swore, I was referring to the logic part, so please don't
swear at me (not cool).

Secondly, you're calling me overly idealistic and simple minded, the world a
complex place, yet make your case by comparing an individual citizen bound by
legal obligations they can't escape without jail time or leaving the country
to a corporate partnership made out of free will? Think of comparing the two
then think about the names you called me. I'll let you be the judge.

~~~
csallen
_> First off, I never swore, I was referring to the logic part, so please
don't swear at me (not cool)._

Whether you swore or not, you're defending the comment "fuck Cloudant by
association". Don't you think it's hypocritical to back up that type of
language when it's directed at others, but criticize it when it's directed at
you? You can't have it both ways. Either it's an immature way to conduct a
discussion or it's not.

 _> yet make your case by comparing an individual citizen bound by legal
obligations they can't escape without jail time or leaving the country to a
corporate partnership made out of free will? Think of comparing the two then
think about the names you called me. I'll let you be the judge._

I gave you a short list of offenses you've committed, and you've only
attempted to defend yourself against one of them (paying income taxes).
Furthermore, your defense is pretty poor: "leaving the country" would be
inconvenient. And you don't think it would be inconvenient for companies to
refuse to do business with others who have at some point committed an ethics
violation?

I'm sorry but your entire position is full of double standards that you can't
justify. When you bend over backwards and make the countless sacrifices
necessary to live your life without supporting questionable organizations,
then you can come back and criticize others for not doing the same.

------
georgemcbay
As much as I'm hesistant to pile on to the general theme of any thread, this
announcement colors my impression of Cloudant very negatively.

There are about a dozen companies that I find so vile that anyone doing active
business with them is marred by association, Monsanto is one of them.

------
inmygarage
For those looking for some background on Monsanto, take the time to read
through this Vanity Fair article from 2008:
[http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto...](http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805).

~~~
dionidium
I don't think this article is as damning as many of the commenters seem to
think.

\- The section addressing the lawsuits includes a lot of "farmers say this"
type statements. It's not very long on facts. It even admits that some farmers
simply aren't aware of their obligations in many cases. The only case that was
actually litigated that I'm aware of is Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser -- a
case in which the farmer almost certainly _was saving seeds_ in violation of
his contract with Monsanto.

\- The section on past environmental violations can be mostly ignored in the
context of this deal. It might be an interesting historical conversation, but
Monsanto is _no longer a chemical company_. Cloudant has not struck a deal
with the company described in that section.

\- I'm sympathetic to the opposition on the labeling debate, but it's a
labeling debate! It should take more than a labeling debate to generate
comparisons to Nazi Germany (as more than one commenter has done below).

~~~
tptacek
Feel free to correct me on this, as I'm likely to be wrong.

Loosely, the way Monsanto's GMO crop system works is, their crops are designed
to resist a specific herbicide, which Monsanto also sells. Farmers pay a per-
acre licensing fee to use the system, meaning they plant the GMO crops and
then bomb their fields with the herbicide to kill everything but the crop,
which improves yield.

The fact pattern in these Monsanto lawsuits seems to be that farmers are doing
_three_ things: (1) planting Monsanto's GMO crops (intentionally or not), (2)
_using Monsanto's herbicide_ to take advantage of the improved yield made
possible with the crop, and (3) not paying Monsanto.

It is obviously possible for Monsanto GMO crops to end up in an unsuspecting
farmer's field. But it's not possible for a farmer to accidentally use Roundup
as an herbicide in that field. If they do that without paying Monsanto, they
are trying to get something for nothing. That, to my understanding, is what's
motivating the lawsuits.

Where am I wrong on this?

~~~
sitkack
You can buy and use Roundup w/o using their GMO seeds. Using Roundup isn't a
sign of malfeasance. I can go by Roundup at Walmart,
[http://www.walmart.com/ip/Roundup-Weed-Grass-Killer-
Concentr...](http://www.walmart.com/ip/Roundup-Weed-Grass-Killer-Concentrate-
Plus-1qt/16911854) doesn't mean I committed contract fraud with Monsanto.

1) Their seeds spread contaminating other farmer's fields. Once GMO is out in
the wild, nothing can be pristine anymore. I wouldn't be surprised to find
Monsanto genetics having made its way into humans in 20 years.

2) By "bombing their fields" with herbicide (biocide, you can't make something
that only poisons one class of organism like this) AND genetically modifying
the crops to be resistent to the biocide you are creating a perfect storm to
quickly develop resistent parasites. __Now everyone has to use your system __,
because there is no other way to have a crop survive due to super-bugs.

This is a direct parallel of the SUV insanity. Vast numbers of people drive
SUVs because they don't want to be in a car _hit_ by an SUV.

~~~
inconditus
> I wouldn't be surprised to find Monsanto genetics having made its way into
> humans in 20 years.

I don't know if you were joking, but I couldn't take you seriously after that.

~~~
sitkack
> wouldn't be surprised.

There is much we don't know. There are _many_ processes of ongoing genetic
transfer.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer>

Next time ask for clarification.

~~~
inconditus
I'm well aware of horizontal gene transfer, but thanks for linking it anyways
for the people who don't know.

Edit: My response was lacking, apologies. AFAIK, there's never been a
horizontal gene transfer from a prokaryote/eukaryote/any other kingdom to a
mammal or animal. The last time may be when we got mitocondria.

~~~
0x12
> AFAIK, there's never been a horizontal gene transfer from a
> prokaryote/eukaryote/any other kingdom to a mammal or animal.

contradicts

> The last time may be when we got mitocondria.

Also, we seem to have quite a bit of bacterial and virus DNA that somehow got
incorporated.

Oh, and it's mitoc _h_ ondria.

~~~
inconditus
When we got mitochondria, we weren't mammals yet. ;) Apologies for spelling.

------
achompas
Congratulations to Cloudant for signing a big deal. Why work with a company
as...ethically ambiguous as Monsanto? I would love to hear how your team
decided to accept this deal, and I hope more than dollar signs crossed your
minds.

Personally, I would start a startup (if I ever have the guts) for freedom. How
could dealing with Monsanto differ from wearing golden handcuffs?

~~~
SODaniel
Calling Monsanto 'ethically ambiguous' is akin to describing Hitler as a
'colorful leader with sporadic public relations issues'.

~~~
itaborai83
Godwin's law - As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a
comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.

------
ebaysucks
Monsanto is one of those rare companies that is so fucked up that it is hated
by both socialists and libertarians.

~~~
nirvana
I know socialists hate it, because they hate capitalism. I don't think
libertarians hate it, because they don't hate capitalism.

However, as libertarianism has become popular, more and more there are
socialists (leftists, "democrats" and "liberals") who are deciding they are
"libertarians" without understanding what libertarianism is.

Libertairans -- and this is what defines the movement-- are people who agree
with the Non Aggression Principle. (aka NAP) In fact, to be a Libertarian
Party Member, and get your card, you had to sign a pledge that you subscribed
to the NAP.

Show us how Monsanto is violating the NAP, and a libertarian will agree that
Monsanto should be held accountable for the crime.

Libertarianism isn't really so much about hating, or loving various companies.
It is really about enforcing the NAP against anyone who would violate
another's rights using violence.

Sometimes this includes companies as well, but we're pretty resistant to the
piling on that a lot of people do. (e.g.: "I hate monsanto, therefore cloudand
is evil").

~~~
william42
Monsanto is one of the biggest pushers for and beneficiaries of corn
subsidies, and corn subsidies are one of the biggest examples of corporate
welfare in existence.

------
InclinedPlane
Personally, I am very anti-Monsanto.

However, I'm a bit surprised at the sentiment expressed here. Monsanto may be
a pretty shitty company, but they are not satan. More so, I'm not convinced
that Monsanto's actions are so exceptionally egregious compared to so many
others.

What about Cisco getting into bed with China and other oppressive regimes in
helping to track down dissidents? What about companies filtering and censoring
content (twitter's hash-tag policing, for example)? Or ISPs and hosting
companies rolling over with zero effort when presented with take-down notices
or requests for customer information (even without a subpoena)?

~~~
sitkack
I am going to sound callous here, the human race can make more people. The
level of shit-getting-fucked up by Monsanto could make it really hard to make
new people.

In long term shittery, Monsanto beats Cisco.

------
headsclouds
It's a weird feeling when a company that's coming from an environment you
admire (YC) makes a move like this. Makes you wonder would you do the same,
and where would your priorities lie.

That's why you need a cofounder; when you start wondering about things like
this, you need someone to slap some sense back into you.

------
shiven
_Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant._

Couldn't have said it better myself. What happened to the "no assholes"
policy? Guess it does not matter when dollar signs start floating in the air.

------
mark_l_watson
I really like BigCouch - a great open source project. Awesome, really.

That said, I think that Cloudant should have kept a low profile as far as
bragging about a big deal with Monsanto, a company that I personally dislike
more than any other corporation on this planet. Awful company!!

That said, I don't blame Cloudant for accepting the business, but they should
have just put it in their Edgar SEC filings, and not done any press releases.
I hope that they did not actively market Monsanto, and that Monsanto liked
BigCouch and approached them. That would make it more palatable for me.

------
SODaniel
Hey Cloudant! Remember that time you first read about IBM supplying the
database system that the Nazi regime used to effectively carry out genocide?
Yeah, that's you now.

------
nizm
I was hoping all Entrepreneurs that run YC companies would have a social
conscience.

------
huntero
When I read the headline I imagined that Cloudant was going to be pretty upset
to see this on the front page of HN - but it looks like it was submitted by
Cloudant themselves and links to their own press release!

If it must be done, this is the type of deal that you sweep under the rug and
never talk about again, much less publicize on a site like HN.

------
rdl
Independent of how you may feel about Monsanto (and industrial agriculture in
general), this is good news for Cloudant -- both an endorsement of their
technology by a technically-competent buyer, and a bunch of contributions to
their open source codebase.

(I dislike Monsanto's heavy-handed IP enforcement, but the data scientists are
pretty far away from that; it's like criticizing Microsoft Research for the
Windows OEM bundling concerns. I prefer organic food, but I'm happy that
industrial agriculture/the green revolution keeps _billions_ of people from
starving.)

~~~
pjscott
It's great news for anybody who wants to use CouchDB, because this means that
they're going to run into the problems of big deployments, and that they'll
have the money and the motivation to fix it.

Better that Monsanto pays for the big-fixing than me.

------
zquestz
Supporting Monsanto is supporting the end of our organic food supply. It
saddens me to see any YC company supporting such an evil organization. Money
just isn't worth it.

~~~
dionidium
Supporting Ford is supporting the end of our organic transportation industry.
I'm kidding, but it is worth remembering that the word "organic" doesn't
contain in it some magical counterargument that requires no further
elaboration.

~~~
run4yourlives
Most people would take "organic" in this context to mean "natural", as in if
you plant one seed, you can grow a crop, save some of the harvest and replant
the seeds for next year, like we've been doing since we started farming.

That is what Monsanto wants to stop.

~~~
william42
If I have to choose between "plant one seed, save some of the harvest, and
replant the seeds for next year" and saving the lives of a billion(10^9)
people from starvation _, I'm picking the latter.

_ this is what the Green Revolution did.

~~~
run4yourlives
That's a false dichotomy.

~~~
william42
In theory, it is, but in practice, the Green Revolution hybrid(very carefully
cross-bred) seeds required you to get new seeds every year, because the seeds
you'd get from your harvest would be cross-pollinated improperly. GMO could
possibly bridge this gap, but you don't want GM crops cross-pollinating with
everyone else's, if only because if it cross-pollinates with an organic
farmer's crops, the latter can lose their organic certification. The solution
to this is the terminator gene, that makes it impossible for such a situation
to happen.

I'm not going to support Monsanto's IP actions here, but they aren't _pure_
evil the way, say, De Beers is.

~~~
run4yourlives
The reason for the terminator gene is not to support the Green Revolution
however. The practice was successfully carried out in North America long
before GURT was even conceived.

The reason for the gene is to ensure Monsanto's share price continues to rise,
by ensuring a recurring stream of income from a product that was never
previously purchased beyond initial implementation.

Hence, false dichotomy.

------
tlogan
Such a horrendous PR move.

This is like during apartheid claiming that you are delighted to have
partnership with government of South Africa. Or like now partnership with
Ministry of Morals of Saudi Arabia.

All customers are good, but but you don't parade all of them during triumph.

------
hvass
It's a huge deal for your team and investors, but don't expect any applauds.

------
kongqiu
This raises a real dilemma: at what point does a company or organization cross
the line from "not my cup of tea" to "ethically ambiguous" to "pure evil"?

What if Cloudant were to power analytics for Trader Joe's?

Goldman Sachs?

Halliburton?

The Sinaloa Cartel?

Certainly there's a line...

------
jasonallen
Yuck. Does anyone know if they were forced to put out that press release or
did they actually write that on their own volition?

~~~
georgemcbay
I don't know anything for sure, but it appears that cloudant themselves posted
the link to the press release on Hacker News, which seems like a pretty good
indication that they are the ones trying to publicize this, which then points
to the latter of your two choices being likely.

Whether this is due to lack of realizing how poorly Monsanto is viewed by
most, or whether they thought the somewhat Rand-ian slant of HN' would offset
that, I don't know.

------
dionidium
I'll offer the first unqualified congratulations. I don't think it's at all
obvious that Monsanto is a perpetrator of "devastating evil" (as one of the
comments says below) and I'd love it if one or more of the critics would do
more than merely state that as fact.

~~~
white_devil
Someone already posted this:
[http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto...](http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805)

But seriously, if even the _politically correct_ & good natured commenters on
HN are unanimous in their hatred for Monsanto, you can be pretty sure it's a
pretty despicable company.

So yes, fuck Monsanto, and fuck Cloudant too. Supporting Monsanto in any way
is _disgusting_. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

~~~
dionidium
_But seriously, if even the politically correct & good natured commenters on
HN are unanimous in their hatred for Monsanto, you can be pretty sure it's a
pretty despicable company._

Do I really need to point out that this is a logical fallacy?

~~~
sespindola
It is, from an absolute standpoint.

But if people all around the world and from every angle of the ideological
spectrum universally vilifies a corporation, I think it would merit to look
into their affairs with suspicion.

------
mshave
Congratulations Cloudant and good luck, you'll need it! A lifetime knowing
you're directly contributing to the future destruction of the worlds
agricultural biodiversity cannot be worth all that dirty money.

------
checoivan
I don't know the details, but whatever sequencing queries Monsanto is running
against cloudant, would be nice to replicate and open source to universities
and researchers.

------
sova
I'm kinda hurt to see this on here, to be honest. Might advise getting out
before you plant the self-terminating PR seed. Dramatically illuminating
movies you can watch to learn about why everyone on YC thinks this is an
absurd move: FUEL, Food Inc.

------
phamilton
Preface: I would like to take the liberty of starting a thread of discussion
about the technical merits of the press release. Any non technical concerns
can be posted under someone else's comment please.

What does this mean for a me as a hacker?

Someone brought up the huge benefit of large scale deployment. I think that's
a very interesting point. If Cloudant can get their system to scale to meet
their large customer's needs, the overall experience for all clients should be
streamlined.

How would such a big client affect their pricing? Would they be able to price
the lower tiers more aggressively?

What other side effects does this press release have for their customers?

------
vej
Logged on here for the first time in 417 days to say:

Fuck you Cloudant.

Also, shame on YC for allowing this to happen.

~~~
rohern
Give us another 417 days of your silence.

------
lispm
The genome of Monsanto is rotten down to the core...

------
amaddox
"the world will not be destroyed by those doing evil, but by those who watch
them without doing anything."

------
goodweeds
Anything to make a buck.

------
Mvandenbergh
I too have opinions based on half-remembered articles in lifestyle magazines!

------
kul
I just threw up in my mouth a little.

------
drivebyacct2
Heh. I didn't know what to expect when I came here, but frankly I was a bit
surprised to see the ethical implications of this deal weighed so heavily
here. Not that I view the HN community as cut throat necessarily, but
certainly often business oriented. Granted this was only posted an hour ago,
but I will try to less judgementally provoke a discussion regarding ethics and
startups...

Is it wrong to even associate with a company like Monsanto? What if they're
providing some tangential support infrastructure that doesn't relate to the
actual business practices that people are so ethically opposed to?

~~~
irrumator
Agreed, I don't think I've ever seen so many 'fucks' and similar words used on
an HN thread before. For some reason all these new posters are tying every
company which they have a grudge against with Monsanto, and by association,
with Cloudant. Amusing to read all the pent up angered comments, with any
dissenting ones heavily downvoted. Did /r/politics arrive to stay? What
happened here?

Cloudant is providing an amazing infrastructure to power a large client, and
with that, they grow as a business and innovate in technology. I don't see
anything wrong with congratulating them for their securing of this great
partnership, and I find the response here from the mainly younger accounts
very disappointing.

edit: We've hit Godwin's law pretty quickly already I see.

~~~
nirvana
I've been very curious about the persistence of anti-capitalists attitudes on
Hacker News.

For me, one of the things that changed me from a liberal into a libertarian
was starting businesses. Getting out there, trying to grow, dealing with
government, and recognizing that I needed to learn finance, etc, caused me to
get experience with how the business world works, and to also learn economics,
and that was pretty much all she wrote.

Maybe Hacker News has a lot of overlap with the /r/politics demographic due to
commonality in ages?

~~~
irrumator
I think this is a more recent development actually, that started in the last
year particularly. Hacker News had a much more business and startup friendly
environment, but the anti-capitalist attitude is a sentiment that was found
mostly at the bottom, downvoted for their mostly incoherent rants. It's
unfortunate that their numbers have gained.

I think one of the biggest signs to always look for is how many comments a
story has. You'll find the older, better commenters tend to be more
conservative with their comments and only joining the discussion when they
have something worthwhile to contribute.

Hacker News has grown a lot in the last year, and obviously many of the new
users are people who don't actually run their own businesses. They view making
money as somehow abhorrent. The same kind of mindset you see in these new
occupy wall street protests.

But lest I take us off on a too political tangent, I'll end it here. Politics
does not belong on Hacker News.

~~~
WiseWeasel
Says the guy whose account is under four months old... while responding to one
whose account is slightly over two months old. The ironing is delicious.

~~~
irrumator
This is just a throwaway account and not the one under my real name. I've been
reading Hacker News since before it was even called that. My "real name"
account is over 4 years old.

------
gravitronic
Unless you've been in the position to turn down a similar offer and did, you
should probably not be criticizing.

~~~
thomasgerbe
Yeah, screw ethics! I can't criticize anyone for anything unless I've been in
there position!

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0AL4yml3bw>

