Universal Software Radio Peripheral From GnuRadio 320
The Universal Software Radio Peripheral for GNURadio has now gone into production and is
available for purchase for $450. It used to be insanely expensive to acquire this
technical equipment. Now the price has dropped by two orders of magnitude, to something about as expensive as a high-end graphics card. How long will it be till it's labeled a terrorist tool and banned?
How long? (Score:2, Funny)
(Just kidding)
Terrorist Tool (Score:3, Insightful)
It just happened. At least for those who know enough to use Google, but don't have enough common sense to handle context issues. Which sounds remarkably like those congressfolk who go around labeling things terrorist tools. Except for the knowing how to use Google bit.
Re:Terrorist Tool (Score:2)
I have RTFM and can find any documentation on the "Google Bit".
Should it be cleared or set? and why?
Re:Terrorist Tool (Score:3, Insightful)
All this overemphasis on terrorism is just as stupid as an extreme born again Christian going into a supermarket and thinking "what sort of ice cream would Jesus choose?"
Claws (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Claws (Score:3)
Re:Claws (Score:2)
Is that you Dubya?
What's it do? (Score:4, Insightful)
Neither of the links provided are much help.
Re:What's it do? (Score:3, Informative)
See http://comsec.com/software-radio.html for a high level overview.
Good reading is Understanding digital Signal processing by Richard G. Lyons. Prentice Hall, 1st ed: ISBN 0201634678 (amazon.com, search). 2nd ed: ISBN 0-13-108989-7 (amazon.com, search)
VanuBose 's company Vanu Technology demonstrated a software radio based on an iPAQ with a digital radio "backpack", in May 2003. Here are some links:
http://slashdot.org
With Tags (Score:5, Informative)
Software radio or SDR - an intresting subject where mathematical formulas become radio.
See for a high level overview. [comsec.com]
Good reading is Understanding digital Signal processing by Richard G. Lyons. Prentice Hall, 1st ed: ISBN 0201634678 (amazon.com, search). 2nd ed: ISBN 0-13-108989-7 (amazon.com, search)
VanuBose 's company Vanu Technology demonstrated a software radio based on an iPAQ with a digital radio "backpack", in May 2003. Here are some links:
Slashdot article [slashdot.org]
Linuxdevices.com [linuxdevices.com]
Vanu.com [vanu.com]
Vanu.com [vanu.com]
Here's a note on the future of software defined radio [cryptonomicon.net]
Several relevant pointers available here [inria.fr]
Re:What's it do? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What's it do? (Score:3, Informative)
It is already capable of tuning HDTV. Screenshots [gnu.org]
Re:What's it do? (Score:5, Informative)
Partial true, it does not eliminate, but reduces the the electronics used by do as much of the decoding (demodulation, etc.) of the RF signa l in programming hardware (FPGA) and in software (GNU Radio code itself). You still need a RF front-end typically for VHF ~100 MHz and higher (microwave signals a la Wi-Fi, GPS, DSS TV, etc.) and hardware like the USRP.
ould theoretically write a receiver to decode digital signals (like TV) without paying for it?
You can legally receive signals in the US, you cannot legally bypass copyright security measures like encryption to decode a satellite TV signal to enable to watch it. There is a moderate large hobby of people who listen or watch un-encrypted signals, we use to call them scanner listeners, but scanners evolved into Software Defined Radio devices as well. NB: There are explicit laws about listening into telephone conversations (both cordless and cellular) in ths US, AFAIK.
Re:What's it do? (Score:5, Interesting)
You can grab an FM signal from an antenna, use some software 'stuff', and get your favorite local station to come out the computer speaker. The only hardware you need is an antenna and a frontend to pump the signal into your computer. This device is that frontend interface between the RF capture device (antenna, dish, etc) and the computer, via a USB2 plug. The reason it was developed was that this kind of hardware was either very specific (grab only FM signals or TV signals) or very expensive (the cost of a new computer or two).
The reason this will be labeled a terrorist device is because you can grab any signal from the spectrum (if you can make an antenna) so all the decoding becomes a software problem. You develop a program to decode HBO's satellite feed, and bang, this thing gets banned as a pirate device, err terrorist device as that's the buzzword dejour. Special interests will push this through Gov like everything else and claim it's destroying American capitalism, meanwhile never mentioning their monopolies destroy fair competition and hurt the consumer when prices rise.
Geeks will lament as not only is this device a reciever but it's a transmiter as well. Want to make an ad-hoc WiFi-like network on some other frequency? What about a smart 'cell' phone that makes it's own network so you don't need a common provider (think p2p phones)? As it's so new, the possibilities have not been well thought out, but technologies like this are a solution looking for a problem, kinda like the PC in the 1980s.
Next insanely great thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Next insanely great thing (Score:2)
-nB
GNURadio? (Score:2)
Slashdot commentary (Score:5, Insightful)
When HAM radio is?
Seriously, what kind of commentary is this, especially with the FCC giving unprecedented amounts of frequency bandwidth back to the public?
Couldn't the article have done just as well without the last sentence?
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:5, Interesting)
SDR is eventually going to make the Stalinist wannabees on Capitol Hill very nervous indeed. There is already precedent for banning the manufacture and sale of certain types of receiving equipment (Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 1987), so I would not take the availability of this technology for granted if I were you. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see a Federal ban on private ownership of high-speed analog-to-digital converters at the IC level.
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
On the contrary, it would be VERY surprising.
First of all, because the high-tech industry is where the money is. Second, because this (and variations of it) has many, many practical uses. Third because stealing a high-speed digital capture card from a university or company would be trivial. And finally, because people could make these out of their garages if need-
Re:Slashdot commentary-Paranoids on parade. (Score:5, Insightful)
Care to tell me what in the world that has to do with anything? A Google search on "dual-use technology" returns nothing particularly enlightening. The term usually comes up in connection with technology exports.
A receiver that covers 870-890 MHz has legitimate uses beyond monitoring AMPS cell-phone conversations, but that didn't stop the cellular lobby from buying the ECPA. What, in your obviously-informed opinion, is going to stop a similar consortium of HDTV broadcasters from buying legislation to outlaw unprotected high-bandwidth conversion hardware?
Don't you guys get tired of being paranoid every second of every day, about everything?
So sayeth the Anonymous Coward....
Re:Slashdot commentary-Paranoids on parade. (Score:2)
Legitimate in whose opinion? Yours? My "need" for a general-coverage receiver was "legitimate" enough before 1987, but evidently not after that.
"What, in your obviously-informed opinion, is going to stop a similar consortium of HDTV broadcasters from buying legislation to outlaw unprotected high-bandwidth conversion hardware?"
Encryption technology, and dual use of high-speed conversion technology.
Yeah, because licensed commercial encryption keys never leak to the public,
Re:Slashdot commentary-Paranoids on parade. (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's see. As a licensed Amateur Radio operator, I'm not only permitted but required to ensure that my transmitted RF emissions are below certain thresholds outside the band I'm operating on. Now, I have no way to check my 902 MHz rig for spurious emissions in the adjacent AMPS band.
I can't even buy a used pre-ECPA receiver on eBay at this point. I guess if I ever accidentally interfere with the cellular folks, they can buy me a new HP 8565EC spectrum analyzer, and I'll track down the problem for them. That'll work.
Oh, and since I'm, like, this uber-paranoid guy, I'm constantly worried about bugs. I have a legitimate need to check for hidden transmitters in that portion of the spectrum, but now I can't, and they're HIDDEN UNDER THE FLOORBOARDS AND IRRADIATING ME FROM THE WALLS... (Sorry about that, ahem.)
Seriously, the ECPA's only exemption is for government agencies and (presumably) licensed government contractors. De jur, no other private citizen or company has a legitimate "need" for this technology. It was passed so the cellular companies could reassure their customers that nobody (who didn't own a TV set capable of tuning all the way up to UHF channel 83) could listen to them. Now that PCS, GSM, and other encrypted wireless technology has obviated the need for the ECPA, why hasn't it been repealed?
DeCSS has only one purpose.
Yep, you're right. To violate a law that did not exist before it was written and paid for by the same people I'm talking about here. "Legitimate uses" such as allowing people with Linux PCs to watch DVDs they legitimately purchased didn't enter into the equation, did they?
Your faith in the legislative and judicial branches is inspirational, I'll give you that much.
Also the author did win the DeCSS case.
Only because he didn't live in the "land of the free" (sic). The person who posted a simple href link to the code wasn't so lucky. See the link I provided.
Giving? (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:4, Interesting)
cellular (Score:2)
If it can tune in cellular frequencies, sorry, it's already illegal in the US and pretty much any other developed nation. Various dictatorship-countries would probably instantly declare anyone they found owning this kind of thing to be a 'spy'.
I imagine this scares the crap out of the FCC. , because prior to this the only thing that stood between your phone call and
Re:cellular (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
2) There are many reasons this tool could be banned, as it could theoretically be used to interfere with or listen in on radio transmissions that are now protected via FCC regulation of devices.
3) The FCC allowing the public to use a few bands relatively freely does not prevent them from regulating other bands very strictly.
4) The last sentence incites a very pertinent discussion, although the "terrorist" statement was unnecessary.
5) You are a jackass.
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
And, if BPL means "broadband over powerline", are you saying that a HAM can set up a 3 kwatt signal on a powerline at the right frequency to blow up the equipment?
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:5, Informative)
Section 5 of the FCC regulations state that any device operating must accept any harmful interference from any device that is licensed to operate at similar frequencies.
Now, that being said... because BPL advocates have much larger lobbies than amateur radio, they have managed to get the FCC to basically ignore their own regulations and all but 'stick it' to the ham operator, even though the ham is legally entitled to that slice of the pie.
The Amateur Radio Relay League [arrl.org] site on BPL has a lot more information.
Interesting Link (Score:2)
From the page:
"...amateurs have done experimentation that shows that as little as 5 watts of power from a nearby radio transmitter can seriously degrade the performance of BPL. In some cases, the interference logged off a BPL user, requiring a reconnection to the network."
So you can see, it would take very little effort for hams to pretty much kill BPL by driving up to some power lines, broadcasting crap on that frequency at 5W (most handheld tranc
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
And also, now many houses are 100 Yards
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
Also, I should have said "...near a power line", instead of giving a specific distance... I realized after the fact that giving a specific value may have been too specific.
When I said 100 yds, I meant high tension lines, not regular lines running into homes.
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
The next few years will be interesting to say the least.
I hope there are some presentations at Dayton this year about it, actually.
Re:Slashdot commentary (Score:2)
terrorist tool? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:terrorist tool? (Score:2)
Editor incoherence (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Editor incoherence (Score:2)
Re:Editor incoherence (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Editor incoherence (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Editor incoherence (Score:4, Informative)
You can say what you like, but the commonly accepted usage in the physics (and most likely the physical sciences and mathematics) has an order of magnitude being equivalent to a factor of 10. So two orders of magnitude would be 100. I've never seen anyone use two orders of magnitude = e^2 before.
Re:Editor incoherence (Score:2)
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dict
http://www.askoxford.c
http://dictionary.reference.com/sear
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order
http://www.vendian.org/envelope/Tem
I can assure you that you have no idea what mathematicians use. QED.
Re:Editor incoherence (Score:2)
(Of course, in Astronomy, your results are generally considered `accurate' if they're within an order of magnitude.)
Re:So how many fingers do you have? (Score:3)
For example, since minutes and seconds are measured in base 60, would you say that the amount of time one order of magnitude greater than one second is one minute, and two orders of magnitude is one hour? What happens as you go beyond that? Do you change base? Is the amount of time three orders of magnitude greater than a second equal to one day? Is four orders equal to a week, a month, or a year? A fortnight,
And this does what? (Score:4, Funny)
Sweet ! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Sweet ! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Sweet ! (Score:5, Informative)
We actually didn't use it for a Ham radio -- we used it to build a fairly inexpensive, high-quality DRM reciever (not Digital Rights Management, it stands for Digital Radio Mondiale [drm.org] -- pretty cool tech).
Re:Sweet ! (Score:3)
Umm ... excuse me ... but ... (Score:3, Insightful)
The web site certainly wasn't much help, and the jargon-laden responses I've seen so far aren't much help either.
Many thanks.
D
Re:Umm ... excuse me ... but ... (Score:3, Informative)
It allows you to quickly readout a couple of analog signals using a PC, and to generate some analog signals under program control.
With some additional radio hardware (supplied on daughterboards) you can convert a certain frequency band into analog signals that are then fed to the converters. With proper software you can use this as a radio that does not have a tuning knob but can be tuned in software and/or to
Re:Umm ... excuse me ... but ... (Score:4, Interesting)
In other words, radio can be completely received, down converted, and demodulated in hardware and by and large this is how it is done.
However, if you instead receive and downconvert the radio signal, then you can let software take over for the demodulation, and in the case of HDTV further digital decoding.
Further, this device can work on about 32MHz of the signal spectrum at a time. This doesn't mean much until you realize that the entire FM radio band (88.1MHz - 107.9MHz) fits within that slice of bandwidth. You can use this radio to decode the entire audio of all the radio statiosn in the area simultaneously. Live in detroit? Listen to and record every single radio station with one device. Not so terribly useful for the consumer, but nice for the re-streamer, radio fanatic, FCC, NSA, etc.
Bandwidth of an NTSC TV signal is about 6MHz. Watch/record 4-5 consecutive channels simultaneously.
HDTV is about 8MHz. Watch and record 3-4 consecutive channels simultaneously.
In short, it's a move from less hardware to more softare. The biggest advantage is not less hardware, but more flexibility. This one tuner can be used to tune your HDTV, TV, radio, 802.11, bluetooth, etc.
-Adam
naive question (Score:2, Interesting)
Why go with usb2.0 as the interface instead of pci or multiple usb2.0 connectors (is the usb 2.0 bandwidth limit a total value or a per/channel value?) I know you want to isolate the radio receiver from all the RF noise inside the PC but there are giga-sample a/d cards that go inside boxes already... Just wondering
Re:naive question (Score:5, Informative)
Because USB2.0 was the fastest commonly available connection found on home PCs and laptops.
PCI rules out laptops, but the developers (Eric and Matt) use and demo their work on laptops.
Firewire wasn't as well developed and as well supported on all Free/Open OSes (OpenBSD in particular) when the decision was made.
The on-board ADC / DAC and FPGA will reduce the needs for most applications to something that works, such as a single HDTV ATSC signal (which is roughly 6MHz bandwidth).
Savings are overrated (Score:2)
Where's the bargain, here?
Re:Savings are overrated (Score:2)
Can you say "Software Decoder? (Score:4, Informative)
Terrorism my ... (Score:2, Funny)
Procyon> I don't know the world around me!
Procyon> I'm scared, and confused!
DS> have you felt a strong desire to vote for george w. bush recently?
Same with terrorism, it sucks. But the politicians should stop banning random stuff out of fear - i want people to start using their brains, for once. In the US they already slashed constitutional rights, and want me to give my fingerprints and digital foto when i travel into US. Forget it!
Too bad the US
2 orders of magnitude? (Score:2, Funny)
Wow...that's some cost reduction.
Limiting factors. (Score:2, Funny)
On a side note, I really have no idea what I am talking about. Just pulled that out of the air based on 10 seconds looking at the two included links, Based on the current comm
too soon, perhaps (Score:2)
With software radios widely and inexpensively available during the initial deployment of the next generation of radio and television broadcasts, broadcasters may recognize too soon the need for bullet-pr
This is what Wikipedia says: (Score:4, Informative)
A software-defined radio (SDR) system is a radio communication system which uses software for the modulation and demodulation of radio signals.
An SDR performs significant amounts of signal processing in a general purpose computer, or a reconfigurable piece of digital electronics. The goal of this design is to produce a radio that can receive and transmit a new form of radio protocol just by running new software.
Software radios have significant utility for the military and cell phone services, both of which must serve a wide variety of changing radio protocols in real time.
The hardware of a software-defined radio typically consists of a superheterodyne RF front end which converts RF signals from and to analog IF signals, and analog to digital converter and digital to analog converters which are used to convert a digitised IF signal to and from analog form.
Software-defined radio can currently be used to implement simple radio modem technologies. In the long run, software-defined radio is expected by its proponents to become the dominant technology in radio communications. GNURadio is a project to implement software-defined radio as free software.
URL:: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software-defined_rad
Instrumentation uses (Score:4, Interesting)
Some years ago, I was doing some work on a laser rangefinder, and got to the point where I needed about $20K in test gear to find out why it wasn't working right. Something like this would have been a big help.
Radio hams will find uses for this. It should be great for working on new data transmission schemes for high-noise links, like HF.
LabView [ni.com] support would be nice.
Salon Article about the broadcasting spectrum... (Score:5, Informative)
Anyway, Here's a Salon Article about the polictical & technical aspects of it:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/03/12/spec
SDR and hacking radios... (Score:5, Informative)
There were quite a few pages dedicated to the advances in digital radio and SDR in Monitoring Times [monitoringtimes.com] a few months back.
One of the biggest advantages to a true SDR radio is that the manufacturer can build one or two models of radios, and have different software loads depending on bandsplit, features, costs, etc.
Motorola tried that with their Jedi-series and XTS series of handy talkies over the past decade... biggest problem was that it is pretty simple (technologically) to take a radio with no special features (smartnet, digital modes, tone signalling, etc.) and enable the features by cloning the software load of another model.
They did smarten up to that with the MTS2000 line of radios; any attempt to force a 'codeplug' into it that didn't belong would turn the unit into a brick, and you'd have to send it back to Motorola for a costly repair (as well as a stern talking to for 'hacking' at the radio).
True software defined radios would be a lot easier to secure... on paper it would drive prices way down... in reality, as long as the radio manufacturers control the public service contracts, prices will still remain sky high.
As an aside, WiNRADiO [winradio.com] markets a device that could *almost* be considered an SDR device... super pricey for a receiver, but neat concept.
I am looking forward to the day we see true SDR transceivers.
Never (Score:2, Insightful)
How long will it be till it's labeled a terrorist tool and banned?
It's not a transmitter as far as I understand.
Re:Never (Score:3, Interesting)
Correct, the USRP (Universal Software Radio Peripheral) base module itself is not an transmitter. There is an additional $50 USD basicTX modules available.
"Terrorist tool" is simply nonsense on the part of the submitter or editor. Ignore the poor fool.
Unlicensed operation and interference are not a new issue, (radio stations use to "compete" by trying to transmit by "out-gunning" by using more power (Watts) on a given frequency (e.g. 105.7 MHz)) are why depa
Any Frying Pan can be used as a terrorist tool! (Score:3, Interesting)
Like PGP/GPG, buy one, use it, build an economy around it BEFORE they start thinking about making it illega.
Kremax
Whoooeeeeeee (Score:2, Funny)
What else has been banned? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm seriously asking what else has been banned under the concerns of terrorism?
I know a terrorist (Score:4, Interesting)
Anything the Powers That Be want to label as terrorist; that's what is terroristic these days. When Disney sees SDR as a threat to Mickey Mouse, it will be labeled a terrorist tool.
Re:I know a terrorist (Score:2)
This has been on the books for a much longer time than terrorism (on the levels we know of it now) has been a threat. The fact is that you can not threaten someone with bodily harm. Perhaps there is a level of provocation that makes it legal but I doubt it.
Anything the Powers That Be want to label as terrorist; that's what is terroristic these days.
As I said, this threat
Re:What else has been banned? (Score:3, Informative)
The current administration is already seriously discussing jamming cell phones and GPS in the event of a terrorist attack. While it's not a ban, it's in the same ball park as far as the kind of thinking goes.
If Copyright Infringment == Terrorism, yes (Score:5, Insightful)
But to make the broadcast flag effective, you also have to mandate that equipment pay attention to it, and be robust against user modification. You've got to make it otherwise illegal to make an ATSC receiver that doesn't obey it. And sure enough, that's what the FCC has done; July 2005, any equipment that doesn't obey the flag is illegal to sell, trade, create, etc.
And with GnuRadio, you write an ATSC receiver that does or doesn't pay attention to it
Heck, it might even be said that GnuRadio itself will be illegal this year, since it fails the robustness rules.
Now, is this copyright infringement? Refusing to record a pristine ATSC transport stream or recording it for personal use isn't necessarily a distinction the MPAA et al. are likely to make. But it does facilitate the distribution of perfect copies of Desperate Housewives and other quality programming (ahem), and the MPAA have used the copyright infringement/terrorism analogy before.
Re:If Copyright Infringment == Terrorism, yes (Score:2)
Impressive (Score:2)
Re:Impressive (Score:3, Informative)
Isn't this already banned? (Score:2, Interesting)
5.3. Why is the HAL closed source?
The Atheros chipset can tune to frequencies that are out of the ISM band(s). These frequencies are licensed by various regulatory agencies, and radar systems thus an open HAL is disallowed by just about every regulatory institution in existence (i.e. FCC etc). On a practical/usability note: Were it not f
Re:Isn't this already banned? (Score:2)
I expect just receivers will bear less of a burden, but I would not be surprised if Gnu Radio was already illegal with massive criminal penalties associated.
Which is an atrocity, frankly. Please correct me. Please.
The FCC, et all (IC, RA, PTO,
I'll ig
Universal? (Score:2)
Prolly I'm a bit confused here.
Digital Oscilloscope (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:But does it ... (Score:2, Funny)
Regards,
RMS
Re:Ah yes but (Score:2)
Re:Ah yes but (Score:2)
You could, but you would be better off using the pcHDTV HD-3000 card [pchdtv.com] which is designed to work well with terrestial, aka Over The Air (OTA), HDTV, "legacy" NTSC, and can legally ignore the FCC Broadcast Flag [eff.org] until June 2005.
To clarify, GNU Radio [gnu.org] is a Free Software software defined radio implementation, and the USRP (Universal Software Radio Peripheral) is the semi-official reference hardware platform designed by Matt Ettus. The USRP is real-life us
Re:Ah yes but (Score:2)
You could just buy an HDTV, too, but that wouldn't have as much hacking value. I assume anyone who is interested in this hardware is also interested in experimenting with it, and the HD-3000 doesn't leave much room for that.
Re:Ah yes but (Score:2)
So, if I just wanted to watch (or record) HDTV, I would get a HD-3000, but as soon as I can get a US dollar money order, I am ordering my USRP and RX/TX modules.
Re:Knee-jerk? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Knee-jerk? (Score:3, Informative)
Ah, no. The USRP and basicRX / basicTX only operate themselves up to 30 or 50 MHz I believe. You would need an additional RF front-end (aka transverter) for VHF frequences like broadcast WFM.
Re:I dont know but you arent helping (Score:2)
I thought, "what, they're not already??"
Re:I dont know but you arent helping (Score:2)
I have read the works of Che and others as I have a solid interest in military history, Where there is a will there is a way, and to be quite honest I am suprised we have not seen a terrorist detonation of a nuke, dirty bomb, or biological (they must be either a little dumber than I give them credit for, or b, even have their own limits, which I doubt)
What I am
Re:I dont know but you arent helping (Score:2)
LS
Re:What does this do? (Score:3, Interesting)
With the right software, it takes control away from the FCC and Congress. The SDR doesn't care if the software that you download isn't type accepted by the FCC or does things that Congress doesn't like, like listening to their cell phone calls.
Re:What does this do? (Score:2)
Using software rather than hardware does not make the intercept of a cell phone call legal.
Re:What does this do? (Score:2)
Re:What does this do? (Score:2)
The thinking is "we could control hardware, but we don't have control of this software. So we need to either gain complete control of the software development process (trusted computing) or effectively ban software that could potentially be used in any way we don't like (DMCA).
Anything that moves control from specialized hardware to software running generalized hardware, is a target for the wrath of various organizations.
Re:What does this do?-No Limit Life. (Score:2)
It happens already, with conventional radio equipment. There are plenty of loons in places like Los Angeles who get their jollies by interfering with other radio users, including the police. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to re-channel a surplus radio.
Re:What does this do? (Score:2)
Re:What does this do? (Score:2)