Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Scientist admits to study of Roswell debris!


  • Please log in to reply
331 replies to this topic

#271    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,308 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 15 September 2009 - 10:04 PM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 15 September 2009 - 08:28 PM, said:

Man I could use some of that memory mental right Now! Who said the  Russians  Had it ?

Hmmm. I'll take a beer instead, big D. ;)

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#272    Captain Zim

Captain Zim

    A voice in the silence

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,253 posts
  • Joined:07 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Johannesburg

Posted 15 September 2009 - 11:45 PM

View Postbadeskov, on 15 September 2009 - 09:48 AM, said:

Zim,

I completely agree with you. I am sure, if there had been a reverse engineering effort somewhere that such people would have been consulted, however, to be quite I do not see any obvious leaps in technology anywhere when looking around.

Cheers,
Badeskov

I do. Groom Lake - however that is the result of advanced requirements and technology suppression combined with streamlined R&D and quite possibly very different organisational structures to the rest of the aerospace industry.

Somebody on this board also mentioned technology releases in the 90s supposedly accelerating the semiconductor industry. THAT could have been the spin-off of some advanced smart materials project, or research into ET technology.

The amount of technology lost to sheer government stupidity is mind-boggling. Our current risk-averse mindset only allows incremental advances, not quantum leaps.

“I consider it an extremely dangerous doctrine, because the more likely we are to assume that the solution comes from the outside, the less likely we are to solve our problems ourselves.”


-Carl Sagan


#273    Captain Zim

Captain Zim

    A voice in the silence

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,253 posts
  • Joined:07 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Johannesburg

Posted 15 September 2009 - 11:53 PM

View Postbadeskov, on 15 September 2009 - 10:02 PM, said:

I would suggest you read up a bit more on cold war history. Nuclear and chemical warfare as first strike scenarios were very viable and very likely options for the Soviets in case of an invasion of Western Europe. The reason being that the Soviets needed to conquer Western Europe before ground and air reinforcements could arrive from the US and they could therefore not allow themselves to be bogged down anywhere, but were 100% dependent on the ability of their armor to continue their advance.

And they do sacrifice troops for advances. As 747400 correctly stated, pretty much standard procedure since Peter the Great. Why do you think the Soviets lost so many during World War II? Why did they send people into battle with no weapons against well equipped German infantry and armor? I seriously suggest you read up on Soviet (and Russian) history and the battles they have engaged in. Simply put, the Soviet soldier was expandable and expected to be expended during times of battle.

And the belief that the Soviets would never strike first is simply just naive. Of course they would if they had deemed it necessary. That was also part of the war plans.  

Cheers,
Badeskov

Bade,

Overall Soviet strategy depends in large part on what decade you were talking about. After Kruschev, Soviet strategy became less belligerent. In all time periods, nuclear was regarded as a last resort because the consequences were obvious. Most Pentagon wargames saw NATO getting swept out of Western Europe within a few weeks. In an armour-heavy environment like Western Europe, there simply would be no way to hold the Soviets for that long. The introduction of tank destroyers like the A-10 and AH-64, as well as the M-1 saw the balance tip towards a stalemate. But in the mid '70s, Sheridans and M-60s versus a tidal wave of T-55s and T-72s, with Spetsnaz creating much excitement in the rear sectors? They would have been toast.

In regards to sending troops through freshly-nuked areas, both sides were willing to do so. The infamous Davy Crockett was essentially a nuclear mortar which would almost invariably give the launching crew a lethal dose, not to mention the unfortunate sods in the trenches in front... this gives you an idea of the mentality on both sides during the early Cold War.

M-388 Davy Crockett

Posted Image

Edited by Captain Zim, 15 September 2009 - 11:57 PM.

“I consider it an extremely dangerous doctrine, because the more likely we are to assume that the solution comes from the outside, the less likely we are to solve our problems ourselves.”


-Carl Sagan


#274    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,308 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 16 September 2009 - 12:26 AM

Hi Zim :)

View PostCaptain Zim, on 15 September 2009 - 11:45 PM, said:

I do. Groom Lake - however that is the result of advanced requirements and technology suppression combined with streamlined R&D and quite possibly very different organisational structures to the rest of the aerospace industry.

I would agree with the streamlining, but I personally still see no sudden leaps or sudden appearances of new technologies.

Quote

Somebody on this board also mentioned technology releases in the 90s supposedly accelerating the semiconductor industry. THAT could have been the spin-off of some advanced smart materials project, or research into ET technology.

To the best of my knowledge there has been no acceleration in the semiconductor industry stemming from technological infusions during the 1990's and right now the semiconductor industry is actually suffering due to power consumption and heat dissipation and is in dire needs for such infusions. In my opinion, what we saw in the 1990's was the proliferation of the personal computer and thus the immense increase in demand for hardware that in turn generated the revenue enabling an intensified research effort (in addition to the increased competition between silicon vendors). Semiconductor technology as such has generally followed Moore's law (predicting roughly the doubling of the number of transistors on a chip per two years) since it was formulated in 1965 with only small deviations. However, what Moore's law does not take into account is how much power that consumes and that has become the main bottleneck now.  

Quote

The amount of technology lost to sheer government stupidity is mind-boggling. Our current risk-averse mindset only allows incremental advances, not quantum leaps.

Now that is something I can wholeheartedly agree with.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#275    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,308 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 16 September 2009 - 12:34 AM

View PostCaptain Zim, on 15 September 2009 - 11:53 PM, said:

Bade,

Overall Soviet strategy depends in large part on what decade you were talking about. After Kruschev, Soviet strategy became less belligerent. In all time periods, nuclear was regarded as a last resort because the consequences were obvious. Most Pentagon wargames saw NATO getting swept out of Western Europe within a few weeks. In an armour-heavy environment like Western Europe, there simply would be no way to hold the Soviets for that long. The introduction of tank destroyers like the A-10 and AH-64, as well as the M-1 saw the balance tip towards a stalemate. But in the mid '70s, Sheridans and M-60s versus a tidal wave of T-55s and T-72s, with Spetsnaz creating much excitement in the rear sectors? They would have been toast.

In regards to sending troops through freshly-nuked areas, both sides were willing to do so. The infamous Davy Crockett was essentially a nuclear mortar which would almost invariably give the launching crew a lethal dose, not to mention the unfortunate sods in the trenches in front... this gives you an idea of the mentality on both sides during the early Cold War.

M-388 Davy Crockett

<snipped image>


Zim,

I would actually be very interested in having a chat with you about it as I enjoy cold war history myself, but that would most certainly be way off-topic here. That said, I completely agree with you and the stance of the Soviet Union and the United States changed with changing leaders, technological advances, the threat assessment at any given time and likewise the assessment of the opponent at any given time.

But it is my opinion that either side would have taken preemptive measures should it be known that the opposing side had gained or could gain a technological advance that was so significant that it would render any deterrence obsolete and that was really the point I was trying to make.  

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#276    Captain Zim

Captain Zim

    A voice in the silence

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,253 posts
  • Joined:07 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Johannesburg

Posted 16 September 2009 - 04:38 AM

View Postbadeskov, on 16 September 2009 - 12:26 AM, said:

Hi Zim :)



I would agree with the streamlining, but I personally still see no sudden leaps or sudden appearances of new technologies.

I would call stealth a "sudden leap."  :ph34r:  Certainly a very tight lid was kept on it such that when it did eventually emerge, it was a sudden upset. The next leap now could be suborbital strike capability. Or antigravity. Or fusion.

Quote

To the best of my knowledge there has been no acceleration in the semiconductor industry stemming from technological infusions during the 1990's and right now the semiconductor industry is actually suffering due to power consumption and heat dissipation and is in dire needs for such infusions. In my opinion, what we saw in the 1990's was the proliferation of the personal computer and thus the immense increase in demand for hardware that in turn generated the revenue enabling an intensified research effort (in addition to the increased competition between silicon vendors). Semiconductor technology as such has generally followed Moore's law (predicting roughly the doubling of the number of transistors on a chip per two years) since it was formulated in 1965 with only small deviations. However, what Moore's law does not take into account is how much power that consumes and that has become the main bottleneck now.
  

One wonders when the first quantum chips will appear? My laptops run quite hot these days. I'm amazed at the gaming performance I get out of only 90 watts! There was, however, a leap forward which was provided by Skylab's molten semiconductor experiments. They allowed for the laws that made the next step of miniaturisation possible, bypassing a lot of grunt work.

Quote


Now that is something I can wholeheartedly agree with.

Cheers,
Badeskov


“I consider it an extremely dangerous doctrine, because the more likely we are to assume that the solution comes from the outside, the less likely we are to solve our problems ourselves.”


-Carl Sagan


#277    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,308 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 16 September 2009 - 10:54 AM

View PostCaptain Zim, on 16 September 2009 - 04:38 AM, said:

I would call stealth a "sudden leap."  :ph34r:  Certainly a very tight lid was kept on it such that when it did eventually emerge, it was a sudden upset.

It appeared suddenly, but it wasn't a certain leap in technology that enabled it, but a long painstaking research and development process. Stealth was really enabled by two things:

1) Radar absorbing materials and,
2) Computers and control systems powerful enough to manage control planes on an ungainly aircraft.

Both were precursors for the F-117A and both had been under development for years before that. While the secrecy under which the technologies were applied to build the F-117A made it appear suddenly, the requirements and what needed to be done were known long before it made the scene. And both radar absorbing materials and computer development history can be traced well back in time to eliminate the technological leap argument.

Quote

The next leap now could be suborbital strike capability.

Not sure exactly what you mean by this. We essentially already have this capability, I believe.

Quote

Or antigravity.

Now that would be a leap if it suddenly popped up ;)

Quote

Or fusion.

Not really, in my opinion. While a huge feat it is still not a technological leap as such. We have known the theory behind fusion, we know how it works, we know what we need to do. We just don't have the materials to line the fusion chamber with yet, as the current materials seem to deteriorate too fast. So again it is a long, painstaking process of hashing out all the details for it to become feasible. It is not like something suddenly fell into our collective laps that not only told that fusion energy is a great idea, but also gave us the means to actually do it - far from it ;)
  

Quote

One wonders when the first quantum chips will appear?

Now, that is where I think the next big step in computing will be taken.

Quote

My laptops run quite hot these days. I'm amazed at the gaming performance I get out of only 90 watts!

Ah, makes me sentimental thinking of my first computer back in the days :P

Quote

There was, however, a leap forward which was provided by Skylab's molten semiconductor experiments. They allowed for the laws that made the next step of miniaturisation possible, bypassing a lot of grunt work.

Again, not really. Those experiments clearly gave some good results, but miniaturization in not only done by that - there are so many more parameters coming into play such as electron mobility, insulation, power consumption and so on.  

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited for typos.

Edited by badeskov, 16 September 2009 - 10:59 AM.

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#278    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,634 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 16 September 2009 - 05:19 PM

Better watch your Jumping If antigravity popped up suddenly.One would find themself heading off Planet !
"To the Moon Alice" :rolleyes:

This is a Work in Progress!

#279    Ra_Sun-God

Ra_Sun-God

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,129 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 16 September 2009 - 07:20 PM

View Postbadeskov, on 15 September 2009 - 10:02 PM, said:

I would suggest you read up a bit more on cold war history. Nuclear and chemical warfare as first strike scenarios were very viable and very likely options for the Soviets in case of an invasion of Western Europe. The reason being that the Soviets needed to conquer Western Europe before ground and air reinforcements could arrive from the US and they could therefore not allow themselves to be bogged down anywhere, but were 100% dependent on the ability of their armor to continue their advance.

And they do sacrifice troops for advances. As 747400 correctly stated, pretty much standard procedure since Peter the Great. Why do you think the Soviets lost so many during World War II? Why did they send people into battle with no weapons against well equipped German infantry and armor? I seriously suggest you read up on Soviet (and Russian) history and the battles they have engaged in. Simply put, the Soviet soldier was expandable and expected to be expended during times of battle.

And the belief that the Soviets would never strike first is simply just naive. Of course they would if they had deemed it necessary. That was also part of the war plans.  

Cheers,
Badeskov
Yes, I know there was a Cold War. But as I have stated before: It sounds too crazy to use Nuclear strikes and chemical weapons before making an invasion. In case of a WW III the Russian Military will first make an "Invasion", and only in case USA make the first Nuclear Strike then Russia will respond with Nuclear weapons as well.

Why the Soviets lost so many during the WW II you ask? Well, they did'nt use Nuclear weapons against the enemy at that time. Did the American soldiers enter Nagasaki after they bombed Nagasaki with a nuclear bomb? No, the Americans would not be that stupid to send their own soldiers into Nagasaki and let their own soldiers suffer of radiation. That is so wrong of you to think that way, Badeskov. Do you really think that the Military works like that? Give me a break, please...... *Sigh*

http://archive.newsm...1999/2/7/214008

Ruddy: What about a first strike on the United States?

The likely plan does not include use of missiles first. First the Russians would use their special operation forces, special troops, inside of the United States to destroy targets like communications facilities, airfields, command centers, and other targets that might be difficult to destroy with a missile attack.

Suitcase nuclear bombs at strategic locations are just one small part of their arsenal. I mentioned this in my book and I have been so surprised that the American public is so interested in this. Why? This is not something unusual for Russian military plans.

Ruddy: One of your jobs here in the U.S. as a spy was to look for locations to hook up these suitcase nukes to electric power sources.

It's not really necessary to have an electric power source because the devices can work on a battery. But not for very long.

Ruddy: Are there such bombs in the United States already?

Lunev: It's possible.

Ruddy: How soon could this war come?

Lunev: The Russian conventional forces are not in a state of readiness. Their rocket and nuclear forces are. This war scenario could be in place by the request of Russian government in a short time.


"The Russian conventional forces are not in a state of readiness. Their rocket and nuclear forces are. This war scenario could be in place by the request of Russian government in a short time", and that means that the Russians don't want to take the first step in an eventual WW III, Badeskov. I think you have misunderstood what you read the link of yours, Badeskov, since I have ripped apart your crazy "First nuclear weapon explosion at some place in a Western country and then send soldiers in there and let them suffer of radiation"-tactic claim. And is it really necessary to remind you of this:

Remember that I mentioned that the Russians don't want to make the first step in Nuclear strike, and that was before you brought up this link of yours:

http://www.telegraph...-unearthed.html And that link of yours also states:

Moscow’s commanders fully expected western “imperialists” to make the first nuclear strike.

Does that look familiar to you? Or should I repeat it until you understand?

Moscow’s commanders fully expected western “imperialists” to make the first nuclear strike.

Still struggling?

Moscow’s commanders fully expected western “imperialists” to make the first nuclear strike.

Edited by Ra_Sun-God, 16 September 2009 - 07:31 PM.


#280    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,308 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 16 September 2009 - 07:33 PM

View PostRa_Sun-God, on 16 September 2009 - 07:20 PM, said:


"The Russian conventional forces are not in a state of readiness. Their rocket and nuclear forces are. This war scenario could be in place by the request of Russian government in a short time", and that means that the Russians don't want to take the first step in an eventual WW III, Badeskov. I think you have misunderstood what you read the link of yours, Badeskov, since I have ripped apart your crazy "First nuclear weapon explosion at some place in a Western country and then send soldiers in there and let them suffer of radiation"-tactic claim. And is it really necessary to remind you of this:


:D

Very amusing indeed. I think you need a crash course on Soviet mentality and overall strategic goals/intentions. Before you actually learn something about the cold war there is no point in engaging you in a debate, I am afraid.

Have fun learning.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#281    morrison1976

morrison1976

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,785 posts
  • Joined:21 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brghton (UK)

  • Absorb what is useful, Discard what is not, Add what is uniquely your own.

Posted 16 September 2009 - 08:53 PM

Wow, My thread is quite big lol


#282    Ra_Sun-God

Ra_Sun-God

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,129 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 16 September 2009 - 09:02 PM

View Postbadeskov, on 16 September 2009 - 07:33 PM, said:

:D

Very amusing indeed. I think you need a crash course on Soviet mentality and overall strategic goals/intentions. Before you actually learn something about the cold war there is no point in engaging you in a debate, I am afraid.

Have fun learning.

Cheers,
Badeskov
So you need crash course on mentality? You're right, You even don't know much about mentality. So my advice to you is, just take so many crash course on mentality as possible, that's what you need. :D  And not only that. Your posts clearly shows that you don't know about Soviet Military Strategy either. Before you actually learn something about the cold war and military strategy there is no point in engaging you in a debate, I am afraid.

Keep on learning, Badeskov, you still have much to learn kid. I'm sure that you some day you will become a "Fessor"


#283    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,554 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 17 September 2009 - 12:38 AM

View PostRa_Sun-God, on 15 September 2009 - 11:19 AM, said:

As much evidence for Bigfoot pilots UFO's as there is an Alien crash landed in Roswell? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA, you can't be that serious, are you really?

First, Bigfoot belongs to Cryptozoology area, and not UFO/ET area. Beside, that unreliable link of yours ONLY ask a question something like this "Is Bigfoot Extraterrestrial?", and that means that you can't take that source of yours seriously at all.

Let me show you something from the Cryptozoolgy world:

http://www.bigfooten...es/argosy71.htm

http://english.pravd...11754_yeti.html



1) The link was describing the ranch in UTAH. The Skinwalker Ranch  The link was not offering evidence, and I do not believe in Bigfoot or ET on earth. It shows there is as much evidence that Bigfoot pilots UFO's as do Greys. Janet Bord has written books that claim the pilots of UFO's are fairies. - Real Encounters With Little People by Janet Bord It's all nuts mate.

2) You offered a link to Pravda? Its a tabloid. It is one of the most unreliable sources you could possibly use. 2 other titles I noticed while there were

Woman gives birth to mutant baby in Malaysia

and

Dog gives birth to mutant creature that resembles human being

M8, that really out to be a clue.

Edited by psyche101, 17 September 2009 - 12:40 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#284    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,308 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 17 September 2009 - 12:55 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 17 September 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

2) You offered a link to Pravda? Its a tabloid. It is one of the most unreliable sources you could possibly use. 2 other titles I noticed while there were

Woman gives birth to mutant baby in Malaysia

and

Dog gives birth to mutant creature that resembles human being

Bummer. Now you made me open the link and read it :D

Quote

M8, that really out to be a clue.

One would think so....Posted Image

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#285    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,308 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 17 September 2009 - 01:25 AM

View PostRa_Sun-God, on 16 September 2009 - 09:02 PM, said:

So you need crash course on mentality? You're right, You even don't know much about mentality. So my advice to you is, just take so many crash course on mentality as possible, that's what you need. Posted Image  And not only that. Your posts clearly shows that you don't know about Soviet Military Strategy either. Before you actually learn something about the cold war and military strategy there is no point in engaging you in a debate, I am afraid.

Keep on learning, Badeskov, you still have much to learn kid. I'm sure that you some day you will become a "Fessor"


Posted Image

Do you know what, idealogically speaking, the goal of the Soviet political leadership was?
Do you know what the Soviet military was tasked with doing if so ordered by the Soviet political leadership?
Do you know what the Soviets saw as the biggest threat should a war break out?
Are you really saying that the Soviets would not use preemptive strikes if they saw themselves threatened?
Are you really saying that the Soviets did not consider troops expendable and would accept even extremely high casualty rates to achieve a given goal?

Ra, seriously, you need to read up on some history. But this has gone way off-topic for now.

View Postmorrison1976, on 16 September 2009 - 08:53 PM, said:

Wow, My thread is quite big lol

Posted Image

Indeed so, old buddy!

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited by badeskov, 17 September 2009 - 01:26 AM.

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users