03x05 - FBI–Apple encryption dispute

[bunniefuu]

[TV static drones]

[bright tone]

[upbeat rock music]

♪

[cheers and applause]

- Welcome,
welcome, welcome

to "Last Week Tonight."

Thank you so much
for joining us.

I'm John Oliver.

Just time for a quick recap
of the week.

And we begin
with the U.S. election,

or, as you may know it,
the "holy shit,

please make it stop trash fire
two thousand fuckteen."

This was not a great week

for either party's
front-runners.

And let's start
with Hillary Clinton,

who, if she is not elected
president this year,

will take all you f*ckers
down with her.

She caused a little controversy
at Nancy Reagan's funeral

on Friday,
and you might think,

"How can you get into trouble
at a funeral?"

Watch her.

Blackwell: Secretary Clinton
is now apologizing

for some comments she made
about Nancy Reagan.

- It may be hard
for your viewers to remember

how difficult it was for people
to talk about HIV/AIDS

back in the 1980s,
and because of both

President and Mrs. Reagan,
in particular Mrs. Reagan,

we started
a national conversation.

- What are you talking about?

Nobody thinks that.

You cannot
give the Reagans credit

for a "national conversation"
when he didn't publicly say

the word "AIDS" until 1985

and didn't address the nation
about it until 1987.

So the Reagans started
a conversation about AIDS

the way many parents
start conversations

with their kids about sex:

by reluctantly mumbling
something about it existing

around five years
after it became relevant.

And the fact Hillary Clinton
didn't know that

is a little weird.

It's strange to forget something
so fundamental about a person.

It's like forgetting

Cookie Monster's thoughts
on cookies

or Sir Mix-A-Lot's opinions
on big butts.

A president is supposed
to know this stuff.

But let's also quickly check in
with Donald Trump,

an ill-fitting suit full of
chickens coming home to roost.

He had a dramatic week,

culminating in this
on Friday evening.

man: Chaos erupting
at a rally for Donald Trump.

The v*olence so bad,
the rally had to be canceled.

- Now, let's be honest.

a Trump rally being canceled
due to v*olence

is the most predictable thing
to happen in this campaign

since Donald Trump mentioning
the size of his d*ck.

Of course those things happened.
Of course they did.

And, look, it doesn't feel
like shutting down his events

is the most effective idea.

But it was hard to hear him
play down any kind of role

he may have had in this.

Trump: I certainly don't
incite v*olence.

And I certainly would--
I don't condone v*olence,

and I don't talk
about v*olence.

- Obviously,
you know that's a lie.

It couldn't be true,
even if he crossed his heart

with his tiny little
AA battery-sized fingers.

Because there have been
an escalating series

of confrontations
at his rallies,

with his supporters
attacking protesters.

And where might they get the
notion that that's a good idea?

- Get him out of here.
Throw him out!

If you see somebody getting
ready to throw a tomato,

knock the crap out of 'em,
would you?

You know what they used to do
to guys like that

when they were at a place
like this?

They'd be carried out
on a stretcher, folks.

I'd like to punch him
in the face.

- Wow.

Strap in, because we're in
for a bumpy ride, folks.

Donald Trump is one
flaming guitar player away

from turning this campaign
into Fury f*cking Road.

But let's move on
to International Women's Day,

the day that men
with girlfriends wake up,

see the words
"International Women's Day"

trending on Facebook,
and suddenly wonder,

"Shit, do I have to do something
right now?"

It took place on Tuesday,
and around the world,

countries celebrated
with varying degrees of success.

For instance, in Russia,

where it's observed
as a public holiday,

Vladimir Putin went on TV
with a message for women.

- [speaking Russian]

- Dear women, I wholeheartedly
congratulate you

on International Women's Day.

You have time for everything,

manage a great load of issues,

and stay gentle, bright,
and charming.

- Okay, okay.

First of all,
it's a little strange to hear

a warm message
from a man who looks

like he's perpetually crushing
a baby bird in his fist.

And second, if he's trying to be
progressive, he's failing here,

because "managing
a great load of issues

while staying gentle
and charming"

is exactly the double standard

that women are constantly trying
to overcome.

[with Russian accent]
"Yes, women, it is great

"to see you're so confident,
capable, and career-focused.

"And sometimes you're not even
a shrill bitch about it.

It's very nice."

Meanwhile--meanwhile in Turkey,
President Recep Erdogan

used his Women's Day speech
to make a point

you might not expect.

- [speaking Turkish]

- I know there will be some
who will be annoyed, but for me,

a woman is, above all, a mother.

In my opinion, the greatest
wrong that you can do to a woman

is to restrict her to live
a life where she is the victim

of her economic independence.

- Okay, okay, okay.

First, "A woman is,
above all, a mother"

is not even appropriate to say
on Mother's Day.

And also,
economic independence

is far from the greatest wrong
you can do to a woman.

There is a list that runs
from genital mutilation

through Nancy Meyers movies

that you need
to get through first.

Now, as for China,
a shopping mall there

offered discounts
in honor of Women's Day

but only to good-looking women

after their facial appearances
were scored by a face scanner.

And I'll say this:
it's not often you hear

a news story that appears
to have taken place

simultaneously
in the distant future

and the distant past.

But it is amazing
that somewhere in China,

a T.J.Maxx manager
will have uttered the phrase,

"Sorry, the robot doesn't want
to f*ck you.

Those capri pants
are full price."

And at this point,
you will be glad to know

that here in the U.S.,
women marked their own day.

For instance,
Fox News' Greta Van Susteren

delivered a commentary
in honor of the event,

and let me just tell you
in advance:

if you think you know
where this is going,

you are wrong.

- The Taliban won't let women
listen to music, go to school,

or leave the house without being
covered head to toe in a burka.

Women around the world
living under sharia law

endure the unthinkable
simply for being women,

which brings me to this:

on this
International Women's Day eve,

it'd be a good time for us women
to recognize that American men--

let's give American men
a shout-out.

- Yes, Greta Van Susteren
marked International Women's Day

with a shout-out to American men

for being better
than the Taliban.

I didn't even know--

I didn't even know
this was possible, but--

but I'm pretty sure
she just leaned out.

And--and she wasn't even done.

- Things aren't perfect.

For instance,
we still don't have

equal pay for equal work.

But American men are by far,
very by far,

the best men on the planet.

And we American women,
we may not say it,

but we know that.

And American men deserve
to hear that from us.

- You know, there may be
no more fitting tribute

to the state of women
internationally

than someone giving men credit
for doing basically nothing.

And finally this week:
Switzerland,

where the national dance

is collapsing
from altitude sickness.

Last Sunday, the Swiss observed
Tag der Kranken,

which I know sounds
like an IKEA product

which might precipitate
a divorce,

but it's in fact their annual
Day of the Sick,

a tradition dating back to 1939.

And interestingly,
Tag der Kranken

is the only Swiss tradition
dating back to 1939

that is not also a w*r crime.

The theme of this year's
Sickness Day was "laughter,"

and no one
embraced the theme more

than Swiss president
Johann Schneider-Ammann,

who gave a speech on the subject
without cracking a smile once.

- [speaking Swiss]

- Dear friends,

those who know sick people,
dear caregivers,

laughter is good
for your health,

according to a popular saying.

Like me, you have certainly
already had the experience.

- Have you, though?
Have you laughed?

'Cause you have the permanent
expression of a school principal

telling a child his hamster was
trampled by the marching band.

His speech was so humorless,
one media outlet noted

that he was "about as funny
as a funeral director,"

which is a little unfair
to funeral directors,

who tell all kinds
of great jokes.

For instance, "Knock, knock."

"Who's there?"

"Well, we know it's not
your uncle."

And the frustrating thing is,
it's not difficult

to make Tag der Kranken funny.

Just look at its official logo.

It is supposed to be a doctor
caring for a patient,

but it's pretty clearly
two priests

f*cking on a kitchen table.

I assume that image beat out
their other logo designs,

such as "doctor leaning over
to check patient's pulse,"

"doctor assisting
a vomiting patient,"

and an orgy.

Just an actual orgy.

But I'm sure the Swiss president
would see no humor in that,

as he seems to be very clear
about the rules

of what constitutes comedy.

- A cynical laugh with the goal
of derisively mocking a person

is not a good laugh,
in my opinion.

- Well, I hate to break it
to you, Mr. President,

but those are the exact laughs

that we're all enjoying
right now.

And I feel great about it.

And now this.

- Let me just say this.

Let me just say this.

Let me say this.

Let me say this
for the fourth time.

Let me say this.
Let me say this again.

Let me say this also.

Let me say this
more importantly.

Let me say this.
Let me just say this.

Let me say this.
Let me say this.

Let me tell you this.
Let me simply say this.

Let me...say this.

- Moving on.

Our main story tonight
concerns encryption,

the best way to keep people
from reading your email,

short of making the subject line
"Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd:

Hilarious joke
from Uncle Walter."

No one's reading that.

You may not think
about encryption much,

but it is pretty fundamental
to all our lives.

Lyne: Almost everything
you do today uses a code.

Every time you log on
to an Internet service

like Twitter or Facebook
and send your password,

every time you log in
to Internet banking,

all of that information is
protected using encryption code.

- [as Lyne] That's right.

[normal voice]
Encryption can protect

the things most important to us:

our financial information,
health records,

d*ck pics, trade secrets,

classified government records,

d*ck pics,
our physical location,

the physical location
of our dicks,

credit card information,

d*ck pics,
and pictures of our dicks.

And it's not just our data.

Lots of things have computers
in them now, even cars,

and last year, two hackers
showed a writer from "WIRED"

how they could disable his car
on the interstate.

man: Do it. k*ll the engine.

- So we're k*lling the engine
right now.

- [bleep].
I actually can't accelerate.

I turned on my hazard lights,
but I was still stuck

in the right lane with
no shoulder to escape onto.

Guys, I'm stuck
on the highway.

- What'd he say?
- I don't know.

I think he's panicking.

- Yeah, no shit he's panicking.

You k*lled his engine
on the freeway.

Those hackers seem like they've
played so many video games,

they've forgotten that cars
are actual objects

carrying living people.

But while it can keep us safe,
it's important to note,

encryption also has a downside.

It's become so ubiquitous,
it's making it impossible

for law enforcement to gain
access to certain information,

or, as FBI director
James Comey puts it...

- Technology has become
a tool of choice

for some very dangerous people,

and unfortunately,
the law has not kept pace

with technology,
and this disconnect has created

the significant
public safety problem

we have long described
as "going dark."

- Yes, "going dark."

It's a deliberately
ominous-sounding term,

because you wouldn't get
so scared if they just called it

"bad guy go bye-bye."

And you may have heard

about this "going dark" problem
recently,

related to one particular
work iPhone

belonging to Syed Farook,

the San Bernardino gunman who,
with his wife,

k*lled 14 people last December.

woman: The FBI
needs Apple's help

because the security settings
on the phone lock the device

if a password is entered
incorrectly too many times.

It may even erase all the data
on the phone.

The FBI wants Apple to upload
software that lets its analysts

get around
the security features

and take as many sh*ts
at the passcode as necessary.

- Yes, the FBI has
a dead t*rror1st's cell phone

that they cannot get into.

It's running a newer version
of Apple's operating system,

where the data
is fully encrypted

and can only be accessed
by unlocking the passcode.

Even Apple can't currently get
into the phone.

So the government
is essentially demanding

that they come up
with a cheat code

for their top-selling
iPhone game,

"f*ck, What's My Passcode?!"
rated E for everyone.

Apple is currently fighting
that order in court,

arguing it shouldn't be forced
to undermine

the security features
that protect its encryption,

an argument which some
have found troubling.

- I think Apple leadership risks
having blood on their hands.

- How the hell
you can't access a phone,

I just find baffling.

- Any system that would allow
a t*rror1st to communicate

with somebody in our country
and we can't find out

what they're saying
is stupid.

- Whoa, that is the angriest
Lindsey Graham has been

about a cell phone since
his name got auto-corrected

to "linty grandma."

[with Southern accent]
"Stupid phone.

"Learn my name.
I am your boss.

Stupid. So dumb."

This issue has even
been brought up

on the campaign trail,
with predictable results.

- What I think you ought to do
is boycott Apple

until such time as
they give that security number.

How do you like that?
I just thought of it.

Boycott Apple.

- "Oh, I don't know.
I just thought of it.

"Give me another one.
Israel-Palestine?

"Make 'em wrestle
in those fake sumo costumes.

"Done! Done!

Being president is easy!"

But I will say:

this is a rare case
where Donald Trump's outrage

is almost understandable,

because Apple's refusal to help
crack a t*rror1st's phone

can seem hard to defend,

especially when,
like John Miller of the NYPD,

you think about it
incredibly simplistically.

- There is no bank,
there is no safe company,

there is no vault,
there is no apartment,

there is no door
that can't be penetrated

with a lawful order
from a U.S. court.

- Okay, point taken,
but was "penetrated"

the best word choice there?

"The government needs to be able
to penetrate you at any time.

"If we feel
you need penetration,

"we have to be able
to penetrate you

"quickly and effectively,
here and now.

Why is everyone getting
so uptight about this?"

But this is not simple.

It's a hugely complicated story
with massive implications.

And once we get
to the end of it,

you may not feel the same way
that you do now.

Because to that man's point,
an encrypted phone

is not really
like a bank or a safe.

If you penetrate a safe,

you've only penetrated
that safe.

But a code to open a phone
could be modified to open

many, many more phones--

a fact that does not escape
Apple CEO Tim Cook.

- No one, I don't believe,
would want a master key built

that would turn hundreds
of millions of locks.

Even if that key were
in the possession

of the person
that you trust the most,

that key could be stolen.

The only way we know to get
additional information

is to write
a piece of software

that is the software equivalent
of cancer.

- Okay, now, on one hand,

giving your phone cancer
sounds bad.

But on the other hand,
"The Fault in Our Stars"

would have been amazing
if Shailene Woodley

was playing a terminally ill
iPhone 6s.

"No, God damn it!
I won't let you go, Hazel!

"I'll hold down the power button
and the home button

simultaneously forever!"

And to be clear: Apple hasn't
been completely uncooperative.

They've already given the FBI

the information
they could access,

including
Farook's iCloud backups

from about six weeks
before the att*cks.

But they are refusing to create

the "cancerous" program
the FBI wants--

not because it can't be done.

They say it would take
six to ten engineers

up to four weeks to do it,

or, you know, a standard
Genius Bar appointment.

But--but Apple worries

that once they make
that program,

they can't keep it 100% safe.

And the FBI and its supporters
can be weirdly dismissive

of that issue
in ways that indicate

they either don't fully
understand how technology works

or are pretending not to.

- What the government is asking
Tim Cook is, "You designed it;

"you can design your way
out of it for this one time.

"If you figure out the formula
and crack open this phone

"to the point that we can then
try codes against it,

"you can tear
that formula up,

toss it in the fireplace,
and throw it away."

- Oh, come on.

You know Apple is not writing
its code on paper

next to a fireplace.

They're a cutting-edge
technology company,

not Lord Grantham.

And as for the notion Apple
can throw the formula away

after the FBI uses it once,

nobody seriously thinks
that is going to happen.

man: Apple says if it complies,
requests from law enforcement

could come for another phone
an hour later,

opening a Pandora's box.

Apple officials pointed to
the Manhattan district attorney

who says he has 175 iPhones
with potential evidence

from serious crimes,
including m*rder,

that he cannot open.

- Exactly.

There are over 175
other phones in line

just in New York,

so this is bound
to set a precedent.

Think of the government
as your dad.

If he asks you to help him
with his iPhone, be careful,

because if you do it once,
you're gonna be doing it



And whatever happens in this
case will have ramifications,

because the FBI
ultimately wants Apple

and the entire tech industry
to have its encryption

always be weak enough
that a company can access

customers' data
if law enforcement needs it.

So it might be the iPhone today,
an Android phone tomorrow,

and a BlackBerry
the day after that,

assuming that the day after that
is in 1998.

And--and you might be wondering,

"But, look,
if there's a warrant,

do these companies
really have a choice?"

To which the answer,
surprisingly,

might be, "Yes, they do."

The government
is currently citing

the All Writs Act of 1789,
which essentially mandates

you must cooperate
with investigators

if they ask you to do something.

But courts are split
over whether it applies

in cases like these.

And there's not really any more
recent law covering this area,

which is not entirely
an accident,

because we've been
down this road before.

The government grappled
with encryption two decades ago.

And in the early '90s, they even
came up with what they thought

would be the ideal solution.

- The government will press
private companies to use

a so-called Clipper chip
in their computers

which would allow authorities
to monitor coded messages.

- Now, that Clipper chip
was theoretically perfect.

Your information
could be encrypted,

but the government would have
an access point

when it needed it.

It was like giving your
house key to a trusted neighbor.

You can trust Mike.

He's only gonna try on
your underwear

if it's absolutely necessary.

There was just one problem
with that chip.

A computer scientist and hacker
named Matt Blaze

figured out a way to disable

the government access feature
of the chip,

and the whole project
was eventually abandoned.

And by the way,
is there a more '90s

series of words than
"a hacker named Matt Blaze"?

It's got to be right up there
with, "Talk to the hand, Furby,"

and "Grammy Award winners
Milli Vanilli."

But thanks
to the Clipper chip fiasco

and strong pressure
from tech companies,

the government backed off,

eventually abandoning the push
for a perfect back door.

But decades later,

they seem to have convinced
themselves that it can be done.

- I believe that Apple's
capabilities are remarkable

when it is their desire.

- I think Silicon Valley
is full of great people who,

when they were younger,
were told,

"Your dreams are too hard."

They were standing
in a garage someplace.

They were told, "Can't be done."

Thank goodness
they didn't listen.

- I hate to hear talk
like, "That cannot be done."

I mean, think about
if Jack Kennedy said,

"We can't go to the moon;
that cannot be done."

He said something else:

"We're gonna get there
in the next decade."

- Okay, listen,
I love that optimism.

But for the record, there are
lots of things we can't do

even though we've been
to the moon.

For example, we are yet
to master time travel

or figure out why Hulk Hogan
dresses for court

like he's a pallbearer
at a boa constrictor's funeral.

Those still elude
human understanding.

And to some extent,
the government's faith

in Apple's magic powers
is the company's own fault.

After all, their ads
have linked them

to Einstein and Gandhi,

and they sell the most mundane
aspects of their products

as world-changers.

woman: This is iPhone 6s.

Not much has changed, except:

it responds to the pressure
of your finger.

Now you can change apps
like this.

Pay at more places like this.

And the new color
looks like this.

It's rose gold.
It's awesome.

- Ugh.

No, it is not.

Rose gold looks like someone
vomited a salmon dinner

onto a pair
of dirty ballet shoes.

But ads like those obscure
the real truth about Apple,

which is that beneath
their shiny rose gold surface,

they, like any other
software company,

are incredibly susceptible
to hackers,

who are constantly finding flaws
in their security features.

Right now, you can buy boxes
like this one on eBay

that can hack you
into an iPhone

running some versions
of iOS 8 or lower.

Just watch this YouTube video
showing you how they work.

You just attach the wire
to the screen,

adjust a few settings,

let it cycle through passcodes,

and eventually, you are in.

And Apple, understandably,

do not want us
thinking too much about that.

"Scary security flaws" is one
of those three-word phrases

they absolutely hate
to be associated with,

like "corporate tax avoidance"

or "factory su1c1de nets."

Also, when Apple argues that
if it's forced to have access

to all its customers'
encrypted data,

it can't 100% guarantee
its safety,

most computer scientists agree,

or, as Matt Blaze,

the guy who hacked
the Clipper chip, puts it...

- When I hear the, "If we
can put a man on the moon,

we can do this,"
I'm hearing an analogy

almost as if we're saying,

"If we can put a man
on the moon,

well, surely we can put a man
on the sun."

- And that is a rational
scientific view.

Just because a man
can walk on the moon

does not mean he might as well
be walking on the sun,

a point summarized recently

in "The New England Journal
of Smashmouth."

But look--

but look,
for the sake of argument,

let's assume Apple could have
access to your encrypted data,

repeatedly help law enforcement,

and always keep
the bad guys out--

which, again, is widely thought
by experts to be impossible.

That still won't solve the FBI's
"going dark" problem.

Because if you really want to
keep your communications secret,

there's an app for that.

- The encryption debate
is proving to be good business

for one start-up.

Telegram, a messaging app

that encrypts messages
end to end,

has surpassed


- And that's the point:
people who want encryption

will always be able to find it.

If it's not Telegram
or WhatsApp,

it could be one
of the more than 800

other encryption products
out there,

almost 2/3 of which
are made by companies

not easily covered by U.S. law,

like Silent Phone or Threema

or SnikkitySnak or MailGrub.

Now, granted, those last two
aren't real, but the point is,

they will be in five minutes
if the government forces

the other ones
to weaken their encryption.

And that might not be the only
unintended consequence

of the FBI's actions.

Many countries around the world,
including Russia and China,

are watching this debate

and will presumably expect
similar access,

because, as you know,
Russia and China

have as much respect
for privacy

as horny teenagers
in '80s comedies.

And when you consider all this--

the legal tenuousness
of the FBI's case,

the security risks
of creating a key,

the borderline impossibility
of perfectly securing the key,

the international fallout
of creating a precedent,

and the fact that a t*rror1st
could circumvent all of this

by downloading whatever the f*ck
Threema is--

it's enough to sway
the most strident opinion.

Case in point:
remember Lindsey Graham,

Mr. "This is stupid"?

Just this week--

three months after he said
that--

he was in a hearing

with the attorney general
Loretta Lynch

about this subject,
and this happened...

- I think that for us,

the issue is about
a criminal investigation

into a t*rror1st act
and the need to obtain evidence.

- And--but it's just not
so simple,

and I'll end with this.

I thought it was that simple;
I was all with you

until I actually started
getting briefed by people

in the intel community,
and I will say I'm a person

who's been moved
by the arguments

of the precedent we set
and the damage we may be doing

to our own national security.

- It's a miracle.

Lindsey Graham
has met the concept of nuance.

And this is a man
who once warned,

"The world is literally
about to blow up."

So you're not dealing
with someone

who likes to dabble
with gray areas.

And look, there is no easy side
to be on in this debate.

Strong encryption has its costs,
from protecting t*rrorists

to drug dealers
to child pornographers.

But I happen to feel that the
risks of weakening encryption--

even a little bit,
even just for the government--

are potentially much worse.

And even though I'm on Apple's
side in this case,

I do think they would help
both their customers

and the government
understand this a lot better

if they were
a little more honest

regarding security in their ads.

woman: Hi. We're Apple.

This is an Apple iPhone.

It comes in rose gold.
It's awesome.

This is an Apple customer.

- Hey, Siri.

Find vegan sushi.

woman: Mmm, sounds good.

And these are the engineers
who make our products.

- Hey.
woman: Hey, guys.

We can help you communicate,
celebrate,

pay for stuff,
everything.

But here's something
you should know.

We're barely one step ahead
of hackers at all times

so that when you idiots
lose your phone,

your information
doesn't wind up in the hands

of guys like Gary.

- Hey. I'm Gary.

Thanks for losing your phone,
dipshit.

woman: Hey, Gary.

Because if Gary can get in,
he has access

to pictures of your food,
your bank account,

pretty much everything.

- Now I can masturbate
to photos of your family.

woman: [laughs]
Okay, Gary.

And when we find out
there's a security flaw,

this is how we react.

- f*ck! f*ck, f*ck!

woman:
Yeah, that's about right.

So when the FBI comes to us
and asks if we can undermine

our encryption without
compromising everyone else's

emails, texts,
and skateboarding videos,

this is our response...

- Are you f*cking kidding me?

We're engineers, not wizards.

woman: Are you sure
you're not wizards?

- Yeah. Pretty sure.
f*ck!

woman: Okay, listen.
Apple's not perfect.

You need proof?
We made the Newton.

We made that one Mac
that looks like a toaster.

We actually thought
the Apple Watch was cool.

- Wait. This isn't cool?

woman: Oh, f*ck no.
- Shit!

woman: We put a U2 album
on your phones.

You know, the one you've been
struggling to delete?

That thing keeps coming back,
huh?

And you can't even make
our battery last

more than, like, a day.

Why is that, exactly?

- Have you tried turning off

location services
and push emails

and adjusting
your screen brightness

so that you can--

woman: Okay.
Forget we asked.

The point is,
best-case scenario,

we can keep hackers
out of your stuff

for about six months
before this happens again.

- I'm back.

I see someone's
been to the beach.

[all yelling]

woman: So please,
keep enjoying our products.

Just know this shaky edifice
could crumble at any moment.

Apple.

- Agh!
- What did you do?

What are you doing?

- That's our show.
Thanks for watching.

See you next week.
Good night.

[cheers and applause]

- Agh!

[all yelling]

- I don't know what to do!

[upbeat rock music]

♪

- No! No!

What did you do?
What did you do?

I don't know how to use
this thing!

I don't know how to--
- Ugh! Ugh! Ugh!

♪

[bright tone]