Irina Palm

[Special Care]

Sorry, I forgot to mention in advance that 'Irina Palm' was being
shown on BBC2 at midnight on Saturday............ or should that be
Sunday............

What day is midnight?

It's very meaningful ...............and educational for some people.

It's about INVERSION.

Put it on your list of those things you have to do before you
die.......

.......... see 'Irina Palm.'

[Max Demian]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 01:46:59 -0700 (PDT), Special Care
<special...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Sorry, I forgot to mention in advance that 'Irina Palm' was being
>shown on BBC2 at midnight on Saturday............ or should that be
>Sunday............

It's neither. It's Sunday night, so it's early Monday...

--
Max Demian

[Special Care]

On Jul 16, 11:57 am, Max Demian <max_dem...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 01:46:59 -0700 (PDT), Special Care
>

> <special.car...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Sorry, I forgot to mention in advance that 'Irina Palm' was being
> >shown on BBC2 at midnight on Saturday............ or should that be
> >Sunday............
>
> It's neither. It's Sunday night, so it's early Monday...
>
> --
> Max Demian

=====================================
OK, but if the time is midnight, what day is it?

[JohnR]

New Year starts when the clock strikes midnight so it belongs to the day
after the one before. I bet that didn't help :)

[spiritrising]

at the stroke of midnight it is actually the same day then. in military
time it is seen as 2400 hours, 'am' is considered 0001hours

[spiritrising]

saturday, many people make the mistake of taking that actual stroke as
the next day but it is the next second that determines the next day

[Special Care]

The Hebrews/Jews got it right.
Every day is measured from sunset to sunset.

[Special Care]

I love all English women of mature age.
(The bigger the better.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vE_PuaqEC4

[spiritrising]

Special Care wrote:
> The Hebrews/Jews got it right.
> Every day is measured from sunset to sunset.
>

but jews are cult worshipers

[spiritrising]

weel gag me atleast her face did!

[conway caine]

"spiritrising" wrote in message
news:bb62c$5004185f$adbe9991$29...@ALLTEL.NET...

****Really????
(Get out the thongs. I feel a Sundance coming on)

[Cynic]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 04:38:38 -0700 (PDT), Special Care
<special...@gmail.com> wrote:

>OK, but if the time is midnight, what day is it?

Midnight is usually designated as time 00:00 rather than 24:00

As such it is the day that is just beginning rather than the day that
has just ended.

--
Cynic

[Cynic]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 06:25:25 -0600, spiritrising
<miketwo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>at the stroke of midnight it is actually the same day then. in military
>time it is seen as 2400 hours, 'am' is considered 0001hours

No, the military (and any other 24 hour clock system) invariably
designates midnight as 00:00

--
Cynic

[AlanG]

Not when I was in the army almost 50 years ago. Midnight was always
designated as 23:59:59 or 23:59 for short. We even had a black
sergeant who's nickname was 23:59.

We were told never to use the terms midnight or 00:00 as they could be
confusing. Quite why this was so I can't recall. I just treated as yet
another army way of doing things that might not make sense but worked
as long as everyone did it.

[Cynic]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:37:01 +0100, AlanG <inv...@invalid.co.uk>

wrote:


>>On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 06:25:25 -0600, spiritrising
>><miketwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>at the stroke of midnight it is actually the same day then. in military
>>>time it is seen as 2400 hours, 'am' is considered 0001hours
>>
>>No, the military (and any other 24 hour clock system) invariably
>>designates midnight as 00:00
>
>Not when I was in the army almost 50 years ago. Midnight was always
>designated as 23:59:59 or 23:59 for short. We even had a black
>sergeant who's nickname was 23:59.

No, that's one second before midnight in the first case, and a minute
before midnight in the second case. We certainly used the time of
00:00 when I was in the army 30 years ago ("zero hundred"). 23:59 is
no more midnight than 21:59 is 10 PM.

>We were told never to use the terms midnight or 00:00 as they could be
>confusing. Quite why this was so I can't recall. I just treated as yet
>another army way of doing things that might not make sense but worked
>as long as everyone did it.

It is confusing for some people for the same reason the PP was
confused - some people will not know whether "00:00:00 on 17th July
2012" is referring to midnight coming up as I post (changing from
Tuesday to Wednesday) or midnight already past (changing from Monday
to Tuesday), in fact it most definitely and unambiguously refers to
midnight already gone (Monday-Tuesday) but some people don't
understand that (IMO rather obvious) fact. Midnight tonight will be
00:00:00 on 18th July 2012, and it will be Wednesday. It will remain
Wednesday until the exact moment it is 00:00 - and not the tiniest of
a fraction of a second before then.

The time of 24:00 does not exist. The hour following 23 is 00, and
the date advances by one day at exactly the same time that the hour
changes - look at any digital 24 hour clock/calender and see what time
& date follows a second after 23:59:59

If a clock could read 24:00:00, what should it read a second later or
a minute later, or an hour later?

Insurance policies often cite an expiry time a minute before midnight
so as to avoid people claiming that they thought they were still
insured the following day.

--
Cynic

[Max Demian]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:55:18 GMT, cyni...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) wrote:

>Insurance policies often cite an expiry time a minute before midnight
>so as to avoid people claiming that they thought they were still
>insured the following day.

They sometimes expire at a minute before noon, with the renewal at
noon. Either way there would appear to be a whole minute when you're
uninsured.

--
Max Demian

[AlanG]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:55:18 GMT, cyni...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:37:01 +0100, AlanG <inv...@invalid.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>
>>>On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 06:25:25 -0600, spiritrising
>>><miketwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>at the stroke of midnight it is actually the same day then. in military
>>>>time it is seen as 2400 hours, 'am' is considered 0001hours
>>>
>>>No, the military (and any other 24 hour clock system) invariably
>>>designates midnight as 00:00
>>
>>Not when I was in the army almost 50 years ago. Midnight was always
>>designated as 23:59:59 or 23:59 for short. We even had a black
>>sergeant who's nickname was 23:59.
>
>No, that's one second before midnight in the first case, and a minute
>before midnight in the second case.

I know. But that's what we were told to use

> We certainly used the time of
>00:00 when I was in the army 30 years ago ("zero hundred"). 23:59 is
>no more midnight than 21:59 is 10 PM.

That's why it was always 23:59 instead of midnight

[BartC]

"Cynic" <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5005af2c...@127.0.0.1...

> The time of 24:00 does not exist. The hour following 23 is 00, and
> the date advances by one day at exactly the same time that the hour
> changes - look at any digital 24 hour clock/calender and see what time
> & date follows a second after 23:59:59

Whether 24:00 is used on actual clocks or not doesn't matter. It's to clear
up the confusion you mentioned where 00:00 can be ambiguous, or requires
extra explanations

(So, an entire day corresponds to the period 00:00 to 24:00; saying 00:00 to
00:00 would look odd; you would have to start mentioning days, or use
23:59:59.9999....)

> If a clock could read 24:00:00, what should it read a second later or
> a minute later, or an hour later?

A second later it might show 00:00:01. However a time such as 24:00 (and
perhaps up to 24:59 or even 29:59) is more likely to be shown on timetables
or TV schedules, which are usually based on a specific day.

(I thought perhaps 24:00:00 might be used when there's a leap-second, but
that uses 23:59:60 instead, which makes sense because 24:00 of one day is
just a synonym for 00:00 of the next; no extra time added)

--
Bartc

[spiritrising]

after 21.5 years in the military you miss one thing in your post the
clock is 24 hours not 2359 hours as you have it down. your right on one
sense but wrong in another.

the correct way to see it is counting on the first hour go to the 24
hr adding the two zeros behind it.
commonly known is 2400 hrs is the same as 0000 hr, but if your
actually in the military the 2400 is used on anything written. that's
where the difference lies. you will never hear 0000 used in a
conversation in the military

in the civilian world using a 24 hr clock you can use this as an example
"on a train arriving you would arrive at 24:00hrs but leave at 00:00
hrs. confusing but it works." civilians put the separation between hr
and minute in the printing.

to get even more confusing is legal contracts they will list 24:00hrs as
the end of the day not 00:00.

to get even more confusing when working in international circles and
business you will also see 24:59 denoted in the 24hr clock.

if you ever listen to the bbc on the radio you will also note the use of
24:00hrs

another note to add is most transportation use the General Transit Feed
Specification (GTFS) for time and it has the 24:00 in it.

[spiritrising]

military time has no separation in it as you post and that's 21 and a
half years for me in the service. its the way of the army trooper. ltc
retired

[spiritrising]

now if you knew what system they(insurance) used you would understand
they use the IETF timestamp where you will see either "-00:00" or
(+00:00) to denote the same day or the next the minus sign denotes the
next day,the plus the same day, and since most customers would never
know what it means they stop one minute before that time.
you can look it up but i bet you will be even more confused than anyone
else on the planet.

[spiritrising]

wow! someone who has a sorta clue, congrats! they actually do have a
representation of the leap seconds used but it is listed a different way
and not generally shown on any paper. 2400 is still used tho 235960 is a
valid number for a leap second, try saying that one the correct way, it
is used only for the leap second event the next number will be 2400
there is no separation(colon) in the military on the numbers that only
occurs in the civilian quadrant. and the civilian quadrant doesn't show
the leap second.

military time includes the US and all Nato countries others may use a
different time usage entirely.

[BartC]

"spiritrising" <miketwo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:93ea3$50069a09$adbe9991$16...@ALLTEL.NET...

> now if you knew what system they(insurance) used you would understand they
> use the IETF timestamp where you will see either "-00:00" or (+00:00) to
> denote the same day or the next the minus sign denotes the next day,the
> plus the same day, and since most customers would never know what it means
> they stop one minute before that time.
> you can look it up but i bet you will be even more confused than anyone
> else on the planet.

So:

+00:00 = 00:00 at the start of a given day
-00:00 = 24:00 at the end of that day (if 24:00 is one minute after
23:59).

But by themselves, I would never remember what is meant by +00:00
and -00:00, even after having it explained a dozen times. It looks too much
like -00:00 ought to be before +00:00.

--
Bartc

[spiritrising]

the minus is the next day and considered less than an hr for the start
of the day
the plus sign denotes adding onto what is already there. like i said
confusing. the IETF timestamp is also used for computer time when the
24hr clock is used.

-00:00 = -00:00 at the start of a given day, 00:00 is not used
and 00:01 is written as -00:01 the first number to lose the minus sign
is +01:00. so the minus makes it less than a full hour and becomes the
first full hour at 1am.

+00:00 = 24:00 at the end of that day

the only other way they could have been consistent would be to say
00:00:00:00:00:00:01 and on and on
and how confusing would that be?

[Cynic]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 22:19:49 +0100, Max Demian
<max_d...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

>>Insurance policies often cite an expiry time a minute before midnight
>>so as to avoid people claiming that they thought they were still
>>insured the following day.

>They sometimes expire at a minute before noon, with the renewal at
>noon. Either way there would appear to be a whole minute when you're
>uninsured.

No, I don't think there is. The expiry time can, IMO, be assumed to
be *inclusive* of the stated time (just as it is inclusive of the
stated date). Time is displayed with seconds *truncated* rather than
rounded if they are not displayed. Thus if the time is 11:59:59.9 ,
an accurate digital clock that did not display the seconds would read
11:59 - and you are still insured until the very instant it flips to
12:00 - at which point your new policy becomes instantly active.

--
Cynic

[Cynic]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:49:03 +0100, "BartC" <b...@freeuk.com> wrote:

>(So, an entire day corresponds to the period 00:00 to 24:00; saying 00:00 to
>00:00 would look odd; you would have to start mentioning days, or use
>23:59:59.9999....)

No, if you would say a day comprises of the full 24 hours that follows
the time of 00:00, or pedantically it is from 00:00 inclusive to the
following 00:00 exclusive. It is *not* from 00:00 to 24:00, because
that would imply that it includes the full minute of time that is
24:00

Think of any number system. There is never any number corresponding
to the modulo of the system - when a count reaches the modulo that
digit becomes zero and the next exponent up advances by 1. In normal
base 10 numbering, there is no symbol for the quantity of ten - we
zero the units and advance the next higher exponent. In a base 2
system (binary) there is no symbol for the quantity of two.

It is the same with systems that have mixed modulos. When writing a
quantity of stones, pounds and ounces, a weight that is an ounce
heavier than 7st 13lb 15oz is 8st 0lb 0oz, not 7st 13lb 16oz or 7st
14lb 0oz.

In time, a time that follow a minute after 31st December 2012 23:59
will similarly cause the numbers to advance according to their modulo,
with any digit that reaches its modulo going to zero and advancing the
next exponent up. So it becomes 1st January 2013 00:00

Saying that the time is 24:00 on 10th May is similar to stating that
your height is 5 feet 12 inches.

--
Cynic

[AlanG]

Almost 50 years since I left the army. I can't remember how it was
written only that we were told to use 23:59 instead of midnight and of
course zero hours for the start of the day.

[spiritrising]

once a soldier always a soldier you forgot sir!

[Cynic]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 06:10:59 -0600, spiritrising
<miketwo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> +00:00 = 00:00 at the start of a given day
>> -00:00 = 24:00 at the end of that day (if 24:00 is one minute after
>> 23:59).
>>
>> But by themselves, I would never remember what is meant by +00:00 and
>> -00:00, even after having it explained a dozen times. It looks too much
>> like -00:00 ought to be before +00:00.
>>
>
>the minus is the next day and considered less than an hr for the start
>of the day
>the plus sign denotes adding onto what is already there. like i said
>confusing. the IETF timestamp is also used for computer time when the
>24hr clock is used.

An absolutely crazy convention. Should we also call new years' day
-31st December and keep it that date until the 2nd January, when we
drop the minus sign?

Which would be exactly the same principle as I understand you have
explained.

--
Cynic

[spiritrising]

the way to look at it is that next second is the next day and the time
anyone could react it is already changed over, its not really a big deal
unless you have a bomb set up somewhere and want it to go off on time.

[Cynic]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 06:16:38 -0600, spiritrising
<miketwo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>the way to look at it is that next second is the next day and the time
>anyone could react it is already changed over, its not really a big deal
>unless you have a bomb set up somewhere and want it to go off on time.

Why the next second? Why not the next milisecond, or microsecond, or
a smaller time period?

Whilst a human may not see a second as being a significant period of
time, it is *very* significant for many electronic systems.

And if you are happy with the date changing over at one second after
midnight, why are you not happy with it happening at *exactly*
midnight? You have just move the area of possible confusion ahead by
a second. If a frame from a CCTV camera has a timestamp of 0.4
seconds after midnight, should that be marked as happening on Sunday
or Monday?

--
Cynic

[spiritrising]

i have no relation to time changing at midnight at all as i am asleep
during that time, infact i own many watches, but haven't worn one in 20
years, shit i don't even know if my watches would run or not even my
rolex just sits there waiting to be winded up, but it ain't happening,
not today, not tomorrow, not next week or even next year. time has
stopped for me, which means i haven't had a birthday in that long as
well. sun comes up, wake up, sun goes down, go to bed such as life is
and works nicely for me. shit i wouldn't know what day of the week it is
unless someone tells me. or what time of year, summer and winter are
both warm so we have no season change here as well....go figure

[%]

are you on some sort of dope

[Charles Bryant]

In article <5005af2c...@127.0.0.1>, Cynic <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
}The time of 24:00 does not exist.

While it is not a conventional representation, it certainly does
exist. It's 00:00 on the next day. Similarly, 25:00 is 01:00 on the
next day. Such a representation would be very silly except in unusual
circumstances. For example, when filing in a form such as a work
timesheet which was designed on the assumption that nobody would ever
need to record a period which corssed midnight, so the form had no way
to specify a separate day for the start and end times of the period.

[%]

what

[Cynic]

On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 01:59:34 +0000 (UTC), Charles Bryant

IOW it is an inelegant workaround for a badly designed form. Known as
"a kludge" in the computer programming industry.

I have written many computer programs that have to make calculations
on times and dates. In most cases the easiest way is to first convert
all date/times into a single large number, that number being the
number of time units (minutes, seconds, milliseconds etc) from a fixed
date & time. The fixed date & time chosen does not matter, as the
time units from that date/time may be positive or negative.

If the smallest time unit is a minute, the calculation is surprisingly
easy. Having the units in seconds is a slightly bigger challenge
because the insertion of leap-seconds does not follow a simple formula
(the easiest way is to use a lookup table).

Any graphical user interface (or printed form) should be designed so
that the user can easily and intuitively encompass a time period that
spans midnight - even if it is not envisaged that it ever will.

--
Cynic

[spiritrising]

come back and say that when you are my age....71

[JohnR]

You know, it's one of those subjects I don't consciously think about
much at all, in terms of what it actually is, but on the odd occasion I
might contemplate the concept of time and the arbitrary nature of the
many units we assign to it which apply a usable measure, on our lump of
rock in the universe, and how they relate to everything else out there
is a fascinating subject. I'm just not interested enough to study it
more, oh well back to watching the markets.

[JohnR]

I wouldn't waste another second of your time replying to twits like that.

[spiritrising]

he will never get to my age, probably die of that dope he speaks of

[Cynic]

On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:51:08 +0100, JohnR <repr...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>You know, it's one of those subjects I don't consciously think about
>much at all, in terms of what it actually is, but on the odd occasion I
>might contemplate the concept of time and the arbitrary nature of the
>many units we assign to it which apply a usable measure, on our lump of
>rock in the universe, and how they relate to everything else out there
>is a fascinating subject. I'm just not interested enough to study it
>more, oh well back to watching the markets.

I OTOH have been fascinated with time for many years. It's a bit of
an obsession with me - I cannot stand to have my watch or any clock
in the house incorrect by more than a couple of seconds. If I cannot
be bothered to keep correcting the time on a clock, I deliberately
deactivate it or set it to an obviously wrong time (e.g. the clock on
my microwave oven). All my house clocks are radio controlled, and my
PCs are sychronised to an online time server.

Ultra-accurate time has become very important now that we have
networked servers that need to "know" which file on different
computers is the most recent even when they were modified seconds
apart. Satellite navigation requires a time synchronisation to within
a tiny fraction of a second.

Decimalising time would create too many problems, because a change in
the length of a second would affect too many other units that are
defined in terms of that unit. If we are obliged to retain the
second, the length of a day is fixed by the rotational period of the
Earth, and so must remain as approximately 86400 seconds long, and
there is no way to subdivide that number that is any more convenient
than our present system of hours and minutes.

Our calender OTOH could certainly be made more simple. My favourite
system would be to do away with months completely, and express a date
as a day, week and year. Days would be by their present name or
number (1-7), and weeks by number (1-52). Week 1 would have an extra
day at the start (day 0), and week 52 would have an extra day at the
end on a leap year (day 8) - probably both being treated as an
extension of the weekend. New years' day would thus never fall on any
normal day of the week, but would have its own special day (day 0),
and probably be given its own special name (as would the leap-year
extra day).


--
Cynic

[%]

oh no not another kid on usenet

[%]

yes you would so stop lying

[%]

you're already younger than me kid

[spiritrising]

lol sure i am, i haven't had a birthday in 50 years!

[spiritrising]

your just going to have to relax, if ya don't your going to force your
self into a heart attack. how about a different way than you are
proposing. go to the link below and download startdate system tray.
might be better than any calender. i would suggest the aztec way but it
is stopping with no update or turn around.

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Desktop-Enhancements/Clocks-Time-Management/Stardate-System-Tray.shtml

[%]

you're only born once anyway

[spiritrising]

that may be in your culture but not in mine

[%]

everything i say is how everything is so it is

[spiritrising]

well.....around here they call me god, so there!

[%]

yes i already know that my grandson

[Charles Bryant]

In article <50094e03....@127.0.0.1>, Cynic <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
}On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 01:59:34 +0000 (UTC), Charles Bryant
}<n207905...@chch.demon.co.uk> wrote:
}>In article <5005af2c...@127.0.0.1>, Cynic <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
}>}The time of 24:00 does not exist.
}
}>While it is not a conventional representation, it certainly does
}>exist. It's 00:00 on the next day.

..

}IOW it is an inelegant workaround for a badly designed form. Known as
}"a kludge" in the computer programming industry.

It certainly is.

}I have written many computer programs that have to make calculations
}on times and dates. In most cases the easiest way is to first convert
}all date/times into a single large number, that number being the
}number of time units (minutes, seconds, milliseconds etc) from a fixed
}date & time. The fixed date & time chosen does not matter, as the
}time units from that date/time may be positive or negative.

I have often done the same. I find the best base date is 1st March
2000 (or 1st March 1600 to cover older dates without negative
numbers). Though this general method is only guaranteed to work on the
past. Some future times cannot be represented like that.

}Any graphical user interface (or printed form) should be designed so
}that the user can easily and intuitively encompass a time period that
}spans midnight - even if it is not envisaged that it ever will.

However when the requrements claim that there is no need for such a
facility, if you put in the ability to specify a different date for
the start and end, you'll be regarded as a fool who cannot read the
requirements, while if you simply allow a larger range of hours than
normal, nobody will notice until the feature is needed, when you'll be
regarded as a genius.

[%]

i'm already fantastic

[spiritrising]

well i am not yours but that is my name...how did you know that? my
great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great
,great, great , great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great, great
,great, great ,great ,great, great , great ,great,great
,great,great,great,great, great ,great, great ,great ,great, great ,
great ,great,great ,great,great,great,great grandstar named me that
against my dad's wishes.

[%]

i know everything

[spiritrising]

i create the information you know

[%]

that's what i created you for