Page 411 of 2682

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:14 pm UTC
by Caswallon
Latent22 wrote:Thanks everyone for helping with the party!
Your Welcome!

I like that other people used my "Prescient" comment about Blitzgirl showing up in the comic ;) That came together beautifully!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:19 pm UTC
by lmjb1964
mscha wrote:
lmjb1964 wrote:That is such a sad, pathetic "bye." And BlitzGirl was just saying how cheerful HER present (our past) was. Maybe we should all go live in the past.

FTFY.

lmjb1964 wrote:That watersemencancercoffeebabybaconice is rising rather quickly.

Not in the past 8 newpix it hasn't. But once Megan is off-screen, it will probably pick up again.


Hmm, I guess you're right. It was going up for a while there. I don't understand what the sea is doing.

Pfhorrest wrote:
descor wrote:Are you suggesting there is some causal link between Megan and the tide? <Fat joke goes here>

Like "Ol' Flat Top" from the classic Beatles song "Come Together", Megan is so attractive that she's hard to see.

Because any light which reaches her is unable to escape.

Because her attractiveness is gravitational.

...cuz she fat.


Oh, no you di'n't.

I keep waiting for a banner to go unfurl in the comic saying "The End." Or maybe "Fin", in honor of La Petite. The suspense is killing me!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:24 pm UTC
by dreiarmumig
Caswallon wrote:
Latent22 wrote:Thanks everyone for helping with the party!
Your Welcome!



Sorry, couldn't resist.
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:24 pm UTC
by mscha
If the comic is going to end, odds are that it'll will happen at midnight EDT; or non-heretically, in 5 newpix.
If that's the case, then Randall (in His infinite wisdom) is probably just padding with things like a final "bye" from Megan, probably one from Cueball coming up.

I hope I'm wrong, though.

Also...

Latent22 wrote:Thanks everyone for helping with the party!

Welcome...
I have the impression, though, that BlitzGirl didn't fully 'get' the time traveling operations we put in place for her, beginning with the request to switch her hat for a beret.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:30 pm UTC
by Caswallon
dreiarmumig wrote:
Caswallon wrote:
Latent22 wrote:Thanks everyone for helping with the party!
Your Welcome!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Spoiler:
Image
Well don't I feel silly now, How dare you! ;)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:36 pm UTC
by KarMann
Flado wrote:
lmjb1964 wrote:Please, no discussions about whether backwards-R is a vowel, or a diphthong, etc...

Happy to oblige ;-) "backwards-R", being Cyrillic Я, is clearly a vowel. Or a diphthong. I'm not sure. We have 6 vowels, and neither Ю nor Я were among them at the time. The sounds are like "yu" and "ya", respectively, so maybe they are diphthongs. I wish I knew the difference, but now I must transcend to coma again, even before catching up. I feel blitzy.

I'm not great with Russian, but I think basically, if they're alone or at the beginning of a word, or following certain consonants or one of those palatization modifiers, they'd be a true diphthong. But, if they're following one of the usual consonants, they wouldn't be, and modify the pronunciation of the preceding consonant instead, kind of like '~' in Spanish & Portuguese.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:37 pm UTC
by ChronosDragon
Comawalltext time!

Caswallon wrote:
dreiarmumig wrote:
Caswallon wrote:
Latent22 wrote:Thanks everyone for helping with the party!
Your Welcome!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Spoiler:
Image
Well don't I feel silly now, How dare you! ;)


Don't kid you'reself, your sure to to better in life if you're yours are sorted.*

Purplepants77 wrote:
1"We" refers to the group of individuals or bots that are following this needle-pulled-thingy at any given point in Time. "We" is a legally binding contract and is subject to change at any Time. "We" assumes no liability.


Implying the individuals make bots to follow the thread? Or the individuals become bots following the thread? Or the individuals are replaced by bots who read the thead? :shock:

descor wrote:
Ptarr wrote:
Megan wrote:bye.
Is this the end of time?

Oh please, say it ain't so!


Your drug is a heartbreaker.

(I can't hear that phrase without thinking of that anymore, not since I played Rock Band and heard this song far too many times...)

airdrik wrote:
azule wrote:OH NOES!!! MEGAN'S GONE FOR REALS! ALL HOPE IS GONE! MEGANPOCALYPSE!!

Wait, Gone? you mean like Gone gone? She isn't really Gone gone, is she? She's just gone, but not gone gone, right? They will be coming back again, right? .. Right?!?


She couldn't possibly be! She *sniffle* she's a main *sob* character, Randall wouldn't *choke sob* dare change the cast of the comic *breakdown into tears*

Randall willing, that won't be the end of M&C's arc!

*This sentence physically hurt to write

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:41 pm UTC
by azule
airdrik wrote:
azule wrote:OH NOES!!! MEGAN'S GONE FOR REALS! ALL HOPE IS GONE! MEGANPOCALYPSE!!

Wait, Gone? you mean like Gone gone? She isn't really Gone gone, is she? She's just gone, but not gone gone, right? They will be coming back again, right? .. Right?!?

Well, you still have BlitzGirl to look forward to. *pat-pat*

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:44 pm UTC
by jjjdavidson
Okay, I'm a little freaked out now. No, I'm a lot freaked out.

Everybody's wondered, How did Randall generate the hashes? I thought about Externalities and the hash everyone was trying to break there, a Skein 1024 1024 hash.

But that's a 128-byte hash (256 hex digits) and the file names are only 32-byte (64 digits). But then I thought, Would it be so un-Randallish to generate a 1024-bit hash and only use 256 bits? So I wrote a script to test the Externalites hash against the Time image folder, taking 64 hex digits at a time for the image name. 192 failures, then this, with the very last 64 digits of the hash.

I don't know how many frames in the future this is, but here's:
b567aa3e2390a573a373a48a5e676640c79cc70197e1c5e7f902fb53ca1858b6.png
Spoiler:
Image
So you see why I'm freaked out.

Edit: 192 failures, not 184. Duh.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:50 pm UTC
by dreiarmumig
jjjdavidson wrote:
Spoiler:
Okay, I'm a little freaked out now. No, I'm a lot freaked out.

Everybody's wondered, How did Randall generate the hashes? I thought about Externalities and the hash everyone was trying to break there, a Skein 1024 1024 hash.

But that's a 128-byte hash (256 hex digits) and the file names are only 32-byte (64 digits). But then I thought, Would it be so un-Randallish to generate a 1024-bit hash and only use 256 bits? So I wrote a script to test the Externalites hash against the Time image folder, taking 64 hex digits at a time for the image name. 184 failures, then this, with the very last 64 digits of the hash.

I don't know how many frames in the future this is, but here's:
b567aa3e2390a573a373a48a5e676640c79cc70197e1c5e7f902fb53ca1858b6.png
[spoiler]ImageSo you see why I'm freaked out.


Woah.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:55 pm UTC
by lmjb1964
dreiarmumig wrote:
Spoiler:
Caswallon wrote:
Latent22 wrote:Thanks everyone for helping with the party!
Your Welcome!



Sorry, couldn't resist.
Image


Hee-hee

Flado wrote:
lmjb1964 wrote:Please, no discussions about whether backwards-R is a vowel, or a diphthong, etc...

Happy to oblige ;-) "backwards-R", being Cyrillic Я, is clearly a vowel. Or a diphthong. I'm not sure. We have 6 vowels, and neither Ю nor Я were among them at the time. The sounds are like "yu" and "ya", respectively, so maybe they are diphthongs. I wish I knew the difference, but now I must transcend to coma again, even before catching up. I feel blitzy.


D'oh! Fine, if you're going to go there, I would say that the backwards R in Toys backwards-R Us (That's how Dave Barry writes it, so it works for me), or Flags backwards-R Us, is not the same thing as the Cyrillic Я. Otherwise, it would be pronounced Toy Ya Us instead of Toys R Us. And that would make no sense.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:56 pm UTC
by Caswallon
jjjdavidson wrote:
Spoiler:
Okay, I'm a little freaked out now. No, I'm a lot freaked out.

Everybody's wondered, How did Randall generate the hashes? I thought about Externalities and the hash everyone was trying to break there, a Skein 1024 1024 hash.

But that's a 128-byte hash (256 hex digits) and the file names are only 32-byte (64 digits). But then I thought, Would it be so un-Randallish to generate a 1024-bit hash and only use 256 bits? So I wrote a script to test the Externalites hash against the Time image folder, taking 64 hex digits at a time for the image name. 184 failures, then this, with the very last 64 digits of the hash.

I don't know how many frames in the future this is, but here's:
b567aa3e2390a573a373a48a5e676640c79cc70197e1c5e7f902fb53ca1858b6.png
ImageSo you see why I'm freaked out.

Holy Crap!
Spoiler:
I would believe this a bit more if any of the EXIF data matched up, or if you actually pointed at http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/time/ :wink:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:02 pm UTC
by Eternal Density
It won't be long, I belong,
Somewhere past the setting sun

Finally free, finally strong,
Somewhere back where I belong

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:03 pm UTC
by mscha
QUAPHTHONG...
Image

Edit: Just some barely visible sea level rise.
Spoiler:
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:05 pm UTC
by Eternal Density
Looks like I picked an extremely suspenseful time to catch up after being preoccupied Outside by ANZAC Day goings-on. But happily it is not over and I can breath a sigh of relief.
And yay, I'm on the List of Hatting :D

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:06 pm UTC
by ChronosDragon
jjjdavidson wrote:I don't know how many frames in the future this is, but here's:
b567aa3e2390a573a373a48a5e676640c79cc70197e1c5e7f902fb53ca1858b6.png
Spoiler:
Image
So you see why I'm freaked out.


Well played, my friend, well played.

So has anyone actually tried to break the hash?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:09 pm UTC
by mscha
ChronosDragon wrote:So has anyone actually tried to break the hash?

I believe the consensus is that IMO it's probably not actually a hash, but just a random ID, so there's nothing to break.

Edit: no consensus, I guess...

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:14 pm UTC
by htom
ChronosDragon wrote:
jjjdavidson wrote:I don't know how many frames in the future this is, but here's:
b567aa3e2390a573a373a48a5e676640c79cc70197e1c5e7f902fb53ca1858b6.png
Spoiler:
Image
So you see why I'm freaked out.


Well played, my friend, well played.

So has anyone actually tried to break the hash?


Not so much tried to break as thought about it. I think for each image n it's the hash of the path on the drive(s) devoted to Time-1190 image n. So he can update images as much as he wants, doesn't change the hash. Each path is different, so each hash will be different. Once the image is first retrieved, it's stored somewhere else as hash(n).png . If he makes changes, he issues a command to resync the images. The hashes don't change, everything else can.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:15 pm UTC
by Caswallon
mscha wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:So has anyone actually tried to break the hash?

I believe the consensus is that it's probably not actually a hash, but just a random ID, so there's nothing to break.

I actually believe it is a hash, but likely seeded and would be very difficult to crack. However the random attack approach suggested by jjjdavidson is not an entirely bad idea, but would likely be detected very easily and shutdown. Plus, if it is a seeded hash, it would be very easy for Randall to then change the seed and essentially all of the image links.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:16 pm UTC
by cmyk
jjjdavidson wrote:Okay, I'm a little freaked out now. No, I'm a lot freaked out.

Everybody's wondered, How did Randall generate the hashes? I thought about Externalities and the hash everyone was trying to break there, a Skein 1024 1024 hash.

But that's a 128-byte hash (256 hex digits) and the file names are only 32-byte (64 digits). But then I thought, Would it be so un-Randallish to generate a 1024-bit hash and only use 256 bits? So I wrote a script to test the Externalites hash against the Time image folder, taking 64 hex digits at a time for the image name. 184 failures, then this, with the very last 64 digits of the hash.

I don't know how many frames in the future this is, but here's:
b567aa3e2390a573a373a48a5e676640c79cc70197e1c5e7f902fb53ca1858b6.png
Spoiler:
Image
So you see why I'm freaked out.


:shock:

Spoiler:
You alllllmost had me. ;)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:18 pm UTC
by Caswallon
htom wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:<snip/>So has anyone actually tried to break the hash?
Not so much tried to break as thought about it. I think for each image n it's the hash of the path on the drive(s) devoted to Time-1190 image n. So he can update images as much as he wants, doesn't change the hash. Each path is different, so each hash will be different. Once the image is first retrieved, it's stored somewhere else as hash(n).png . If he makes changes, he issues a command to resync the images. The hashes don't change, everything else can.
I would suggest similar, but likely using a database to contain the images instead of a path. Easier management of the images, and how/when they render. This could also potentially show the behaviors with the image EXIF Data that has been noted earlier.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:42 pm UTC
by SBN
lmjb1964 wrote:D'oh! Fine, if you're going to go there, I would say that the backwards R in Toys backwards-R Us (That's how Dave Barry writes it, so it works for me), or Flags backwards-R Us, is not the same thing as the Cyrillic Я. Otherwise, it would be pronounced Toy Ya Us instead of Toys R Us. And that would make no sense.

I've been calling it We-Be-Toys, but I like Toys Ya Us so I may switch. Does the s in toys go away, or was that a typo? I want to get my incorrect store name right, after all.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:44 pm UTC
by Valarya
ChronosDragon wrote:<snip>

Don't kid you'reself, your sure to to better in life if you're yours are sorted.*

*This sentence physically hurt to write


It hurt so bad* to read, to*. ><

Intentional.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:46 pm UTC
by azule
^"too", not "to". The hurt continues.

Anyone tried generating random hashes of the appropriate length and seeing if they exist on the server?

p.s. I wouldn't want to peek, just curious.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:55 pm UTC
by dreiarmumig
azule wrote:I wouldn't want to peek, just curious.

That sounds a bit contradictory.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:57 pm UTC
by BytEfLUSh
azule wrote:Anyone tried generating random hashes of the appropriate length and seeing if they exist on the server?


I may be wrong in my calculations, but let's assume there are 1 000 000 frames on the server and we bomb it with requests 1 000 000 times per second. The chance of loading an actual frame within one year is cca. 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003%

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:02 am UTC
by dreiarmumig
RIGGA-DIGGA-DING-DONG-SONG
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:03 am UTC
by mscha
Uh oh, sea wall collapse. (No sea level rise, though.)
Time_sea_level_rise_20130426_0000.png
Time_sea_level_rise_20130426_0000.png (1.51 KiB) Viewed 15351 times

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:06 am UTC
by Caswallon
BytEfLUSh wrote:
azule wrote:Anyone tried generating random hashes of the appropriate length and seeing if they exist on the server?


I may be wrong in my calculations, but let's assume there are 1.000.000 frames on the server and we bomb it with requests 1.000.000 times per second. The chance of loading an actual frame within one year is cca. 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003%

Huh, mine say 0.00000002%. So that seems much more likely
Edit: totally missed a power, my calculations match up.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:07 am UTC
by azule
This semenwall is crap. Too bad.

dreiarmumig wrote:
azule wrote:I wouldn't want to peek, just curious.

That sounds a bit contradictory.

I don't know what you mean. I wouldn't look. Maybe. I just want to know how good you guys are.

BytEfLUSh wrote:
azule wrote:Anyone tried generating random hashes of the appropriate length and seeing if they exist on the server?


I may be wrong in my calculations, but let's assume there are 1.000.000 frames on the server and we bomb it with requests 1.000.000 times per second. The chance of loading an actual frame within one year is cca. 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003%

But is that for real? It is not possible to just be lucky and see where that gets us?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:08 am UTC
by Latent22
Did a bit more investigation into the Modified dates but didn't find anything much useful.

Code: Select all

wget "http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/time/c47e36a518ab34230553d695eb4d4be0bbee134d003a6c9a9acdd585c4b7b014.png" --output-document=Times883.dat  --save-header


This wget command gets the image and also the http headers and the headers have the following:

Spoiler:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Via: 1.1 NAME_OF_MY_WEBPROXY
Connection: Keep-Alive
Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive
Content-Length: 11276
Age: 214
Expires: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 23:25:08 GMT
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 23:23:42 GMT
Content-Type: image/png
ETag: "3278645104"
Server: VoxCAST
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Last-Modified: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 05:31:13 GMT
Cache-Control: public, max-age=300
X-Cache: HIT from VoxCAST
Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=47


The only interesting bit is the Last-Modified: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 05:31:13 GMT bit.

This date is exactly the same down to the second on all frames.

This tells us the date modified of the file stored on the web servers.

Note this date lines up with the change that was made on the 22nd when he modified all the images with the mod times of 2013-04-22 01:07:25-04:00. Note you need to add 4 hours to the 1:07:25 to get it to UTC/GMT.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:09 am UTC
by speising
azule wrote:This semenwall is crap. Too bad.

dreiarmumig wrote:
azule wrote:I wouldn't want to peek, just curious.

That sounds a bit contradictory.

I don't know what you mean. I wouldn't look. Maybe. I just want to know how good you guys are.

BytEfLUSh wrote:
azule wrote:Anyone tried generating random hashes of the appropriate length and seeing if they exist on the server?


I may be wrong in my calculations, but let's assume there are 1.000.000 frames on the server and we bomb it with requests 1.000.000 times per second. The chance of loading an actual frame within one year is cca. 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003%

But is that for real? It is not possible to just be lucky and see where that gets us?


sure, why not, a million to one chances crop up nine out of ten times, after all.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:12 am UTC
by Latent22
azule wrote:But is that for real? It is not possible to just be lucky and see where that gets us?

Are you win lotto 10 times in a row lucky? if so start guessing ;)

Edit: my guess at 10 lotto's was a bit off sorry. based on the lottery we have here in New Zealand anyway which is 1/3, 838, 380 chance of winning (bigger countries have harder to win lotteries with bigger prizes of course). So the chance of winning 9 NZ lotto's in a row is the same chance as guessing the hash if you tried 1,000,000 a second for about a month. so all you need to do is buy 9 random lotto over 9 weeks and if you win on all of them then start hitting the server for a month! And you will find ONE future frame! Good luck!
Edit2: by the way if you don't win all 9 lotteries but only say 8 of them then your not lucky enough and don't bother trying the hashs. But you are welcome to donate some of your winnings to me anyway!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:39 am UTC
by buffygirl
cmyk wrote:
jjjdavidson wrote:Okay, I'm a little freaked out now. No, I'm a lot freaked out.

Everybody's wondered, How did Randall generate the hashes? I thought about Externalities and the hash everyone was trying to break there, a Skein 1024 1024 hash.

But that's a 128-byte hash (256 hex digits) and the file names are only 32-byte (64 digits). But then I thought, Would it be so un-Randallish to generate a 1024-bit hash and only use 256 bits? So I wrote a script to test the Externalites hash against the Time image folder, taking 64 hex digits at a time for the image name. 184 failures, then this, with the very last 64 digits of the hash.

I don't know how many frames in the future this is, but here's:
b567aa3e2390a573a373a48a5e676640c79cc70197e1c5e7f902fb53ca1858b6.png
Spoiler:
Image
So you see why I'm freaked out.


:shock:

Spoiler:
You alllllmost had me. ;)

You people are sooooo gullible!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:43 am UTC
by richP
It's not the end until the view pans out and over the sandcastles...
Spoiler:
And we see that the sandcastles spell out "goodbye" when seen from above.
Ask an old person, kids!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:47 am UTC
by AluisioASG
richP wrote:It's not the end until the view pans out and over the sandcastles...
Spoiler:
And we see that the sandcastles spell out "goodbye" when seen from above.
Ask an old person, kids!

or SOS

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:47 am UTC
by Valarya
azule wrote:^"too", not "to". The hurt continues.


Um, honey: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xECUrlnXCqk

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:47 am UTC
by jjjdavidson
Caswallon wrote:
mscha wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:So has anyone actually tried to break the hash?

I believe the consensus is that it's probably not actually a hash, but just a random ID, so there's nothing to break.

I actually believe it is a hash, but likely seeded and would be very difficult to crack. However the random attack approach suggested by jjjdavidson is not an entirely bad idea, but would likely be detected very easily and shutdown. Plus, if it is a seeded hash, it would be very easy for Randall to then change the seed and essentially all of the image links.

I don't know whether the image names are a hash or a random string, but I don't believe they're related to file content, and probably not to the sequence numbers. Back around frame 255 or so, the comic page was returning two different file names, depending on how fast you captured the image--but both names returned the same image.

Nevertheless, I seriously had to wonder if Time and Externalities were linked somehow (especially since nobody's yet figured out the data for the Externalities-hash). I really did test all 193 contiguous 64-digit substrings of the E-hash, and likewise the reversed E-hash. No joy. (I'm still thinking about variants like every fourth digit, every fourth bit, and so on.)

Not that I expected to get anything back, anyway--at least not any future image. After all, it's pretty trivial coding to have the next image uploaded to the image server just in time; that's standard practice for most of the webcomics out there, where the next image name is often quite predictable. (Skin Horse doesn't, I've discovered, but each of their file names includes a few words of an ongoing story, so they're not easy to predict.)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:50 am UTC
by vvn
buffygirl wrote:
vvn wrote:
HAL9000 wrote:Maybe it's Asteroid B-612.

From "Le petit prince":
The narrator explains that, as a young boy, he once drew a picture of a boa constrictor with an elephant digesting in its stomach; however, every adult who saw the picture would mistakenly interpret it as a drawing of a hat.
I want that hat!

Pour toi 1

1 EXCEPT THAT YOU DON'T NEED ANOTHER HAT!!! *pouts*

EDIT: Just aesthetic stuff.

No, I don't. I love my hat. I was just overwhelmed by the idea of a hat with an elephant inside. I am glad to see the image. Thank you. Besides, an elephant might make me capsize.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:57 am UTC
by Soup
Many thanks to mscha and any and all other members of the "Guild of People Who Know How to Do That Red/ Green Pixel Thing!" I would be blind by now if I had to gauge caffeinatedsemencancerbabybaconicesea-levels on my own. :wink: