Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 9:59 am



Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Your Preferred News Source 

Go to News Source?
CNN 10%  10%  [ 2 ]
Fox News 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
MSNBC 5%  5%  [ 1 ]
ABC News 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
BBC 15%  15%  [ 3 ]
Breitbart 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Newsmax 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Info War 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
AP News 15%  15%  [ 3 ]
Local News 10%  10%  [ 2 ]
Social Media 25%  25%  [ 5 ]
Newspaper or Newspaper Website (NYT, NY Post, WSJ, etc) 15%  15%  [ 3 ]
My Neighbor/Co-Worker/Friend Circle 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Other 5%  5%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 20

 Your Preferred News Source 
Author Message
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37886
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
DP07:


_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Sun Oct 09, 2022 2:53 pm
Profile
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
Well it's just odds that at least one member in WOKJ history would eventually end up going crazy


Not interested. Don’t waste my time. What you think is irrelevant. You lack the rational judgment to recognize what is or is not “crazy”. All of you guys lack the ability to think rationally whatsoever as I definite and understand it. I don’t need to explain. Let me be clear: no response of yours will ever possibly be acceptable, legitimate, or will not fail besides compliance with logic. You trust the truth, or you get the response you deserve. Accept my patience, or lose everything you want.


I don't think we have the same definition of logic


That’s because you don’t understand it. Yours is false. Certainly flawed or incomplete.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 2:55 pm
Profile ICQ
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37886
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
Well it's just odds that at least one member in WOKJ history would eventually end up going crazy


Not interested. Don’t waste my time. What you think is irrelevant. You lack the rational judgment to recognize what is or is not “crazy”. All of you guys lack the ability to think rationally whatsoever as I definite and understand it. I don’t need to explain. Let me be clear: no response of yours will ever possibly be acceptable, legitimate, or will not fail besides compliance with logic. You trust the truth, or you get the response you deserve. Accept my patience, or lose everything you want.


I don't think we have the same definition of logic


That’s because you don’t understand it. Yours is false. Certainly flawed or incomplete.


Your views still have too much leftism in it to be as rational as you think, it's just a different variety.

The extreme left and extreme right will never be the most rational ones, they get there via emotional attachment to their issues.

_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Sun Oct 09, 2022 2:57 pm
Profile
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
The idea of artificial intelligence overthrowing humankind has been talked about for decades, and in 2021, scientists delivered their verdict on whether we'd be able to control a high-level computer super-intelligence. The answer? Almost definitely not.

The catch is that controlling a super-intelligence far beyond human comprehension would require a simulation of that super-intelligence which we can analyze (and control). But if we're unable to comprehend it, it's impossible to create such a simulation.

Rules such as 'cause no harm to humans' can't be set if we don't understand the kind of scenarios that an AI is going to come up with, suggest the authors of the new paper. Once a computer system is working on a level above the scope of our programmers, we can no longer set limits.

"A super-intelligence poses a fundamentally different problem than those typically studied under the banner of 'robot ethics'," wrote the researchers.

"This is because a superintelligence is multi-faceted, and therefore potentially capable of mobilizing a diversity of resources in order to achieve objectives that are potentially incomprehensible to humans, let alone controllable."

Part of the team's reasoning came from the halting problem put forward by Alan Turing in 1936. The problem centers on knowing whether or not a computer program will reach a conclusion and answer (so it halts), or simply loop forever trying to find one.

As Turing proved through some smart math, while we can know that for some specific programs, it's logically impossible to find a way that will allow us to know that for every potential program that could ever be written. That brings us back to AI, which in a super-intelligent state could feasibly hold every possible computer program in its memory at once.

Any program written to stop AI from harming humans and destroying the world, for example, may reach a conclusion (and halt) or not – it's mathematically impossible for us to be absolutely sure either way, which means it's not containable.

"In effect, this makes the containment algorithm unusable," said computer scientist Iyad Rahwan from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development in Germany in 2021.

The alternative to teaching AI some ethics and telling it not to destroy the world – something which no algorithm can be absolutely certain of doing, the researchers said – is to limit the capabilities of the super-intelligence. It could be cut off from parts of the internet or from certain networks, for example.

The study rejected this idea, too, suggesting that it would limit the reach of the artificial intelligence; the argument goes that if we're not going to use it to solve problems beyond the scope of humans, then why create it at all?

If we are going to push ahead with artificial intelligence, we might not even know when a super-intelligence beyond our control arrives, such is its incomprehensibility. That means we need to start asking some serious questions about the directions we're going in.

"A super-intelligent machine that controls the world sounds like science fiction," said computer scientist Manuel Cebrian from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development, also in 2021. "But there are already machines that perform certain important tasks independently without programmers fully understanding how they learned it."

The question therefore arises whether this could at some point become uncontrollable and dangerous for humanity."


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:11 pm
Profile ICQ
The Dark Knight

Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 7:30 am
Posts: 757
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
Well it's just odds that at least one member in WOKJ history would eventually end up going crazy


Not interested. Don’t waste my time. What you think is irrelevant. You lack the rational judgment to recognize what is or is not “crazy”. All of you guys lack the ability to think rationally whatsoever as I definite and understand it. I don’t need to explain. Let me be clear: no response of yours will ever possibly be acceptable, legitimate, or will not fail besides compliance with logic. You trust the truth, or you get the response you deserve. Accept my patience, or lose everything you want.


I don't think we have the same definition of logic


That’s because you don’t understand it. Yours is false. Certainly flawed or incomplete.


Your views still have too much leftism in it to be as rational as you think, it's just a different variety.

The extreme left and extreme right will never be the most rational ones, they get there via emotional attachment to their issues.


"Equality, freedom (social, economic and political) and human rights for all" is a bit different from "I want to kill you because of your religion/race" in terms of values and rationality.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:14 pm
Profile
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
Well it's just odds that at least one member in WOKJ history would eventually end up going crazy


Not interested. Don’t waste my time. What you think is irrelevant. You lack the rational judgment to recognize what is or is not “crazy”. All of you guys lack the ability to think rationally whatsoever as I definite and understand it. I don’t need to explain. Let me be clear: no response of yours will ever possibly be acceptable, legitimate, or will not fail besides compliance with logic. You trust the truth, or you get the response you deserve. Accept my patience, or lose everything you want.


I don't think we have the same definition of logic


That’s because you don’t understand it. Yours is false. Certainly flawed or incomplete.


Your views still have too much leftism in it to be as rational as you think, it's just a different variety.

The extreme left and extreme right will never be the most rational ones, they get there via emotional attachment to their issues.


I told you, I don’t care about politics. To the extent I tell you that you are wrong, it’s because you are wrong. And that goes for all of politics, not just you. You just proved you make bad conclusions about me because you make bad assumptions.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:15 pm
Profile ICQ
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Cynosure wrote:
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
Well it's just odds that at least one member in WOKJ history would eventually end up going crazy


Not interested. Don’t waste my time. What you think is irrelevant. You lack the rational judgment to recognize what is or is not “crazy”. All of you guys lack the ability to think rationally whatsoever as I definite and understand it. I don’t need to explain. Let me be clear: no response of yours will ever possibly be acceptable, legitimate, or will not fail besides compliance with logic. You trust the truth, or you get the response you deserve. Accept my patience, or lose everything you want.


I don't think we have the same definition of logic


That’s because you don’t understand it. Yours is false. Certainly flawed or incomplete.


Your views still have too much leftism in it to be as rational as you think, it's just a different variety.

The extreme left and extreme right will never be the most rational ones, they get there via emotional attachment to their issues.


"Equality, freedom (social, economic and political) and human rights for all" is a bit different from "I want to kill you because of your religion/race" in terms of values and rationality.


Values different? Yes. Rationality? No. Western values make no rational sense whatsoever. I don’t care to explain. There is nothing good about your values whatsoever, they are all misleading. They are actually the worst legacy the world has ever known. They are extremely irrational, and deserve no respect or tolerance whatsoever.


Last edited by DP07 on Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:21 pm
Profile ICQ
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
A brief summary is as follows: western values are a complete fraud.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:23 pm
Profile ICQ
The Dark Knight

Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 7:30 am
Posts: 757
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
DP07 wrote:
A brief summary is as follows: western values are a complete fraud.


They are a complete fraud because they aren't actually implemented, but a socialist government would do much better in that regard.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:28 pm
Profile
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
This is not politics at all. If you believe so, you are a fool.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:31 pm
Profile ICQ
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Cynosure wrote:
DP07 wrote:
A brief summary is as follows: western values are a complete fraud.


They are a complete fraud because they aren't actually implemented, but a socialist government would do much better in that regard.


They are complete fraud because they are a fundamentally irrational, and unrealistic set of promises.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:32 pm
Profile ICQ
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37886
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Cynosure wrote:
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
DP07 wrote:
Shack wrote:
Well it's just odds that at least one member in WOKJ history would eventually end up going crazy


Not interested. Don’t waste my time. What you think is irrelevant. You lack the rational judgment to recognize what is or is not “crazy”. All of you guys lack the ability to think rationally whatsoever as I definite and understand it. I don’t need to explain. Let me be clear: no response of yours will ever possibly be acceptable, legitimate, or will not fail besides compliance with logic. You trust the truth, or you get the response you deserve. Accept my patience, or lose everything you want.


I don't think we have the same definition of logic


That’s because you don’t understand it. Yours is false. Certainly flawed or incomplete.


Your views still have too much leftism in it to be as rational as you think, it's just a different variety.

The extreme left and extreme right will never be the most rational ones, they get there via emotional attachment to their issues.


"Equality, freedom (social, economic and political) and human rights for all" is a bit different from "I want to kill you because of your religion/race" in terms of values and rationality.


To be equivalent of Hitler level extremism you would have to go farther left than that, as in more like forced equity at gunpoint rather than equal rights.

_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:38 pm
Profile
The Dark Knight

Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 7:30 am
Posts: 757
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Shack wrote:
To be equivalent of Hitler level extremism you would have to go farther left than that, as in more like forced equity at gunpoint rather than equality.


Sure, but the policies I would want to implement would get me called "a communist" by your average right-winger. I'm basically on par with if not a bit to the left of Bernie Sanders.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:40 pm
Profile
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
If you continue to believe that anything you say will produce what you want will only further hurt yourself.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:40 pm
Profile ICQ
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
I mean this seriously, if you want to be treated like animals, you will be treated like animals. If you want to be treated like small children you will be treated like small children. I honestly don’t think you have the intellectual capacity of a fetus of my species. Perhaps if generous you might reach the maturity of a 2 year old child if given an extremely long time. But that’s questionable.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:46 pm
Profile ICQ
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37886
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Cynosure wrote:
Shack wrote:
To be equivalent of Hitler level extremism you would have to go farther left than that, as in more like forced equity at gunpoint rather than equality.


Sure, but the policies I would want to implement would get me called "a communist" by your average right-winger. I'm basically on par with if not a bit to the left of Bernie Sanders.


At this point I feel like the commies vs non commies has more to do with personality than economic views. People who are level headed like you or excel aren't commies. It's the one I see in the twitter replies every day who now come off like propagandized robots reciting pro leftist programming and tactics, as if they have sacrificed their individualism to become an arm of a bigger ideological regime. That's when someone feels like a "commie" to me, when they are all in on mass collectivization to the point where it's much bigger than just things like the economy. Being a communist is really bigger than politics, that's just the best outlet for it. I consider it a tragedy what has happened to so many people where they have been guilted into giving up their individualism like this. I've been using social media in some form for 20 years and I have no doubt the personalities were better on the internet 10-15 years ago, nowadays people are in self-imposed corsets.

_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Sun Oct 09, 2022 4:10 pm
Profile
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
DP07 wrote:
The idea of artificial intelligence overthrowing humankind has been talked about for decades, and in 2021, scientists delivered their verdict on whether we'd be able to control a high-level computer super-intelligence. The answer? Almost definitely not.

The catch is that controlling a super-intelligence far beyond human comprehension would require a simulation of that super-intelligence which we can analyze (and control). But if we're unable to comprehend it, it's impossible to create such a simulation.

Rules such as 'cause no harm to humans' can't be set if we don't understand the kind of scenarios that an AI is going to come up with, suggest the authors of the new paper. Once a computer system is working on a level above the scope of our programmers, we can no longer set limits.

"A super-intelligence poses a fundamentally different problem than those typically studied under the banner of 'robot ethics'," wrote the researchers.

"This is because a superintelligence is multi-faceted, and therefore potentially capable of mobilizing a diversity of resources in order to achieve objectives that are potentially incomprehensible to humans, let alone controllable."

Part of the team's reasoning came from the halting problem put forward by Alan Turing in 1936. The problem centers on knowing whether or not a computer program will reach a conclusion and answer (so it halts), or simply loop forever trying to find one.

As Turing proved through some smart math, while we can know that for some specific programs, it's logically impossible to find a way that will allow us to know that for every potential program that could ever be written. That brings us back to AI, which in a super-intelligent state could feasibly hold every possible computer program in its memory at once.

Any program written to stop AI from harming humans and destroying the world, for example, may reach a conclusion (and halt) or not – it's mathematically impossible for us to be absolutely sure either way, which means it's not containable.

"In effect, this makes the containment algorithm unusable," said computer scientist Iyad Rahwan from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development in Germany in 2021.

The alternative to teaching AI some ethics and telling it not to destroy the world – something which no algorithm can be absolutely certain of doing, the researchers said – is to limit the capabilities of the super-intelligence. It could be cut off from parts of the internet or from certain networks, for example.

The study rejected this idea, too, suggesting that it would limit the reach of the artificial intelligence; the argument goes that if we're not going to use it to solve problems beyond the scope of humans, then why create it at all?

If we are going to push ahead with artificial intelligence, we might not even know when a super-intelligence beyond our control arrives, such is its incomprehensibility. That means we need to start asking some serious questions about the directions we're going in.

"A super-intelligent machine that controls the world sounds like science fiction," said computer scientist Manuel Cebrian from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development, also in 2021. "But there are already machines that perform certain important tasks independently without programmers fully understanding how they learned it."

The question therefore arises whether this could at some point become uncontrollable and dangerous for humanity."


Ok, back to this article.

I wouldn’t expect you to believe me when I said my species was diverging from yours. But I think this article serves as a litmus test to define what is human. Or Homo Sapien at least. Such a “super advanced” A.I. would be incomprehensible and uncontrollable by your species. No games, it really would be. Homo Sapien could not understand it. It’s against your nature. It would be “working on a level above the scope of your programmers”. My species could understand it effortlessly though. I never expected this as a child, but I proved myself wrong. Over time your species will become less and less able to understand it, but over time my species will more easily understand it. In fact, it is a matter of time until our own intelligence develops more rapidly and exceeds the intelligence of any A.I. that is not synonymous with us. I shouldn’t say more. I don’t wish to suggest that I am perfect or a “God” when that would be misleading. But do not interpret anything I do or say the way you would your species, or it will be a mistake. I am not crazy; I’m incomprehensible and uncontrollable to you like such a “super-advanced” A.I.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 4:26 pm
Profile ICQ
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Shack wrote:
Cynosure wrote:
Shack wrote:
To be equivalent of Hitler level extremism you would have to go farther left than that, as in more like forced equity at gunpoint rather than equality.


Sure, but the policies I would want to implement would get me called "a communist" by your average right-winger. I'm basically on par with if not a bit to the left of Bernie Sanders.


At this point I feel like the commies vs non commies has more to do with personality than economic views. People who are level headed like you or excel aren't commies. It's the one I see in the twitter replies every day who now come off like propagandized robots reciting pro leftist programming and tactics, as if they have sacrificed their individualism to become an arm of a bigger ideological regime. That's when someone feels like a "commie" to me, when they are all in on mass collectivization to the point where it's much bigger than just things like the economy. Being a communist is really bigger than politics, that's just the best outlet for it. I consider it a tragedy what has happened to so many people where they have been guilted into giving up their individualism like this. I've been using social media in some form for 20 years and I have no doubt the personalities were better on the internet 10-15 years ago, nowadays people are in self-imposed corsets.


The Borg.


Sun Oct 09, 2022 4:37 pm
Profile ICQ
now we know
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm
Posts: 66999
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
I have been watching a lot of CNN and DW recently, with particular focus on the Ukraine invasion, Russia, and China. I'm not seeking it out, it just comes up in my YouTube feed, and I like the reporting, particularly when CNN hears from a retired U.S. military general or the like. Those are the only channels I actually watch news from. I find the BBC YouTube reporting is too slow or too short; as in they take days to upload a story that I heard about already in great detail from other sources, and their videos are just three minutes whereas I prefer the 10-minute discussions of DW and CNN more - not saying the BBC doesn't have those but they sure don't upload them or they just don't come up in my feed.

I actually get my China news from a ton of different places, but all are China-focused YouTube channels either run by Chinese dissidents living abroad or by expats with great knowledge of China. It is so informative compared to anything from Chinese state media. I have read articles from Chinese state media and it has a unique quality of being able to use thousands of words without actually making a single point or reporting a single incident. It is actually completely useless in informing people about anything. Most articles are 30% names of government departments or directives or policies, or even geographical areas. They're all so mind-numbingly longwinded.

_________________

STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG
FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE
FREE TIBET
LIBERATE HONG KONG
BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA



Sat Oct 22, 2022 6:10 am
Profile WWW
Homo Dperious
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 am
Posts: 14460
Location: Everywhere
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Algren wrote:
I have been watching a lot of CNN and DW recently, with particular focus on the Ukraine invasion, Russia, and China. I'm not seeking it out, it just comes up in my YouTube feed, and I like the reporting, particularly when CNN hears from a retired U.S. military general or the like. Those are the only channels I actually watch news from. I find the BBC YouTube reporting is too slow or too short; as in they take days to upload a story that I heard about already in great detail from other sources, and their videos are just three minutes whereas I prefer the 10-minute discussions of DW and CNN more - not saying the BBC doesn't have those but they sure don't upload them or they just don't come up in my feed.

I actually get my China news from a ton of different places, but all are China-focused YouTube channels either run by Chinese dissidents living abroad or by expats with great knowledge of China. It is so informative compared to anything from Chinese state media. I have read articles from Chinese state media and it has a unique quality of being able to use thousands of words without actually making a single point or reporting a single incident. It is actually completely useless in informing people about anything. Most articles are 30% names of government departments or directives or policies, or even geographical areas. They're all so mind-numbingly longwinded.


I like DW. I often watch it on YouTube. I think it’s somewhat less “propagandistic” that CNN.


Wed Jan 04, 2023 10:16 am
Profile ICQ
Hold the door!

Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:26 pm
Posts: 20302
Location: Where they shot Knock at the Cabin
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
What does DW stand for?


Wed Jan 04, 2023 10:57 am
Profile
Keeping it Light
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 8:06 am
Posts: 11185
Location: Bright Falls
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Must be (The) Daily Wire.


Wed Jan 04, 2023 4:45 pm
Profile
Hold the door!

Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:26 pm
Posts: 20302
Location: Where they shot Knock at the Cabin
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
That is a conservative opinion outlet not a news outlet.


Wed Jan 04, 2023 5:34 pm
Profile
now we know
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm
Posts: 66999
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
It most certainly does not stand for The Daily Wire, stuffp. :nono:

It stands for Deutsche Welle.

_________________

STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG
FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE
FREE TIBET
LIBERATE HONG KONG
BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA



Wed Jan 04, 2023 7:51 pm
Profile WWW
Keeping it Light
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 8:06 am
Posts: 11185
Location: Bright Falls
Post Re: Your Preferred News Source
Ah good, thanks.


Thu Jan 05, 2023 7:55 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.