|
[ August 2008 ] | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
TCHS 4O 2000 [4o's nonsense] alvinny [2] - csq - edchong jenming - joseph - law meepok - mingqi - pea pengkian [2] - qwergopot - woof xinghao - zhengyu HCJC 01S60 [understated sixzero] andy - edwin - jack jiaqi - peter - rex serena SAF 21SA khenghui - jiaming - jinrui [2] ritchie - vicknesh - zhenhao Others Lwei [2] - shaowei - website links - Alien Loves Predator BloggerSG Cute Overload! Cyanide and Happiness Daily Bunny Hamleto Hattrick Magic: The Gathering The Onion The Order of the Stick Perry Bible Fellowship PvP Online Soccernet Sluggy Freelance The Students' Sketchpad Talk Rock Talking Cock.com Tom the Dancing Bug Wikipedia Wulffmorgenthaler       |
|
bert's blog v1.21 Powered by glolg Programmed with Perl 5.6.1 on Apache/1.3.27 (Red Hat Linux) best viewed at 1024 x 768 resolution on Internet Explorer 6.0+ or Mozilla Firefox 1.5+ today's page views: 231 (52 mobile) all-time page views: 3402918 most viewed entry: 18739 views most commented entry: 14 comments number of entries: 1228 page created Sat Jul 19, 2025 16:27:51 |
|
- tagcloud - academics [70] art [8] changelog [49] current events [36] cute stuff [12] gaming [11] music [8] outings [16] philosophy [10] poetry [4] programming [15] rants [5] reviews [8] sport [37] travel [19] work [3] miscellaneous [75] |
|
- category tags - academics art changelog current events cute stuff gaming miscellaneous music outings philosophy poetry programming rants reviews sport travel work tags in total: 386 |
| ||
|
- + epl tales -
It's been a bad two weeks for the Challenge ($90/$200 so far), and to catch up in the virtual stakes it'll take something from Arsenal: $100 on Arsenal to beat Newcastle (at 1.40)
- Starhub Olympic coverage commentator. Erm. That didn't happen several times over as Li Jiawei got her second Olympics fourth-place finish (which has to be said isn't that bad at all), and Singapore's other representatives too fell by the wayside. Wasn't much of a surprise, of course - I remember reading that former national player Jing Junhong gave Li a 20% to 30% chance (I may be mistaken, so don't quote me on this), while the coach gave the team a 10% chance against the Chinese team. Being slightly curious about these estimates, I wrote a simple simulation script to pull out some numbers, and it appears that to have a 10% chance of winning a standard seven-game table tennis match, a player must have approximately a 44% chance of winning each and every point (assuming both players play at a constant standard for each point, no matter their situation at that time, and that service brings a negligible advantage, which I accept is probably false). For a 25% chance of winning, the percentage of points won has to be about 47%. Notably, if a player has only a 35% chance of winning each point, he or she has almost no hope of winning the match (< 0.1%), with the result often being a 4-0 blowout. Therefore, it seems that a slight gulf in ability actually translates to a virtual impossibility, form and psychological toughness notwithstanding. So, when the Singapore team was smiling through their finals defeat, they may have just been realistic. And a comment on the article, "Why They Switch Loyalties", on page 12 of today's Weekend Today - the author listed politics (clearly not in Singapore's case), economics (which authorities would like us to believe is completely not in Singapore's case) and overcrowding (which was previously covered here). Coincidentally the author also pointed to the dilemma of the sixth-best player, but may have been mistaken when saying "However, there are some circumstances in which athletes would not switch nationalities. It would be hard to imagine a Chinese athlete donning a Korean jersey...". Hello, Dang Ye-Seo? Insignificant This year's National Day Rally speech by our PM touched on Singapore's woeful fertility rate (of 1.29, far below the replacement rate of about 2.1) and introduced some (more) ways to try and raise it. The easy and always available way is, of course, immigration, but that creates its own host of problems. Leaving that and more SDU matchmaking aside, let's look at the incentives to already-married couples: Firstly, cash gifts of S$3000 for the first and second child, and S$6000 for the third and fourth ones, as well as a dollar-for-dollar matching savings account capped at S$6000(1st, 2nd)/S$12000(3rd, 4th)/S$18000(fifth child and beyond) for each of them (which probably penalizes poorer parents, since they are less likely to have the free cash to plunk into the accounts). So, that's a direct payment of S$9000 to S$18000 per child. Now, as the expected direct cost of bringing up a single kid here would probably run into the hundreds of thousands (supposedly S$270000+ from a Straits Times report in 2004, though I couldn't confirm it given the slowness of Factiva), a savings in the tens of thousands (even with tax rebates) is miniscule. Of course, it can be said that children are priceless, but the assumption being taken here is that being priceless is insufficient, and that throwing a bit more money at the problem would help. Personally, I would say that about S$10k would not be a deciding factor (or even a valid contributing factor) for most, if money were the main obstacle. Put it this way: If insufficient funds were the problem for responsible parents who did their sums and decided they couldn't afford a child, the baby bonus likely wouldn't be enough to make a difference. And if funds weren't the issue, the bonus wouldn't have any impact anyway. Secondly, there's increased maternity leave. Now, it must be realized that this nice gesture comes at a cost - to the employer. Assuming now that the employer is not running with too much slack (which would be the case more for SMEs), the employer will be staring at two months of paying for zero returns for the first two babies, and a disruption of three or four months for each baby, for which they would have to make alternative arrangements. The free market says that rational employers would thus (i) offer lower pay to women (which already happens in reality) for the same job as men, or (ii) employ fewer equally-qualified women compared to men, or a combination of the two, and thus parents end up footing the "bill" in one way or another. Before I get slammed for being a heartless jerk and for insinuating that employers are too, this is just basic economics finding a new equilibrium from the previous one, given the past quantity of maternity benefits. Individual employers may well be family-friendly, but this is the big picture here. To conclude, I daresay these policies will have all too little impact, and would be completely (if pleasantly) surprised if the annual fertility rate does edge above even 1.5 at any time in the next ten years. Interestingly, given the government's penchant for setting targets (Goal 2010? 6.5 million population in 50 years?), there are no goalposts or even expectations that I could find for this issue, which to be fair is at its heart a private one. Thus, to me, it's sort of "We know the results will be negligible, but we have no real answers. Still, we must start to wayang something, even if it won't work, and we won't stick our necks out with any official projections since we'll look bad when they aren't fulfilled." Once more, to be fair, this is a problem that many other developed countries have grappled with (and mostly failed). So can Singapore be an exception? Hmm. Cool 
Enjoying their Alex Animal Farm cooling pad (inset: Chew Stick and Cooling House) Eight months of dedicated service sees Ham & Fish rewarded in typical Singaporean "goodies-if-you-vote-the-right-way" fashion - with improved amenities. Snuck down to the Pet Lovers Centre at Vivocity last night upon recommendation by cousin, and was confronted by tons of options for the Cage Upgrading Project. Oh, and the S$30 robos were impossibly adorable too. Turned out that the chew stick was a little too big to get their jaws around, and they seem to have become too lazy to climb up to the cooling house (though ironically they do chew on the metal edges), but the cooling pad seems a hit. Too bad they aren't happy at being lumped into a "small animal" category on the online store. 
Duchess Station? Why not Hwa Chong Station? (Source: LTA) And it seems that my alma mater will have an MRT station under the school field soon. If that isn't cool, I don't know what is. After a losing start to the new season ($90/$100), the Challenge enters Week Two: $80 on Aston Villa to beat Stoke City (at 1.70) - Saturday's prime deal $20 on Bolton to beat Newcastle (4.10) - Great odds for what should be a reasonably close match... And just for the record, I managed to crack my injured finger on Thursday night. Took about three weeks.
- sport - 
Wow. Just wow. (Sources: New York Times, Actionnooz) Usain Bolt scorched the 100m in a new world record time of 9.69s, with no tailwind and doing celebratory high steps well before the finish line (video). He finished a whole 0.2s ahead of the second-placed Richard Thompson, which is an eternity over such a short distance, who himself only managed to finish 0.14s before last-placed Patton. Oh, and Bolt had at 0.165s the second slowest reaction time of the eight runners (not exactly competitors here). This is all rather crazy, since it seems to imply that he could have conceivably hacked the world record down to say 9.4s without too much trouble. Deduct some 0.04s for a better reaction time, 0.1s for a good 2m/s tailwind and probably over 0.1s for simply getting his head down and continuing over the finish line at top speed. Or maybe it was a one-off freak effort, like Bob Beamon's still-standing Olympic record of 8.90m, over half a metre longer than the standing record at that time (and which he was unable to come close to replicating ever again). Either way, please let him not be on dope as all too many champion sprinters have been. Michael Phelps got his eight golds to compete for story of the Olympics, but that's enough superhumans for today. Unless the Singapore table team follows up with the gold, right about now. Sneak preview: glolg's next planned development is a Google Calendar-like scheduler, with improvements over it, of course. Planned extra features include:
Same old Spurs (SOS) as they crashed to unheralded Boro, and it looks like the fifth placing that many pundits have foisted upon them may be some time in coming. Generally, I think bookies are more accurate than pundits in their predictions - bookies have to put their money where their mouth is. United are hot favourites against a Newcastle whom the Fink Tank (and they're pretty good) peg at having a 20% chance of relegation, but the odds for a straight win are low and with only Tevez up front, two or more goals may not be that easy to achieve. Therefore: $50 on Aston Villa to beat Man City (at 1.80) $25 on Man Utd (-1.5) vs Newcastle (1.90)
- sport - "Heheheheheh." - EC3312 lecturer translating a revolutionary slogan to illustrate the Prisoner's Dilemma All credit to our Game Theory professor from the PRC, who managed to gain the undivided attention of an entire lecture theatre (an understated skill) with a laughing pattern that somehow reminded me of Muttley. He also has a Ph.D in Mathematics despite helming an Economics module, further reinforcing the notion that math is the basis of all science, but that's neither here nor there. 
(Source: xkcd) Health Economics is under a Swedish professor, and Labour Economics under a Korean one, so it's certainly true that NUS gives a multicultural experience. That goes for table tennis too, as the Singaporean women's team clinched a guaranteed silver at least by reaching the finals, ending a 48-year wait. It was hardly smooth sailing as they had some trouble with the opponents' chopping style (which occ likes to promote as the invincible Modern Defense), but they prevailed at the end. With that bit of history consigned to the books, it's eye-opening to read what the (non-Singaporean) media has to say (these are two of the top three reports about the feat on Google News): "...Somewhat dulling the achievement for the country of 4.6 million, the players and coach that carried Singapore to victory were all imports from table tennis powerhouse China." - Simon Rabinovitch, Reuters "...Feng Tianwei, who, like the rest of the Singapore team, is an import from China, won both her singles matches to help them clinch a tense 3-2 victory." - BBC (2nd paragraph) While these comments may be the personal opinions of a couple of reporters (and in the second case, perhaps even simply factual), there is no escaping the truth that our representatives were rather newly-minted citizens (other than Li Jiawei, who has already clocked up a dozen or so years as a Singaporean). Then again, it seems that relying on Chinese paddlers is an accepted route to success in the sport anyway - Dang Ye Seo, who lost 0-3 to Feng Tianwei and beat Wang Ye Gu by the same margin, was formerly known as Tang Na. Tellingly, an article about this year's world championships is peppered with Chinese names (unlike Korea, other countries which take on "former Chinese" seem to have them keep their original one). South Korea had two out of three then (including Kwak Bang Bang a.k.a Kwok Fong Fong), Germany had Wu Jiaduo, Austria had Liu Jia and Li Qiangbing, while the USA with over three hundred million people could do no better than "former world doubles champions" Gao Jun and Wang Chen, both well over thirty years of age and likely past their competitive prime. It could be argued that the calculus of national competitions made this state of affairs inevitable - with only a handful of slots for each country, prohibiting the transfer of players would have shut out extreme talents more or less permanently from the world stage. For example, if China had the lion's share of the top 20 women players (which in fact they do if Hong Kong is considered too), most of them would inevitably have to sit out (even the individual event at the Olympics is limited to three per country). The situation is slightly less pronounced but still similar for the men. In this case, it makes a lot of sense for say a World Number Six in China to emigrate to get international opportunities, which the ITTF has noted. All in all, despite this not being a case of Singapore nurturing talent from youth, which was and remains my main gripe about the whole business (new national heroine Feng Tianwei, who won both her games, was actually spotted only last year when she was playing professionally in Japan, while Wang is 28 years old but also a recent addition), I suppose it's still an achievement to be proud of. Sort of. Appreciation for this achievement can only grow each year they stay citizens, on the bright side, but woe betide if they quietly slip back to China when their term is up, though of course one can't really blame them if that happens. Discounting them just because they are China-born doesn't make sense, though, since our only previous medallist Tan Howe Liang was from China too (albeit having come over at the age of four). Competitive Cuteness 
Lin Miaoke, 9, (right) edged Yang Peiyi, 7 (left) in the finals of the Under-10 Freestyle Cute-ing event (Source: New York Times) China has gotten its share of bad press for having one young girl lip-synch (probably unknowingly) to the voice of another girl in the Opening Ceremony, and in this particular case I think some of the criticism is undeserved. Typical comments were along the lines of "cold calculation", "fake(d) loveliness" and "how would the poor not-cute-enough Yang Peiyi feel?" First off, I would say there is nothing inherently wrong in combining the looks and voice of two different people - as long as it is not fraudently presented as being the effort of one alone. In this case, there appeared to be no express effort by the authorities to credit Yang (at least till one of her tutors outed her on a blog), which was the major failing of the organizers. In their defense they could perhaps say that they did not declare that the voice was Lin's, and everyone just assumed it to be so, which isn't being entirely honest since the insinuation had to be there, but not really dishonest either. But the comments on being calculating and not-innocent ring somewhat hollow to me. Big organized events are hardly spontaneous affairs - they were hardly going to give just any kid off the street a three-day lesson on Hymn to the Motherland and give her the stage, though that would surely be very endearing. Why not just sit in a circle and sing Kumbaya and donate the cash to those in need then? I would gather the very people who protested at the scheming would have a word to say about unschooled vocals, which goes to show that it is impossible to please everyone, so don't try. Personally, I am unsure why looks and voice have to come in one package. Nobody hammers an actress for not knowing how to write a script, design a wardrobe, control the lighting or set up the cameras, but surely they all contribute to the overall production. Why then is only having half of the look/voice duality anathema (at least since the silent film era), since they are clearly independent talents as say the ability to sing an aria and the ability to write one, is? One good thing that may have come of this is the acknowledgement that cuteness is very important. A Hong Kong pet shop has started the hamsterball rolling with the Olympets, to which I would have shipped Messers Bacon and Chips over in a return-postage paid box had I known about it in advance. 
Bacon: "That could have been me!" EPL Weekly Challenge Again Samir Nasri has already gotten the first goal of the season for Arsenal, and it goes without saying that all bets are off on that game (since it has already started). The other three games (West Ham vs Wigan, Boro vs Spurs, Everton vs Blackburn) today don't look clear-cut, but Tottenham have been pretty good in the preseason, and despite losing Keane (and probably Berbatov to United) they look worth a small flutter on. $25 on Tottenham to beat Middlesbrough (at 2.00)
Manchester United retain the Community Shield, the Beijing Olympics are here (with Singapore's medal hopes once again resting squarely on the table tennis players' shoulders) and the EPL season is rebooting - what's not to like? Even got LSM1301 General Biology for a measly single General Account point. Today's introductionary lecture covered the scientific method, and according to the syllabus evolution will be taught. Hmmm, I wonder what comes out on top when there's a clash of convictions? Caught Money No Enough 2 with a few of the guys on Monday. There were the usual gags we've all come to expect of Jack Neo, and passable (if somewhat less than totally realistic) computer graphics, but the plot was a bit too contrived and melodramatic for my taste. For example (Spoiler warning): When a character is of the O- blood type (which happens only to be able to receive O- blood), offspring with the correct blood type will happen to have a medical condition making it impossible for him to donate. Furthermore, that offspring's wife with the same blood type (slightly improbable since only about one or two in a thousand Chinese have that type) will happen also have another disqualifying medical condition. Oh, and would you know it, their daughter will get into a serious car accident and require a transfusion at exactly the same time! It was frustratingly hard to find the casting details, such as the name of the old lady who acted as the main characters' mother (and put in quite a good showing). Even the official site only mentions the main stars (the Funny Trinity of Neo, Mark Lee and Henry Thia) and no-one else, though in my opinion there were quite a few others with similar impact. Kinda hard to get a career boost like that. Being a Computing major gives a whole new perspective on CG effects, as there's a tendency to try and figure out how they were achieved, as most people do during a magic performance. The end-of-film outtakes included a rendering with the title Crystal CG, which I thought was the software used, but as it turns out likely refers to a digital media design company. Oh well. On this note, I believe I have yet to reveal the very rough 3D model of my artillery unit's self-propelled howitzer that I created circa 2003, when I had nothing better to do. Only photo references used, in trueSpace 4. Fun times:  High point of today's Game Development lecture was towards the end, when the Spore Creature Creator was demo-ed. Supposedly Spore (and SimCity) creator Will Wright will be at the Mandai Zoo tomorrow. If I didn't have more lectures, I might have been tempted to go down. I even printed all available notes and readings - how's that for the Organized trait (Civic upkeep reduced 50%, double production speed of Lighthouse and Courthouse)? Darn, I've got to unaddict myself from Civilization IV.
- sport - 
One of these joints, is not the same as the others
Inflation? ----------------- Allocated Modules ----------------- Module Code: CS4213 Module Title: Game Development Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX Your Bid: 2001 Winning Bid: 743 Module Code: EC3361 Module Title: Labour Economics I Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX Your Bid: 101 Winning Bid: 17 ---------------------------------- Modules Not Successfully Allocated ---------------------------------- Module Code: EC3312 Module Title: Game Theory & Applications to Economics Reason: Outbidded Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX Your Bid: ???? Winning Bid: 1217 Module Code: EC3341 Module Title: International Economics I Reason: Outbidded Bid ID: B0000XXXXXXX Your Bid: ???? Winning Bid: 869 Forget grades, oil or the local economy, the CORS bidding system is getting hit by inflation too. Okay, perhaps not, since I didn't pay attention to the FASS Module Preference Exercise despite getting two emails about it. Then again, a fellow Econs major reported that he had not managed to get any modules preallocated to him despite taking part, which is backed up by the fact that nine out of thirteen level three EC modules appear to be oversubscribed, so perhaps I haven't missed much. Thing is, I am not overly concerned yet as several more slots have historically been opened up in Round 2A and beyond, and this time I am prepared to dump 2000++ points into EC3312 just to make sure. Not getting EC3341 off the bat could actually be a blessing in disguise, since I discovered that EC3322 Industrial Organization I and EC3353 Health Economics I both fit into my schedule too, and have better hours to boot. Can't bid for LSM1301 till Round 3A, but I'll have no further use for my General Account points, so I guess I can show my hand (and possibly fuel bid inflation slightly, but that's a senior's prerogative, haha). This might have been avoided had I been in anti-sniper mode at the close of Round 1A, instead of being overcomplacent. Bidding's better than NTU's fastest-finger-first system I suppose, but the NUS authorities should seriously consider bringing it to the next level. Evolution! Got assigned to man the booth for CVWO at the NUS Matriculation Fair on Wednesday afternoon, which was an eye-opener by default since I matriculated in Semester Two unlike the vast majority of students. The booth wound out being directly opposite those of the NUS Buddhist Society, Flight and Space and NUS Invest, and was flanked by the NUS Muslim Society and NUS Electronic Gaming (which had a laptop running DotA replays :D). It was also mutually backed to that of the Nam Wah Pai (南華派), though the 掌門人 happened not to be there. The atmosphere was lively thanks to skilled banter from the Radio Pulze student DJs, and all in all there are far worse places to spend four hours of one's life, such as in an Army training shed. Personally, the most noteworthy part of the whole gig was the humourous notices displayed by the Muslim Society - among them "Dear Mr. Darwin, there's a difference between feet and fin" and "Only Darwin believes that Man is descended from apes". This perspective is hardly unique to Islam, of course; The Scopes Monkey Trial was fought in the USA way back in 1925, as a response to a law being passed upholding Creationism in education. Myself, I vaguely recall a kindergarten teacher deriding evolution by questioning why the (now sorely missed) Ah Meng didn't become human, and indeed why no monkey-kin ever did so, which is a pretty poor objection as they come. Keeping in mind that there doesn't need to be a chasm between religion and evolution - in the USA, 39% of the general populace believe in "God-guided evolution" compared to 44% for Creationism and just 10% for plain old evolution - the subject is still ripe for discussion. Notably, the corresponding figures are 40% (Both)/5% (Creationism)/55% (Evolution) for American scientists, which could have been expected, since the dissonance caused by riding roughshod over hard evidence would likely be harder to bear for those who continually apply a robust methodology in their professional life. After all, it is not much fun when dogma (when it is precise enough to be pinned down) butts heads with facts - no religion exists that I know of claims to allow its followers to fly, for example. Gravity and the unyielding base of a cliff quickly dispels such delusions. Of course, it could be argued that a superintelligent force ensures the falling of objects, but certainly God is known to gracefully acquiese when His immutable Laws are followed. As an agnostic, my Maybe-God-Which-Does-Not-Care-To-Be-Known-As-God, is one that, if it existed, set all other existence into motion, and then retired evermore. This worldview was endorsed by no less than Einstein, and great presidents such as Jefferson and Lincoln, among others, subscribed to a similar Deist philosophy - "God's greatest gift to humanity is not religion, but the ability to reason." And what greater gift could there be? Anyhow, the specialness of the Creationism vs. Evolution contest is that it involves an argument that is not easily followed or verified by the layman, has no direct immediate impact on daily life, and appears in clear contradiction to sacred teachings. In general, religions stay clear of making claims against easily verifiable facts. Prayers are frequently offered to aid in the healing of not-fully-understood cancers (though their actual effect is hazy to say the least) and miracles proclaimed when remission occurs (with the efforts of any doctors involved slightly overlooked), but not for amputees to regrow limbs (or even a mere fingertip), to the best of my knowledge. Clearly, believers who profess that their God is perfect and all-powerful still place (well-founded) limits on his abilities, which at least indicates that they retain some rationality. A more in-depth discussion on amputee discrimination can be found here, which points to the same website as the last link but which I repeat just because it's worth it. 
But here, with the development of life, there seems some room for doubt. Not too much, it seems, as evolution as a theory converges towards Truth, with Darwin's rough manuscript being refined much as Newton's mechanics was polished into Einstein's relativity; And God is Truth, most religions would agree. Still, I would expect mainstream religions to settle the issue in their traditional way, as they usually do:
In fairness, no knowledge is absolute - we have no way of knowing if God will decide to overturn all His Laws in the next instant, or in fact created the universe last Thursday, with our memories all loaded appropriately. It is technically impossible to disprove an assertion that God created the Earth five thousand years ago, but planted fossils and twiddled with radioactivity decay rates just to test our faith. Such is the parable of the invisible gardener. But why have organized religions flourished for much of recent human history? Ironically, the framework of evolution has its bit to say. Religion admittedly can provide a certain purpose and zest, and provide a ready fellowship with fellow adherents, with the concomitant in-group benefits. Crusading spirits and swords can achieve much, not the least through the alienation, oppression or outright slaughter of those not of the fold. The lure of being "correct" by fiat is not inconsiderable, and the inability of many to survive as a heretic in a religious community or country reinforces religious propagation. Indeed, leaving the flock can be prohibited by weight of law as a last resort. Still, just as a guy who walks around claiming to be the latest prophet of God often ends up wrapped snugly in a straitjacket and deposited in a padded room, religions never dare come close to taking their beliefs all the way, despite usually claiming their absolute righteousness. Those who believe must tread an amorphous line, between the world according to their faith, and the world as it is. I suppose it gets easier once one is used to it, and in fact the assumption that humans are meant to be perfectly rational beings may be a poor one, which can explain a lot. So, here we have belief systems that, while being demonstrably untrue in some respects, have thus far been rather fit in terms of aiding survival. Will this state of affairs last indefinitely? Probably not. In much the same way that developing the capacity for trigonometry instead of more powerful leg muscles would be silly in an age when one is chased by sabre-toothed tigers, not taking a religious side would have been irrationally dangerous for many centuries. I doubt that religions will suddenly vanish, but they do change, if slowly, as they have been changing; Practices have come and gone, and indeed those from a dozen generations ago might not accept or even recognize what their creed has become. The abominations of previous eras transform into the merely discouraged, then into common behaviour, and finally even that memory fades into obscurity. So be it I hope with those of our days, mellowing into a gentle, thoughtful deism, and thereon perhaps into mere agnostism, but really it need not go that far. If the urge to worship remains overwhelming, I do have a beautiful faith to recommend: 
(Source: 4-4-2)
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Copyright © 2006-2025 GLYS. All Rights Reserved. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr. Fish is IN
