Slashdot Mirror
Robot Bat With Echolocation
productdose.com writes "A robotic bat head that can emit and detect ultrasound in the band of frequencies used by the world's bats will give echolocation research a huge boost. Sonar in water is a mature field, but sonar in air is far less advanced. Whenever a robot team wants to build an autonomous robot they look at sonar first, but they quickly run into problems due to the simple nature of commercial sonar systems, and switch to vision or laser-ranging. The
IST project CIRCE hopes that the research they can now do with the robotic bat will lead to more sophisticated sonar systems being used for robot navigation and other applications."
It collects information about its surroundings, evaluates it, and then discards the data in favour of running into un-seen objects.
I saw this one on Loony Tunes...the robot bat is dressed up as an attractive female bat, and lures the lovestruck male bat offscreen, where it then explodes, charring the male bat most humourously.
At least that's the way I remember it. Stupid closed-head injury...
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
What? It's not MIT? ... so who cares, then?
I swear, I haven't heard that word since elementary school... After hearing about if for a few years, no one gives a damn about how bats get around.
Is is is...there there there...anyone anyone anyone...in in in....there there there?
Gonna cruise for some robo babes.
For all the old Pink Floyd fans -- it's "ANYBODY", not "ANYONE"! ;-)
Paul B.
i think that these researchers are likely going in the wrong direction. The way I see it, the main problem with things like sonar isn't lack of signals or information. It's processing that information and coming up with useful data. The impressive thing about bats is that they can use the data they resieve meaningfully, not that they can recieve it. once they start writing software that can accurately map a 3d landscape on sonar alone, i'll be more impressed. proxy
BTW, that URL shows me using a pair of screen windows to "fend" one off (I was only armed with a frisbee) - I figured that would provide a pretty good radar return as "solid" surface.
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
If any biologists are reading this, I wonder if any other terrestrial nocturnal animals use echolocation? I know that some birds (owls in particular) are very good in low-light conditions, do any of them navigate with sound as well?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Sorry. It's all I could come up with. Squeek.
The Computations of AdamR
http://www.adamreyher.com
You remember those "human heads" they use in some recording studios? Same idea.
--
The "are you a script" word for today is discover.
Its just not cricket.
This sig is intentionally blank
Who says the visual spectrum of the EM band is the best way to interperit the world.
Wet, the only way to be sure if something is wet is to touch it (or put some other sensor into or onto it. I've seen lots of thengs that "looked" wet but it was just the glossy type look.
Soft, Sound is a MUCH better indicator for softness than sight. We've learnt that certain things look hard and soft. it's no measure if they are or not. You can make a barbell out of foam and with a good paint job it will look exactly like the real thing until you touch it. it won't however sound like a solid piece of metal. the returning sound will be muted / distorted.
Alive, see soft. I've seen people make realistic looking things on the beach. They could never have been alive, but they can look it.
Sorry bot the 3 examples you've used would have to be the worst 3. A more likely reason we have 2 eyes is we were origionally predators. We notice movement and distance well. It helps us hunt. As sight is effectivly passive (we don't have to shine light out of our eyes) it allows us to be more stealthy.
While bats use sonar, it's an active sensor. you have to keep making sound to use it. If more predatory animals used sonar to hunt, then more hunted animals would be able to detect it.
Back on topic however, If naval sonar is so advanced, why is atmospheric sonar so lacking ?
isn't it essentually a timing thing (sound travels faster in denser mediums like water than air). put a different emitter on and then adjust the timings.
Oh and if you're just sitting down, not moving etc can anyone see that you're drunk ?
sonar does, indeed, suck. and not in the fun way.
/anyways/ pretty much seal the deal.
why, you ask?
1) it's an active sensing modality (unless you've got a really bigass submarine with phased passive sonar arrays and a huge baseline, you're not going to get any range data out of the thing passively).
2) it's really damn tricky to process properly. sonar tends to fail in littoral waters because of multipath, echos, etc. in man made environments, the multipath + echo issues become really damn hard to solve without some good 3D models of the world around you (but if you can build those models, why bother with the sonar?)
3) signal to noise ratios are killer. this coupled with the innate difficulties in processing sonar
4) compared to other sensing modalities for non-aquatic environments, sonar just can't compete. if you have a single, calibrated camera and know its pose relative to the ground, you can calculate the exact position of any object on the ground. (more generally: if you know the pose of the camera relative to a known plane, you can precisely determine the position of any point on that plane up to what the camera's resolution will allow) if you have a stereo head, things get a lot more interesting (you can combine stereo imaging with structure from motion and get some highly accurate ranges).
that all said, if this research can solve those problems, i know i will gladly use their sonar / echolocation stuff (it can't be blinded by the sun, unlike ladars, although both will have major issues with rain).
Question: is it waterproof? Man, I can't wait to take one of these babies in the pool to play marco polo! Then we'll FINALLY get to have a proper showdown between man and machine! USA! USA!
Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
One project partner developed a broadband transducer that could both convert acoustical energy to electrical energy and electrical to acoustical across the 20 to 200 kHz spectrum.
Now all we need to do is train bats to repeat what they hear, and we will have wireless TCP/IP by bat.While this in interesting research, I can't help wonder if they are taking into account the possible negative effects this might have on real bats. Could too much noise confuse them? As I've understood, bats can cooperate in order not to create too much noise. One chirps, many listen to the result.
I doubt a robot would show the same courtesy...
.: Max Romantschuk
... the morphing wing gull plane from a few posts back. It could become a serious nuisance worthy of commercial or military exploit.
Fish, Please reenter the water, you have 20 seconds to comply"
"Okay, I'm getting in!"
"Unable to read from Infrared device, abort, retry, ignore?"
"What? Uhh, Abort!! Abort!!"
"Unable to close application, terminate now, or wait another five seconds?"
"Terminate! Stop! Halt! Please, goddamit!"
I think the general conscensus is that a combination of several methods is the best way to observe and interpret the world. Obviously visual isn't the most accurate otherwise eye-witness testimony would mean more and it wouldn't be so easy for hollywood to convince us that keanu revees can fly. Sound isn't nessicarily the best way because it's quite easy to be fooled by such things as a tennis racket being swung through the air (mwhaha). Touch isn't always 100% accurate either due to the way it's wired to the brain (try having a friend cross their index and middle finger and close their eyes. then use a pencil to touch right in the middle of the tips of their crossed fingers. very strange sensation).
The reason we have five senses (and potentially others) is that each of them reduces the uncertainty of the observation.
PS: If you observe certain muscles in the face, they tend to be far more relaxed when intoxicated, resulting in that stupid 'drunk gaze'.
I, for one, welcome our new robotic homerun hitting overlords.
Still IMing in the stone age?
I applaud their efforts to increase human knowledge regarding SONAR technologies. There are quite a few potential benefits that may arise.
;) Either that or maybe it would drive dogs and cats crazy.
/tactile sensors, etc.
One would hope, however, that we don't start relying too much on SONAR becuase it appears to be of limited functionality, can potentially cause noise pollution, and even alter the migration patters of bats themselves
Well, whatever the case, I'm quite curious to see how far they go. I mean really, the technology is only going to be good at things that reflect sound. Is it going to be good for people avoidance? Tree / shurb avoidance? Maybe.... but then again any addition information is better than none.. that is if it were suplimented with appropriate visual
--Matt Wong
Echolocation as a group sense in animals and robots.
Discuss.
...tell me these people have been responsible enough to also design a robotic tennis racket, in case that damn bat finds its way into my house?
I am not left-handed, either!
squirrels can be mischievous...one ran right in my door as i was outside watching him, i had to chase him out. but i wouldn't kill one. unless he was really being annoying and had been duly warned.
Funny thing about bats in the kitchen. At work I found a small tupperware of bat heads in the "biological samples only" refrigerator. Must belong to some other lab that use our facilities. Either way, I'd have to say that's the most random thing I've come across yet in my time there.
PS: Mod -1 off topic. I just thought I'd share something random from my otherwise uneventful job.
Forgive us, for we know not what we hath wrought.
StupidChildren...the reason jesus is crying
I remember reading a few years ago about a new sonar-like system being tested by the military to locate snipers. A soldier would carry a microphone, recording the sounds as he went. When a gun was test fired, the information was fed into a computer which computationally tracked the motion of the sound waves through a test course back to the point of origin.
It's a very promising system (Someone shoots at you, your eyepiece HUD immediately tells you where he is), but it was totally impractical. IIRC, they needed to have a prebuilt 3-d model of the test range for the program to backtrace the bullet. It also took the simulation hours to backtrace one bullet when run on a supercomputer. The computing power will soon be no problem. The hard part will be to generate a sufficiently accurate 3-d model of downtown Baghdad...
It sounds as if some of the things they are researching here (preprocessing input/output) might have some application. Don't know what became of that sound-backtrace project, though.
Call me crazy...
but isn't "Sonar in Air" called "radar"?
and don't we pretty much have some pretty sophisticated radar systems out there?
or are we talking about some horrible shrieking sounds in the audible spectrum to make this happen?
Did someone say E-chocolate?
Don't blame me -- I voted for Roslin.
Just be glad that you didn't get rabies from either one of them. I've heard of one case where a woman was bit by a bat, and didn't even realize it because the puncture wound was so small/superficial. She died several days later.
FYI: If you see a bat during the *DAY*, it most likely has rabies.
Or more correctly Cillia.
A single (ignore the pair for direction for a moment) detector element is not going to get any accurate (3D) results, no matter how good the post processing.
Also the shape of the ear is minor in comparison to the "array" of information from the messages the individual hairs(cillia) send to the brain. Not saying they're wasting their time, just that it will likely be sub-optimal by design. Also I'd bet the hair pattern(layout) is more important than the over all shape too. But then IANAB* so what do I know.
(*I Am Not A Bat)
Wow, you are an incredible coward. They are just little bats, and you're a goddamn human being. What do you think they're going to do, clamp onto your face and eat your eyeballs? You freak out each time you see these little creatures that have just wandered into your home.. grow a pair and realize that you are much higher on the food chain.
Whenever a robot team wants to build an autonomous robot they look at sonar first...
Sonar has a place, but is by no means the first thing that everyone looks at when designing an autonomous robot. I imagine most would like to use cameras, but the complexitys of image analysis put that out of reach(for most), so they look at more simple sensors such as sonar/laser range finders/antennae.
Though all of this depends on the builders skill and the projects needs.
Uses frequencies in an already crowded band....
Get your Unix fortune now!
Lets get this straighten out.. they made cyborg bats with friggin' radar beams attached to their heads!!
There is more than just range or location of objects to map. You could possibly map the density of objects, or even dynamic media like beer, dense air in storms, fluctuating seawater or even semen salinity, or the complex atmospheres on other planets/planetoids using echo location derived technologies. These capabilities come from the fact that sound is a different form of energy wave than EM waves. Sound is a compression of the medium, like air, at certain times, like 50 times per second (the brown noise.) So it is very well suited to detecting changes in matter that other waves can pass right through or simply bounce off the mere surface of. There are also different ways to map objects and their locations. The simple approach would be to send out a sound, listen for it to return, then try to decide how far away was the object from which it reflected. An alternative way of mapping would be perhaps a statistical process. First you send out a sound or just listen to ambient noise and determine how many ways it can change. Then you can fly around while you record what you hear. You also want to record each time you run into an object and all of the acoustic features each object you run into possesses. Eventually, you will have enough data to build a statistical probability or regression or whatever model and a derived algorithm for listening to the environment. By using a listening algorithm tailored for the environment, like xmas2003's Frisbee ridden house, the robot bat can simply fly around and guess when it will hit something. The robot bat can even determine if it is about to hit a Frisbee, a window screen, a tennis racket or whatever weapon the flying mammal hater has deployed. This is probably a lot closer to what a live bat actually does. Rather than draw a map of where the moth is, the bat simply remembers what a moth three feet away sounds like and veers in the direction that sounds better. Of course, the live bat's OS is not Linux but Hunger1.0. Not a very stable platform, but the computational power is fantastic! I don't really know a lot about echo location or sonar, but I play like I do on /. I have also seen statistical mapping used in many similar applications like ground penetrating radar. Statistics is applied in geophysical/seismic mapping. Mechanical failure analysis can be done by listening to vibrations which are just below the audible frequencies. Then there is the Weather Channel. So, if statistical mapping of sonar and echo data is not in use by robots for navigation and targeting today, then it will be soon.
With the demise of real nature, and cutting cost on the remaining nature, the following proposals are being made:
In cities replace real gras with fake gras, same for flowers and trees (who cares that the real versions produce oxygen, and reduce polution in several ways)
Since plastic trees and flowers are less likely to sustain life, other forms of life will be replaced too. The research sofar has the following:
Robotic dog
Robotic cat
Head of bat (hey, Do you want to have them flying around?)
Some fake cockroaches
For on the benches in the parks, which without real nature will be less attractive anyway, all dirt which is now cleaned up by nature, will stay around, we will have cute looking japanese femal robots able to wave at you when you drive by, making it look very lively.
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
Maybe they were someones lunch?
Back on topic however, If naval sonar is so advanced, why is atmospheric sonar so lacking ? isn't it essentually a timing thing (sound travels faster in denser mediums like water than air). put a different emitter on and then adjust the timings.
Air and water have very different sonic properties. Air is highly compressible, water is less so. Sounds travel short distances in air compared to water... etc.
Sonar was developed because you can't see underwater. The military has invested huge sums refining it. Above ground we can see, so nobody's bothered researching air-based sonar to the same degree.
The reason why we have 2 eyes, aligned in a way that lets us judge range, is that our ancestors were hopping from tree to tree. Misjudging distances while doing so can have consequences ranging from "painful" to "removal from the gene pool".
We notice movement and distance well.
Compared to a real predator, we're pretty much blind in these regards.
It helps us hunt.
Not really. Hunters do not need color perception, instead they need high resolution (especially temporal) and good performance through a wide spectrum of light intensities.
We, on the other hand, have sacrificed low-light performance for color perception so we can tell the red fruit from the green fruit and the leaves.
If naval sonar is so advanced, why is atmospheric sonar so lacking ?
Sound (especially ultrasound) attenuation in air is a real pain here, as is the low, low speed of sound in air.
Wow! I would have freaked out if I saw a bat in my house.
Have you ever looked into something like an Ultrasonic Pest Repeller? I'm not 100% certain; but, I believe they would work with bats, too. I know for sure that the one my parents have came with an explicit warning to not use the device around pet mice and hamsters.
My lame blog.
Get back to me when it can fly.
A head that can ecolocate is nothing - we've been using sonar and radar for years.
Seriously this reminds me of an apartment I almost rented years ago... it was an attic of a building; there was a guy living there who was moving out in a few weeks and I was about to hand over the money when I noticed a butterfly net near his futon .... Being a smartass I was like, "Hey, are you a lepidopterist?" He said no, no, that's for the bats. Huh? "Oh it's no big deal - they show up every once in a while. You just turn on the radio to confuse their sonar and catch them with this net." OK, then what do I do? The guy picks up a baseball bat... "You hit it a few times with this bat until it stops moving and then you can flush it down the toilet." I almost lost my lunch right there. I wound up renting a room on the first floor -- so I lived in the house but I never ventured up to the attic after that story. I think bats are really cool but I could not imagine having to catch them and kill them in my bedroom on a regular enough basis to keep a net next to my bed.
http://bash.org/?240849
"Robotic Bat Heads" ~ Good name for a rock band
With one hair per frequency. Make that one frequency per hair.
Hair damaged? you can't hear that frequency. Lots of hairs damaged? You're deaf, even though the actual receiving equipment may be fine. You can no longer receive input from that hair which makes you deaf to roughly that frequency, +- some percentage around it.
I'm sure that it would be possible to 'grow' silicon cilia to fit into a 'tuned pipe' to give ears to our computers. Then the fun comes with processing.
Detecting direction is simple and can be done with a couple of 'gates' (digital equivalent of a couple of analog devices,) which just detect the phase difference between inputs (a neural net is the simplest way to handle the processing and 'training' consists of placing a sound source on a traveling rail. [Babies can do it long before they are capable of knowing what a source is.])
CPE (cocktail party effect [the ability to pick a voice out of a crowd]) is more involved and does things with frequency matching. (And is a problem with MS sufferers, which is how I learned about it. You would not believe how much richer my ears 'hear' music compared to yours. Of course, if we're in a room with others talking, I get no coherent input.)
Back to physics:
The length of the cilia determine the 'sensitivity' to sound. Short hairs are less sensitive because there is less 'piezo' flexing distance, but longer hairs are more prone to damage (deafening.) There's also more stuff related to the actual mass of the cilia and its relation to motion.
The perception of 'loudness' is a post-processing effect and depends on relative strength of a signal to other signals.
Ask the submarine echo location staff in the navy and you'd be amazed at what they already know on the subject.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
To Robot Dracula! The vorld vill tremble! He vill suck your blood! Problem is, when he gets too close to a Window in the daytime he gets a BSOD
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
I was just curious if this technology would be harmful to bats? Would it make them confused or crash into things?
Isn't that the case with sonar where it harms dolphins somehows?
You are also lucky you are in Colorado.
.... there are three bats clinging to the wall and slowly climbing down towards me.....
In the UK and in some parts of Europe, it's illegal to injure, kill or otherwise disturb bats while they are breeding.
Being caught can lead to a fine of up to 5000 pounds ($10K US dollars) per bat. A recent court case.
We had bats in our attic too - they were getting in through the gaps in the eaves of the house. For several months, we had always wondered why our cats were going into the room and jumping about. It wasn't until I was sleeping in the room one night, and was woken up to hear a scraping noise above on the wall beside me. I switch on the light and
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
... so does wearing a tinfoil hat help protect you from these robotic bats?
Or does tinfoil help "bounce" the sounds back and give them a better target!?!
It is getting so hard to be paranoid these days.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Not sure If I'm for or against this.
On the one hand, bats are scary.
And yet everyone likes a little head.
We used to throw rocks at 'em at twilight and watch them chase the rocks. (That's what country folk do.)
I was hoping to see a bunch of links to modern linux software for using those cheap Poloroid distance sensors. Imagine waving a sensor a few times to get a picture something like a Sonogram or Diagnostic Ultrasound image. That would be cool.
A Dolphin (or Porpoise) has a large head filled with fat and nerves. The dimensional space receives echoes. I believe the Dolphin keeps all the sound in 3 dimensions -- never detecting it in two. The nerves within the fat model the wave form shapes directly to the brain.
;-)
I've always felt that we should be using ultrasound devices to communicate with dolphins, rather than trying to send them recordings. We think it is the same sound, but our sound comes out of a speaker which is two-dimensional, while the dolphin is sending and receiving sound in 3D.
The point I'm making is, that our 2D receptors for sonar need a lot of processing power to remove extraneous ripples and sound-bouncing. If you were to detect the effect and actual motion of sound passing through a sensitive gelatinous medium (say an aero-gel), any and all origins of sound would be easily apparent. The arc of each wave would be different as well as the direction -- it is many orders of magnitude simpler to find the shape and location of an object making the sound in 3D space then to look at one plane and try to compute anything. You have to separate the sounds by sampling over time and determining the various wave forms making up the resulting jumble.
Anyway, if someone wants to build this--email me and let me get credit on the patent
Talking to Dolphins would finally be possible. For instance, I hypothesis that the word for fish is a sound picture of a fish -- and of a specific fish -- meaning that any Dolphin would know exactly which fish you were talking about -- like sending a picture that included how healthy a person was. Close as you can get to telepathy and a lot more detailed than language. Humans in this regard, must seem very crude the a Dolphin -- they must wonder how we could have accomplished so many things being as poor in language as we are.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
Hehe, great site, and great stories.. I think I'm in a pretty bat-free zone but should they venture near, I now know what to do!
we had always wondered why our cats were going into the room and jumping about.
Hah. I imagine a flying rodent would be a cat's idea of great fun. Smells like a mouse, flits about like a small bird, add some catnip and it might just be too much to handle altogether.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
So if I shape it like the head of a bat, like Batman's cowl, I will appear to be one of their brethren, abeit much larger... maybe they will even worship me as fricking huge bat god... ... Did I mention that I am paranoid and semi-delusional? ... Oh you got that from the comment already... ... Good.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Sonar was developed because you can't see underwater. The military has invested huge sums refining it. Above ground we can see, so nobody's bothered researching air-based sonar to the same degree.
Not exactly true. You can definitely see underwater, your range is just limited. Sonar extends that range. Above ground we have radar. Sonar wouldn't have significantly more range than visual does, so the military has no need to invest in sonar.
Find coupons in Greeley
Not exactly true. You can definitely see underwater...
Nobody told me that! I always wondered why fish had eyes...
Cats chasing bats is one thing. We've got a dog that chases them when we take her out for a walk. Took us ages to realise that was what she was doing...
I say we take off and nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...
I remember seeing/reading about a blind guy who made clicks and sounds and then navigates the world.
The part that impressed me is that while walking down the street he could tell what vehicles where parked on the road... as he walk he said car, car, truck, car, van, red car. (Last one being a joke on his part). He claimed that he noticed that the echoing sound from his walking stick changed slightly. After much trail and error he was able to make a clicking noise and then deciphered the returning echoed sound. I seem to recall that he is teaching his technique to blind people.
My Sig indicates the end of the comment I posted.
Bats are also predators. Sonar seems to work for them.
Stop Global Warming!
Just say no to irreversible processes!
No, but I hear they will be mounting refrigerator sized lasers on them.
Stop Global Warming!
Just say no to irreversible processes!
up here in canada on the west coast I've heard of many fisherman talking about large US military boats coming though and blasting their sonar and killing a assortment of fish. If this technology is not used carefully we will see all the land animals that use sonar have serious issues.
Bats are not rodents.
Whenever a robot team wants to build an autonomous robot they look at sonar first, but they quickly run into problems due to the simple nature of commercial sonar systems
What do they base that on? That's just ridiculous. I admit, sonar is a very common choice, but he says it as if robot builders blindly go into sonar first thing always.
I think maybe he went into it without doing any research because he's clearly not aware of some of the impressive prior work done in the field. He's not the first to use ultrasonic imaging. There's been really impressive work going back to the mid to late 90s. This guy, living in his own world, clearly thinks he invented the field.
I mean, they've done some new stuff here, but the field wasn't nearly as primitive as he made it out to be. Hell, back in the mid-90's, 3 other hobbyists and I built a pretty decent 3-d imaging system from slightly modified Polaroid 6500 ranging modules. And we were just hobbyists. I know much more impressive stuff has been done by others in the past 10 years. Hell, back in the early 90s, there was a group doing facial recongition with ultrasonics and neural nets.
I dunno, I'm just not terribly impressed by their work, though I'm jaded a lot by the guy's arrogant "we invented the field" kind of attitude.
- good thing my wife didn't see that onebr>
Um... Did anyone see it? What about the others? If you find that frequently bats get into your house and no one else sees them, that may be indicative of some "other" type of problem. Good luck with that!!!
Duh, that's what bats do. What kind of pussy bats do you have where you live?
I think I saw the same thing on a Discovery Channel special. I believe it might have been these guys http://www.xbow.com/ but I could only find information on it in a newletter http://www.xbow.com/General_info/Info_pdf_files/Xb owNewsletter_Q1-05.pdf
I already have too many real bats getting tangled up in my hair. Why would I want a robotic bat that would inevitably get tangled up in my hair too?
Why don't researchers try to use human sound localization methods. Humans do have an innate ability to detect the localization of sound sources for various directions and distances. In particular, a simple way to detect the locations in the horizontal domain are Interaural Time Delays(ITD) and Interaural Level Delays(ILD), where interaural means between the ears. These are just fancy ways of saying the source location is closest to the ear that hears the loudest sound and hears it first. The other ear will then hear that same sound with some time delay and at a lesser volume. Depending on the length of the time delay and how much the volume of the sound has decreased, we can tell which direction the sound came from. It essentially reduces to a high school geometry problem.
after learning all about echolocation with this couldnt you make a device with headphones and mount it on a bat and instead of sending out waves and determining location sending fake readings to the bat so that they become remote controlled?
wow a remoter control bat, that would be, like, so awesome, especially with a mini HELLADS laser on it.
if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
...te?
ah, land sharks and twisted legal counsel...
...the Tigers STILL suck...
One word: rabies