Slashdot Mirror
23-Year-Old Chess Grandmaster Whips Bill Gates In 71 Seconds
MojoKid writes "There's no disputing that Bill Gates is blessed with a brilliant mind. Sure, he dropped out of Harvard College, but he got accepted into the elite institution of higher learning in the first place. Leading into his college career, Gates scored 1,590 out of 1,600 on the SAT. The rest is history — he went on to co-found Microsoft, built a net worth that's in the billions ($76.8 billion at last count), and now spends his time on his philanthropic efforts. Regardless, it took 23-year-old Magnus Carlsen, a "grandmaster" Chess player since the age of 13 and new world Chess champion, just 71 seconds to defeat Gates in a friendly game of Chess on a Norwegian television show. It takes longer to heat up a cup of water in the microwave."
Your microwave sucks
And about as long as it takes Windows to blue-screen...
He should have brought a Chess computer.
Learn to love Alaska
He lost to someone who spent much of their life practicing the game. That doesn't really mean anything. To be a chess grandmaster requires a great natural aptitude - but it also requires devotion to practice and study within that very narrow field.
The definitive example of 'News' is 'Man bites dog'. If Carlsen had established a business empire to rival Microsoft in 71 seconds, that might be news.
Succeeding in business is about being in the right place at the right time. Some do it buy luck others do it by maneuvering into position. Bill did the latter as did Jobs, they had a gift of vision knowing where they needed to be with what product offering. Sure he made some missteps latter but nobody has a perfect record if they play they game for long, overall though it's real clear Bill has a strong business sense, If anyone could do it today, and now that the industry has matured I am not so sure they could, it would be Bill.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
The most intelligent person in the world would not stand a chance versus an experienced, serious chess aficionado. Being good at chess not only requires raw intelligence, but also strategic and tactical insights that just can't be developed on the fly no matter how intelligent you are, and especially not during a speed chess match.
Reminds me of the story of world-class poker player Tom Dwan (who has won millions at poker and is likely very intelligent) losing > $50k in misjudging his chances of beating chess International Master Greg Shahade, who was starting the game down a rook (an insurmountable difference when players have remotely similar skill).
If you place all of your pieces in the right place you can get out of this TV show quicker .
I'm sorry, but first off - Magnus Carlsen has been an extremely well known chess player since 2004. Justin Bieber was discovered when? 2008?
Secondly, while Bieber is famous for being famous.. Carlsen is famous for using his brain and becoming the world champion of chess. He built his career around his brain. Yes, some fashion agency also discovered his good looks and started sponsoring him and using him as a model - but that's not his main work. It's a hobby thing on the side. Good for him.
For those slightly interested in chess, but not interested enough to normally follow ratings and such - take a look at: http://2700chess.com/ for the up to date live ratings.
Aronian is doing a massive jump these days due to Tata Steel. I'm guessing the next WCC match will be between Carlsen and Aronian. They're typically rather evenly matched.
"Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
Not
and also not stuff that matters
Anyway you don't measure the length of a chess game by time, you measure it by the number of moves
I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off the head of Bill Gates and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some software comes with too high a price. I would look up into his lifeless eyes and wave, like this. Can you and your Utilities arrange that for me, Mr Norton?
Modern chess grandmasters frequently play whats called "lightning" or "bullet" chess with a time control of 60 seconds for each player for all of their moves is the entire game. In this time control, a player who uses 71 seconds has already lost on time.
... 3:1 advantage = 0.75 expected value) His rating is over 2800, so against an average opponent with a 1200 rating his advantage is over 6500:1.
Clearly someone who suggests "scholars mate" here such as yourself would not understand that these GM's actually play extremely strongly even with so little time on the clock. While this speed of chess was popularized by computer interfaces and online chess servers, its actually played OTB as well
Magnus Carlsen is the highest rated chess player ever. The standard ELO chess rating system is set up such that a +200 point difference in ELO equals a 3:1 advantage (a games score is 1.0 for a win, 0.5 for a draw, or 0.0 for a loss
"His name was James Damore."
Bill Gates is not a polymath, I am sure he is no longer competitive in coding, let alone most tasks requiring intellect only because you need to have the knowledge, the talent and the intellect. Hi might have the second and he probably has the third but he can't make up for the first.
An annotated game record is available here:
http://en.chessbase.com/post/carlsen-mates-bill-gates-in-79-seconds
The interactive way to Go -- http://www.playgo.to/iwtg/en/
Not sure if the video plays outside of Norway:
http://tv.nrk.no/serie/skavlan...
It's about at 54 min. in.
Facts:
- Carlsen was given 30 sec to win.
- Gates humbly said he had a 1600 rating vs someone with 2000 etc.
- Gates was actually a sponsor of Carlsen at the start.
- Carlsen said he violated one of his principles by using a cheap trick to win.
Yeah, then we can finally have a GCC that's faster than Clang!
It was not. It was an attack using two knights and the queen, while busily sacrificing material as a smokescreen. Very elegantly done.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
Reminds me of an old saying:
Every person you meet is always better at something then you are...
Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
Reading the annotated game, Bill not only had white, but got one ? move and another ?? move. A ? is a blunder and ?? is a really stupid blunder. The ?? move lost him the game. The other player even sacrificed one of his bishops which put the convicted monopolist up on material. He still should have lost, but BG screwed up royally. Can't blame him for being mediocre at chess, though, because that has been regarded for centuries as a good thing.
"[Chess] is certainly a pleasing and ingenious amusement, but it seems to have one defect, which is that it is possible to have too much knowledge of it, so that whoever would excel in the game must give a great deal of time to it, as I believe, and as much study as if he would learn some noble science or perform well anything of importance; and yet in the end, for all his pains, he only knows how to play a game. Thus, I think a very unusual thing happens in this, namely that mediocrity is more to be praised than excellence."
-- Castiglione, The Book of the Courtier, 1528, Book II para. 31, Singleton translation
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
...than a chess game with Bill Gates, as even a Microsoft Surface tablet will behave in a wildly different manner between the two:
* Surface placed in front of Bill Gates and switched on = Very low levels of molecular, audio and visual excitation
* Microwave loaded with a Surface and switched on = Very high excitation and dynamic visual displays
but all of the pieces required were in play - both play horses, hate those people!!!
Can take them just takes longer.
Bill Gates is impressive steal code or whatever he did it. but Chess isn't his game. Leading with a knight sigh was after a quick win but
prevented all his other pieces from moving; able to castle, had em on the run from the start. kinda think e castled to show he knew a bit about chess.
Thanks for that helpful comparison---without it, I would have had no clue how long 71 seconds actually is.
Liberty in your lifetime
The chess franchise is still very successful, but I lost interest after ChessVII - Pawn's Castle. Lame story, too many quicktime events.
I don't think so. Sure, he's a smart guy, but 99.999% of his success came from being at the right place at the right time.
i.e. writing DOS just as IBM entered the PC market. The rest is history.
Someone please call this, ahem, "Carlsen" guy, and set up a series of matches against me. It should take no more than 6500 matches, but I WILL become the new chess grand champion!
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
Game on chessgames.com.
1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 is unusual but not crazy.
2. ... d4 seems suitably aggressive; the black queen backs her pawn up, the white king can't.
3. Bd3? Gates is trying to protect his pawn (and preparing to castle), but ends up blocking in his black bishop; better is 3. d3.
3. ... Nf6
4. exd5? Qxd5 lets the black queen out of her hidey-hole.
5. Nc3 Qh5 White tries to play queen-be-gone, but the queen is happy to be on her way.
6. 0-0? Dude, with the queen sitting on h5? 6. ... Bg4 after the knight on f3.
7. h3 trying bishop-be-gone; perhaps White should have played this instead of castling. 7. ... Ne5 again contending for f3.
8. hxg4 Nfxg4 aiming for h2 while keeping an attack on f3. ... Nxf3+ 10. Qxf3 or gxf3 Qh2#. But White played about the worst move he could have made:
The only thing that saves White at this point is 9. Re1 giving the king an escape route and developing the rook. Anything else and, at best, 9.
9. Nxe5?? Qh2#.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
I'm not Bill, but I accept the challenge. :D
I would write a flood fill function like this: take a starting point (from a mouse click, for example). Expand recursively in all directions (pass the image data as a pointer to the children, also pass the color of the starting point pixel) but do not expand if the color is different than the starting point pixel. In every iteration, change the color of the current pixel to the one which we have selected from the palette.
He didn't lose--presumably they both won, just different things. The result was a foregone conclusion, so Gates would not have agreed if he hadn't gotten something else out of it. He presumably accomplished his goal.
My ancient Sharp microwave takes 4 minutes to heat a cup of water.
Guy who is really really good at chess beats quite smart guy of unknown chess-playing ability at chess.
This is news?
Regardless, it took 23-year-old Magnus Carlsen, a "grandmaster" Chess player since the age of 13 and new world Chess champion, just 71 seconds to defeat Gates in a friendly game of Chess
What do you mean, "regardless"? There's no "regardless" about it. It's like comparing a guy who won a gajillion dollars on a scratchcard to Warren Buffett (except for the fact that you could never get richer than Warren Buffett with any scratchcard). There is no comparison.
Or are we really now meant to re-appraise Bill Gates's intelligence and business acumen in light of this spectacular failure to hold out against a chess grandmaster?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
http://en.chessbase.com/post/c...
If nine moves is in the TL;DR range for you, it was a bishop sacrifice to open up the h-file for a queen and knight attack. Poor Bill missed a mate in one, but I suspect most would do the same under those conditions.
Chess is a very specialized skill, unrelated to pretty much everything that matters in life. Yeah, it's not surprising that an expert level chess player can win against a business tycoon. He'd probably also win against a Nobel prize winner or mathematician.
Carlsen earned 800k last november for playing 10 games.
He is a phenomenon though. And of course everybody is poor by Bill's standards.
Could you do it in 71 swconds though?
(and have the patient live afterward)
This article claims he was beaten in 71 seconds, while most sources claim 79 seconds. Who is correct and why is there a discrepancy?
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
>"There's no disputing that Bill Gates is blessed with a brilliant mind."
I think I shall barf now.
More like "ruthless", "greedy", and "does not care how much damage he does as long as he profits". Also surprising incompetent with regard to technology. This person will go down in history as the reason the computer revolution was delayed by a few decades, because he managed to push his sub-standard technology into the market in a small window of opportunity.
As to the grand-master though, any grand-master will wipe the flow with anybody who is not, genius does not play a role here.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
An idiot that also does not understand chess one bit....
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I dunno, ask Zuckerberg.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Bill Gates is meant [] to be intelligent[]? I can think of several things that his history would tend to show of himself (???) and intelligence is not one of them.
House of glass, meet rock.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
That's not even true, according to TFA Gates had 2 minutes of time per move, while the kid had 30 secs per move.
Also, I don't like Gates, but he didn't play bad (except the obvious mistake at the end which led to surprise checkmate)
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
I bet Magnus Carlsen can give himself a haircut faster than Bill Gates.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
All Gates-bashing aside, I'm a little surprised that the win was so fast. I once played chess against a much better player at a Renaissance fair. He was playing many people at once. He didn't cream me (or anyone else around the table) instantly. Instead, I think he played the same sort of strong, deliberate chess game that he would have played against a better player. Basically, he systematically built up a stronger position until I was so overpowered that he could force checkmate. Though I never stood a chance, it took him awhile to do the deed.
From that angle, in the "71 seconds" scenario, we can assume that either Gates is an extremely poor chess player, he let the kid win in 71 seconds, or maybe he just fell into some sort of textbook trap that Carlsen knew. But since Gates is an accomplished bridge player and seems to have been an effective strategist at Microsoft (it ain't easy to put together a monopoly), he's probably not an extremely poor chess player.
Or, maybe the guy at the Renaissance fair was just taking it easy on me (us) to make it more fun.
Have you ever played a grandmaster? I imagine Bill Gates and I are probably on par, chess-wise. As an anecdote, I won my town's chess championship at the age of 15. (Population: 10K.) I'm not USCF rated, though I've considered it, and I generally run roughshod over my friends.
My grandfather was a grandmaster. Until his faculties started to fail him, I *never* beat him. And we played regularly. I always seemed to be a move behind, no matter who started. It was this vice that just closed in. And if we played quickly, well, it just happened that much the faster.
The original Beowulf was set in Scandinavia, so maybe.
Perhaps next week we'll find out how long Gates can go against a professional Sumo wrestler. Or maybe not, I really don't want to see him wearing a loincloth.
Beat Gates and Osberg at duplicate bridge and you'll have something to talk about.
When I read other articles it looks like Gates had 2 minutes total, not per move, which is more conventional for a chess game. The article writer may have been confused.
In a match against an overwhelmingly better opponent your only chance is to throw him off balance. Play by the books and you surely get wiped out, but throw in a random move, a strange gambit, and maybe, just maybe the grandmaster will get confused. You still haven't got a real chance as he will get you in the end game anyway, but that is understood.
Will he win or loose against Serena Williams? I mean, come on, she is a woman. Or drive faster in a rally then Juha Kankkunen, Tommi MÃkinen or even Marcus GrÃnholm? That should be easy. They are Finnish. ... !
We already know no Fin could make a better OS then Bill Ga...oh
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
IBM slipped up and let Gates keep rights to DOS. This unexpectedly made him a billionaire. Not his smarts. Being a billionaire he was able to keep a crappy company afloat with predatory tactics. The first edition of The Road Ahead hardly mentioned the Internet. When others were already well on their way with it. A year later, he finally caught on, and in the paperback edition there were, as I recall, three chapters on the Internet. A leader? No! In my following of Microsoft, they have stolen or bought up every important new product, and usually make a mess of it until the N-teenth version. Bill Gates a visionary? I laugh every time I heat that. When he makes predictions I turn the page or turn the channel. Nothing interesting to read or hear.
you are right that it is unsurprising — as is the result of a game between a tennis champ and an amateur — but you are wrong in saying that the skills one squires in chess are unrelated to everything that matters in life.
you obviously have never taken up the sport, or you would soon see how it disciplines and trains the mind to meet everything else in life with more and better discrimination — just like science enables one to cut out a lot of the crap that people superstitiously believe — chess teaches your mind how to think clearly in a better way than anything else. it shows you how to overcome superstitious instincts, and train them towards better results — and this helps in almost every area of life.
As Benjamin Franklin wrote in 1750 in his article, The Morals of Chess — The Game of Chess is not merely an idle amusement; several very valuable qualities of mind, useful in the course of human life, are to be acquired and strengthened by it, so as to become habits ready on all occasions; for life is a kind of Chess... By playing at Chess then, we may learn:
1st, Foresight, which looks a little into futurity, and considers the consequences that may attend an action.
2nd, Circumspection, which surveys the whole Chess-board, or scene of action—the relation of the several pieces and their situations...
3rd, Caution, not to make our moves too hastily...
two cents from toronto island
j
I don't see you contributing anything useful. Can you elaborate on what was held back during these decades? Graphical interfaces? TCP/IP? Filesystems? Talk about armchair history buffs.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I played chess in high school, and reasonably well, mostly because I believed such crap. I play Go now, because I think it's a more interesting game. I still don't kid myself about either game having any other benefit than enjoyment.
Oh, well, that settles it! Throw decades of psychological research out the window because Franklin stated an uninformed opinion in 1750.
Much of his 23 year long life. Still couldn't have been very long. I've spent more time taking a crap than he's been alive.
This fast-paced style of game is most commonly referred to as "blitz".
No, Blitz is slower than Bullet/Lightning.
Blitz is typically considered to be games where players have somewhere between 3 minutes and 14 minutes to make all their moves, and most frequently 5 minute or 2 minutes with a 12 seconds increment added after each move.
Between 15 minutes and 1 hour of often called "Rapid."
Now STFU when you know that you are ignorant. We both know that you knew that you were ignorant.
"His name was James Damore."
I guess being good at chess isn't an indication of anything when it comes to real life. For all its relevance, they may as well have played tiddlywinks. I appreciate chess myself, but I have to laugh when people crow about how good they are. You beat Bill Gates. Great. Go build an empire now.
This person will go down in history as the reason the computer revolution was delayed by a few decades, because he managed to push his sub-standard technology into the market in a small window of opportunity.
Microsoft cast a huge shadow across the eight-bit world. The 16 bit CP/M clone was the obvious migration path for small business ---- and there was never the slightest doubt that the new IBM micro would ship with a full suite of development tools from Microsoft.
Digital Research threatened legal action, claiming PC DOS/MS-DOS to be too similar to CP/M. IBM settled by agreeing to sell their x86 version of CP/M, CP/M-86, alongside PC DOS. However, PC DOS sold for $40, while CP/M-86 had a $240 price tag. The proportion of PC buyers prepared to spend six times as much to buy CP/M-86 was very small.
DR-DOS
Gate's negotiation of a non-exclusive license for MSDOS was a stroke of brilliance. There were commercially viable MSDOS PCs on the market before the cloning of the IBM PC BIOS.
Digital Research would not have a plausible mass market alternative to MSDOS until the release of DR-DOS in 1988.
The Macintosh 128K was released in 1884.
$2500, $5439, adjusted for inflation.
Integrated 9 inch monochrome screen with a resolution of 512x342 pixels, No arrow keys, keypad or function keys. The GUI a resource hog.
The Mac would find success in niche markets, desktop publishing perhaps must visibly. But it was not, in the eighties, and beyond, positioned to challenge Microsoft on all fronts.
So much for the geek's "small window" of opportunity --- as open as eight lanes of expressway traffic at three a.m. in the morning would be closer to the truth.
Gates played in a 'think only of one move' mode, he has no strategy and doesn't even try to look at the board from POV of his opponent, so this was childs game.
Well, nobody really can strategize in the first few moves - that's why all the serious players memorize books full of opening positions. Any intuition they do have usually just is the result of having studied. There are some strategies that can be employed like steering towards more open/closed play and such, but again it all goes back to the book. Everything is empirical.
Disclaimer - I'm not all that seriously into chess, so I'm certainly open to enlightenment by somebody who is.
The first two-thirds of the summary lauds Bill Gates like a propaganda piece about the dictator of North Korea. This whole place has become sickeningly MS-friendly ever since Dice took over.
Great one guys.
I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
The clock started out with 30s vs 120s, and it continuously counted down for the active side. I don't know at what point more time would have been given, but it was obviously speed chess. Carlson used half of his time to even win in 9 moves.
could he do the same thing today if he was starting from scratch?
Probably. Maybe not to billions, but he surely would have made millions.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Not only that, Carlsen had a lot of time to think while Gates was moving.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Nonsense. Talk about revisionist history.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
That's the old testament Bill Gates. He's New Testament Bill now: more love, less smiting. On topic: Sounds like fun for a talk show, but no surprise.
Bill Gates played too conservatively so that he couldn't mobilize his pieces before getting checkmated. It's a common mistake if you care too much about losing pieces (presumably because that might appear embarrassing). I think it's uncharacteristic of Bill actually. He was known to be a lot more aggressive when he was younger, but I have to admit he's a lot more admirable now that he's older and mellowed.
I once had a signature.
Even though I loathe Gates, this is a cheap shot.
Ever since computers came into the chess scene, chess has changed a lot, and to be a grandmaster today, you have to basically memorize a ton of openings and typical moves.
To me (no chess expert at all), the sheer speed of reactions indicates a learned response. Gates was almost certainly playing an opening that Carlsen knew by heart and had memorized half a dozen responses to that he simply unrolled.
That kind of memory and being able to recognize the patterns, recall the proper evaluation and responses is a massive skill all in itself, but it's not the same kind of mind-beating-mind that you think about when you read the headline.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
"There's no disputing that Bill Gates is blessed with a brilliant mind. Sure, he dropped out of Harvard College, but he got accepted into the elite institution of higher learning in the first place.
His daddy went to Harvard, he was a legacy applicant, the same way that George Weasel Bush's daddy and granddaddy, etc., went to Yale, he too was a legacy applicant!
Next, Gates' mommy sat on one or more boards with the CEO of IBM, who gave the sweetest licensing deal ever to her son.
Billy hired a dood to copy Gary Kildall's CP/M operating system (those of us who remember dissembling the first version of DOS remember Gary's notes still there!!!!), and Micro$oft later settled out of court with the owner to the rights of Kildall's Dr.DOS (to the tune of around $1 billion or more).
BillyG got his financing for his startup from his uncle, who was VP of First Interstate.
Let's stick to the facts, please!
Oh, well, that settles it! Throw decades of psychological research out the window because Franklin stated an uninformed opinion in 1750.
Which research? You have me interested.
Anyone who generalizes about slashdotters is a typical slashdotter.
There's no disputing that Bill Gates is blessed with a brilliant mind.
Sure there is.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Look at the literature. Here is a start:
http://scholar.google.de/schol...
A young chess grandmaster, who has being practicing chess every single day for 10 years, quickly defeats Bill Gates, who is now an old man with little chess experience.
I wonder why this is a news.
Parents inbreed much in that redneck hick town you're from? Seriously get a life. Or on second thoughts...
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
I won against a number of people with exactly the same (move by move) game
No, you didn't - Carlsen didn't just play e5 Nf6 Ng4 Qh4 and Qxh2 (the basic Scholar's Mate from the black side). This game was nine move pairs, and included Gates playing Bd3 with his queen pawn still on d2 (a seriously weak move). I suspect that when Carlsen saw that move he knew he could just march his knight and queen over and checkmate Gates with no particular effort required. I think Carlsen only used about 10 seconds on his clock (of the 30 seconds he got - Gates got two minutes).
Have you read my blog lately?
I've been looking for someone to finally make this point.
Let's also consider that the attack Magnus used on Bill was a class speed chess method. He sacrificed his front row, took a small gamble that Bill would play regular chess and be protective of his front row. As a result, Magnus came out fast and hard with his knights and queen. I have seen this precise game played (move for move) many time growing up by the old jewish men in the park in Brooklyn. In fact, I'm almost sure I played it against other people several times.
Speed chess is rarely about skill or beauty. It's about patterns. The difference between speed chess and an opening moves book is that the speed chess games build a start to finish tree of possibilities in 10 moves or less.
Want to talk about impressive? Bill was smart enough (just before moving his bishop in a "protective" measure) to recognize that he'd lost already. Watch the video and you'll see. My wife was laughing because I was telling her the game and how it would be played from the second Bill too Magnus's pawn.
I was hoping that you could backup your own claim but it seems you want me to do it for you ;-)
Anyone who generalizes about slashdotters is a typical slashdotter.
1. f3 e5
2. g4 Qh4 checkmate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Casteism
It may have been a *long* time since Bill Gates has coded, but let's see how long it takes Gates and Carlsen to write a reasonably simple subroutine, function, or module. Even in pseudocode, my money would be on Gates. (Though I would be prepared to be surprised.)
Since Bill Gates is well known for cheating at many things (business partners, court depositions, arrested for habitual speeding etc) it is likely that he cheated on his SAT as well, quite possibly with the aid of family money. 99% seems a rather unlikely result for somebody who was dumb enough to fail to notice the rise of the internet and, let Steve Ballmer run Microsoft, and bet the company on winfs (it didn't die but it certainly got sick). Smells more like the an election result in a one party state. The Gates family has never been widely renowned for wanting to play on a level playing field.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
But I heat my water for *exactly* 71 seconds: the turntable takes 10 seconds to revolve once, and in order to have the mug wind up at the door, so it's easy to take out, I time it for a multiple of ten seconds...plus one second, because of the lag in startup of the turntable.
It is not always the one that is richer smarter
[url=http://www.zapaleniestawow.eu/osteoporoza.html]Osteoporoza - choroba ukladu szkieletowego - zapaleniestawow.e