Oh, hey! I forgot about these guys. EVO acts as sort of a clearing house for indie games. Except that their website is horrible and there has never been anything there worth buying. So I've always gone directly to the studios themselves.
If this is the same EVO, I wouldn't put too much stock in their success.
Especially if you think about what they're offering. Operating Systems are quite possibly the least important part of a game console. At least to the user. Developers only care about APIs and ease of development. While Linux may alleviate the latter issue, what is truly gained by advertising a console based on Linux? Because you'll be able to... to... um... recompile the kernel! No, that's not it. Port TuxRacer! Um... hmm... Run you Linux applications on it! Yeah, that's it. Run your--
Wait. Why would you want to do that? Isn't the point to play games?
It's nice to see they're basically using a PS2/3 controller knockoff.
No it's not. It a very bad sign. See, every so often a company comes along and sees how profitable the gaming industry is. They then think to themselves, "well, that's EASY! I should get a piece of the pie!" Then they spare no imagination (literally, none at all) in creating the most generic "game console" known to mankind. Without fail, they always copy the PS2 controller design. (Which isn't even that great to begin with.)
Then when they stroll into the market thinking they're going to pick up a few dozen studio partnerships and get about the business of selling this generic piece of plastic. Except, shock and horror! None of the game studios are taking them seriously! Why oh why?!? Don't they see how awesome and moneyful* this venture will be?!?!
Eventually, the company runs out of money and hangs their heads in shame. Those stupid game studios. It's all their fault.
Many of the vaporware game consoles and PDAs over the years have convinced Linux users to plunk down pre-order cash before a product existed. Of course, the product often never materializes.
I wouldn't put too much credibility into anything offering pre-orders until they are vetted as a reliable company with actual hardware in the mail.
Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again.:-P
Remember, judges are usually lawyers, too. Old ones that may have a hard time understanding technology...something the MAFIAA has capitalized on so far...maybe it can work both ways.
If every other lawyer in existence is telling him he's nuts, does he really have a solid chance with a judge?
I doubt it. She may listen to his ramblings, she may even humor him a bit. But unless he starts convincing people real quick-like, the judge isn't going to buy it any more than his peers.
It's faintly conceivable that he may be attempting to assert that p2p distribution provides a positive benefit to the copyright holder in the form of increased exposure.
It's a bit hard to understand exactly what it is he's claiming, since he does not appear to publish any concise treatise of his legal theory. He does appear to claim that the four question test is invalid as he feels that Fair Use is a Common Law construct that supersedes the current precedent for Fair Use.
To which my only response is incredulity. The legal system simply isn't setup in such a way that anyone can come in and claim that the last hundred years of precedent is completely wrong. You'd have to have an incredibly powerful argument to overturn that sort of precedent.
Now supposedly he wants to get a jury trial in hopes of convincing them. To which I'm left scratching my head. Is he counting on jury stupidity? Or insanely good ability to follow convoluted logic? His own students (who are doing most of the work) are extremely wary of this tact and have voiced opinions that they don't think it's going to work.
But as I said, maybe he'll prove me wrong.
(Then again, he might just piss off the judge instead. She didn't seem very happy when he was recording their phone call.)
I understand, but what I'm saying is that the joules stored in the battery for possible use in case of a power failure would dwarf the number of joules that would bypass the cells after they're charged. Given a reasonably long length of time (e.g. a month), the losses from having the battery present would appear to be insignificant. Yet the battery will still provide the same function as a UPS in case of a power failure, but without the AC->DC->AC power losses.
That's probably the way that Google is computing efficiency. Which is reasonable for the specific circumstances.
...going to Harvard is not a guarantee of sanity. Just looking at this guy's blog seems to confirm that suspicion. Of course, I wish him the best of luck! If he somehow manages to successfully argue his case, I will be very happy for him. Shocked, but happy.
1. Reaching a black hole is not impossible with current technology, but it is beside the point.
2. This is a research tool intended to help physicists understand what happens to matter as it enters a black hole.
3. Using all your grant money to run on an SGI cluster is so... 1990s. This was probably rendered on a modern laptop. If the calculations really did turn out to be too computationally intensive for a modern personal computer (I wouldn't count on it), they would have bought time on one of the more modern Linux or Mac computing clusters.
4. "Cool" is not the purpose. If it was, there wouldn't be fun guide-lines left in the film. This is a research tool that happened to get passed on to NewScientist to share with anyone who might be interested.
We even sprung for the sound dampening box for the daisy wheel printer for you.
When I first skimmed your post, I saw the words "daisy wheel printer" and my first reaction was, "Put it in the other room! Those fuckers are LOUD!" But it seems you've thought of everything.
And that's what I'm talking about! WWII levels of efficiency. Not this namby, pamby, "I didn't know that slotting DIMMs of different sizes into the motherboard would disable dual-channel access" BS. Somebody give this boy a raise!
/me goes off to play with the switches on the front of the computer
Here in the real world, mainframes are as generic as desktops
Not really. They're built from generic parts, but that doesn't mean that they're alike. When you order a mainframe, practically every major part in the system is specified in the contract. From the CPUs, to the mainboards, to the backplane, to the network cards, to the memory chips, to the drives, to the power supplies, etc.
what determines what they can do is the OS and the applications.
This is more or less correct, but it ignores what makes a mainframe different from a normal server. Once upon a time, software was a hugely differentiating factor. These days, not so much. I can run all kinds of OSes on a desktop machine all the way up to a mainframe-class machine. It's the hardware that really makes the difference in the class of computer these days. The software is relatively portable.
People buy mainframes because they need a mainframe's capability
People buy CICS or MCP because they need a capability. They buy a mainframe because they need capacity. That's why Linux runs on quite a few IBM mainframes these days.
And container data centers aren't exactly cheap either - nobody is going to buy them without a use in mind either
Maybe? You think? Possibly? Perhaps? Just slightly? Bueller? Bueller? What was I saying again? This is a lot of question marks? If you can read this bumper sticker, you are too close?
Here in real world, mainframes continue chugging along handling the tasks that mini's, workstations, and PC's can't.
Here in the real world, traditional mainframes are maintained for legacy support. The other class of mainframes (e.g. the Unix-based ones) are quickly falling out of favor for new, large-scale projects. Making scalable clusters of computers is a workable solution that provides a greater deal of flexibility than plopping down 5-10 big iron machines.
Not that Big Iron is going anywhere. It's just become the modern minicomputer compared to these new container-mainframes.
This is using the usual definition of "efficiency" in batteries, of course: the ratio of output power to input power (measured over a period of time).
By this definition, it may be possible to get little more than line losses. These systems are running 24x7 over long periods of time. Power failures are uncommon enough to where the batteries are almost never drained. As long as these systems don't need their batteries to condition the power (a common use of UPSes) the battery can bypass the cells under most conditions.
UPSes OTOH, have to take AC power, convert it to DC, then covert it back to AC power. That causes significant losses that aren't present in a straight DC system.
Just because something is published on April 1st doesn't mean it's an April Fools joke. In the case of this article, it's clearly not.
Also the two hard drives are plugged into each other.
You're seeing a connection where there is none. The two SATA cables run back behind the plate the drives are mounted on. Presumably, the mainboard connectors are back there as they're not visible on the rest of the mainboard.
Google is basically re-implementing the efficiency that already exists in a laptop.
You have a laptop with >1000 processors, consisting of several times that many cores, with its own built-in gigabit ethernet running on built-in gigabit switches?
By some measurements they exceed the computing power of a mainframe, by others they don't.
A fair point. However, I should probably point out that mainframe systems are always purpose built with a specific goal in mind. No one invests in a hugely expensive machine unless they already have clear and specific intentions for its usage. When used for the purpose this machine was built for, these cargo containers outperform a traditional mainframe tasked for the same purpose.
I don't know which 80's you lived through, but mainframe processing was alive and well in the 80's I lived through. Minicomputers were a joke back then, and were seen as mostly a way to play video games. (With a smattering of spreadsheet and word processing here and there.) In the 90's, PCs started to take hold. They took over the word processing and spreadsheet functionality of the mainframe helper systems. (Anybody here remember BTOS? No? Damn. I'm getting old.)
Note that this didn't retire the mainframe despite public impressions. It only caused a number of bridge solutions to pop up. It was the rise of the World Wide Web that led to a general shift toward PC server systems over mainframes. All we're doing now is reinventing the mainframe concept in a more modern fashion that supports multimedia and interactivity.
Welcome to Web 2.0. It's not thin-client, it's rich terminal. The mainframe is sitting in a cargo container somewhere far away and we're all communicating with it over a worldwide telecom infrastructure known as the "internet". MULTICS, eat your heart out.
Most people buy computers one at a time, but Google thinks on a very different scale. Jimmy Clidaras revealed that the core of the company's data centers are composed of standard 1AAA shipping containers packed with 1,160 servers each, with many containers in each data center.
Mainstream servers with x86 processors were the only option, he added. "Ten years ago...it was clear the only way to make (search) work as free product was to run on relatively cheap hardware. You can't run it on a mainframe. The margins just don't work out," he said.
I think Google may be selling themselves short. Once you start building standardized data centers in shipping containers with singular hookups between the container and the outside world, you've stopped building individual rack-mounted machines. Instead, you've begun building a much larger machine with thousands of networked components. In effect, Google is building the mainframes of the 21st century. No longer are we talking about dozens of mainboards hooked up via multi-gigabit backplanes. We're talking about complete computing elements wired up via a self-contained, high speed network with a combined computing power that far exceeds anything currently identified as a mainframe.
The industry needs to stop thinking of these systems as portable data centers, and start recognizing them for what they are: Incredibly advanced machines with massive, distributed computing power. And since high-end computing has been headed toward multiprocessing for some time now, the market is ripe for these sorts of solutions. It's not a "cloud". It's the new mainframe.
The particular situation here deals with compressed/encoded HTML in an effort to prevent screen-scraping. This leaves two options for screen scrapers:
Option 1 1) Figure out how the decoder works 2) Replicate the decoder functionality in the screen scraper 3) Parse the decoded HTML 4) Make changes as the encoding scheme changes 5) ??? 6) Profit!
Option 2 1) Link a Javascript engine like SpiderMonkey, Rhino, V8, or SquirrelFish into the screen scraper 2) Run the Javascript to decode the HTML 3) Parse the decoded HTML 4) ??? 5) Profit!
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, hey! I forgot about these guys. EVO acts as sort of a clearing house for indie games. Except that their website is horrible and there has never been anything there worth buying. So I've always gone directly to the studios themselves.
If this is the same EVO, I wouldn't put too much stock in their success.
Especially if you think about what they're offering. Operating Systems are quite possibly the least important part of a game console. At least to the user. Developers only care about APIs and ease of development. While Linux may alleviate the latter issue, what is truly gained by advertising a console based on Linux? Because you'll be able to... to... um... recompile the kernel! No, that's not it. Port TuxRacer! Um... hmm... Run you Linux applications on it! Yeah, that's it. Run your--
Wait. Why would you want to do that? Isn't the point to play games?
No it's not. It a very bad sign. See, every so often a company comes along and sees how profitable the gaming industry is. They then think to themselves, "well, that's EASY! I should get a piece of the pie!" Then they spare no imagination (literally, none at all) in creating the most generic "game console" known to mankind. Without fail, they always copy the PS2 controller design. (Which isn't even that great to begin with.)
Then when they stroll into the market thinking they're going to pick up a few dozen studio partnerships and get about the business of selling this generic piece of plastic. Except, shock and horror! None of the game studios are taking them seriously! Why oh why?!? Don't they see how awesome and moneyful* this venture will be?!?!
Eventually, the company runs out of money and hangs their heads in shame. Those stupid game studios. It's all their fault.
Cases in Point (Note the controllers):
Indrema
Mattel Hyperscan
Phantom Game Console
If you ever see a game console that uses a rip-off PS2 controller, run the other way. FAST.
* Hey, it's a perfectly cromulent word!
Lemme see here...
Many of the vaporware game consoles and PDAs over the years have convinced Linux users to plunk down pre-order cash before a product existed. Of course, the product often never materializes.
I wouldn't put too much credibility into anything offering pre-orders until they are vetted as a reliable company with actual hardware in the mail.
Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again. :-P
You don't know IBM very well, then.
If every other lawyer in existence is telling him he's nuts, does he really have a solid chance with a judge?
I doubt it. She may listen to his ramblings, she may even humor him a bit. But unless he starts convincing people real quick-like, the judge isn't going to buy it any more than his peers.
It's a bit hard to understand exactly what it is he's claiming, since he does not appear to publish any concise treatise of his legal theory. He does appear to claim that the four question test is invalid as he feels that Fair Use is a Common Law construct that supersedes the current precedent for Fair Use.
To which my only response is incredulity. The legal system simply isn't setup in such a way that anyone can come in and claim that the last hundred years of precedent is completely wrong. You'd have to have an incredibly powerful argument to overturn that sort of precedent.
Now supposedly he wants to get a jury trial in hopes of convincing them. To which I'm left scratching my head. Is he counting on jury stupidity? Or insanely good ability to follow convoluted logic? His own students (who are doing most of the work) are extremely wary of this tact and have voiced opinions that they don't think it's going to work.
But as I said, maybe he'll prove me wrong.
(Then again, he might just piss off the judge instead. She didn't seem very happy when he was recording their phone call.)
I understand, but what I'm saying is that the joules stored in the battery for possible use in case of a power failure would dwarf the number of joules that would bypass the cells after they're charged. Given a reasonably long length of time (e.g. a month), the losses from having the battery present would appear to be insignificant. Yet the battery will still provide the same function as a UPS in case of a power failure, but without the AC->DC->AC power losses.
That's probably the way that Google is computing efficiency. Which is reasonable for the specific circumstances.
...going to Harvard is not a guarantee of sanity. Just looking at this guy's blog seems to confirm that suspicion. Of course, I wish him the best of luck! If he somehow manages to successfully argue his case, I will be very happy for him. Shocked, but happy.
1. Reaching a black hole is not impossible with current technology, but it is beside the point.
2. This is a research tool intended to help physicists understand what happens to matter as it enters a black hole.
3. Using all your grant money to run on an SGI cluster is so... 1990s. This was probably rendered on a modern laptop. If the calculations really did turn out to be too computationally intensive for a modern personal computer (I wouldn't count on it), they would have bought time on one of the more modern Linux or Mac computing clusters.
4. "Cool" is not the purpose. If it was, there wouldn't be fun guide-lines left in the film. This is a research tool that happened to get passed on to NewScientist to share with anyone who might be interested.
When I first skimmed your post, I saw the words "daisy wheel printer" and my first reaction was, "Put it in the other room! Those fuckers are LOUD!" But it seems you've thought of everything.
And that's what I'm talking about! WWII levels of efficiency. Not this namby, pamby, "I didn't know that slotting DIMMs of different sizes into the motherboard would disable dual-channel access" BS. Somebody give this boy a raise!
Not really. They're built from generic parts, but that doesn't mean that they're alike. When you order a mainframe, practically every major part in the system is specified in the contract. From the CPUs, to the mainboards, to the backplane, to the network cards, to the memory chips, to the drives, to the power supplies, etc.
This is more or less correct, but it ignores what makes a mainframe different from a normal server. Once upon a time, software was a hugely differentiating factor. These days, not so much. I can run all kinds of OSes on a desktop machine all the way up to a mainframe-class machine. It's the hardware that really makes the difference in the class of computer these days. The software is relatively portable.
People buy CICS or MCP because they need a capability. They buy a mainframe because they need capacity. That's why Linux runs on quite a few IBM mainframes these days.
I don't recall stating otherwise?
Dude, seriously. Would it have hurt you to read the FIRST *BLEEPING* REPLY POSTED OVER AN HOUR BEFORE YOURS AND MODDED UP TO +4 FUNNY??? You know, the one where I complained my brain was going at my old age, and that I meant to type "microcomputers"?
Maybe? You think? Possibly? Perhaps? Just slightly? Bueller? Bueller? What was I saying again? This is a lot of question marks? If you can read this bumper sticker, you are too close?
Here in the real world, traditional mainframes are maintained for legacy support. The other class of mainframes (e.g. the Unix-based ones) are quickly falling out of favor for new, large-scale projects. Making scalable clusters of computers is a workable solution that provides a greater deal of flexibility than plopping down 5-10 big iron machines.
Not that Big Iron is going anywhere. It's just become the modern minicomputer compared to these new container-mainframes.
By this definition, it may be possible to get little more than line losses. These systems are running 24x7 over long periods of time. Power failures are uncommon enough to where the batteries are almost never drained. As long as these systems don't need their batteries to condition the power (a common use of UPSes) the battery can bypass the cells under most conditions.
UPSes OTOH, have to take AC power, convert it to DC, then covert it back to AC power. That causes significant losses that aren't present in a straight DC system.
Just because something is published on April 1st doesn't mean it's an April Fools joke. In the case of this article, it's clearly not.
You're seeing a connection where there is none. The two SATA cables run back behind the plate the drives are mounted on. Presumably, the mainboard connectors are back there as they're not visible on the rest of the mainboard.
I believe the joke was that the distance a DeskStar can be thrown may be published in the data sheets. Being such a common concern and all. :-)
Google is basically re-implementing the efficiency that already exists in a laptop.
You have a laptop with >1000 processors, consisting of several times that many cores, with its own built-in gigabit ethernet running on built-in gigabit switches?
I'd hate to sit next to you on an airplane!
Derr... minicomputers should say microcomputers. My old brain is failing me. Help! Help! Help! He-- wait. What was I screaming for help for again?
A fair point. However, I should probably point out that mainframe systems are always purpose built with a specific goal in mind. No one invests in a hugely expensive machine unless they already have clear and specific intentions for its usage. When used for the purpose this machine was built for, these cargo containers outperform a traditional mainframe tasked for the same purpose.
I don't know which 80's you lived through, but mainframe processing was alive and well in the 80's I lived through. Minicomputers were a joke back then, and were seen as mostly a way to play video games. (With a smattering of spreadsheet and word processing here and there.) In the 90's, PCs started to take hold. They took over the word processing and spreadsheet functionality of the mainframe helper systems. (Anybody here remember BTOS? No? Damn. I'm getting old.)
Note that this didn't retire the mainframe despite public impressions. It only caused a number of bridge solutions to pop up. It was the rise of the World Wide Web that led to a general shift toward PC server systems over mainframes. All we're doing now is reinventing the mainframe concept in a more modern fashion that supports multimedia and interactivity.
Welcome to Web 2.0. It's not thin-client, it's rich terminal. The mainframe is sitting in a cargo container somewhere far away and we're all communicating with it over a worldwide telecom infrastructure known as the "internet". MULTICS, eat your heart out.
I think Google may be selling themselves short. Once you start building standardized data centers in shipping containers with singular hookups between the container and the outside world, you've stopped building individual rack-mounted machines. Instead, you've begun building a much larger machine with thousands of networked components. In effect, Google is building the mainframes of the 21st century. No longer are we talking about dozens of mainboards hooked up via multi-gigabit backplanes. We're talking about complete computing elements wired up via a self-contained, high speed network with a combined computing power that far exceeds anything currently identified as a mainframe.
The industry needs to stop thinking of these systems as portable data centers, and start recognizing them for what they are: Incredibly advanced machines with massive, distributed computing power. And since high-end computing has been headed toward multiprocessing for some time now, the market is ripe for these sorts of solutions. It's not a "cloud". It's the new mainframe.
The particular situation here deals with compressed/encoded HTML in an effort to prevent screen-scraping. This leaves two options for screen scrapers:
Option 1
1) Figure out how the decoder works
2) Replicate the decoder functionality in the screen scraper
3) Parse the decoded HTML
4) Make changes as the encoding scheme changes
5) ???
6) Profit!
Option 2
1) Link a Javascript engine like SpiderMonkey, Rhino, V8, or SquirrelFish into the screen scraper
2) Run the Javascript to decode the HTML
3) Parse the decoded HTML
4) ???
5) Profit!
Among other things it says if you can't read the message, hand in your geek card.
Hand in your geek card.
N erny trrx jbhyq jevgr bar. Ohg vs lbh zhfg...
uggc://jjj.cnhyfpubh.pbz/gbbyf/kyngr/
All hail Caesar! -- I mean, CADIE!
49 66 20 79 6f 75 20 63 61 6e 27 74 20 72 65 61 64 20 74 68 69 73 2c 20 79 6f 75 20 6e 65 65 64 20 79 6f 75 72 20 47 65 65 6b 20 63 61 72 64 20 72 65 76 6f 6b 65 64 2e 0d 0a 0d 0a 22 77 69 74 68 20 74 68 65 20 68 65 6c 70 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 6f 74 68 65 72 20 70 6f 73 74 73 22 0d 0a 0d 0a 49 20 72 65 6d 65 6d 62 65 72 20 62 61 63 6b 20 77 68 65 6e 20 65 6e 63 6f 64 65 64 20 70 6f 73 74 73 20 77 6f 75 6c 64 20 67 65 74 20 64 65 63 6f 64 65 64 20 77 69 74 68 69 6e 20 66 69 76 65 20 6d 69 6e 75 74 65 73 20 6f 66 20 62 65 69 6e 67 20 70 6f 73 74 65 64 2e 20 57 68 61 74 20 68 61 73 20 68 61 70 70 65 6e 65 64 20 74 6f 20 53 6c 61 73 68 64 6f 74 3f 0d 0a 0d 0a 0d 0a 2a 73 69 67 68 2a 0d 0a 0d 0a 0d 0a 34 33 20 34 31 20 34 34 20 34 39 20 34 35 20 32 30 20 36 38 20 36 31 20 37 33 20 32 30 20 36 64 20 36 31 20 36 65 20 36 31 20 36 37 20 36 35 20 36 34 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 66 20 32 30 20 36 34 20 36 35 20 36 33 20 36 66 20 36 34 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 36 64 20 37 39 20 32 30 20 36 66 20 37 34 20 36 38 20 36 35 20 37 32 20 32 30 20 36 64 20 36 35 20 37 33 20 37 33 20 36 31 20 36 37 20 36 35 20 37 33 20 32 65 20 32 30 20 34 34 20 36 31 20 36 64 20 36 65 20 32 65 20 32 30 20 35 33 20 36 38 20 36 35 20 32 37 20 37 33 20 32 30 20 36 37 20 36 35 20 37 34 20 37 34 20 36 39 20 36 65 20 36 37 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 66 20 36 66 20 32 30 20 37 33 20 36 64 20 36 31 20 37 32 20 37 34 20 32 65 20 32 30 20 34 34 20 36 66 20 37 35 20 36 32 20 36 63 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 34 38 20 36 35 20 37 38 20 32 30 20 36 35 20 36 65 20 36 33 20 36 66 20 36 34 20 36 39 20 36 65 20 36 37 20 32 30 20 37 33 20 36 35 20 36 35 20 36 64 20 37 33 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 66 20 32 30 20 36 32 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 38 20 37 32 20 36 66 20 37 37 20 36 39 20 36 65 20 36 37 20 32 30 20 36 38 20 36 35 20 37 32 20 32 30 20 36 66 20 36 36 20 36 36 20 32 30 20 36 36 20 36 66 20 37 32 20 32 30 20 36 65 20 36 66 20 37 37 20 32 65 20 32 30 20 34 32 20 37 35 20 37 34 20 32 30 20 36 31 20 37 34 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 38 20 36 39 20 37 33 20 32 30 20 37 32 20 36 31 20 37 34 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 37 37 20 36 35 20 32 37 20 36 63 20 36 63 20 32 30 20 36 65 20 36 35 20 36 35 20 36 34 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 66 20 32 30 20 36 37 20 36 66 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 66 20 32 30 20 35 34 20 37 32 20 36 39 20 37 30 20 36 63 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 34 34 20 34 35 20 35 33 20 32 30 20 36 66 20 37 32 20 32 30 20 36 31 20 32 30 20 37 30 20 37 35 20 36 32 20 36 63 20 36 39 20 36 33 20 32 64 20 36 62 20 36 35 20 37 39 20 32 30 20 37 33 20 37 39 20 37 33 20 37 34 20 36 35 20 36 64 20 32 30 20 36 63 20 36 39 20 36 62 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 35 32 20 35 33 20 34 31 20 32 65 20 32 30 20 34 39 20 32 37 20 36 64 20 32 30 20 36 65 20 36 66 20 37 34 20 32 30 20 37 33 20 37 35 20 37 32 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 36 38 20 36 66 20 37 37 20 32 30 20 37 37 20 36 35 20 32 37 20 36 63 20 36 63 20 32 30 20 36 35 20 37 38 20 36 33 20 36 38 20 36 31 20 36 65 20 36 37 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 36 62 20 36 35 20 37 39 20 37 33 20 32 63 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 38 20 36 66 20 37 35 20 36 37 20 36 38 20 32 65 20 32 30 20 30 64 20 30 61 20 30 64 20 30 61 20 34 35 20 37 36 20 36 35 20 36 65 20 32 30 20 37 37 20 36 39 20 37 34 20 36 38 20 32 30 20 36 31 20 32 30 20 37 30 20 37 35 20 36 32 20 36 63 20 36 39 20 36 33 20 32 64 20 36 62 20 36 35 20 37 39 20 32 30 20 37 33 20 36 66 20 36 63 20 37 35 20 37 34 20 36 39 20 36 66 20 36 65 20 32 63 20 32 30 20 37 33 20 36 38 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 36 64 20 36 31 20 37 39 20 32 30 20 36 36 20 36 39 20 36 65 20 36 34 20 32 30 20 36 31 20 32 30 20 37 37 20 36 31 20 37 39 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 66 20 32 30 20 36 35 20 37 38 20 37 34 20 37 32 20 36 31 20 36 33 20 37 34 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 38 20 36 35 20 32 30 20 36 62 20 36 35 20 37 39 20 37 33 20 32 30 20 36 36 20 37 32 20 36 66 20 36 64 20 32 30 20 36 66 20 37 35 20 37 32 20 32 30 20 36 64 20 36 31 20 36 33 20 36 38 20 36 39 20 36 65 20 36 35 20 37 33 20 32 65 20 32 30 20 34 32 20 36 31 20 37 32 20 37 32 20 36 39 20 36 65 20 36 37 20 32 30 20 37 34 20 36 38 20 36 31 20 37 34 20 32 63 20 32 30 20 37 33 20 36 38 20 36 35 20 32 37 20
Hehe. An apt description if I ever heard one. :-P