• Gitsnik (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy
    Grovesy:
    I remember being a poor Full Time Employee back in 1999, around me contractors milked the companies with rates heading up to £1000pd for some basic SQL work. I was more irate at the fact that some of the contractors had almost no previous work experience... I missed the gravy train

    I saw the future and went contracting, sadly the rate boom had ended and rates have since subsided down to normal levels.

    All those programmers who have written date time WTF’ery we’ve seen on this site are on to something, they are creating their own new ‘millennium bug’, so they can rake it in later. When it comes to 2011/12/31 I want to have enough money to retire in my bank. Let’s band together, programmers unite and create the 2012 bug, we have a whole three years to write crappy code to create world wide panic when we mention it to the world press early in 2011. We can then take those blue chip companies for all they have.

    Anyone with me?

    One Australian bastard on your side there bud. I missed the same gravy train by virtue of being otherwise occupied. Now everyone tells me they're earning 100,000+ AU$ a year for crappy jobs. That's the real wtf, I've not met a single IT who actually earns anywhere near these fabled numbers.

  • (cs) in reply to FredSaw
    FredSaw:
    If you opened your bank account in the year 93 and it's now the year 00, your bank account may no longer exist. Would that qualify as glitch enough?

    I'm just getting a mortgage. Let's just hope they don't want me to pay it back by 1901... (Which is now+30 years in a signed 32-bit integer)

  • Some Unix Hacker (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy
    Grovesy:
    I remember being a poor Full Time Employee back in 1999, around me contractors milked the companies with rates heading up to £1000pd for some basic SQL work. I was more irate at the fact that some of the contractors had almost no previous work experience... I missed the gravy train

    I saw the future and went contracting, sadly the rate boom had ended and rates have since subsided down to normal levels.

    All those programmers who have written date time WTF’ery we’ve seen on this site are on to something, they are creating their own new ‘millennium bug’, so they can rake it in later. When it comes to 2011/12/31 I want to have enough money to retire in my bank. Let’s band together, programmers unite and create the 2012 bug, we have a whole three years to write crappy code to create world wide panic when we mention it to the world press early in 2011. We can then take those blue chip companies for all they have.

    Anyone with me?

    Actually the Y2K38 bug is already firmly entrenched. It'll be another 25 years or so before anybody can cash in, but I've already broken out my ANSI C books, studying the date_t type in various unix systems!

  • Paul (unregistered) in reply to bramster

    It was pretty easy to get a flight on Dec 31, 1999, I remember. I flew Seattle -> San Francisco that evening and we had plenty of empty seats to stretch out on.

  • Grassfire (unregistered)

    I just managed to find a y2k10 bug in one of our major systems.

    A financial system tracking fortnightly pay periods, usually stored in the form: YYYYPP.

    eg. 200713

    for year 2007 pay 13

    I just found a table that stores a 3 digit version. ie. 713.

    Various bits of code add 200 to the front in order to join to other tables.

    I can't wait till 2010 comes around, and our systems are trying to compare 200013 with 201013

  • (cs) in reply to Choo-Choo Train
    Choo-Choo Train:
    The only reason I could see the year 2000 breaking things is if people were storing dates with 2-digit years as text, which is dumb.

    Nobody ever accused COBOL of being smart.

  • Phleabo (unregistered) in reply to Code Slave
    Code Slave:
    I dread the day when I have to meet with a junior-high principal when my child gets into a brawl over whether Y2K really was a problem or not.

    Imustresisttheurgetostrangleliberalartsmajorwithhisowntongue!!!*

    Could you explain why, in this scenario, the fact that you have an ill behaved child with poor impulse control makes you want to strangle the liberal arts major? Or are you trying to show where the little bastard gets it from?

  • (cs)

    Having recently moved to Texas, I was both surprised and happy when I turned on the radio during the holiday season and heard a public service announcement telling people not to fire their guns in the air in celebration. Only in Texas.

  • Pax (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy

    What's the 2012 bug? The next one I know of is around Feb 2034 when the 32-bit time_t values run out.

  • Cpt (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy
    Grovesy:
    I remember being a poor Full Time Employee back in 1999, around me contractors milked the companies with rates heading up to £1000pd for some basic SQL work. I was more irate at the fact that some of the contractors had almost no previous work experience... I missed the gravy train

    I saw the future and went contracting, sadly the rate boom had ended and rates have since subsided down to normal levels.

    All those programmers who have written date time WTF’ery we’ve seen on this site are on to something, they are creating their own new ‘millennium bug’, so they can rake it in later. When it comes to 2011/12/31 I want to have enough money to retire in my bank. Let’s band together, programmers unite and create the 2012 bug, we have a whole three years to write crappy code to create world wide panic when we mention it to the world press early in 2011. We can then take those blue chip companies for all they have.

    Anyone with me?

    I see a small bug in this: if any of the participants works at your bank, and (s)he isn't a knowingly participant, your account might be zeroed out at 01/01/2012 and you will have to continue working...... But why wait until 2011? Why not create some scheme that because of the rising oil prizes the computers will fail to work in 2009, unless we all enable some form of solar power code injection - the word is close enough to 'fuel injection' to work -.

    Java example:

    package world.domination

    import alt.power.Solar

    class TellMeAll() { .... private Long solarPower = null; ....

    public void setSolarPower(Long solarPower) { this.solarPower = solarPower; } ... }

    you need not do anything with the field... just inject Solar Power and the world will be saved!

  • Unit 73 (unregistered)

    I only saw one real bug in our stuff on Jan 1 2000 (we worked for a solid six months leading up to that, finding about 30 problems though none were serious). One of our web pages proudly proclaimed the date as 1/1/19100; those familiar with 'struct tm' will know why.

    Then on Jan 2, my pancreas packed it in and I spent 8 months in hospital. Guys at work had a great laugh wondering why no-one had checked staff for Y2K-compliance.

  • Jacques (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy

    If I don't have quite enough cash to retire by 2038, I'm planning to do remediation consulting to finish up my nest egg. The fact that I got through Y2K without incident should be of at least some interest to potential clients.....

  • Choo-Choo Train (unregistered) in reply to FredSaw
    FredSaw:
    If you opened your bank account in the year 93 and it's now the year 00, your bank account may no longer exist. Would that qualify as glitch enough?
    Except the whole point of that post was why would 100 magically become 0? It's not overflowing anything. Keeping in mind that I already mentioned 2-digit dates in text form.
  • Dillon (unregistered)

    Dude, no freaking way.

    I was in that part of the grid. My house (zip code 75229) lost power at exactly the same time. We went up on the roof of the house to survey the damage. Before I could come to grips with never being on IRC again (I was 14), it came back on.

    So thank you, kind sir, for saving the day. :)

  • Cloak (unregistered)

    As if the American Idiots were not war-pushing enough. Let them swallow their guns.

  • Dillon (unregistered)

    And just briefly, I don't appreciate the sweeping stereotypes being made of Dallasites in this thread. There are far more (several orders of magnitude) Mexican and various Latino immigrants in Dallas than there are gun-toting, shit-kicking cowboys.

    (you have to go to Fort Worth for the real rednecks :)

  • Cloak (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy
    Grovesy:
    All those programmers who have written date time WTF’ery we’ve seen on this site are on to something, they are creating their own new ‘millennium bug’, so they can rake it in later. When it comes to 2011/12/31 I want to have enough money to retire in my bank. Let’s band together, programmers unite and create the 2012 bug, we have a whole three years to write crappy code to create world wide panic when we mention it to the world press early in 2011. We can then take those blue chip companies for all they have.

    Anyone with me?

    Sounds interesting. And even achievable. Would be a kind of conspiracy but in the end... When I think how companies treated me, I must say: WHY NOT???

  • grammernarzee (unregistered) in reply to DP
    DP:
    There are 3 rules for leap years. Rule 1: A leap year must be evenly divisible by four. Rule 2: If the year is evenly divisible by 100, it is not a leap year. Rule 3: If the year is evenly divisible by 1000, then it IS a leap year. DP
    WTF? Please tell me you don't work on anything critical, financially sensitive, or important to anyone at all.
  • NeoMojo (unregistered) in reply to Pax
    Pax:
    What's the 2012 bug? The next one I know of is around Feb 2034 when the 32-bit time_t values run out.

    Yeah, I'm aware of the unix epoch bug, but not of any problem with 2012. I've even googled it just now with such cryptic search terms as 2012 time bug IT y2k -maya -mayan -olympics

    I got nothing. I think you're inventing this issue now, just to try to fire up media hysteria. There is no 2012 bug.

  • (cs)

    Now just wait for the Y2K38 Bug X-D

    Edit: Or the Y10K Bug ;)

  • dkf (unregistered) in reply to emurphy
    emurphy:
    plus any software dealing with 30-year mortgages is now (as of 2 days ago) potentially susceptible.
    You do know that there are a number of applications (especially relating to actuarial/pensions) where 40 or 50 year horizons are used? And where they still have to deal with a few people with pre-1900 dates-of-birth? IIRC (and no, I don't work in that field) they use Julian days (or something closely related) instead of seconds-from-Unix-epoch. After all, a granularity of a day isn't a big deal in that application area.
  • John Goewert (unregistered)

    :)

    One of the other things I fondly remember from Y2K was that even offhanded jokes were taken seriously. I think it was one of India's Ministers of Energy or some position like that who when asked about the state of their nuclear reactors joked:

    Our plan is to watch Australia and fix things they find. They are 5 hours ahead of us.

    Most people took that to mean:

    We aren't doing anything at all, but if Australia has a problem, we are going to try to bust our humps for 5 hours before we experience meltdown.

  • Dolorous Luser (unregistered) in reply to tacticus
    tacticus:
    i thought the third rule was that if a year was also evenly divisible by 400 it is a leap year

    as 1600 was a leap year

    1700 was a leap year in England, Scotland and possibly some other European countries, as we were still on the Julian calendar.

    It's all rather confusing really...

  • Henry Miller (unregistered)

    I always expected the macs to be affected most by Y2K problems. Everyone else was busy looking for problems and fixing them. Most mac users just said "Macs don't store dates, they count seconds sence 1904" (whatever the date was - different from unix or dos epoc). It never occured to them that unix and dos uses the same trick, but users of those systems were still careful to find and fix problems. I guess mac programmers were busy fixing things even while users remained ignorant.

  • Tom_fan_DK (unregistered) in reply to Choo-Choo Train
    Choo-Choo Train:
    There was one thing I didn't get about Y2K. So the computers think it's the year 99 and will hit a 3-digit number for the first time. So what? The number 100 doesn't mean anything special to a computer. Now, maybe in the year 2028 or 2156 these problems might start happening.

    The only reason I could see the year 2000 breaking things is if people were storing dates with 2-digit years as text, which is dumb. And maybe there would be some visual glitches with programs showing 1900, 19100 or 19:0, but they'd still work.

    <sarcasm> Thankyouthankyouthankyou!!!! Finally I see the light! You're really "brillant"! </sarcasm>
  • Nicolas V. (unregistered)

    I too had to scramble to clear out many potential glitches and apply fixes and updates to prevent the Y2K bug. Out IT Manager thought it was all done and that nothing was going to happen, but we ended up with one little glitch in a credit card authorization software, which saved all its install files in a read-only folder called "00", and also all its transactions to authorize in clear in folders by year then month, all coded in 2-digit. So when it did find a "00" folder for "2000", it failed to create the "01" for "January" as the folder was read only. Besides that, no Y2K bugs.

    I remember seeing some White supremacist weirdo wearing a "Y2K 00:00:01 am : a new beginning" T-Shirt, as these idiots believed the entire governmental "mainframe" would go down in flames so they could start their little rebellion.

  • Texan (unregistered) in reply to Phleabo
    Phleabo:
    Code Slave:
    I dread the day when I have to meet with a junior-high principal when my child gets into a brawl over whether Y2K really was a problem or not.

    Imustresisttheurgetostrangleliberalartsmajorwithhisowntongue!!!*

    Could you explain why, in this scenario, the fact that you have an ill behaved child with poor impulse control makes you want to strangle the liberal arts major? Or are you trying to show where the little bastard gets it from?

    I think the point is that he's giving his child the wisdom to stand up for truth rather than drinking whatever flavor of kool-aid they're passing around on Air America today.

  • Da' Man (unregistered)

    Hehe.. reminds me of some practical joke one colleague played during my then-company's 2000 new years party.

    It involved a shitload of booze, a screw driver (to open the main fuse box) and a good sense of timing (10 seconds past midnight) - but after the initial shock was over, even the company owner had a good laugh (lucky for that guy)...

    But you should have seen the faces! LOL!

    Da' Man

  • (cs) in reply to Choo-Choo Train
    Choo-Choo Train:
    FredSaw:
    If you opened your bank account in the year 93 and it's now the year 00, your bank account may no longer exist. Would that qualify as glitch enough?
    Except the whole point of that post was why would 100 magically become 0? It's not overflowing anything. Keeping in mind that I already mentioned 2-digit dates in text form.
    You mentioned that 2-digit dates in text form would be dumb. Someone has already answered you, that nobody ever accused COBOL of being smart. The fact is, dumb or not, two-digit text fields were being used, and for that reason 100 would become 00 -- not magically, but because it has three digits and only two places were reserved to store the value. Dismissing it as "dumb" doesn't mean it didn't happen. That was the root of the problem with Y2K.

    Google is your friend; learn to use it.

    Quote from Wikipedia:

    Wikipedia on Y2K:
    In the 1960s, computer memory was scarce and expensive, and most data processing was done on punch cards which represented text data in 80-column records. Programming languages of the time, such as COBOL and RPG, processed numbers in their ASCII or EBCDIC representations. They occasionally used an extra bit called a "zone punch" to save one character for a minus sign on a negative number, or compressed two digits into one byte in a form called binary-coded decimal, but otherwise processed numbers as straight text. Over time the punch cards were converted to magnetic tape and then disk files and later to simple databases like ISAM, but the structure of the programs usually changed very little. Popular software like dBase continued the practice of storing dates as text well into the 1980s and 1990s.
  • (cs) in reply to vt_mruhlin
    vt_mruhlin:
    Having recently moved to Texas, I was both surprised and happy when I turned on the radio during the holiday season and heard a public service announcement telling people not to fire their guns in the air in celebration. Only in Texas.
    Why would you think this could only happen in Texas?
  • (cs) in reply to Code Slave
    Code Slave:
    I dread the day when I have to meet with a junior-high principal when my child gets into a brawl over whether Y2K really was a problem or not.

    Imustresisttheurgetostrangleliberalartsmajorwithhisowntongue!!!*

    Why? Are you going to try to argue that your child should be forgiven for the fight because he was in the right in the argument? If your child starts throwing punches over whether y2k was a problem, then he needs to sit in that detention and learn about the proper way to resolve differences.

  • (cs) in reply to Dillon
    Dillon:
    And just briefly, I don't appreciate the sweeping stereotypes being made of Dallasites in this thread. There are far more (several orders of magnitude) Mexican and various Latino immigrants in Dallas than there are gun-toting, shit-kicking cowboys.

    (you have to go to Fort Worth for the real rednecks :)

    Actually, Fort Worth is where the yankees and european/asian tourists go to buy $1200 boots, $300 hats, $150 bluejeans, red cowboy-cut shirts with embroidered wagon wheels, and Texas-shaped keychains to take home to their friends and family. The rednecks are in Louisiana.

  • (cs) in reply to Texan
    Texan:
    I think the point is that he's giving his child the wisdom to stand up for truth rather than drinking whatever flavor of kool-aid they're passing around on Air America today.

    And instead passing him the dumb idea that starting a fight is the best way to win an argument? They should be able to make the parents sit in detention as well, when it's obvious that they're the real problem.

  • Mattkins (unregistered)

    The two most common problems with downed telephone/power/etc lines:

    1. Squirrels
    2. Rednecks with firearms celebrating just about anything
  • Phleabo (unregistered) in reply to SuperousOxide
    SuperousOxide:
    Texan:
    I think the point is that he's giving his child the wisdom to stand up for truth rather than drinking whatever flavor of kool-aid they're passing around on Air America today.

    And instead passing him the dumb idea that starting a fight is the best way to win an argument? They should be able to make the parents sit in detention as well, when it's obvious that they're the real problem.

    Oh, don't mind him, he's just a Texan. They have to talk that way cause they're nervous about their small penises.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to A nonymous
    A nonymous:
    I think there were two big factors that contributed to why the media made such a big deal about Y2K and then why they were surprised when nothing really happened.

    One is the standards of quality control the folks in the media (reporters, writers, editors) have. I am not saying that us folks in the engineering and software profession are perfect, but we are light years ahead of the folks in the media as far as quality.

    My experience with the media is that they get things about 80-90% right pretty much all the time. ...

    Oh, I think it's way worse than that. I used to be involved in state and local politics -- not that I was some big-time politician, just a small-fry -- but it wasn't uncommon then for me to see a story in the newspaper or on TV about an event that I had first-hand knowledge of. And at one point I started keeping track, and found that they had important facts wrong in 45-50% of the stories. One example: A reporter interviewed me about education policy for about an hour. I said many things that I considered intelligent and coherent. But when the story was printed, nothing said in the interview was even mentioned. Instead he reported that I supported a proposal that was never mentioned in the interview, that I had never heard of before reading that I was backing it, and that from the brief description in that story, I thought sounded rather impractical. Whether the error rate is bias or sloppiness, it's pretty depressing. Every now and then I say to myself, Given that when I actually knew the facts, the media were wrong half the time, why do I continue to believe what they report on subjects that I know nothing about?

    When they talk about technical subjects, I often find myself trying to read between the lines to see what really happened.

  • Jay (unregistered)

    On Dec 31, 1999 I was in a restaurant, and I happened to overheard one waitress telling another that she didn't plan to punch out on the time clock until 12:01. That way if the computers went down at midnight, she wouldn't be able to punch out, and so they'd have to pay her for the time until they got the computers up again. Sounded like a good plan to me.

    At the time I worked with a guy named Tom who was convinced that civilization was going to end on Y2K. A group of us from the office were having lunch together one day where he explained how he had bought a generator and was stockpiling food in his basement and so on. Then someone asked me what I was doing to prepare for Y2K. I replied, "I bought a gun. If anything happens, I'm going to take it and go to Tom's house."

  • eric76 (unregistered)

    Around here, the only eventful thing was that precisely at midnight, cable tv throughout the town went down. All you could get was static.

    After about two minutes, it came back on with a message that said something to the effect of "just kidding".

  • (cs) in reply to Phleabo
    Phleabo:
    Oh, don't mind him, he's just a Texan. They have to talk that way cause they're nervous about their small penises.
    Of course, having a small penis isn't a characteristic of a geographical region; only of an individual. Interesting that you should bring it up.
  • captcha opto (unregistered) in reply to A nonymous
    A nonymous:
    I think there were two big factors that contributed to why the media made such a big deal about Y2K and then why they were surprised when nothing really happened.

    One is the standards of quality control the folks in the media (reporters, writers, editors) have. I am not saying that us folks in the engineering and software profession are perfect, but we are light years ahead of the folks in the media as far as quality.

    My experience with the media is that they get things about 80-90% right pretty much all the time. One example. I used to work for a place that rented plasma TV's to people. In an article in the newspaper that was written about us, they wrote that we MADE the TVs. It seems that they usually miss a couple facts like this, or misspell names, etc.

    Now when you are writing an article in the newspaper minor mistakes like this are sloppy, but do not cause real harm most of the time. But if you are designing an airplane and mess up 10% of the design its gonna crash. And if 10% of your code is buggy, the app will likely not even compile let alone run. So our quality standards are at a level that they can't even comprehend. They expected us to turn out stuff at the same crappy quality level they do, which means that everything would have fallen apart on Y2K.

    The other factor is that most folks in the media don't understand what makes computers work anyway, they think it is all magic and so they get confused when trying to explain the whole Y2K issue itself.

    Two of the medias most profitable stories are:

    1. Fear. "The world is going to blow up at midnight!"
    2. Government/corporations being wrong. "Look! They spent all this money to 'fix' a problem that eneded up not being a problem!"

    Obviously they're lying SOBs about the "being wrong" part, but idiots in the general public bought it.

  • Phleabo (unregistered) in reply to FredSaw
    FredSaw:
    Phleabo:
    Oh, don't mind him, he's just a Texan. They have to talk that way cause they're nervous about their small penises.
    Interesting that you should bring it up.

    No, not particularly interesting to me. Why? Are you interested in my penis?

  • (cs) in reply to Phleabo
    Phleabo:
    FredSaw:
    Phleabo:
    Oh, don't mind him, he's just a Texan. They have to talk that way cause they're nervous about their small penises.
    Interesting that you should bring it up.

    No, not particularly interesting to me. Why? Are you interested in my penis?

    You brought up the subject, not me. It's clear what's on your mind.

  • (cs)

    TRWTF is that people were expecting Y2K to take place in the year 2000. In computer terms "K" means 1024, so Y2K will take place in the year 2048.

    http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19991231 ;)

  • Cloak (unregistered) in reply to DP
    DP:
    Someone pointed out that calling the problem "Y2K" was the kind of thinking that got us into the problem in the first place.

    The next major gotcha for years will be in 2100. I doubt I'll be programming then, but the problem is that 2100 will not be a leap year.

    There are 3 rules for leap years. (There may be more rules, but they are not going to be an issue for a long time.)

    Rule 1: A leap year must be evenly divisible by four. This would seem to include 1900, 2000, 2100, 2008, etc.

    Rule 2: If the year is evenly divisible by 100, it is not a leap year. Whoa! That seems to disallow 1900, 2000, and 2100.

    Rule 3: If the year is evenly divisible by 1000, then it IS a leap year. Thus, 1900 and 2100 are not leap years (by rules 1 and 2 but not by rule 3) but 2000 is a leap year because of rules 1, 2, and 3. So, if you only knew rule 1 (not an impossible idea given some of the WTF programmers around), you got away with bad code in 2000. This code will fail in 2100 because it will wrongly insert Feb 29. So, midnight on Feb 28, 2100 should be a night of nervousness as people wait to see if the next day is Feb 29, or March 1.

    DP

    Well, first, a leap year does not have to be evenly divisible by 1000 but 400 instead.

    Secondly, the next "catastrophy" will happen in 2038 or more precisely: 03:14:07 UTC on Tuesday, January 19, 2038 as the number of seconds since 1970 will overflow signed 32-bit integers.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem

  • jayh (unregistered)

    Actually what that situation showed, is that, as usual the screamers were wet.

    Yes, it was an important job, but no, the sky was not going to fall, the job will get managed, as necessary. Like bird flu, like climate shift. Everything seems be be described in apocalyptic terms.

    captcha 'appellatio' sounds like it's NSFW

  • david (unregistered)

    Here in AUS, the financial services arm of a Major International Car Company (our client) had been told that if there were any Y2K problems, people would be fired. All development was put on hold: all systems were reviewed. It's all about priorities.

    After Y2K, that left the local branch with exactly 6 months to get ready for the Australian introduction of GST (VAT) on July 1, 2000. Come the day, they weren't ready. 3 weeks later they were authorising payments to the large suppliers (the $10,000,000 cheques) on trust, because the accounting system was still down and they couldn't get any more cars on credit.

  • TR (unregistered) in reply to Cloak

    The Chinese beat us to it. Damn! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y1C_Problem

  • (cs) in reply to Code Slave
    I dread the day when I have to meet with a junior-high principal when my child gets into a brawl over whether Y2K really was a problem or not.

    Imustresisttheurgetostrangleliberalartsmajorwithhisowntongue!!!*

    Just remember this quote from Albert Einstein: "Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them."

    Then you can apologize for being a genius and not providing enough problems for him to remember Y2K by. ;)

  • - (unregistered) in reply to Pete
    Pete:
    About the time of Y2K hysteria, the stock market's Dow Jones Industrial Average was approaching 10,000. I wanted to start a rumor on the stock message boards that the stock market was not Dow10K compliant and when the market hit 10,000 everything would be worth zero and everyone would lose all of their money. But I was scared the SEC would not think it was as funny as I did. In hindsight, I should have done it.

    "How I destroyed the world's economy" is not a story you would want to tell your grand children.

  • - (unregistered) in reply to Jackal von ÖRF
    Jackal von ÖRF:
    TRWTF is that people were expecting Y2K to take place in the year 2000. In computer terms "K" means 1024, so Y2K will take place in the year 2048.

    http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19991231 ;)

    I know that you were just kidding, but Y2K is not in the computer "realm", so K means 1000. It's like saying that a computer weights 2Kg, and someone saying that it is actually 2048 grams

Leave a comment on “Yee-hawtf!”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article