Youtube comments of n (@user-pq4by2rq9y).
-
1400
-
656
-
448
-
297
-
295
-
278
-
169
-
146
-
132
-
99
-
95
-
66
-
63
-
62
-
61
-
59
-
50
-
49
-
46
-
46
-
43
-
37
-
36
-
32
-
32
-
30
-
29
-
28
-
27
-
26
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
In hindsight, yeah it is a bad idea, heavy rifles aren't particularly suited for urban warfare and you will have better options to deal with enemies in open terrain. Think small wheeled drones armed with anything from 7.62x51mm to 30mm cannons, loitering ammunitions, air lifted artillery, improved air support capabilities (cheap turboprops and tilt-rotors with much better loitering times compared to jets).
There will be plenty of ways to deal with enemies in the open, will the capability to defeat level III body armor be enough to offset the cons in the urban environment? I don't think so. Personally, I would choose a 300blk carbine with, let's say, 10.5 inches of barrel length, raise the pressure as far as I can and build my concept from there.
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Fracking isn’t so bad anymore, I mean, in the search of efficiency, they use undrinkable water for deep underground that requires less chemicals to prep, they also reutilize the same water for other wells, further reducing costs, and the fracking operation itself became crazy efficient, requiring less pipes to operate, even using carbon dioxide to help push that last bit of oil from the underground.
Still, if they made geothermal commercially viable... that would become the de facto global clean energy source solving the massive issues we currently have with wind, solar and even hydro while being much less controversial than nuclear... That's exciting news.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
If I had to guess, no, millenials are not entitled. Millenials are confused, that's because boomers are so narcisistic that they see their children as a means of self promotion, in other words, forget about morals and social interactions, get a degree and make me look good.
To them, cellphones are a indispensable parenting tool because it is convenient.
Their lack of moral compass and self control also don't help, depriving their children of good role models.
And last but not least, the addicted youth has hardly any positive future to look for. That's because boomers only care about immediate gains and it shows. Forget about long term policies from boomer governments.
Even green policies, something that should be aimed at building a better future, often results in virtual signaling over reason, with countries like Germany phasing out a perfectly capable, relatively clean energy source (nuclear) in favor of a highly inconsistent renewable source (in this case, wind) because it feels safer, even when it is not. In fact, the germans will not stop expanding wind farms despite the yearly decrease in energy output.
With such irrational behaviors, absent/neglectful parenting, disconnect with reality and rise of addiction, millenials couldn't help themselves but to feel confused.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@acarrillo8277 Just to add a bit of context, the S-97 Raider isn't the Defiant X, not even close. It is a small, single engine aircraft designed as Scout Helicopter that can convert its internal weapons bay to carry 6 troops in a pinch, but NOT intended to lift cargo (hence why the single engine).
As far as I am aware, the Raider prototype has been flying for some time while the Defiant had a troubled history. Probably because the Defiant introduces way more vibration with its second engine but who knows for sure.
The Raider is intended for FARA while the Defiant is Sikorsky's bid for FLRAA (blackhawk's replacement, essentially).
Just as the Valor won against the Defiant, don't be surprised if the Raider wins against the Invictus, because it can do what the Bell 360 can do with only a single engine.
Obs.: for those complaining about the Valor's footprint, well, the Raider has some transport capability and its footprint is closer to a Killer Egg than a Blackhawk. Assuming that nothing goes wrong with it, Valor/Raider combo offers some serious flexibility.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@денисбаженов-щ1б So do you want Brazil to innovate so a business overseas can make millions of our technology, how does it benefit Brazilians?
Btw, the French minimum wage is about 6 times ours. They can afford their taxes.
Second, our middle class is still poor. About the upper middle class, that's mostly the people working for the state, some make it to the top 1%.
Third, Steve Jobs and Elon Musk had investors and a decent economic climate in their favor at some point.
And last but not least, does it really matter if we pay more or less for energy than Koreans, Germans, British etc, if we have little money for everything else?
- Koreans: 5.6x our minimum wage;
- Germans: 6.4x
- British: 6.9x
Do you get my point now?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@petlahk4119 the supertucano was designed to use improvised airstrips in the amazon forest region so it would have to deal with it a lot of dirt, yes. Same goes for rain, though I am not sure about how it would handle snow.
Turboprops are more fuel efficient, easier to maintain and usually have more endurance which gives you more range and the capability to use improvised airstrip. Both the Hercules and the Supertucano were designed with that in mind, I guess.
Ideally, you could set a improvised airstrip relatively close to the action and use, as example, two supertucanos or wolverines to cover a substantially larger area over a substantially longer period of time (basically all day long) for a fraction of the cost of running a a-10 which is, quite frankly, not as capable for this kind of job. So unless the gau-8 or its robustness offers a significant advantage, you are better off with a light attack aircraft. I actually didn't expect me to say that but oh well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Considering that amd is about to launch rdna 3, I would be buying. They aren't losing money with rdna 3, with the possibility to shift production to what is best, be a console refresh, the mobile market (where I bet they will destroy intel - that's where they actualy won marketshare) or traditional gpus, where they will be alone in the low to mid range market.
That said, the market for hardware aimed at 1080p may dry up forever, considering even a 3060/6600xt will crush that resolution while a 3070 is already very capable with dlss 2.0/fsr at 1440p. And in the console side, a series s zen4/rdna3 refresh would easily crush that resolution for this gen, and we probably won't need another one.
By the way, zen 4 launch only flopped because motherboard manufacturers that decided that milking am5 motherboards was a good idea. It should be a better deal than Intel 13th gen even at desktop, requiring less cooling for the same performance.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Doug, what we should be building is hybrid tiltrotors. We have axial flux motors now that are very light and compact, able to deliver high torque, perfect to provide a boost during take off and climb, where the engine is the least efficient, and we only need a smaller battery to do so that should be charged in forward flight.
Even in aircraft like these, one or two small gas turbines working as generators could be placed anywhere in the fuselage to power any configuration of propellers, although not ideal because of the extra weight. Still, one of these with a "booster" battery could eventually be cheaper to operate than conventional fixed wing turboprops, despite being way more flexible.
Furthermore, a single frame could support a variety of configurations, smaller engines can give you more range or fuel economy while bigger ones increase your payload capacity, and you can even remove that weight if all you do is short sporadic flights.
That's something we are plenty capable to do today, not 30 years from now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There is one thing that bothers me about energy from renewables (specifically solar and wind), while it can be cheap, that might be for the wrong reasons. What happens is that because you can't produce and sell on demand, you are forced to sell your peak production at cheaper prices, driving down your profit margin substantially after a certain point.
And, of course, there is not much you can do about peak demand without energy storage anyway, which could improve or destroy the economic viability of renewables altogether, despite never being accounted for, as far as I am aware.
So in reality, nuclear is competing with heavily subsided fossil fuels (I wish I could find out how much exactly), geothermal and hydro, unless we can make mass storage battery production economically viable.
In other words, this debate goes beyond just numbers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is not at all exclusive to evs, of course. I don't hate evs but I am not enthusiastic about batteries and I do wish to see more hydrogen fuel cells in the future. Unless a new wonder batteries appears, of course.
Ideally, I want to see batteries and fuel cells working together, so I can charge my car at home for daily commute and fuel it under five minutes in a road trip. Preferably in a way that does not spontaneously combust.
I know hydrogen sucks as a fuel but massive lithium batteries aren't that great either. People put too much faith in something that could never come to the market, and even if it does, not in sufficient numbers, there are problems you can't fix by throwing money at. At least hydrogen is here, we know that it works, we know that we can produce as much as we need without fossil fuels and now we have renewables that, because they produce a lot when demand is low, could make its production viable. Yes, there is talk about producing clean hydrogen as a byproduct of nuclear energy but I haven't see it yet.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The problem I have with hydrogen is that it takes attention away from compressed natural gas in combustion engines, the cleanest (and potentially cheaper) of fossil fuels with infrastructure already in place and the perfect option for plug-in hybrids.
Being conservative, you could power twice as many plug-in hybrids with the same amount of batteries required for bEVs, cutting twice as much emissions, possibly more. And at the end of its battery life, you can replace it with the latest battery technology, potentially turning that hybrid in a full time EV for practical purposes, because in the end of the day, electricity should be even cheaper.
The only BIG problem with it is the long term business strategy for natgas suppliers. However they could turn some of those fracking wells into geothermal to power the EVs they once fuelled so there is still hope.
Now we just have to actually think long term without the interference of lobbyists. The great thing about this is that it does not only makes environmental sense, but economic sense as well, for everyone involved.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
i don't know... it's a modern trend but when i played halo reach back then securing a advantage was more important than to actually outgun the enemy (at least in invasion mode) and you were able to do it in a variety of ways. Things like avoiding or setting ambushes, going for weakpoints, making the most of your current weaponry, finding a way to secure extra firepower, whether or not to waste your grenade, you had to make quick decisions all the time. You can certainly put up a fight against a quicker player, but your team will get decimated by a smarter one the moment the big guns show up on the map.
Even the standard assault rifle was a particularly difficult weapon to handle in multiplayer, requiring a specific medium range to work with, too close and you will be killed by melee, shotgun, plasma grenade or plasma pistol, too far and your damage potential will drop very quickly, even if you know how to handle the spread, but once you find that sweet spot, it will give you just that slight advantage that will be the difference between life and death. I believe in modern halo this idea of "weapon triangle" was thrown out of the window in favor of player loadouts and killstreak mechanics, which is, at least for me, a severe downgrade, you had stuff like zombie and swat modes for when you just want to unwind. Too bad bungie's great game design (specially in multiplayer) didn't make a comeback in Destiny, even though raids were magical at launch, when everyone had to collect information from the environment just to figure out what to do next.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You just resumed the gun control debate perfectly. The thing is so heavily biased to one side that you would think there is a consensus, except the prevalent opinion (pro-control) can't hold itself for a second of serious scrutiny.
There is no debate or research, only manipulation through confirmation bias. The proof is the ar-15, barely used in crime yet possibly the most demonized firearm in american history. Same with bump stocks, silencers, ghost guns, etc (disclaimer: I understand bump stocks are a delicate subject but I am merely stating a fact, not a opinion).
I don't mean to imply that there are no serious arguments for gun control, but I personally haven't seen many of the good ones, the ones who actually make sense when you think about it and do some research.
And that's the prevalent opinion holding no grounds in reality, that's why you see the right suddenly doubt climate change, or even the shape of the globe. Mass manipulation broke our capacity for trust and reasoning.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1