Probability now at 35% based on allegations of what I consider to be fraud from a partner.
http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/11/24/probability-now-35-based-on-allegations-of-fraud/ On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: > Blaze exhibits his wishy-washiness yet again. He also doesn't follow his > own posted "criteria", which was that if the report came out after > September he would lower the probability to 25%, which he never did. He > went straight to 20% yesterday and today he's at 45%. Because of ONE > reaction to the report. One might as well use a windvane, it would give > at least traceable information. > > Oh well, at least he's posting on his own thread. > > So I'm constrained, again, to decrease my ASSessment of an ASSurance that > Blaze will pull his head out of his ASinine "hind quarters" from 7.09% down > to 6.59%. Blaze might as well start building a shelter, because his head > will be staying there for a long time. > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/probability-is-now-45/ >> >> Based on http://www.nyteknik.se/asikter/debatt/article3854541.ece >> >> Exciting times! >> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/probability-now-20/ >>> >>> Disappointed to see the same names at the top of the paper. Shocked >>> to see not even Arxiv will accept it. I will increase the probability if >>> does make it onto Arxiv or if we see IH and Cherokee step up. >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/06/29/probability-is-now-27/ >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/probability-rossi-is-real-is-now-28/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Well I worded that strongly to drive home a point, we often hide our >>>>>> ignorance in the talk of probability. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are 4 domains in which we apply probability. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1: Things which are set and we are ignorant of, no actual element of >>>>>> chance exist, such as with Rossi. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2: Macro chance, things that we fail to predict but maybe could if we >>>>>> did sufficiently in-depth analysis, this could be likened to the spinning >>>>>> of a wheel of wheel of fortune >>>>>> >>>>>> 3: While a machine could be used to spin a wheel and get the desired >>>>>> selection to come up on a wheel, some things seem beyond our ability to >>>>>> predict. The experiment with falling BB's hitting pegs and being >>>>>> seemingly >>>>>> effected by the intent of the observer in university studies backs up >>>>>> that >>>>>> this is maybe beyond modeling within known physics/ Rolling a dice is >>>>>> similar, but we do know dice can be loaded showing that even on this >>>>>> level >>>>>> small physical changes can reduce the randomness. >>>>>> >>>>>> 4: Quantum physics where it is believed God does actually pay dice. >>>>>> But this is in ignorance of the state of the aether behind such >>>>>> interactions. >>>>>> It could be that these things are not random at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> But even IF you believe that probability really exist, that does not >>>>>> apply to Rossi. >>>>>> >>>>>> And if you were to hide ignorance in the language of probability >>>>>> despite the obvious lack of 'chance', there is the fact that if you were >>>>>> at >>>>>> 1% confidence and then saw one tiny single sign, you could have to go to >>>>>> 100%. >>>>>> >>>>>> Such as an event that can only be explained by Rossi being genuine. >>>>>> >>>>>> Granted this is difficult with magicians (illusionists) and con men, >>>>>> but there has very likely been such a sign that either moves him to 100% >>>>>> or >>>>>> damn near 0%. >>>>>> Not that there is anything that could prove him false so easily >>>>>> including proof he faked a test as there might be genuine motives to >>>>>> fake a >>>>>> test despite being genuinely in possession of the real thing, it really >>>>>> is >>>>>> harder/impossible to prove a negative. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> "1: There is no such things as probability, things either happen or >>>>>>> they don't. Rossi either IS real, or he is NOT real.. >>>>>>> There is no such thing as probability in reality." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I see.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:12 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Blaze's ego is astounding, thinking that he has things so well >>>>>>>> worked out that his ramblings about probability have meaning. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Even if he were that good at working out probability, a few facts >>>>>>>> remain that make it worthless. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1: There is no such things as probability, things either happen or >>>>>>>> they don't. Rossi either IS real, or he is NOT real.. >>>>>>>> There is no such thing as probability in reality. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2: What is the difference between a 30% chance and a 70% chance? >>>>>>>> Answer 1: 40% >>>>>>>> Answer 2: Nothing much, both means that there is a very real >>>>>>>> possibility of it going either way. >>>>>>>> If you were invested in oil, it would mean that there is a very >>>>>>>> real risk that you must take seriously. >>>>>>>> If you are on the side of good, you know that there is an >>>>>>>> extraordinary possibility that might be worthy of attention, but might >>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>> pan out. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But the difference between 0.1% chance and a 0.0000001% chance is >>>>>>>> huge! >>>>>>>> With the 0.1% there is a long shot, but one that could still very >>>>>>>> well pan out. Just 1 in 1,000 is not too distant odds to let one ignore >>>>>>>> something potentially significant good or bad. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But 0.0000001 is 1 in ten million, an almost impossible long shot >>>>>>>> worthy of no attention/investment unless there are enough of these low >>>>>>>> level 'promises/threats' to bring it up to a level of relevance. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Kevin O'Malley < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm constrained to decrease my ASSessment of an ASSurance >>>>>>>>> that Blaze will pull his head out of his ASinine "hind quarters" down >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> 7.51%, taking into account the direction of the wind and the stock >>>>>>>>> price for CYPW Cyclone Power. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> At least this time Blaze increased the chances of Rossi being real >>>>>>>>> on the basis of stuff that had SOMEthing to do with Rossi. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, he thinks the In Mercato Veritas is a sign of unrealness rather >>>>>>>>> than the OBVIOUS thing it is: >>>>>>>>> an old fashioned Rossism expression of confidence. This was exactly >>>>>>>>> the way Rossi used to post >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> before his friend Focardi got cancer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When Blaze talks about the lack of news leaks, he doesn't seem to >>>>>>>>> realize he's engaging in a classic >>>>>>>>> fallacy of arguing from silence. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Going to start publishing updates on this blog >>>>>>>>>> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/ rather than this mailing list. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Rossi is now at 30% >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Kevin O'Malley < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If it's interesting enough to generate a patent then it is >>>>>>>>>>> worthwhile. The world would sit up and take notice simply because >>>>>>>>>>> Rossi >>>>>>>>>>> ain't a fraud, as the common notion suggests. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Another possibility is IH may have decided they don't want the >>>>>>>>>>>> world competing with them, so they gave the researchers an eCat >>>>>>>>>>>> which is >>>>>>>>>>>> just enough interesting to generate a patent but not so >>>>>>>>>>>> interesting it >>>>>>>>>>>> causes the world to sit up and take notice. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> More and more I'm beginning to wonder if we're going to get a >>>>>>>>>>>>> TIP report that shows something interesting, but nowhere >>>>>>>>>>>>> guaranteeing the >>>>>>>>>>>>> power densities shown in the first report. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> While I believe that Rossi believes he has something and that >>>>>>>>>>>>> IH believes they have something and that there is no fraudulent >>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior >>>>>>>>>>>>> going on here, I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And the middle is, yes energy, just not very exciting energy. >>>>>>>>>>>>> And possibly, after some analysis, it could be just an impressive >>>>>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>>>> source of chemical energy that's competitive perhaps with Rocket >>>>>>>>>>>>> Fuel in >>>>>>>>>>>>> the best case scenario, but in reality it's just competitive with >>>>>>>>>>>>> optimal >>>>>>>>>>>>> Geothermal. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In this scenario, I consider the eCat not to have lived up to >>>>>>>>>>>>> its promises which is why my estimate is around 35%. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Decreasing the probability to 31% based on smelly stock >>>>>>>>>>>>>> offering. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://freeenergyscams.com/andrea-rossi-e-cat-hydro-fusion-cashing-in-before-the-collapse/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> HydroFusion is ran by Dr. Magnus Holm. Seems credible - but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> why didn't he wait until after the report to ask for more money? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rossi doing shout outs about Dr Holm? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea Rossi >>>>>>>>>>>>>> May 18th, 2014 at 11:20 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848&cpage=1#comment-957368> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Orsobubu: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your comment, that indroduces us to the paper >>>>>>>>>>>>>> published today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEOMETRY OF STRING THEORY SOLITONS >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by Dr Magnus Holm . It is an important work of this scientist >>>>>>>>>>>>>> made in 1999, but I find his work dense of important >>>>>>>>>>>>>> information. It is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>> an easy reading, the work is rigorous, but this is the Journal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Nuclear >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Physics, and the paper is perfectly in line with the field of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> application >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of our Journal. Dr Magnus Holm is presently working also with me >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> E-Cat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> About the comment of our friend Orsobubu: I do not share his >>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainties regarding the so called “social sciences”. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Warm Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A.R. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This could be just really inane business strategy or perhaps >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Magnus just doesn't have a good contract with Rossi/IH. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For those who really believe in Rossi, my suggestion would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to contact Hydro fusion and buy up as many shares as you >>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly can. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think everything comes down to this report that should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming over the next month. We could see a rise over over >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20-30% on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis of this report. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another possibility is that the report may reveal a low COP >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is competitive only with geothermal and could be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> uninteresting fuel sources. (which means a drop in probability >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of 10% or so) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another (unlikely in my mind) possibility is that the report >>>>>>>>>>>>>> will reveal that it doesn't do anything useful, which will be a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> drop in 25%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Decreasing the probability to 35% based on shattering news >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the Defkalion demo being completely worthless. I hesitate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to say it, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but It almost sounds like fraud is being implied. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/12/defkalion-demo-proven-not-to-be-reliable/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Decreasing probability to 46% based on lack of news from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nanor but up to 47% based on recent news from Darden in China: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.icebank.cn/news/detail_2.php?id=118 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hat tip: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/05/09/tom-darden-involved-in-opening-of-nickel-hydrogen-energy-research-center-in-tianjin-china/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note: I suspect there will be an up to (-30%, +15%) swing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in probability when the june report comes out. Big news >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> indeed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Increasing the probability to 47% on the basis on Nanor / >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MIT videos. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Put that back to 43%: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Darden earned an MRP in environmental planning from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,* a JD >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from Yale Law School* and a BA from the University of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he was a Morehead >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scholar. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Correction, make that 41%. It's not Cherokee but rather >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Darden (investor, co founder of Cherokee) and Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vaughn (senior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analyst at Cherokee, BA Economics) who are the players >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd be good to find out who those other investors are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Increasing the probability to 44% on the basis of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cherokee PR release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Big big BIG news. Now this is no longer about Rossi, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but about Cherokee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know you guys think I'm a git for my doubt, but hey, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my model is waaaay ahead of the curve than the vast >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> investing universe. XOM is still trading near >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> historical highs, for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Increasing the probability back to 35% based on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latest news coming out of BLP and McKubre. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hopefully we'll see some more encouraging things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon. The next indie report on the ecat should be an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interesting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inflection report. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fulvio , the tech Director & R.D. at Leonardo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Corporation MIAMI - FL - USA previous job was: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> " Frelance Consultant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/search?search=&title=Frelance+Consultant&sortCriteria=R&keepFacets=true¤tTitle=CP&trk=prof-exp-title> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> European >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gaming and Gambling Tech Market >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/search?search=&company=European+Gaming+and+Gambling+Tech+Market&sortCriteria=R&keepFacets=true&trk=prof-exp-company-name> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> " >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -4% >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now back to 31%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 6:21 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is based on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - STMicro patent (Increased about 4.5%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Cherokee Investments (Increased about 2.5%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Rossi stating third party reports in March >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (increased 2%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Lack of news from Defkalion (-1%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> News seems to be coming in fairly rapidly at this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point. Could be updating this probability more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequently. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
