Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Bubblews)   Oh, and btw, the Earth might get struck by Asteroid Apophis today. Just saying   (bubblews.com ) divider line
    More: Scary, Asteroid Apophis, Apophis, Earth  
•       •       •

17361 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jan 2013 at 10:44 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



198 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-01-09 11:37:24 AM  

Mr_Fabulous: OK, so it's almost certainly not a happening deal. But let's say, for the sake of argument only, that the 2029 thing was a significant risk. Significant to the extent that "something must be done".

What is the current thinking on how to attack such a problem, if we got started on it today? Sixteen years is a fairly long time, and we can assume some technological advances will occur... but we can't know what they will be.

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?

/just a 'what if'
//this time


That NASA article I linked above had a few things in there but it seems they haven't wasted too much money on theoreticals. One of the ideas is to add some kind of reflective surface to the asteroid on one of the next passes to make it absorb more energy and knock it off course. Although, not sure what the vessel would be. Super duper space drone?
 
2013-01-09 11:37:30 AM  

Mr_Fabulous: Bungles: Just look how well Kyoto did.

I've been to Kyoto; it's a lovely town.

No idea what point you're trying to make, but clearly you didn't understand my question. Good day.



Umm. Kyoto Protocol

My point is, even if we start now, absolutely nothing will be done. Beyond lots and lots of arguing.
 
2013-01-09 11:37:54 AM  

Ivo Shandor: Current thinking? Burn down all of the world's observatories and then go back to watching reality TV.


Is Kim K. thinking about lowering the pressure in her butt?
 
2013-01-09 11:45:15 AM  

Carn: Mr_Fabulous: OK, so it's almost certainly not a happening deal. But let's say, for the sake of argument only, that the 2029 thing was a significant risk. Significant to the extent that "something must be done".

What is the current thinking on how to attack such a problem, if we got started on it today? Sixteen years is a fairly long time, and we can assume some technological advances will occur... but we can't know what they will be.

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?

/just a 'what if'
//this time

That NASA article I linked above had a few things in there but it seems they haven't wasted too much money on theoreticals. One of the ideas is to add some kind of reflective surface to the asteroid on one of the next passes to make it absorb more energy and knock it off course. Although, not sure what the vessel would be. Super duper space drone?


Thanks.

Yeah, I have a feeling that an impending explosive disaster of global scale would probably free up some resources pronto. But I'm still not clear on what they'd actually do. (I'm also not clear on how a "reflective surface" would "absorb more energy," but that whole concept seems dodgy to me anyway.)

Someday, it's gonna be for realzies. And someone very bright is going to have to come with something very practicable.
 
2013-01-09 11:46:26 AM  
So, what are some of the variables in the 2029 approach that affect the probability of an impact in 2032? Is it a matter of how much its velocity changes as a result of interacting with the Earth/Moon system? Is it a question of if it strikes an unsuspecting "weather satellite?"
 
2013-01-09 11:46:37 AM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Did it come from the Arachnid quarantine zone?

/want to know more


If it hits Buenos Aires at least we don't have to listen to the argie bargie cry about wanting the Falklands back any longer. So win-win situation.

Besides the danger is the next pass of the asteroid if it happens to go through a certain window this time around.
 
2013-01-09 11:48:06 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Impact simulator.. have fun playing with the possibilities.


After plugging in numbers for a small planet-sized body:

"
The Earth is completely disrupted by the impact and its debris forms a new asteroid belt orbiting the sun between Venus and Mars.
100 percent of the Earth is melted
Depending on the direction and location the collision, the impact may make a significant change in the tilt of Earth's axis.
Depending on the direction and location of impact, the collision may cause a change in the length of the day of up to 8470 hours.
The impact shifts the Earth's orbit noticeably."

That would be a bad day...
 
2013-01-09 11:49:41 AM  

Bungles: Umm. Kyoto Protocol

My point is, even if we start now, absolutely nothing will be done.



Ah, got you now.

I think it might be different if we were facing one single, explosive moment of doom instead of an arguably arguable long-term trend of warmer weather (note: I understand it's not really "arguable" at this point). But my worst fear is... you might be right, and it won't matter.
 
2013-01-09 11:50:57 AM  
John Carmack tried to warn us...

/runs to his ark
 
2013-01-09 11:53:33 AM  
Is it gonna hit us Cowardly Lion?!?!

www.snopes.com

Nope, not gonna hit us ... sadly ...

www.snopes.com
 
2013-01-09 11:55:02 AM  
I'd happily put up with some ice age sh*t if the damn asteroid would take out all the fundies, science deniers, people who use ALL CAPS WHILE TYPING, terrorists of any religion, the Wall Street morons who f*cked the economy, anyone who wears socks with sandals, and anybody else I don't like.

\time for *more* caffiene
 
2013-01-09 11:55:03 AM  

Mr_Fabulous: Bungles: Umm. Kyoto Protocol

My point is, even if we start now, absolutely nothing will be done.


Ah, got you now.

I think it might be different if we were facing one single, explosive moment of doom instead of an arguably arguable long-term trend of warmer weather (note: I understand it's not really "arguable" at this point). But my worst fear is... you might be right, and it won't matter.


The problem is, we don't have an efficient system for inter-governmental cooperation that doesn't take forever, and one that didn't would be wildly undemocratic.

The only real hope would probably be China saying "screw this" and doing it entirely themselves using massive compulsory work camps.
 
2013-01-09 11:56:36 AM  

kvinesknows: and this article says 15 million kms away today


http://ca.news.yahoo.com/asteroid-extremely-remote-possibility-striki n g-earth-2036-makes-090011942.html


Do you dare doubt the scientific rigor of Bubblews?
 
2013-01-09 11:57:10 AM  
just FYI:

I could stay awake just to hear you breathing
Watch you smile while you are sleeping
While you're far away and dreaming
I could spend my life in this sweet surrender
I could stay lost in this moment forever
Where every moment spent with you is a moment I treasure

Don't want to close my eyes
I don't want to fall asleep
Cause I'd miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing
Cause even when I dream of you
The sweetest dream will never do
I'd still miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing
 
2013-01-09 11:57:14 AM  
Ban asteroids!
 
2013-01-09 11:59:37 AM  

Biness: just FYI:

I could stay awake just to hear you breathing
Watch you smile while you are sleeping
While you're far away and dreaming
I could spend my life in this sweet surrender
I could stay lost in this moment forever
Where every moment spent with you is a moment I treasure

Don't want to close my eyes
I don't want to fall asleep
Cause I'd miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing
Cause even when I dream of you
The sweetest dream will never do
I'd still miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing


Damn you to hell.
 
2013-01-09 12:02:12 PM  
From what I have seen, it's supposed to pass by at 30,000 kilometres above the Earth today.

Either way, load Milla Jovovich onto the pillar and get the stones from the freaky blue b*tch over there...
 
2013-01-09 12:02:42 PM  

Carn: Biness: just FYI:

I could stay awake just to hear you breathing
Watch you smile while you are sleeping
While you're far away and dreaming
I could spend my life in this sweet surrender
I could stay lost in this moment forever
Where every moment spent with you is a moment I treasure

Don't want to close my eyes
I don't want to fall asleep
Cause I'd miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing
Cause even when I dream of you
The sweetest dream will never do
I'd still miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing

Damn you to hell.


Lying close to you feeling your heart beating
And I'm wondering what you're dreaming
Wondering if it's me you're seeing
Then I kiss your eyes
And thank God we're together
I just want to stay with you in this moment forever
Forever and ever

/you're going to get taken out by an asteroid with this stuck in your head
//no you're not, but can you imagine?!
 
2013-01-09 12:02:50 PM  
Apophis has a diameter of 275 metres. That's big but not world-destroying big.

Check out possible scenarios at : Purdue Earth Impact Simulator.

Assumptions
At 100 kilometres distance (60 miles), composed of dense rock, and hitting sedimentary rock at 45 degrees, it would sound like heavy traffic (on top of any noise in the vicinity). The airblast speed would be 28.8 mph, 5 minutes after impact. The crater would be more than twice as big as the famous Meteor Crater in Arizona, so you would definitely want to be more than 30 miles away, and my 60 mile distance would be safe enough I think. Different assumptions produce different results. The most important assumption would be a water landing (with about 70% of the Earth's surface water or sea ice).

In other words, a,n Apophis impact would have a couple of upsides, one, it would prevent a future Apophis impact, and two, it would be very educational for geologists, disaster planers and the population of Earth in general.

I think I might add it to my bucket list: be very far from a minor NEO impact in a remote area. Provided it did not hit anything important or close by, it would be a very interesting life lesson for the human race.
 
2013-01-09 12:04:03 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Impact simulator.. have fun playing with the possibilities.


OK... I've had waaaay to much morbid fun with that.
 
2013-01-09 12:04:29 PM  

Mr.Sharpy: So, what are some of the variables in the 2029 approach that affect the probability of an impact in 2032? Is it a matter of how much its velocity changes as a result of interacting with the Earth/Moon system? Is it a question of if it strikes an unsuspecting "weather satellite?"


From what I recall seeing about this on documentaries, it's just that the measurements are so precise to figure out exactly where it's going to be in 15 years that they just can't measure them accurately enough until it gets really really close. There's a "keyhole" that they have mapped out, and if it ends up passing through that particular window, then it's a big Uh Oh.
 
2013-01-09 12:07:07 PM  
When asteroids are oulawed, then only outla.....ah screw it!
 
2013-01-09 12:07:20 PM  

Carn: There is zero chance that it hits us this pass. They think there is a minute chance that is essentially zero that it could hit us in 2036 but they'll be certain after it passes.


Or they'll come back and say, "Hey, guys... we're going to buy lottery tickets. Just sayin'."
 
2013-01-09 12:13:50 PM  
I wish amateur astronomers would tell us whether it is going to hit in 2029 - because the government wouldn't tell us if it would.
 
2013-01-09 12:14:26 PM  

kvinesknows: and this article says 15 million kms away today


http://ca.news.yahoo.com/asteroid-extremely-remote-possibility-striki n g-earth-2036-makes-090011942.html


It should be about ~0.09 - 0.1 AU away right now, or a tenth the distance between the earth and sun, so yeah, ~14-15 million km. About 40 times the distance from the Earth to the Moon. It won't be until 2029 that it comes near as close as TFA says.
 
2013-01-09 12:15:41 PM  
i.imgur.com

(Original version: Bob the Angry Flower, Asteroid 2030)

The cartoon from 13 years ago was originally in reference to 2000 SG344, but there's still a sliver of hope in the form of 2011 AG5, which will make a keyhole pass in 2023.
 
2013-01-09 12:21:47 PM  
Just because we KNOW about this asteroid and can track it's movements, doesn't mean it's safe. Who knows what might happen to change it's course? Another asteroid hit's it, perhaps. And it also doesn't mean it's time to stop looking for these things. There are billions of them out there. One could strike the planet out of a clear sky before I finish typing this. (looks up. Wheewww....)

It's not like I spend my time concerned about these things... But we humans have been here for such a brief amount of time, and we think we are so smart. It's been a long time since there was a real disaster... Consider that if you think it's impossible.

Sleep well...
 
2013-01-09 12:24:46 PM  

KarmicDisaster: shifter_: Complete Bullshiat. Apophis is 0.0966 AU. 1AU= 149 597 871 kilometers

That is 14,451,154km away.....

Someone got thier math wrong.

Gah, I give up. How many people are going to come in here to say that the headline is stupid. The mods must be crazy.


I think the article writer confused AU and LD.......
 
2013-01-09 12:24:56 PM  

brantgoose: Apophis has a diameter of 275 metres. That's big but not world-destroying big.

Check out possible scenarios at : Purdue Earth Impact Simulator.

Assumptions
At 100 kilometres distance (60 miles), composed of dense rock, and hitting sedimentary rock at 45 degrees, it would sound like heavy traffic (on top of any noise in the vicinity). The airblast speed would be 28.8 mph, 5 minutes after impact. The crater would be more than twice as big as the famous Meteor Crater in Arizona, so you would definitely want to be more than 30 miles away, and my 60 mile distance would be safe enough I think. Different assumptions produce different results. The most important assumption would be a water landing (with about 70% of the Earth's surface water or sea ice).

In other words, a,n Apophis impact would have a couple of upsides, one, it would prevent a future Apophis impact, and two, it would be very educational for geologists, disaster planers and the population of Earth in general.

I think I might add it to my bucket list: be very far from a minor NEO impact in a remote area. Provided it did not hit anything important or close by, it would be a very interesting life lesson for the human race.


Did you remember to set the velocity appropriately? Apophis is traveling at 30 km/s. Doesn't seem to change too much though.
 
2013-01-09 12:25:46 PM  

Bungles: digitalrain: FTA: "...but its probably not a planet killer."

Good to know!

[www.stardestroyer.net image 550x413]

They're not hard to spot.


I thought that they looked more like this.

abagond.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-01-09 12:25:56 PM  

Cheese eating surrender monkey: zarberg: [media.comicvine.com image 300x216]

He's not that big, couldn't possibly do that much damage.

What if he's stuffed full of naquadah?

/don't ask me how.


They could just expand a hyperdrive bubble around him and go through the Earth in hyperspace.
 
2013-01-09 12:26:44 PM  
Sounds apocryphal.
 
2013-01-09 12:27:33 PM  

Biness: Carn: Biness: just FYI:

I could stay awake just to hear you breathing
Watch you smile while you are sleeping
While you're far away and dreaming
I could spend my life in this sweet surrender
I could stay lost in this moment forever
Where every moment spent with you is a moment I treasure

Don't want to close my eyes
I don't want to fall asleep
Cause I'd miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing
Cause even when I dream of you
The sweetest dream will never do
I'd still miss you babe
And I don't want to miss a thing

Damn you to hell.

Lying close to you feeling your heart beating
And I'm wondering what you're dreaming
Wondering if it's me you're seeing
Then I kiss your eyes
And thank God we're together
I just want to stay with you in this moment forever
Forever and ever

/you're going to get taken out by an asteroid with this stuck in your head
//no you're not, but can you imagine?!


I think if I had that song in my head when the asteroid was coming I'd tell it to hurry up. I turned on my thrash radio station on Pandora after you gave me that ear poison. Currently I'm enjoying the end of Sanitarium by Metallica. I guess it's fitting for this discussion too.

Welcome to where time stands still
No one sleeps and no one will
 
2013-01-09 12:28:13 PM  

Mr_Fabulous:

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?



My vote would be a Rail Gun, I don't know why it just sounds cool pelting that big rock with super speed objects to try and knock it off it's course

Now that has me thinking, so this question goes out to all those fark geeks out there (NTTIAWWT). My understanding is a rail gun uses magnets to accelerate an object. So if the rail gun was in space would there be a need for counter thrusters when the gun fires?
 
2013-01-09 12:31:25 PM  

Mr_Fabulous: Someday, it's gonna be for realzies. And someone very bright is going to have to come with something very practicable.


The first step would be to land a few radio transponders on it so that it could be tracked much more precisely. That doesn't require any new technology, just a funding and engineering push to get it done in time. Of course if the updated information then rules out an impact, everyone will scream that the whole thing was just a Y2K-style scam.

Assuming that it will still hit, if it's small enough you could just live with it or evacuate the target region. If it's large or if it's heading for one of your important cities then you move on to deflection. At this point you risk provoking wars, e.g. if Russia decides to deflect it away from their territory into some part of China but China isn't too keen on the idea. If you're going to do it at all, you need to provide reasonable assurance that you can deflect it far enough to miss the planet completely.

As for deflection mechanisms, several have been proposed. Nuclear bombs detonated just above the surface, a nuclear-reactor-powered spacecraft with an ion engine, a robot to mine chunks of the asteroid and throw them of into space, etc. It really depends how large the object is and how much time you have, and there's a chance that the final answer will be "sucks to be you, should have built that Mars colony when you had the chance".
 
2013-01-09 12:32:14 PM  
When these things come up I amuse myself by imagining our current government(s) reaction to an actual threat. No running in the streets for me, I'll die laughing at watching congress arguing over spending cuts to fund the "We're all going to die, please do something" bill.
 
2013-01-09 12:35:55 PM  
say... how come in deep impact and Armageddon they pretty much knew EXACTLY where on earth it would hit but they dont even know IF this one will hit Earth, never mind where. Has forecasting technology gotten worse since 1998?
 
2013-01-09 12:36:32 PM  

ha-ha-guy: I'm more curious to see if manages to clip a satellite or two on the way past.


Billion-to-one odds. There's a lot more empty space to travel through than there are satellites in orbit.
 
2013-01-09 12:36:32 PM  
Part of me really wants to see a sizable asteroid strike the planet. Not a planet or civilization killer, but one big enough to put a big f*cking hole in the ground. Just think of the invaluable scientific data we could collect witnessing an actually meteor impact. Granted it would most like hit the ocean and drown millions, but still, kinda cool.
 
2013-01-09 12:42:25 PM  

Heathen: Mr_Fabulous:

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?

My vote would be a Rail Gun, I don't know why it just sounds cool pelting that big rock with super speed objects to try and knock it off it's course

Now that has me thinking, so this question goes out to all those fark geeks out there (NTTIAWWT). My understanding is a rail gun uses magnets to accelerate an object. So if the rail gun was in space would there be a need for counter thrusters when the gun fires?


Absolutely. Think of any large artillery guns. There is a housing that allows the gun to recoil but stay in its position. This is just classic Newtonian physics. In space of course, you have no resistance (large ship, planetary mass, etc) to absorb the impact. If it were mounted on the moon, that might be enough mass to offset the firing, but it's possible that a big enough gun could actually alter the moon's orbit, which would be bad. You could have it floating in its own orbit but you'd need thrusters to fire when the gun did to keep it stabilized or the thing would spin itself all over the damn place. What would be easier potentially is a giant laser, but a projectile might be more effective.
 
2013-01-09 12:42:31 PM  

kvinesknows: say... how come in deep impact and Armageddon they pretty much knew EXACTLY where on earth it would hit but they dont even know IF this one will hit Earth, never mind where. Has forecasting technology gotten worse since 1998?


No. Those were movies.
 
2013-01-09 12:47:40 PM  
Armageddon is one of the most horrible movies ever made.
 
2013-01-09 12:48:20 PM  

Heathen: Mr_Fabulous:

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?

My vote would be a Rail Gun, I don't know why it just sounds cool pelting that big rock with super speed objects to try and knock it off it's course

Now that has me thinking, so this question goes out to all those fark geeks out there (NTTIAWWT). My understanding is a rail gun uses magnets to accelerate an object. So if the rail gun was in space would there be a need for counter thrusters when the gun fires?


If I understand this correctly, the magnetic accelerators are pulling the ballistic. Pretty sure the recoil, at least on a terrestrial version, is negligible to nonexistent. In space, with no gravity well acting on the whole mechanism I'm not sure if you'd need the counter thrust or not.
 
2013-01-09 12:52:16 PM  
Wait for 2036
 
2013-01-09 12:53:25 PM  
...so the Mayans were not that far off after all? Ha! HA!

waitwut?
 
2013-01-09 12:56:42 PM  

Carn: Heathen: Mr_Fabulous:

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?

My vote would be a Rail Gun, I don't know why it just sounds cool pelting that big rock with super speed objects to try and knock it off it's course

Now that has me thinking, so this question goes out to all those fark geeks out there (NTTIAWWT). My understanding is a rail gun uses magnets to accelerate an object. So if the rail gun was in space would there be a need for counter thrusters when the gun fires?

Absolutely. Think of any large artillery guns. There is a housing that allows the gun to recoil but stay in its position. This is just classic Newtonian physics. In space of course, you have no resistance (large ship, planetary mass, etc) to absorb the impact. If it were mounted on the moon, that might be enough mass to offset the firing, but it's possible that a big enough gun could actually alter the moon's orbit, which would be bad. You could have it floating in its own orbit but you'd need thrusters to fire when the gun did to keep it stabilized or the thing would spin itself all over the damn place. What would be easier potentially is a giant laser, but a projectile might be more effective.


But it's not an artillery gun. It's a rail gun. There's no explosion delivering force to the ballistic. There's a magnetic field pulling it instead. Then a field further down the barrel turns on, the original turns off and the object is advanced down the barrel. This provides the acceleration. Traditional weapons use explosives, which produce recoil (it's really the Newtonian side effect of channeling that force into a linear vector). No explosion means no recoil.

/in space the changing location of the ballistic's gravity field could produce a similar effect in the opposite direction
 
2013-01-09 12:59:12 PM  
So should I take back my purple Nikes or what?
 
2013-01-09 12:59:17 PM  

KingsleyZisou: Heathen: Mr_Fabulous:

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?

My vote would be a Rail Gun, I don't know why it just sounds cool pelting that big rock with super speed objects to try and knock it off it's course

Now that has me thinking, so this question goes out to all those fark geeks out there (NTTIAWWT). My understanding is a rail gun uses magnets to accelerate an object. So if the rail gun was in space would there be a need for counter thrusters when the gun fires?

If I understand this correctly, the magnetic accelerators are pulling the ballistic. Pretty sure the recoil, at least on a terrestrial version, is negligible to nonexistent. In space, with no gravity well acting on the whole mechanism I'm not sure if you'd need the counter thrust or not.


I'm almost certain you would. It's the same as if you were in space and you threw a baseball. Because, here's the thing: When the magnets are 'pulling' the slug forwards, the slug is 'pulling' the magnets backwards with an equal force. Just as when you fall towards the earth, it's pulling you, but you're also pulling *it* up towards you with the exact same force. (But since F=mass*acceleration, and the earth is FRIGGEN HUGE, its acceleration is absurdly miniscule)
 
2013-01-09 01:02:11 PM  
Obviously we should outlaw asteroids.
 
2013-01-09 01:03:46 PM  

Felgraf: KingsleyZisou: Heathen: Mr_Fabulous:

Bottom line: what would we start doing now to fix this, and who would be the people working it out for the next 16 years?

My vote would be a Rail Gun, I don't know why it just sounds cool pelting that big rock with super speed objects to try and knock it off it's course

Now that has me thinking, so this question goes out to all those fark geeks out there (NTTIAWWT). My understanding is a rail gun uses magnets to accelerate an object. So if the rail gun was in space would there be a need for counter thrusters when the gun fires?

If I understand this correctly, the magnetic accelerators are pulling the ballistic. Pretty sure the recoil, at least on a terrestrial version, is negligible to nonexistent. In space, with no gravity well acting on the whole mechanism I'm not sure if you'd need the counter thrust or not.

I'm almost certain you would. It's the same as if you were in space and you threw a baseball. Because, here's the thing: When the magnets are 'pulling' the slug forwards, the slug is 'pulling' the magnets backwards with an equal force. Just as when you fall towards the earth, it's pulling you, but you're also pulling *it* up towards you with the exact same force. (But since F=mass*acceleration, and the earth is FRIGGEN HUGE, its acceleration is absurdly miniscule)


This makes sense to me. Thank you. It's hard to envision the cumulative effect on the weapon as each magnet takes its turn pulling the ballistic. Also, based on the equation, the ratio of m(gun) : m(bullet) comes into play.

/there's only one way to find out! Build it!
//and they will come
 
Displayed 50 of 198 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report