Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them.

I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
82 Posts 64 Posters 77 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • pojntfx@mastodon.socialP pojntfx@mastodon.social

    @mitchellh One of the best descriptions I've heard lately was that it feels like "losing coworkers to dementia" as people adopt it, where everyone feels like they know everything, but when you talk with them in person or there is a problem that needs to be fixed _now_ it becomes very clear that the capability to do that has atrophied basically completely

    commonst@social.vivaldi.netC This user is from outside of this forum
    commonst@social.vivaldi.netC This user is from outside of this forum
    commonst@social.vivaldi.net
    wrote last edited by
    #67

    @pojntfx @mitchellh this nails how I have been feeling at work lately. As more people adopt and push AI, it's like seeing more people lose their abilities at a level similar to some senior relatives losing their faculties. Well worded.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

      I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

      I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

      It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

      The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

      We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

      I worry.

      n_dimension@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
      n_dimension@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
      n_dimension@infosec.exchange
      wrote last edited by
      #68

      @mitchellh

      Conversely, there is entire cohorts of folks who are in depths of severe #Ai anxiety.

      There is no point having a conversation with them because they are entirely irrational.

      I worry.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

        I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

        I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

        It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

        The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

        We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

        I worry.

        rene_mobile@infosec.exchangeR This user is from outside of this forum
        rene_mobile@infosec.exchangeR This user is from outside of this forum
        rene_mobile@infosec.exchange
        wrote last edited by
        #69

        @mitchellh We've also learned the lesson (at least in security) to not mix code and data, yet all LLMs intrinsically repeat those mistakes.

        We're living through a time of forgotten history, which is kind-of funny-but-not-really in computer science when the main crowd having learned these lessons is still around and - quite ironically - now often in middle to upper management.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

          I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

          I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

          It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

          The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

          We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

          I worry.

          humanhorseshoes@mastodon.worldH This user is from outside of this forum
          humanhorseshoes@mastodon.worldH This user is from outside of this forum
          humanhorseshoes@mastodon.world
          wrote last edited by
          #70

          @mitchellh To a man with only a hammer every problem is a nail

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

            I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

            I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

            It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

            The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

            We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

            I worry.

            theonedoc@tech.lgbtT This user is from outside of this forum
            theonedoc@tech.lgbtT This user is from outside of this forum
            theonedoc@tech.lgbt
            wrote last edited by
            #71

            @mitchellh let it burn. That's what they want that's what they get.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

              I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

              I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

              It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

              The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

              We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

              I worry.

              aristot73@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
              aristot73@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
              aristot73@infosec.exchange
              wrote last edited by
              #72

              @mitchellh code rot

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • pojntfx@mastodon.socialP pojntfx@mastodon.social

                @mitchellh One of the best descriptions I've heard lately was that it feels like "losing coworkers to dementia" as people adopt it, where everyone feels like they know everything, but when you talk with them in person or there is a problem that needs to be fixed _now_ it becomes very clear that the capability to do that has atrophied basically completely

                ojocle_olonam@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                ojocle_olonam@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                ojocle_olonam@mastodon.social
                wrote last edited by
                #73

                @pojntfx @mitchellh I have seen the same behavior even with capable engineers that in the past I knew as strong designers and code quality champions now reduced to faith followers with 2 or 3 agents working on different branches of the same project at the same time and really not understanding or owning anything and still feeling top performers.
                I do agree it looks very much like a dementia

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

                  I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

                  I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

                  It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

                  The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

                  We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

                  I worry.

                  robinsyl@meow.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                  robinsyl@meow.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                  robinsyl@meow.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #74

                  @mitchellh I thought devs get chewed out for prod going down, and now management is normalizing prod going down? I feel like I first observed the change when Elon bought Twitter, and everyone was applauding his cost cutting and that Twitter only went down a couple times, when in the past every single downtime was significant.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

                    I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

                    I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

                    It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

                    The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

                    We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

                    I worry.

                    3dcandy@mastodon.social3 This user is from outside of this forum
                    3dcandy@mastodon.social3 This user is from outside of this forum
                    3dcandy@mastodon.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #75

                    @mitchellh obviously written by a pissed sentient AI agent.....

                    😋

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • datenwolf@chaos.socialD datenwolf@chaos.social

                      @cczona @pojntfx

                      I wonder how long it will take for the rest of the world to a) realize what's going on, b) arrive at the objectively valid conclusion and c) act on it and see it through.

                      Recently past experience (COVID-19) shows that being a tall order.

                      Anyway, I wonder when, if so, people who actively rejected contact with LLMs will be in extremely high demand, being knowledge bearers in teaching and technical lead positions.

                      crell@phpc.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                      crell@phpc.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                      crell@phpc.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #76

                      @datenwolf @cczona @pojntfx The longer this goes on, the fewer of us will be left. And we're suffering in the meantime.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

                        I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

                        I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

                        It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

                        The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

                        We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

                        I worry.

                        tanyelcakmak@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                        tanyelcakmak@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                        tanyelcakmak@mastodon.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #77

                        @mitchellh MTBF vs MTTR is a symptom, not the disease.

                        The real question: when an AI-driven system causes harm, where does accountability live?

                        Failures get attributed to the AI, successes claimed by humans, liability dissolves into complexity.

                        We don't need humans to understand the system. We need governance architecture. Without that, MTTR is just failing faster and cleaner.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

                          I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

                          I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

                          It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

                          The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

                          We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

                          I worry.

                          bearbob@hachyderm.ioB This user is from outside of this forum
                          bearbob@hachyderm.ioB This user is from outside of this forum
                          bearbob@hachyderm.io
                          wrote last edited by
                          #78

                          @mitchellh I also constantly worry about „becoming one of them“ because I do think there are some cool use cases but they are not close to what some colleagues tell me it will be able to do (and I don’t see it happening) and it does not outweigh the negative impact in any moment

                          Link Preview Image
                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • pgoultiaev@hachyderm.ioP pgoultiaev@hachyderm.io

                            @mitchellh Unfortunately, changing a very convinced person’s view to a different perspective is almost impossible.
                            Not enough things have gone wrong due to AI psychosis for people to augment their perspectives and be open to helpful discussions… yes, databases have been wiped etc., but these examples are (unfortunately) seen as one-offs.
                            I feel like discussing the approach to how to apply AI in the best way can bring perspectives together instead of battling an opposing view.

                            bearbob@hachyderm.ioB This user is from outside of this forum
                            bearbob@hachyderm.ioB This user is from outside of this forum
                            bearbob@hachyderm.io
                            wrote last edited by
                            #79

                            @pgoultiaev @mitchellh the issue with these „one-off“ failure cases is lack of empathy. They are seen as stupid mistakes by stupid people. I am smart, surely this won’t happen to me. So I don’t need to take any learnings from there, especially not questioning if this has any implications for the road I am travelling.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

                              I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

                              I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

                              It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

                              The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

                              We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

                              I worry.

                              mloxton@zeroes.caM This user is from outside of this forum
                              mloxton@zeroes.caM This user is from outside of this forum
                              mloxton@zeroes.ca
                              wrote last edited by
                              #80

                              @mitchellh
                              Knowledge Management and Application Support guy here.

                              What I see is a whole lot of faith-based planning that resembles the "innovation fairy" claptrap of years before. Companies are charging into the world while caving out experienced and trained people to save money in the belief, hope, prayer that the AI fairy will be there to catch them and build foundations under the causeway they are on.

                              There is no evidence or past performance to suggest the AI fairy will come through, and every indication that it won't

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • mitchellh@hachyderm.ioM mitchellh@hachyderm.io

                                I strongly believe there are entire companies right now under heavy AI psychosis and its impossible to have rational conversations about it with them. I can't name any specific people because they include personal friends I deeply respect, but I worry about how this plays out.

                                I lived through the great MTBF vs MTTR (mean-time-between-failure vs. mean-time-to-recovery) reckoning of infrastructure during the transition to cloud and cloud automation. All those arguments are rearing their ugly heads again but now its... the whole software development industry (maybe the whole world, really).

                                It's frightening, because the psychosis folks operate under an almost absolute "MTTR is all you need" mentality: "its fine to ship bugs because the agents will fix them so quickly and at a scale humans can't do!" We learned in infrastructure that MTTR is great but you can't yeet resilient systems entirely.

                                The main issue is I don't even know how to bring this up to people I know personally, because bringing this topic up leads to immediately dismissals like "no no, it has full test coverage" or "bug reports are going down" or something, which just don't paint the whole picture.

                                We already learned this lesson once in infrastructure: you can automate yourself into a very resilient catastrophe machine. Systems can appear healthy by local metrics while globally becoming incomprehensible. Bug reports can go down while latent risk explodes. Test coverage can rise while semantic understanding falls. Changes happens so fast that nobody notices the underlying architecture decaying.

                                I worry.

                                cppguy@infosec.spaceC This user is from outside of this forum
                                cppguy@infosec.spaceC This user is from outside of this forum
                                cppguy@infosec.space
                                wrote last edited by
                                #81

                                @mitchellh

                                I agree with the broad brush strokes, but companies are not monolithic. For example, Management at my employer is completely AI-pilled, but my immediate team is much more sceptical about it, perhaps because we understand the technicalities better than Management does, and perhaps because it's hard to be enthusiastic about something that threatens wholesale job losses.

                                So there's tension within the organisation: pressure to adopt AI, good reasons not to, and a wide range of opinions represented.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • pojntfx@mastodon.socialP pojntfx@mastodon.social

                                  @mitchellh I would love to see someone commission a study on this. It _feels_ like things are in general getting less reliable atm, esp. the stack I rely on for work (GitHub, Linear, Slack, Notion, VSCode, <insert-tui-tool-here>), but then I can't find any data on any of it.

                                  cppguy@infosec.spaceC This user is from outside of this forum
                                  cppguy@infosec.spaceC This user is from outside of this forum
                                  cppguy@infosec.space
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #82

                                  @pojntfx @mitchellh

                                  Agreed. But I think it's worth distinguishing between two aspects of this decrease in reliability: one is the increasing use of #LLMs to write shoddy code that would previously have been written better by humans, but the other is the use of LLMs to find longstanding bugs in code written years ago by humans. The former is a real decrease in reliability; the other is illusory.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  Reply
                                  • Reply as topic
                                  Log in to reply
                                  • Oldest to Newest
                                  • Newest to Oldest
                                  • Most Votes


                                  • Login

                                  • Login or register to search.
                                  • First post
                                    Last post
                                  0
                                  • Categories
                                  • Recent
                                  • Tags
                                  • Popular
                                  • World
                                  • Users
                                  • Groups