
TL;DR — Faster News - swader
http://toolong-didntread.com/
======
DanielBMarkham
I don't want to step on these guys' PR, but I do have a similar personal
project for anybody who is interested, <http://newspaper23.com>

Initially it's just an aggregator that presents commentary in plain text. I
plan on adding a summarizer one day. For a personal project, I've been using
it daily for over a year, so I know I find a lot of value in this type of
thing.

As sites try to get more sticky, the signal-to-noise ratio decreases. You
spend more time reading a lot of trivial articles that a Facebook friend
recommended instead of a few articles that you've scanned yourself. I know
Google and FB say social search is the cool thing, but in my experience the
only thing it does is increase consumption of mediocre shiny stuff. Much
better to pre-qualify sources and then control the depth of your dive. For
newspaper23, one of the original ideas was a timer for each day. 30 minutes of
scanning and the site would refuse to load until the next day.

I'd like to see more of this type of thing -- gearing content consumption to
humans instead of site creators and advertisers.

~~~
MichaelApproved
Looks like there are a few of us on HN trying to solve the news consumption
problem. My site[1] tries to crowdsource the summaries by encouraging the
readers to summarize a story themselves. In the meantime, we create most of
the summaries in-house.

Newser[2] tried to do the same thing but gave up and just focused on in-house
created summaries.

Regarding the summary process, it's good to see another group manually
summarizing posts as opposed to Summly[3] which tries automate the process.
For many reasons already stated in another comment[4], I don't think
automation will ever work.

Good luck to the guys over at <http://toolong-didntread.com> and
<http://newspaper23.com>. I hope one of us gets some real traction!

[1] <http://skimthat.com> [2] <http://www.newser.com/> [3]
<http://summly.com/> [4] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4741855>

Edit: Another product that tries to summarize news <http://cir.ca/>

~~~
brador
I'll add my baby to the pot: <http://skimfeed.com>.

~~~
mstefanko
This is actually really nice, well done. Hard to drop the frills for thrills
so to speak. This is a much more functional site than most of the similar
bootstrappy approaches, despite it looking like it came out of the 90s. It's
actually useful, I like.

------
macrael
If you haven't seen <http://evening-edition.com/> I highly reccomend it. It is
bite sized world news published every weekday at 5 pm in a few different
locales. The news is all written by a journalist, and they track some of the
same stories day to day. It's not trying to solve the same problem as this
site, and its not just summarizing articles you could read elsewhere. I've
been reading it pretty much every day for a few months; it's great.

~~~
antrix
Agreed. After their UK & France editions, I am hoping they'll launch an Asian
edition too.

------
slashcom
As an NLP researcher, this is interesting as a sort of summarization data set.

The thing is though, summarizing news articles is best done by just reading
the first paragraph of the article. News articles are intentionally written
this way, and it's a _very_ difficult baseline to beat in automatic
summarization.

Still nice site though.

~~~
crusso
No, the first paragraph of a news article is designed to give the reader just
enough information to get the gist of the article, but tease the reader into
continuing to read along.

On web sites, the goal is to get the user to click the "more" or "details"
link to get the whole article and thus display more ads.

The reality is that most of the "good stuff" for a news article _could_ be
summarized in a paragraph that would satisfy 90% of the need to read the full
article - but that would defeat the business model of most sites/media
dispensing news.

I like the idea of this site.

~~~
brnstz
What you're saying may be true of new media sites and investigative / gonzo /
entertainment journalism, but old school journalism 101 says the first
paragraph should be a summary for hard news stories. In fact, hard news should
be written such that you can chop off paragraphs in reverse order and still
have a sensible article.

~~~
mullr
100% agreed - that's what I learned to do in high school journalism class as
well. But there's lots of stuff on the web, even that's considered news, that
doesn't follow this format. Here's some first sentences from other Times
articles:

"The flesh is weak but the spirit of commerce is willing." (op-ed)

"Last weekend, my family and I packed our car full of supplies and drove to a
fire station in New Jersey to deliver goods to an area that had been hit hard
by Hurricane Sandy." (small business)

"Last April 28, a splendid spring Saturday that fairly begged you to be
outdoors, I spent all afternoon in front of my living-room TV, anxiously
watching the last day of the annual N.F.L. draft, live from Radio City Music
Hall. " (NY Times Magazine)

"The relocation of Albert C. Barnes’s great polyglot art collection to central
Philadelphia was opposed by many and dreaded by most." (A&E)

I guess my point is that journalism styles vary even within a publication.
Therefore, any automated attempt to simply use the first paragraph as a
summary is bound to be wrong a lot of the time. It would however be
interesting to use a human-generated summary dataset as the training data for
a "buries the lead" classifier. I'll bet you could do it with a bag-of-words
feature pretty easily, and that the most important words would be personal
pronouns.

~~~
brnstz
You're right, many "news" articles don't follow that traditional format. The
difference is that your examples are not the primary news article about an
important event. They are either commentary / color on an important event, an
opinion piece, or human interest piece about something interesting (but not
really "news"-worthy).

Of course, much of what is in the paper is not "hard news" so some sort of
automatic summarization could be useful for those pieces.

------
irahul
You probably already know that, but your "sponsors" page is completely broken
on my system, and it blames adblock.

Page:

[http://buysellads.com/buy/detail/158594?utm_source=shorturl&...](http://buysellads.com/buy/detail/158594?utm_source=shorturl&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=selfpromote)

Error message:

Does BuySellAds look broken? Disable your ad blocker, their haphazard default
filters sometimes break our site.

I don't care enough about you(yet) to disable adblock. I don't even know what
"sponsor" means in context of your site. I was just clicking around.

Also, you probably need it for tracking, but I don't like clicking on
<http://toolong-didntread.com/sponsorship> and being redirected to
[http://buysellads.com/buy/detail/158594?utm_source=shorturl&...](http://buysellads.com/buy/detail/158594?utm_source=shorturl&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=selfpromote)

------
tokenadult
I browsed around a bit to check it out. tl;dr: I can get the same use out of
Google News by customizing sections there and scanning headlines.

Longer comparison with the main competition: Google News also allows me to
group sources that are consistently reliable (which appear in an "Editors'
Picks" section that I can customize). The Spotlight section of Google News
seems to provide much of the same usability as the prototype site submitted
here, showing only headlines at a glance, but as another comment here has
already said, news stories are written with lede paragraphs to give you the
main idea rapidly.

The kind of automated curation and formatting I look for most in a news
aggregation site is not curation for short snippets and formatting for good-
looking white space, but curation for quality of content and formatting for
information density. As I have customized it on my browser, Google News
provides that.

I sympathize with anyone who feels too busy making a living to have time to
read. But when I can win reading time, I'm glad to read long articles, and I
still try to read actual books even in this era of most people doing a lot of
their reading online. I appreciate people working on the issue of getting more
reading done in less time, and meanwhile hope that the long writings continue
to get plenty of attention from thoughtful readers, and plenty of discussion
here among the busy participants on Hacker News.

~~~
MichaelApproved
_"I sympathize with anyone who feels too busy making a living to have time to
read."_

Yes, being too busy is one reason for wanting summarized news but it's not the
only reason.

Often, news stories are created for search engine consumption, not human
consumption. You find long articles full of repetitive information and
bloviating. A good summary can cut out everything but the basic facts of the
story so you're up to date on the news without having to consume all the
fluff.

Of course, liking summarized news doesn't mean you can't take the time to read
an in-depth article or a book. In fact, you probably have more time to do that
since you saved time with the TLDR version of the news.

~~~
goldfeld
Not to mention books which are often stuffed with lots of filler rehashing
points, to avoid being the below-hundred pages quick read it should have been.

------
cwilson
Would love to see a "top stories from last week" feature. Imagine I'm on
vacation, or I've just been too busy to keep up with current events but would
like to catch up.

This is nicely done. I'll be giving it a shot as a tab that never closes.

~~~
eterps
<http://hckrnews.com/> (for Hackernews posts)

~~~
cwilson
This is awesome, thank you.

------
nathan_long
Nice. My curmudgeonly response, though, is: "Now all we have to do is put
another TL;DR on top of that: a monthly or yearly summary of 'items that
actually mattered.'"

It's always interesting to pick up a newspaper from a year ago and see how few
items are worth reading anymore, and imagine how many stories I've read and
forgotten.

The same might be said for HN, for that matter... what am I doing here again?
;)

------
mstefanko
I've given a lot of thought to the TL;DR approach to content digestion. It
works extremely well, in a vacuum, or on the site it was made popular, reddit.
Their, the original poster writes the TL;DR, which is why it works so well. If
you write a large post, then immediately after summarize the post into 1-2
sentences, it becomes a very efficient message that still expresses exactly
what you wanted to get across. TL;DR is the future, almost to a sad degree. A
lot of time it digs deeper than just wanting to filter out the articles you
have no interest in reading. But this becomes the only form of digesting news.
You begin consuming a lot of news, stories, articles, but you're no longer
actually informed on any of the topics, you just end up with a vague idea of
what is going on around you. That's far beside the point though.

This is a actually a very nice effort.

The issues I have with growth and actual value, is with how the summaries are
generated. Automatic generation is fast and inaccurate, manually curated is
slow and very accurate. In a world where people no longer have the time to
read newspapers, their not only looking for quick news on the run, they want
current news. Something that happened today, everything that happened today.
But quick, not the full story, "i'll read that later." Meeting in the middle
between fast and slow approaches does not work here. You're too slow, and the
headlines in my RSS feed and twitter have already informed me of the news, too
fast and your summary becomes a failed attempt to make twitter and RSS better
quality. I have no idea how your TL;DR are currently generated. But I would
think you'd have an aggregation and be doing some manual curation. To me for
this to really work, you'd have to have a large group of people that read the
article generating the TL;DR, constantly iterating, until you end up with an
extremely efficient 2 sentence summary. Or there needs to be a project that
integrates TL;DR on large scale, the publishers, news papers of the world,
blogs..They submit these directly.

I think there's still a lot of value in what you're doing. I just don't think
it will take off as it is now. Away from the name/marketing/novelty/social
aspect not really being there. Twitter, RSS feeds, and sites like
<http://skimfeed.com/> end up providing me with far more day to day value. If
you took this and spoon-fed me the TL;DR via my phone, i'd consider being a
repeat visitor a little bit more. But you'd then be competing with a whole
'nother slice of the pie.

~~~
OafTobark
Thanks for including the skimfeed link. Didn't know they existed. I am
building out something almost exactly like their site but going to expand on
it a bit.

------
logn
Cool. I was just complaining how cluttered and junky Google News has been
looking lately. Way too many links, borders, and images. It used to feel so
clean compared to the other news sites. This is what I was looking for.

Also, how did you get the summaries? It's like you have some algorithm to re-
word the first paragraph of the story.

------
redcircle
Why do people put the TL;DR summary at the bottom? If the content is too long,
and I didn't read it, then I'm not going to see a summary at the bottom.
Abstracts, introductions, executive summaries, etc., go at the top. You don't
even have to call it one of those: the goal of good writing is to engage
people before they move onwards. I guess that locating it at the bottom is
equivalent to adding a conclusion, and I'll grant that some people skim to the
conclusion, rather than use the abstract/intro/exec-summary.

------
drd
Effective news consumption has been a huge problem since Internet got
exponentially publishing disease. Unfortunately today writing for some writers
and journalists is a matter of mass producing text not informing people.

I don’t think today’s technology can auto-summarize news for us properly. The
approach taken by TLDR is the correct one. The news should be summarized by
human to be useful.

To crowd source this function we can create groups of like-minded people.
Members of each group need to split the job. Such a process will save many
souls.

------
pasbesoin
I'm popping a comment in here without reading all the content (I guess there's
irony in that, if not disrespect, but I'm due shortly for a dinner party).
That said, my comment is that I don't mind the _length_ of articles so much as
the circumstance that _nobody_ seems to write in the "traditional", top-down
("inverted pyramid", etc., etc.) "newspaper" style, anymore.

In that style, a summary and broad overview with the most salient points, is
presented first. Then the article may delve into further detail. The reader
can quickly get an overview and then decide whether and how much further they
care to read into the details.

Instead, today everything seems to be written in a "narrative style". Often,
the first some paragraphs set the scene -- they're "atmosphere" -- sometimes
before the writer even deigns to tell you, the reader, what the story is
actually about.

Facts are interspersed throughout the remainder of the story, and often don't
even lead paragraphs but rather remain buried within them amidst a muddle of
further descriptive language.

For the conveyance of _news_ , it's actually quite crappy writing.

I hear/read that it's part and parcel of the push for everybody to have a
byline and to establish a "name" for themselves. Which I can in part
understand particularly in this day and age of contract work and zero job
security -- or even a job (as opposed to endless freelancing) per se.

But, for the seeking and consuming of _news_ , it sucks.

------
rhplus
I don't have a citation for this, but I read recently that BBC News articles
always lead with a concise one-sentence summary rather than something that
trails to ellipses... supposedly the original reason was to fit the text
within the fixed width of their CeeFax (Teletext) news pages. The result is
that their RSS feeds are still rather concisely descriptive.

[1]
[http://newsrss.bbc.co.uk/rss/newsonline_uk_edition/world/rss...](http://newsrss.bbc.co.uk/rss/newsonline_uk_edition/world/rss.xml)

------
billirvine
Common problem, problematic solution.

Humans, no matter how altruistic, have inherent bias that will influence their
selection of news to summarize, as well as the nature of their summarization.

Circa is another prime example of right idea, problematic solution. It gives
me news and photos with no attribution... not even bylines of whomever created
their shortened bits of things that they claim could be news. (intentional
sarcasm) There's no mechanism whereby I can learn to trust them, or toolong-
didntread.com.

~~~
sixbit
Hi Bill, if you hit the (i) info button on the top bar in the circa app it
will show the attribution for each point in a given story.

~~~
billirvine
Now I see that -- not sure why I didn't notice sooner (@@)

I wonder how many other users may have had a different takeaway of the product
if the attribution and sources was more obvious?

~~~
sixbit
We are definitely working on calling it out better in an update to the app.
Thanks for the feedback!

~~~
billirvine
Oh, you're associated with Circa.

As a digital publisher myself, I'm curious as to how you obtain the rights to
the images you're using in the app.

------
MojoJolo
If you want my "TextTeaser" (<http://textteaser.com/>) can really help provide
"faster news". I'm currently doing an API that accepts a URL as an input and
returns a JSON result that contains the following: title, url, sentences with
their respective scores.

The scores are based on title, sentence length and sentence position for now.
Because there are more to come. They are included in the JSON output.

------
czzarr
Seems like there are a lot of people trying to tackle this problem at the
moment. We are using a different route with our tl;dr Chrome extension for
Hacker News:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tldr/ohmamcbkcmfal...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tldr/ohmamcbkcmfalompaelgoepcnbnpiioe)

~~~
drakaal
I like
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tldr/giepilabiomhl...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tldr/giepilabiomhlcmlefmbfkgeoccfhhhc?hl=en-
US) better. It doesn't make you leave a website to get the summary and even
works with your email, and facebook.

------
rglover
Why don't people like to _read_ anymore?

~~~
MichaelApproved
Reading news isnt necessarily recreational for everyone. Just because someone
want to stay informed about current events in a concise manner, doesn't mean
they don't like to read. You can consume the news quickly and take your time
reading something else that you enjoy.

~~~
rglover
That's what I assumed, but what happens if I'm in a conversation and my
knowledge is only as long as the little blurb I just read?

Ultimately it ends up devaluing my conversation and _could_ make for an
awkward experience. Better to be oblivious to something rather than semi-
educated. So if I'm honest and say "no, I haven't read that," the person I'm
speaking with can fill me in and we can have a great talk.

There's a little term I came across a few years ago that's brilliant: info
snacking. Paralleled with a healthy diet (food), too much "snacking" can
result in poor health. Same thing here: without substance you're but a balloon
waiting to be popped.

~~~
MichaelApproved
I see your point but what I'm trying to do with my site Skim That[1] is
actually convey nearly all the information in a source story. So, if you just
read the summary and someone else reads the source, you should both be able to
have a conversation on the same level.

[1] <http://skimthat.com>

------
corporalagumbo
Nice clear tablet-friendly design. Bold to go with text-only too. How is this
news chosen and paraphrased though?

~~~
cskau
The info page[0] says a little more, though not much. The news seems simply
selected by the small handful of guys behind it, rewritten and posted
manually.

This being HN and all I must admit I had my hopes up for something more ..
technical. Some kind of text summariser perhaps..

Nice site never the less.

[0] <http://toolong-didntread.com/info>

~~~
jimsilverman
agreed. the current "hand curated" approach does not seem sustainable in the
long term.

it's already showing some quite old news as a result. the new jersey
earthquake was several weeks ago, positioned as the third "world news" story.

great concept and design, though.

~~~
logn
>the current "hand curated" approach does not seem sustainable in the long
term

I disagree. I had the same idea for a news site and I'm disappointed they beat
me to it. I think it would only take me maybe 30-minutes to and hour to
summarize the news of the moment. Do it three times a day. How hard is that?
You could easily hire extremely smart people to do this. What English major at
a top college wouldn't love to put this on his/her resume for some extra beer
money?

~~~
louischatriot
It is in fact pretty hard :) We are working on content summarization too, with
a Chrome extension that lets you read a human written summary of Hacker News
frontpage links. Writing the summaries and making sure you're up to date takes
time. You need to make sure you stick to the author's point of view, that you
really understand the article in depth and groked the key points. Of course it
depends on the article you summarize but I can spend a good 30 minutes on one
article by Paul Graham or Mark Suster.

PS: the chrome extension I'm talking about is here:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tldr/ohmamcbkcmfal...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tldr/ohmamcbkcmfalompaelgoepcnbnpiioe)
(same one czzarr is referring to)

------
nickbarone
There's something missing from the summaries: An indication of how much there
is to read when non-summarized / how wrong the summary might be.

Two of my favorite examples for this are the DCA cancer treatment news and
those people who don't pay for fire protection in counties that don't require
it; the typical headlines are "Canada Cures Cancer" and "Firemen stand by as
house burns down". The former isn't very true and there's a fair amount to
read, while the latter is entirely true, only missing a little, critical, bit.

To put it another way, you're teaching me something with all those summaries,
but you're NOT teaching me how much I don't know or when to go look up more
information, and I think you should try.

------
lutusp
This tl;dr thing can be taken too far --

"War and Peace", Leo Tolstoy, 1,225 pages : it's about Russia.

"Hindenburg" : a really nice dirigible, until something bad happened in New
Jersey.

"Adolf Hitler" : politician, didn't like Jews very much.

"Helen of Troy" : nice-looking woman.

"Calculus" : a province somewhere north of algebra.

------
swader
While I feel like this is a very interesting initiative, my distrust in
humankind makes me fear bias and sponsorship. What if a big sponsor decides
competitor news are to be ignored and their own news are to be kept at the top
longer?

~~~
OafTobark
Talk to yourself much?

~~~
swader
Ain't my site. I just posted the link and expressed my opinion on it.

------
ErikGelderblom
Compared to all the others, I really like this execution of the simple, eye
friendly design and the color coding. Well done! A small source url after the
headline like reddit and HN do, would be a welcome addition imo.

~~~
genwin
Would a small source url still have benefit when there are thousands of unique
domains possible? I think it would be ignored by most people.

------
pseut
Is this trying to be, "headlines done right," "a newspaper's home page done
right," or something else? FWIW a combination of twitter and the BBC's mobile
site[1] work for me.

I was surprised that Gaza was mentioned on your front page but not world news
(at 10:20 ET) and that a 2.0 earthquake in new jersey made world news.

[1] <http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world>

EDIT: after thinking about it some more, I'm still not sure how your website
is different than, "We opened a Tumblr and/or Twitter account." There are lots
of link blogs.

------
iamdave
Caveat: Not speaking against you (the developers of this) or the work you put
into it, but instead against the notion behind this trend of summarizing the
news: Why?

That's a curious "Why", not a crotchety "Why". Lots of people are talking
about browser extensions that summarize the news or are linking to other
sources that do this; is the state of journalism so that a summary is _better_
than what media outlets produce because of excessive filler (redundancy
department all hands alert), or because we don't like reading anymore?

~~~
petercooper
People are short of time and want to feel they've skimmed enough news to feel
up to date to catch cultural references, bluff their way through a discussion,
or notice things 'on the radar' that might be directly relevant to them.

Reading full form journalism is great but if you had to do it for 100 news
stories a day, your day is gone. And, right or wrong, many people want to get
a breadth of information and then focus on a few parts of it, rather than
solely consume a deep amount of information.

Newspapers used to fulfil this role quite well. You could "scan" a paper in 20
minutes and feel reasonably up to date. But "scanning" online is somewhat
trickier because of the format. So these services seem to try and bridge that
gap of offering you a ton of headlines and summaries all in one place.

------
joelthelion
I have a request: make a "real news" feed, which is only about things that
will actually make your life a bit different. Two or three items a week would
be a maximum.

------
abalashov
Torn about whether to praise or damn this. On the one hand, I'm critical of
modern attention spans, laziness and ADD-addled brains (allegedly) that don't
have the discipline and intellectual wherewithal to actually focus on a single
thought for a whole minute or more.

On the other hand, far too much of journalistic prose (and even more so,
speech) in mainstream media is contentless fluff.

------
hdragomir
If it would create separate twitter accounts per section (like tech) and
autopost stuff there, that would be a major win.

------
mysteryleo
Weird. I like how hacker news is all text and read it daily.

But I could see my eyes getting bored after a while on tldr. I much prefer
this layout <http://www.rawsignal.com/>

Optimized for fast consumption or just dicking around.

------
pseut
One point in addition to what I posted earlier: check out the old (maybe the
original) version of Slate's "Today's Papers." It was awesome: a ~1 page prose
summary of the major newspapers every morning. The Slatest is but a pale
shadow.

------
damian2000
Good to see these guys are from Perth, Western Australia. We need more
startups here!

------
lambersley
There was a previous discussion on this topic (1) but I found skimthat.com
served useful information to me via daily email.

(1) <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4734654>

------
allsystemsgo
I like the idea. I really do. But doesn't twitter do a lot of this already?

Good luck to you.

------
JeremyMorgan
Recently someone did this to one of my articles and I think they did an
excellent job summarizing it, and it got me hooked on reading similar stories.
It's a good idea to capture interest and save time

------
iaskwhy
The idea is good but the implementation is what sets it apart, good work!

------
azinman2
I love how the featured news contained like 90% tech, and not even a single
mention of the current war between Hamas & Israel... with a cease fire
brokered by Egypt already.

Priorities?

~~~
billirvine
Human bias.

------
j2labs
That's an amusingly long URL, given the context of the name...

------
jnazario
i like it, guys! neat! i share the concern about sustainability if humans
drive it, but beyond that well done.

i do a sector (infosec) specific site for myself and a handful of friends
using twitter to seed links and libots to summarize, works like a champ and
has been running solidly and automatically for over 3 years. could be easy to
retarget. python, mysql, libots powers it, think delicious+twitter.

------
abemassry
Did something very similar to this in node with socket.io realtime updates.
<http://mashrd.com/>

------
mea36
I like this, it's simple and easy to skim. I'd suggest adding date/time so the
user knows when the article was published.

------
luckysh0t
<http://www.reddit.com/r/tldr>

I'm not sure there's any advancement here.

------
tanaytandon
clipped.me/tftrial check it out - Its a one man teen startup - would love to
get feedback from the community!

------
g3orge
I'd like to see the favicons of the original poster's website added.

------
samspot
I will always maintain that "summary" is easier to type than "TL;DR"

------
Jemaclus
This is one of those things I wish I'd thought of first. Good job!

------
dev360
If this was done algorithmically, then it would be way cool.

------
halayli
I like using nextly.com for the same reason.

------
robmcm
Amazing, still only read the titles though!

------
viggity
wow. I can't count the number of times I've thought about doing something
similar. looks like I don't need to now.

------
elliott99
I like Prismatic. Why is that not popular?

------
nathell
The domain name seems slightly TL;DR.

~~~
criswell
tldr.com would be such a sweet domain name. It doesn't look like it's getting
much use right now, either. I wonder if they'd sell.

------
perfunctory
What is their business model?

------
olog-hai
No feed.

~~~
rogem002
Yeah there is: <http://toolong-didntread.com/feed>

------
amanuel
I always had thought it was TooLazy;Didn'tRead....I guess TooLong also works.

~~~
OafTobark
First time I've heard of Too Lazy. But makes sense. Always known it as Too
Long

------
tolos
isn't that the point of headlines?

------
jackyyappp
love the idea.

