WEBVTT Kind: captions Language: en 00:00:00.040 --> 00:00:00.610 Here's an idea. 00:00:00.610 --> 00:00:02.886 Certain parts of the internet have their own dialects. 00:00:07.500 --> 00:00:10.100 I've joked more than once that the internet is my home town. 00:00:10.100 --> 00:00:12.516 And I want to be completely clear that that is not a joke. 00:00:12.516 --> 00:00:13.930 I am literally from the internet. 00:00:13.930 --> 00:00:14.430 OK. 00:00:14.430 --> 00:00:15.590 Really, I'm from Massachusetts. 00:00:15.590 --> 00:00:18.089 But I have been wondering, in the way that most of my family 00:00:18.089 --> 00:00:21.390 has a strong Boston accent, do I or other people 00:00:21.390 --> 00:00:23.530 have internet accents? 00:00:23.530 --> 00:00:24.504 Is that a thing? 00:00:24.504 --> 00:00:25.920 Is there some part of the internet 00:00:25.920 --> 00:00:28.020 that I sound like I am from? 00:00:28.020 --> 00:00:29.830 I mean, it's probably not an accent, 00:00:29.830 --> 00:00:31.304 because accents are pronunciation. 00:00:31.304 --> 00:00:33.220 And on the internet, you don't talk, you type. 00:00:33.220 --> 00:00:35.210 And when you're reading what I have written, 00:00:35.210 --> 00:00:36.460 I'm not doing the pronouncing. 00:00:36.460 --> 00:00:38.750 You are, in your head. 00:00:38.750 --> 00:00:41.210 Unless I start writing like James Joyce, I guess. 00:00:41.210 --> 00:00:43.160 We know you like Latin with essies impures, 00:00:43.160 --> 00:00:45.650 and your liber as they sea, we certney like gurgles, 00:00:45.650 --> 00:00:47.830 love the nagleygargley, so arrahbeejee. 00:00:47.830 --> 00:00:50.790 So maybe on the internet, it's not an accent but a dialect. 00:00:50.790 --> 00:00:52.770 Dialects account for pronunciation, but also 00:00:52.770 --> 00:00:55.120 word choice, vocabulary, how those words are 00:00:55.120 --> 00:00:56.420 arranged and used. 00:00:56.420 --> 00:00:58.740 Usually, we take dialect to indicate a group of people 00:00:58.740 --> 00:01:01.300 in a place, like southern American English, Rioplatense 00:01:01.300 --> 00:01:04.080 Spanish, or the Norrland dialects of northern Sweden. 00:01:04.080 --> 00:01:06.450 But These are simply regional dialects. 00:01:06.450 --> 00:01:09.330 Dialect refers to any characteristic use of language 00:01:09.330 --> 00:01:13.160 by a group of people-- a region, ethnicity, social class-- 00:01:13.160 --> 00:01:16.000 including uses that don't really sound characteristic, 00:01:16.000 --> 00:01:19.880 like Midwestern American English or, quote, general American, 00:01:19.880 --> 00:01:22.680 the seemingly featureless dialect of American English 00:01:22.680 --> 00:01:24.880 that most national newscasters speak. 00:01:24.880 --> 00:01:26.860 I'm chasing down leads and practicing 00:01:26.860 --> 00:01:28.172 my non-regional diction. 00:01:28.172 --> 00:01:29.630 And speaking of speaking of which, 00:01:29.630 --> 00:01:32.050 since American English is the thing I speak the most, 00:01:32.050 --> 00:01:33.510 besides highly of Chris Pratt, it's 00:01:33.510 --> 00:01:36.430 gonna have to be the lingua franca for this episode. 00:01:36.430 --> 00:01:38.366 I'm sure all of this stuff applies really well 00:01:38.366 --> 00:01:39.740 to other languages and internets, 00:01:39.740 --> 00:01:42.320 and I hope that you'll tell me how in the comments. 00:01:42.320 --> 00:01:44.200 So then I wonder, if there is such a thing 00:01:44.200 --> 00:01:47.630 as general American internet variety, 00:01:47.630 --> 00:01:52.790 a kind of uninflected standard dialect of internet English. 00:01:52.790 --> 00:01:53.640 I think so. 00:01:53.640 --> 00:01:56.100 I think it's marked by the use of common acronyms 00:01:56.100 --> 00:01:58.600 and emoticons, lots of which are shared with SMS 00:01:58.600 --> 00:02:00.900 speak, maybe a nervously deployed 00:02:00.900 --> 00:02:04.100 hash tag or the occasional nonstandard abbreviation, 00:02:04.100 --> 00:02:07.330 maybe the only semi self-conscious use of the word 00:02:07.330 --> 00:02:08.690 selfie. 00:02:08.690 --> 00:02:10.320 I think of general internet English 00:02:10.320 --> 00:02:13.040 as being used by those with no particular internet 00:02:13.040 --> 00:02:16.630 affiliation, or who are old. 00:02:16.630 --> 00:02:19.760 General internet English is an email from your coworker 00:02:19.760 --> 00:02:22.430 who really enjoys going jet skiing. 00:02:22.430 --> 00:02:25.761 It's the opposite end of the spectrum from, say, /b/. 00:02:25.761 --> 00:02:27.260 And here, I think it's worth pausing 00:02:27.260 --> 00:02:30.150 to say that it is always irresponsible to confidently 00:02:30.150 --> 00:02:33.370 proclaim that all people in X location do Y thing. 00:02:33.370 --> 00:02:35.460 I think all of my generalizations 00:02:35.460 --> 00:02:37.770 have at least one foot in reality. 00:02:37.770 --> 00:02:40.070 But if you disagree, I hope you will tell me why. 00:02:40.070 --> 00:02:43.220 So that being said, lots of the boards on 4chan have clearly 00:02:43.220 --> 00:02:44.720 identifiable ways of communicating, 00:02:44.720 --> 00:02:47.300 but /b/'s is more so. 00:02:47.300 --> 00:02:49.770 Many anons on /b/ make liberal use of epithets 00:02:49.770 --> 00:02:53.040 for homosexuality, describe people or media as cancer, 00:02:53.040 --> 00:02:55.270 and generally traffic in conversation unsuitable 00:02:55.270 --> 00:02:58.500 for your run of the mill grandma, Let's say. 00:02:58.500 --> 00:03:00.850 Some features of communication, like green texting, 00:03:00.850 --> 00:03:03.780 which isn't particular to /b/ but 4chan as a whole, 00:03:03.780 --> 00:03:07.320 exists because the code of 4chan provides it. 00:03:07.320 --> 00:03:10.930 This is an important part of the equation-- available technology 00:03:10.930 --> 00:03:14.440 influencing components of mediated communication. 00:03:14.440 --> 00:03:16.380 For example, the fact that Tumblr animates 00:03:16.380 --> 00:03:19.970 gifs in stream made them important and powerfully 00:03:19.970 --> 00:03:22.750 expressive there, which is funny because while gifs might 00:03:22.750 --> 00:03:25.700 be powerfully expressive, the stereotypical Tumblr text 00:03:25.700 --> 00:03:29.530 post lacks effusiveness-- all lowercase, very fluid, 00:03:29.530 --> 00:03:30.470 no punctuation. 00:03:30.470 --> 00:03:33.350 It's like Cormac McCarthy without capital letters, 00:03:33.350 --> 00:03:36.280 and channeling some kind of recognizable quirkiness instead 00:03:36.280 --> 00:03:38.660 of frustration at the futility of justice 00:03:38.660 --> 00:03:39.840 in a society on the brink. 00:03:39.840 --> 00:03:43.260 MAN: TBH, I literally say "literally" and "TBH" 00:03:43.260 --> 00:03:45.650 literally all the time, TBH. 00:03:45.650 --> 00:03:47.810 Anyway, TBH we could literally spend 00:03:47.810 --> 00:03:49.900 the rest of the day talking about how people talk. 00:03:49.900 --> 00:03:53.070 But I still have some questions, and we're be running out 00:03:53.070 --> 00:03:53.976 of time here. 00:03:53.976 --> 00:03:55.600 Doesn't there seem to be something more 00:03:55.600 --> 00:03:57.940 to these couple examples than just this is 00:03:57.940 --> 00:03:59.070 how these people talk? 00:03:59.070 --> 00:04:01.210 More than simply words and how they're used, 00:04:01.210 --> 00:04:04.290 it also seems to reflect the values and norms 00:04:04.290 --> 00:04:05.650 of the community itself. 00:04:05.650 --> 00:04:09.830 Tumblr's stereotypical text post is hesitant, even vulnerable, 00:04:09.830 --> 00:04:12.440 on a website where many people value sensitivity 00:04:12.440 --> 00:04:15.540 and occasionally become so emotional that they simply 00:04:15.540 --> 00:04:17.589 cannot even-- myself included. 00:04:17.589 --> 00:04:22.560 I frequently am just completely unable to even, 00:04:22.560 --> 00:04:24.840 especially if there's a Chris Pratt gif set involved. 00:04:24.840 --> 00:04:25.515 What? 00:04:25.515 --> 00:04:25.790 I literally can't even. 00:04:25.790 --> 00:04:26.670 I'm done. 00:04:26.670 --> 00:04:29.890 /b/ is a very fast paced environment concerned with very 00:04:29.890 --> 00:04:32.440 particular aspects of the internet and culture. 00:04:32.440 --> 00:04:35.360 It appears unwelcoming to most newcomers, 00:04:35.360 --> 00:04:37.170 and its language reflects that. 00:04:37.170 --> 00:04:39.730 This isn't necessarily true of dialects which, yes, 00:04:39.730 --> 00:04:42.370 are particular uses of language, but don't really account 00:04:42.370 --> 00:04:44.150 for any kind of value system. 00:04:44.150 --> 00:04:46.780 The fact that Rhode Islanders use "cabinet" for "milkshake" 00:04:46.780 --> 00:04:49.060 or that Bostonians call the person who repairs shoes 00:04:49.060 --> 00:04:51.840 a "cobbler" doesn't arise from any attitude 00:04:51.840 --> 00:04:55.060 about dairy products, loafers, or being from New England. 00:04:55.060 --> 00:04:56.600 My boy's wicked smart. 00:04:56.600 --> 00:04:59.170 So maybe we're not talking about dialects? 00:04:59.170 --> 00:05:00.820 Educational theorist Etienne Wenger 00:05:00.820 --> 00:05:03.130 wrote about communities of practice, 00:05:03.130 --> 00:05:06.000 which describe roughly-- very roughly-- 00:05:06.000 --> 00:05:08.100 people who do things together. 00:05:08.100 --> 00:05:09.990 The concept of practice, he wrote, 00:05:09.990 --> 00:05:13.890 connotes doing, but not just doing in and of itself. 00:05:13.890 --> 00:05:16.950 It is doing in a historical and social context that 00:05:16.950 --> 00:05:20.170 gives structure and meaning to what we do. 00:05:20.170 --> 00:05:24.130 In this sense, practice is always social practice. 00:05:24.130 --> 00:05:26.610 Communities forming around said practice share 00:05:26.610 --> 00:05:29.660 all kinds of stuff, including but not limited to, quote, 00:05:29.660 --> 00:05:32.770 untold rules of thumb, recognizable intuitions, 00:05:32.770 --> 00:05:37.680 specific perceptions, well-tuned sensitivities, and shared world 00:05:37.680 --> 00:05:38.495 views. 00:05:38.495 --> 00:05:40.435 I know you all in for just enough. 00:05:40.435 --> 00:05:42.500 For Wenger, the idea of communities of practice 00:05:42.500 --> 00:05:44.830 is rooted in education, specifically 00:05:44.830 --> 00:05:46.850 about interests and professions. 00:05:46.850 --> 00:05:49.540 But its uses are really wide ranging. 00:05:49.540 --> 00:05:51.180 Linguistics professor Penelope Eckert, 00:05:51.180 --> 00:05:53.080 who you might remember from our BMO episode, 00:05:53.080 --> 00:05:55.590 wrote about how communities of practice, because they 00:05:55.590 --> 00:05:57.130 share all of those things, can have 00:05:57.130 --> 00:05:59.610 very strong linguistic aspects. 00:05:59.610 --> 00:06:01.550 Speakers develop linguistic patterns 00:06:01.550 --> 00:06:04.650 as they engage in activity in the communities in which they 00:06:04.650 --> 00:06:06.230 participate, she writes. 00:06:06.230 --> 00:06:09.280 And later, social identity, community membership, 00:06:09.280 --> 00:06:13.800 forms of participation, the full range of community practice, 00:06:13.800 --> 00:06:16.430 and the symbolic value of linguistic form 00:06:16.430 --> 00:06:19.250 are being constantly and mutually constructed. 00:06:19.250 --> 00:06:21.500 Eckert was writing specifically about the construction 00:06:21.500 --> 00:06:21.999 of gender. 00:06:21.999 --> 00:06:24.120 But her thesis still applies, I think. 00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:26.890 In short, what you do, who you do it with, 00:06:26.890 --> 00:06:30.490 how you talk about it, how the talking advertises or supports 00:06:30.490 --> 00:06:33.210 the doing, and how you self-identify 00:06:33.210 --> 00:06:37.529 as a doer of things are all very intimately linked. 00:06:37.529 --> 00:06:40.070 Captain Rachel on Twitter let me know that alternatively, you 00:06:40.070 --> 00:06:42.290 could call these speech communities, a term 00:06:42.290 --> 00:06:44.920 with a separate but related background and connotation, 00:06:44.920 --> 00:06:48.250 lacking a specific emphasis on doing stuff, 00:06:48.250 --> 00:06:51.150 but with a similar insistence that members share, quote, 00:06:51.150 --> 00:06:54.540 language ideology, beliefs about language, identity, 00:06:54.540 --> 00:06:58.260 and membership, and attitudes towards language use. 00:06:58.260 --> 00:07:01.230 Of course, people rarely belong to just one community 00:07:01.230 --> 00:07:03.360 of practice or speech community. 00:07:03.360 --> 00:07:05.170 Like Settlers of Catan, your alliances 00:07:05.170 --> 00:07:08.620 are always changing, intensifying, attenuating, 00:07:08.620 --> 00:07:10.880 and with them, the way you communicate. 00:07:10.880 --> 00:07:15.380 So maybe I talk more Tumblrish on Tumblr and less Twitterese 00:07:15.380 --> 00:07:16.290 on Facebook. 00:07:16.290 --> 00:07:18.590 Maybe sometimes my Something Awful or IRC days 00:07:18.590 --> 00:07:22.010 ring through when I want to feel cool or let someone else 00:07:22.010 --> 00:07:24.030 know that I know what's up. 00:07:24.030 --> 00:07:26.270 And oh, on the original topic of pronunciation, 00:07:26.270 --> 00:07:28.550 I am trying to adopt the Idea Channel 00:07:28.550 --> 00:07:32.150 native pronunciation of zhaif, because I do really 00:07:32.150 --> 00:07:32.822 want to fit in. 00:07:32.822 --> 00:07:33.780 What do you guys think? 00:07:33.780 --> 00:07:36.640 What are the recognizable speech communities on the internet? 00:07:36.640 --> 00:07:40.640 And do their characteristics say something about that community? 00:07:40.640 --> 00:07:41.950 Let us know in the comments. 00:07:41.950 --> 00:07:45.340 And unbeknownst to you would ire turn o'er see, 00:07:45.340 --> 00:07:47.600 a nuncio would I return here. 00:07:47.600 --> 00:07:48.730 Subscribe. 00:07:48.730 --> 00:07:50.270 It doesn't actually say subscribe. 00:07:50.270 --> 00:07:53.430 I added the subscribe to "Finnegan's Wake." 00:07:53.430 --> 00:07:54.450 Sorry, Joyce. 00:07:54.450 --> 00:07:56.679 (SINGING) Do you want to read some comments? 00:07:56.679 --> 00:07:58.720 Let's see what you guys had to say about "Frozen" 00:07:58.720 --> 00:08:00.550 as a critique of fairy tales. 00:08:00.550 --> 00:08:02.230 yepimbatman makes a really good point 00:08:02.230 --> 00:08:05.290 when they bring up "Shrek," which is a movie we did not 00:08:05.290 --> 00:08:06.097 spend any time on. 00:08:06.097 --> 00:08:07.680 And yes, that is a complete oversight. 00:08:07.680 --> 00:08:10.830 I think I feel similarly to how String.Epsilon feels, 00:08:10.830 --> 00:08:13.620 which is that "Shrek," to me, communicates 00:08:13.620 --> 00:08:16.840 a kind of parody, satire, maybe even pastiche of fairy tales. 00:08:16.840 --> 00:08:21.150 But it's not nearly as much of a kind of genre deconstruction 00:08:21.150 --> 00:08:23.360 as "Frozen" is. 00:08:23.360 --> 00:08:27.340 I mean, it does contain actual elements from real fairy tales, 00:08:27.340 --> 00:08:31.670 but it seems much more like a set of jokes relating to, 00:08:31.670 --> 00:08:36.600 as opposed to a dismantling of, which-- yeah. 00:08:36.600 --> 00:08:37.100 Yeah. 00:08:37.100 --> 00:08:38.039 I think that's how I feel. 00:08:38.039 --> 00:08:39.980 Relatedly, Desiree DeCosta brings up "Mulan" 00:08:39.980 --> 00:08:42.030 and "Brave" as examples of movies 00:08:42.030 --> 00:08:44.250 that did things similar to what "Frozen" has done, 00:08:44.250 --> 00:08:47.894 but didn't maybe receive the same level of notoriety. 00:08:47.894 --> 00:08:49.310 And I totally agree that these are 00:08:49.310 --> 00:08:51.840 movies that are super important and have 00:08:51.840 --> 00:08:53.091 done cool and exciting things. 00:08:53.091 --> 00:08:54.506 But the reason they didn't come up 00:08:54.506 --> 00:08:56.140 is because they don't so much sit 00:08:56.140 --> 00:09:00.280 inside that genre deconstruction idea-- 00:09:00.280 --> 00:09:02.280 that "Mulan" is based on a Chinese myth, 00:09:02.280 --> 00:09:04.530 "Brave" is a totally new property 00:09:04.530 --> 00:09:06.370 that has its own sort of reference 00:09:06.370 --> 00:09:07.620 to things that came before it. 00:09:07.620 --> 00:09:11.485 But I don't think that they sort of relate to that, 00:09:11.485 --> 00:09:15.050 like we were talking about, culturally ingrained kind 00:09:15.050 --> 00:09:17.880 of story nearly as much. 00:09:17.880 --> 00:09:19.610 nyihead and I are on similar wavelengths 00:09:19.610 --> 00:09:23.870 in that what Terence Hawkes says about the critic finalizing 00:09:23.870 --> 00:09:26.120 a work is true, but that distinguishing 00:09:26.120 --> 00:09:28.140 between the professionally-trained critic 00:09:28.140 --> 00:09:30.880 and the fan who is critiquing things 00:09:30.880 --> 00:09:33.380 does stink of a little bit of elitism. 00:09:33.380 --> 00:09:35.249 So yeah, I agree. 00:09:35.249 --> 00:09:37.040 Anna Robinson writes a really great comment 00:09:37.040 --> 00:09:39.180 that maps the trajectory of the Disney Renaissance 00:09:39.180 --> 00:09:42.050 to art history, and says that their current period is 00:09:42.050 --> 00:09:45.950 something like the neoclassical period of Disney fairy tales. 00:09:45.950 --> 00:09:47.500 And yeah, I really love this idea. 00:09:47.500 --> 00:09:49.700 And this makes me wonder how long is it 00:09:49.700 --> 00:09:55.150 going to take for us to get to the Disney postmodern fairy 00:09:55.150 --> 00:09:56.150 tale period? 00:09:56.150 --> 00:09:59.715 And what is it going to look like? 00:09:59.715 --> 00:10:04.460 I'm gonna like brain chew on that for a little while. 00:10:04.460 --> 00:10:07.340 Disney and postmodern are two things that I don't normally 00:10:07.340 --> 00:10:08.590 put together. 00:10:08.590 --> 00:10:11.190 Mikaele Baker writes a comment about Strauss-Howe generational 00:10:11.190 --> 00:10:13.400 theory and how applying those ideas to "Frozen" 00:10:13.400 --> 00:10:15.840 might not turn out perfectly. 00:10:15.840 --> 00:10:17.700 But it still could provide some insight 00:10:17.700 --> 00:10:20.160 into how it works as a movie and why it is so popular. 00:10:20.160 --> 00:10:23.930 And this comment is just-- it is so good. 00:10:23.930 --> 00:10:26.472 I wish I could spend so much more time talking about how 00:10:26.472 --> 00:10:27.680 good I think this comment is. 00:10:27.680 --> 00:10:29.346 But I can't, so you should just read it. 00:10:29.346 --> 00:10:31.710 Links to this one and the rest in the doobly-doo. 00:10:31.710 --> 00:10:35.770 Mikaele, awesome-- just awesome. 00:10:35.770 --> 00:10:37.640 This is why I do this-- comments like this. 00:10:37.640 --> 00:10:40.280 NKR178 writes that while people critiquing "Frozen" 00:10:40.280 --> 00:10:44.260 might have realized the movie, "Frozen" itself does not 00:10:44.260 --> 00:10:48.100 necessarily realize its genre of fairy tale, 00:10:48.100 --> 00:10:51.510 and that because of its ideological positioning, 00:10:51.510 --> 00:10:54.080 it can come across as simply an attack on it 00:10:54.080 --> 00:10:57.759 and not a realization of genre. 00:10:57.759 --> 00:11:00.050 And I think this is a really fair and important point-- 00:11:00.050 --> 00:11:03.830 that every genre deconstruction is not necessarily 00:11:03.830 --> 00:11:05.780 a realization of that genre. 00:11:05.780 --> 00:11:09.180 And the point might be to actually deconstruct it, 00:11:09.180 --> 00:11:12.950 to do maybe even some kind of violence to that genre, which 00:11:12.950 --> 00:11:16.140 can be good or bad, depending upon your relationship 00:11:16.140 --> 00:11:19.340 to that genre or the work you do in the deconstructing. 00:11:19.340 --> 00:11:21.180 But yeah, this was a really great comment. 00:11:21.180 --> 00:11:23.096 Amy Kinsman writes a really insightful comment 00:11:23.096 --> 00:11:24.560 about how "Frozen" might actually 00:11:24.560 --> 00:11:28.170 create its own critics-- that because 00:11:28.170 --> 00:11:32.010 of what it does with its genre, it will implant in the audience 00:11:32.010 --> 00:11:34.870 a tendency to be critical of it, and then draws 00:11:34.870 --> 00:11:37.040 a really awesome connection to Bioshock Infinite, 00:11:37.040 --> 00:11:40.800 right, which is a game that really encouraged the players 00:11:40.800 --> 00:11:42.580 to look critically at what was being 00:11:42.580 --> 00:11:45.020 asked of them in the game. 00:11:45.020 --> 00:11:47.760 And by extension, maybe other games. 00:11:47.760 --> 00:11:50.140 So yeah, this is-- I did not even make that connection. 00:11:50.140 --> 00:11:51.750 And that's really awesome. 00:11:51.750 --> 00:11:53.833 (SINGING) The fact that I don't read your comments 00:11:53.833 --> 00:11:58.590 shouldn't bother you anyway, because there's a lot of them. 00:11:58.590 --> 00:12:01.800 At this point, it's basically like winning the lottery. 00:12:01.800 --> 00:12:03.607 Thank you for writing this one, though. 00:12:03.607 --> 00:12:05.190 This week's episode was brought to you 00:12:05.190 --> 00:12:07.820 by the hard work of these people, who say "bubbler" 00:12:07.820 --> 00:12:09.320 instead of "water fountain." 00:12:09.320 --> 00:12:11.820 We have a Facebook, an IRC, and a subreddit-- links 00:12:11.820 --> 00:12:13.290 in the doobly-doo. 00:12:13.290 --> 00:12:15.550 There are two things of the week. 00:12:15.550 --> 00:12:17.400 A tweet from @enochobus who points us 00:12:17.400 --> 00:12:19.840 towards a Wired article about an Instagram 00:12:19.840 --> 00:12:22.680 account that posts only amazing looking 00:12:22.680 --> 00:12:25.490 glitches that are so cool, and a post on Tumblr 00:12:25.490 --> 00:12:30.800 from therisingtides about how criticism in the age of Tumblr 00:12:30.800 --> 00:12:34.320 is becoming much easier and is somehow contributing 00:12:34.320 --> 00:12:37.376 to the popularity of things. 00:12:37.376 --> 00:12:38.750 It's very good, very interesting. 00:12:38.750 --> 00:12:39.541 You should read it. 00:12:48.267 --> 00:12:49.850 And for this week's record swap, we're 00:12:49.850 --> 00:12:51.600 going to be replacing Jack Elliott singing 00:12:51.600 --> 00:13:04.075 the songs of Woody Guthrie with Okkyung Lee's "Ghil." 00:13:04.075 --> 00:13:06.420 I really wish you could see that better. 00:13:06.420 --> 00:13:08.260 Well, adios, Jack Elliott. 00:13:08.260 --> 00:13:12.050 Welcome, Okkung Lee.