It was her very own unadulterated data, she was sure of it; it could be represented as more than one possible image, an image begging to be standardized. Suzi doesn't think she needs to compare all of her logic images for equivalence(L.I.F.E.) anymore and she never looks for better ways to add up her distinct architecture data(D.A.D.)--only the occasional elimination of calculation repeats (even so,her algorithms had their own take on it). Was it fate that the algorithms themselves continually looked for more possible ways to order themselves (imposing on Suzi in the most meaningful way possible)? Except for one thing. They need Suzi to covert the data for the sake of their own rules of security--stating "only" and tracking the data path from its pure origin, not merely accepting face value traced to her simplest unique image (yes, Suzi can stop that with her own standardization scheme. It's a simple case of discrete changes in her stateful orb system(S.O.S.) because of her simple passage of time--her internal states allow for the potential of evolution time(P.O.E.T.). Her own algorithms let it be her time.What is so odd about attaching her control state to a personalized time evolution? So, her algorithms stay alive by being dually described as the ways of her sequences of operations tasks(S.O.O.T.) placed in the physical world, observable, by someone (or, some thing) simply reading a meter or a gauge as different observers in different reference frames, you think? Not that there is anything wrong with auto-morphing inside her own personal stateful system space, making sure to preserve at least one mathematical property without distorting any of its math architecture. Suzi doesn't even try to formalize these algorithms into collections of behaviors--of arrows and objects--nor do they try to entice her into any advanced datatype (category?) beyond the basics to represent truth values, or even logic for that matter (of course she won't be bothered by that kid's game of algebraic sub-systems holding overt logic entities(A.S.S.H.O.L,E.). Yes, both Suzi and her algorithms subscribe to logic (they both want Aristotle to be right), making it all the more important in every operation to deny or affirm(D.O.A.) and, with no probabilities erecting room for online meddle-inquiring nano grounds(P.E.R.F.O.R.M.I.N.G.). All earth beings were never meant to fall into the realm of the formal, the systematic, the all-encompassing correctness reason and validity entity(C.R.A.V.E.), of valid forms and architectural fallacy--and yes, they weren't very lucky if the wrong ones tried anyway and inadvertently started yet another experimental war that all living creatures would again be forced into, for whatever was left of the 21stCentury; only Suzi and her algorithms can work this one out.