Bitcoin Forum
May 12, 2024, 02:30:43 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 »
541  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Segregated witness - The solution to Scalability (short term)? on: December 16, 2015, 02:45:51 PM
Sorry I am slow.  What won't be as efficient?  I guess I don't understand the problem exactly.

https://blog.bitgo.com/malevolent-malleability/  <-- I see here a list of how folks who didn't know what they were doing could make mistakes, and a conclusion: "The general consensus up to this point has been that malleability is an annoying but not critical system-wide problem. "

Anyway, if for some reason you can't figure out a way to actually check that funds have been sent and arrived at the proper address, or to not reference any TXs by number, you can always pay a miner a few extra milliies to put your TX with exactly the bit order you like into the block just where you want it.  

The whitepaper details it a bit more. In laymans terms, tx malleability allows interesting and complex attack vectors on non-confirmed transactions. Since the Lightning network is a caching layer where contracts are made between lightning nodes before confirmations appear than one has to assume all implications in a hostile environment. Fixing malleability allows for decentralized and untrusted parties to cache these tx's. In order to cache tx with malleability than one has to have centralized sources of trust which basically amounts to a coinbase/circle model of off the chain txs. Centralized off the chain solutions do provide a valuable service to our ecosystem but have heavy inherent regulatory, human , and insurance overhead. If bitcoin is to compete with other payment systems and fullfil its true vision it must eliminate these inefficient and corruptible sources of security.

Thanks for your reply.  I think the details are important here.  "I have a way to make a secure lightning network if TXs were not malleable" is not the same as "I have a proof that lightning networks will only work securely if TXs are not malleable".   Sadly I'm not qualified to tell you at the moment whether one, both, or neither of these are true.

/begin rant

This "if bitcoin is to compete with other payment systems" stuff is all nonsense.  Bitcoin is a unit of account.  A public, verifiable, noncounterfeitable unit of account.  Visa, Swift, and ACH don't offer that.  There's no competition. All of these work on top of bitcoin just as well (or better) than they did on top of funbux.  .    ,

/end rant

Anyway, even if someone were to come up with a proof that certain forms of payment channels are only possible with a hardfork level protocol change..  it still wouldn't happen.  I'm still interested though!  Cheesy   



542  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 16, 2015, 02:27:50 PM
 
Clearly the population has hugely increased, meaning that individual's fraction of ownership of the whole shebang has gone down

As I said, this is outright wrong. Why? Because the whole shebang (as you call it) can be and is actually expanded multifold

OK, well it depends on other factors.  For example if you have a farm with 100 cows that live comfortably on your acreage, you have a certain amount of wealth from your operation.  Now imagine 100 of you live there.  Each one will have access to less of the wealth.  It's not a huge stretch to move this example to the whole planet considering constant solar influx

You don't get it, fundamentally. But you should necessarily agree that if don't understand this (as you didn't understand why population growth is so much important for the division of labor) then all your ideas and notions about fiat money (dimensionless token sheistery, exchange commodity fraud, and all other derogatory names you used or abstained from using) can be as much misguided or just downright false (reverse thinking, yeah)...

This story is not so much about money as it is about ignorance, wow

Well hey, why don't you educate me then?   What is missing from the simple example I gave?  I tried to make it very simple.. sure I can think of some things about life that are not exactly imitable by farms of spherical cows.  Which ones do you have in mind?  Or is it something else entirely I am missing?  I'm sure you will agree that in some instances, e.g. cancer, population growth is not the greatest marker of long term health.   

You should necessarily agree that even if you have lost hope in this dwarf in ever leaving ignorance, there might be a forum reader somewhere that could benefit from your current expenditure of energy here.  Otherwise..  why bother?  Lets hear it Smiley   





543  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Segregated witness - The solution to Scalability (short term)? on: December 15, 2015, 09:07:50 PM

I'm not sure that's the case, but of course I could be wrong.  Can't you build it to actually check receipt of funds?  I mean, that should in theory be the important part of making a payment anyway, rather than thepayment ID.  Please let me know what I am missing here.    



Lightning Network can work just fine with tx Malleability but wont be as efficient and cannot scale as long as it remains. This is why solving it is one of the requirements to proceed with the project.

https://blog.bitgo.com/malevolent-malleability/
https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper-DRAFT-0.5.pdf


Sorry I am slow.  What won't be as efficient?  I guess I don't understand the problem exactly.

https://blog.bitgo.com/malevolent-malleability/  <-- I see here a list of how folks who didn't know what they were doing could make mistakes, and a conclusion: "The general consensus up to this point has been that malleability is an annoying but not critical system-wide problem. "

Anyway, if for some reason you can't figure out a way to actually check that funds have been sent and arrived at the proper address, or to not reference any TXs by number, you can always pay a miner a few extra milliies to put your TX with exactly the bit order you like into the block just where you want it. 





544  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Segregated witness - The solution to Scalability (short term)? on: December 15, 2015, 08:06:55 PM
1) Malleability of TXID has never been an issue or a problem
For you? Because if we're to implement full Lightning Network and possibly other sophisticated solutions, we need malleability solved.

I'm not sure that's the case, but of course I could be wrong.  Can't you build it to actually check receipt of funds?  I mean, that should in theory be the important part of making a payment anyway, rather than thepayment ID.  Please let me know what I am missing here.     
 

545  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 15, 2015, 06:00:13 PM

Sorry, here's the question again, edited for clarity:
"You mean, like a whole bunch of animals and plants, irrelevant if humans are [or are not] around?"

I'm saying that biodiversity is relevant, to me, only inasmuch as I [a human] profit from it. Wouldn't like it at all if a new species appeared. while I went instinct.


Aha, OK gotcha thanks I see your point now.  Yeah, they are relevant in that they help us stay alive (survivability), barring that, not so much.  A pile of food in the larder does indeed become irrelevant after the inhabitants capable of eating said food all died off.  Well not to the bacteria in there or the people who come and find it but that's a different story.   

Quote

Because the efficiency with which the infrastructure was, or was not, built, is irrelevant to the current state of the infrastructure.


Well my apologies if I misspoke.  Certainly different infrastructures are decaying and growing simultaneously..  for example railroad in north america and bitcoin infrastrucure worldwide.  My point was not to claim any one type or other was increasing or decreasing but that in general the use of counterfeitable currencies in the construction and maintenance of said infrastructure can only be a detriment to its long term survival. 

Quote

Please learn to respond to the actual question, which is: 'which resources are depleted?'
Las Vegas is in the middle of a fucking desert, so no trees to cut down. If pictures help, here's an aerial shot of the Life-giving Forest, cut down to make possible air-conditioned open air decks:



Topsoil, hardwood, fish stocks, helium, groundwater reservoirs, glaciers, natural gas to name seven. 

I didn't mean the trees in Vegas were being chopped, haha, sorry.  I meant that the trees in the Amazon are being chopped and traded for fiat..  while others are printing fiat and it gets spent air conditioning Vegas - a process which leads to depreciating the value of the tokens which were given in exchange for the trees.  You see how that goes. 

 
546  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Segregated witness - The solution to Scalability (short term)? on: December 15, 2015, 05:02:33 PM

It makes no sense to stop right there. You can't just split a transaction without it losing its integrity, because we need the whole transaction to calculate its txid. With SW we can do that by introducing a new consensus rule (witness merkle hash), and now we will have two hashes representing a transaction: txid and witness hash. The benefit is that only txid is used as a reference in the blockchain, and this way we solve the malleability issue introduced by scriptSig.


Thanks for your reply.  Well certainly we don't want to lose integrity!  That is important emphasis thank you.  

One can split data apart, move it around, stack it in different piles, but if one has thrown out the instructions for how to put it back.. well, one is royally fucked at that point or at least out the original data.

So a couple things come to mind:

1) Malleability of TXID has never been an issue or a problem

2) The fundamental data we need for integrity is still the fundamental data we need for integrity.  Nothing has really changed.  If you come up with a clever way to store data that helps miners be efficient, that's great.  Not that any of them would bother looking here anyway for such ideas.  Nor would they care if pull requests are "approved".  Just grab the code and run it if you like.  
    
547  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Segregated witness - The solution to Scalability (short term)? on: December 15, 2015, 01:12:41 PM
Also a good summary by StephenM347
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/41771
Quote
Segregated witness splits up transactions into different parts that can be handled separately instead of the single chunk of data as they are now.

Wait a minute.  Lets just stop right there shall we?  Because I was under the impression that a transaction, and in fact any information at all, could already be divided up in to ones and zeros and handled any way we liked. 

Isn't a "single chunk of data" actually a bunch of ones and zeros that any client, miner, observer, bot, or individual, and do whatever they want with - put in tables, trees, hash them, store them.. whatever?  That is, already? 

What am I missing here?  How is this a thing to be discussed or debated?  Go, split your transactions up any way you like.  Nobody is stopping you. 

Personally I have some code that only keeps the first 20 base58 digits of btc addresses, dropping the rest, to save space.  I didn't make a post on a forum about it or a talk at a conference though.  You don't have to ask permission to manipulate public data. 

548  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 14, 2015, 07:38:09 PM
 
Clearly the population has hugely increased, meaning that individual's fraction of ownership of the whole shebang has gone down

As I said, this is outright wrong. Why? Because the whole shebang (as you call it) can be and is actually expanded multifold

OK, well it depends on other factors.  For example if you have a farm with 100 cows that live comfortably on your acreage, you have a certain amount of wealth from your operation.  Now imagine 100 of you live there.  Each one will have access to less of the wealth.  It's not a huge stretch to move this example to the whole planet considering constant solar influx.

Clearly homeless populations are likely to go up with larger populations.  I think you will find that a certain level of poverty is correlated with population density.  But yeah, these examples are too simple and one should consider exactly what might be meant by the whole shebang and multifold growth. 
549  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 14, 2015, 07:30:29 PM
...On top of the list for me would be survivability, that is: health of the ecosystem and preparedness for shock.  Biodiversity.

You mean, like a whole bunch of animals and plants, irrelevant if humans are around? How silly is that, from the human perspective?




??!!??? 
Life is irrelevant to humans how?  Remember we ARE a bunch of animals and plants.

Animals, Mammals, Primates, in particular humans, require and are part of a large web of interconnected life forms.  Have you ever heard of e.g. food?  It's not exactly irrelevant to your economy.     

Quote

Quote
The "grand experiment" of dimensionless token sheistery is an anathema to societal wealth.  Infrastructure is decayed.

Compared to what? We have more roads, more computers, the internet, etc., etc. Please qualify.


Compared to what would happen if sanity were considered and failures were allowed to fail instead of being propped up with "lets issue tokens to avoid market forces".   

Sure lets look at the construction and use of the roads.  You asked for a qualifier.  That's good.  Because a blanket assertion that "roads are good" would sure look bad especially after what appeared to be claiming that life is irrelevant.  Roads can suck and be way to expensive to maintain, destroy arable land, and make property more worthless.  Or they can be hugely important to commerce and getting people what they need to pursue happiness.  The difference needs to be decided by the people who use them and by the people who pay for them.  Not by:  "Oh roads.  They are good.  Here let's print some tokens and build them in the most inefficient and short lasting way".  Look at the construction and use of the computers and the internet.  Look at railroads.  Yes people are progressing and building things but we they are held back by the heavy weight of continuous theft and malinvestment.   

Quote
Quote
Resources are depleted.

Which resources, guano? We know how to make nitric fertilizer now. Can't give oil away. What are we talking about here?


Great example.  NPK fertilizers are not solely responsible, but certainly part of the system that has reduced the once great heart of agriculture in north america to near desert status (actually deserts show remarkably higher biodiversity).  Desertification is par for the course around the globe at this time.  Why?  In part because those farmers using fiat are being constantly robbed.  To stay afloat they need to deplete the resources maximally, even then of course they won't stay afloat.  It is impossible to stay afloat if you imagine a fiat currency to in any way represent wealth.  So it's:  chop the trees all down now.  We need to pay for air conditioning of open air decks in las vegas and trillion dollar wars so cut it all down.   

Quote
Quote
Educational systems have become frayed and broken.
Higher literacy rates across the world, larger % going on to college after primary school. Again, what do you mean?

Forgive me but I've seen no evidence that you are literate here.  Literacy rates are lower than ever.  I estimate them at 2%.  By literacy I don't mean "can read stop signs and twitter", I mean a minimum of 1000 pages printed material per month.  Competence in at least two languages.  Basic shit that any college would have required a century ago.  "Oh a higher percentage are going to college now we are so literate!"  <-- you must be kidding us!  Too funny. 

The great thing is that while it might be entertaining and educational to argue these topics here, it is in no way necessary to convince anyone.  There isn't any policy change or vote required to turn the corner of history and get out of the dark ages.  We already are doing it. 




550  Economy / Speculation / Re: How many bitcoins do I need to retire in 20 years? on: December 14, 2015, 06:35:24 PM
Maybe in 20 years the price of a bitcoin will be $10000 so you need a couple of coins to have a comfortable living.

What makes you think $10000 (whatever that might mean to you, lets say quality M0 notes) will be worth anything in even 5 years?   
551  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 14, 2015, 12:37:37 PM

Thereby you agree that using machinery, or, in a broader sense, technological innovations make people richer and wealthier overall (since they get more output with less or the same amount of effort), right?

Not necessarily. It depends how they are used.  If it is truly more output in a long term sense, then yes.  But one must keep in mind the story of the Lorax.  In the end everyone was poorer overall.  Not because of the technology but because of the idiocy. 

But using (as well as developing and building) more and more sophisticated machinery requires yet more specialization, i.e. what is otherwise called division of labor. Given that, the growing division of labor necessarily requires more skilled hands in greater numbers, i.e., on one hand, it requires the growth of population, and, on the other hand, provides means for this growth through a qualitative increase in productivity, right?

So what about the importance of the population growth now?

This is a good point about population feeding back into ability to specialize.  I'll be sure to bring it up with the Malthusians and various other "blame all problems on too many people" proponents, thanks Smiley  And my apologies: carrying capacity and population growth is indeed a worthy topic that should be given some airtime whenever it comes up, no matter how off topic it might seem. 
552  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 14, 2015, 01:19:35 AM
And I have to repeat another question which you seem to have decided to deliberately ignore:

The use of internal combustion engines in agriculture especially correlated with rapid growth in the last 100 years

So you agree that the use of machinery allowed to produce more foods and goods by the same hands, right?

Yes, of course.

Thereby you agree that using machinery, or, in a broader sense, technological innovations make people richer and wealthier overall (since they get more output with less or the same amount of effort), right?

Not necessarily.  It depends how they are used.  If it is truly more output in a long term sense, then yes.  But one must keep in mind the story of the Lorax.  In the end everyone was poorer overall.  Not because of the technology but because of the idiocy. 
553  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 14, 2015, 01:12:03 AM
Counterfeitable money didn't cause population increase and lack of pirates didn't cause global warming.  Seems dead obvious to me there but hey a lot of people like to get on the correlation is always causation bandwagon so what do I know right?

You just think that you understand everything (in respect to this discussion about the wealth of society and the growth of population), but you don't. I remember that I already said this, but since it evidently didn't get through, lol, I repeat it once again that I never said nor implied that fiat did or can contribute directly to the population growth...

But because you lack the ability of thinking in reverse, you can't possibly understand where exactly you fail

Greetings.  Well actually I know far too little about wealth of society, which is kinda why I'm here.  Perhaps expose some of my ignorance and maybe pick up a few new ideas no?   Stranger things have happened.  

But since we got some formalities out of the way maybe this could become a more interesting discussion.  

First thing that should be said is that there is no economic model behind bitcoin.  At least not necessarily.  Just like there is no economic model behind 79 protons.  Or "corn".  They are just things for us to use as we wish, with certain properties.  Properties that are useful for certain uses.  An economic model implies a household; whether one can sustain things like food, shelter, clothing, water, and other things one might need or want to keep up in life.  Economic models are often in flux, as one adds new activities, needs, desires.. and problems arise.  There are necessarily many such models simultaneously overlapping.  Individuals, families, and larger corporations.. all the way up to Gaia herself.  

As to the "societal wealth" thing I can tell you my opinion about it fwiw.  Population size seems really not a good metric at all.  On top of the list for me would be survivability, that is: health of the ecosystem and preparedness for shock.  Biodiversity.  Also involved is education.  How much of your population can play Bach pieces in multiple keys on multiple instruments?  That is wealthy.  How many people really feel the funk?  That is wealthy.  How many George Clinton shows did people get to see this year?  How many nights did they sleep out under the stars?  These things constitute a wealthy society in my mind much more than having 10 kids.  

The ability to pursue happiness.  It's a vague phrase but it was chosen well and can get the point across, that we don't have to agree on exactly what it is but we do agree that people should be able to do it as they see fit, and that their ability to do so could be called wealth.  

The "grand experiment" of dimensionless token sheistery is an anathema to societal wealth.  Infrastructure is decayed.  Resources are depleted.  Educational systems have become frayed and broken.  Corruption and fraud are at the core of everything it touches.  How can one pursue happiness if one is beholden to the counterfeiters to no limit?  The amazing thing is how well people have done despite its perniciousness.            


In other news, I'd love to learn to think in reverse.  Please help.  It's a cryptographers dream. 
    
554  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 13, 2015, 08:40:41 PM


I see that you don't have a clue about how fiat (credit) money works. Fiat money is not a commodity, to begin with. It doesn't have nor is it required to have any value of its own...

Only a transactional utility, which is a bonus

Hmm transactional utility without value?   Interesting. 

Hmm, not a commodity, yet I go to the market and buy it just like I do all other commodities.  Interesting.

Tell us more. 
   

 
555  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 13, 2015, 08:28:31 PM
And I have to repeat another question which you seem to have decided to deliberately ignore:

The use of internal combustion engines in agriculture especially correlated with rapid growth in the last 100 years

So you agree that the use of machinery allowed to produce more foods and goods by the same hands, right?

Yes, of course. 

Since we're doing nonsequitur queries heres a few for you too: 

What procedure would you use to fit a set of data to an exponential curve, in other words determining the best values of A and B such that a dataset P_i(t_i) most closely matched the function P(t) = A*e^(Bt) ?  What criteria would you use to say the fit was "good"?  What criteria would lead you to describe the data as growing faster or slowly than an exponential? 

What fraction of the total bitcoin supply will 1 bitcoin be in 20 years? 

What fraction of the total USD supply will 500 dollars be in 20 years? 

Counterfeitable money didn't cause population increase and lack of pirates didn't cause global warming.  Seems dead obvious to me there but hey a lot of people like to get on the correlation is always causation bandwagon so what do I know right? 

556  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 13, 2015, 04:24:29 PM

It all depends. As I have explained it earlier, the ultimate idea of money is to provide a handy and universal tool for measuring the value of goods against each other. If the number of goods produced in the economy increases, then you have to create more money so that to keep the reference point of the scale the same (which you set when you bootstrap the money). Conversely, if the number of goods decreases, you have to destroy some fraction of money. The fiat money (namely, the credit money) fulfills this function automatically through a positive feedback loop...

That is, increased production triggers creation of new money (so-called endogenous money), and vice versa

LOLK!  As you explained earlier, fiat money ELIMINATES any reference point of the scale.  "Dimensionless" you called it.  Production of tokens is not tied to any physical unit or good, therefore every token is unverifiable as is the total supply.    

Your claim that "if the number of goods increases we have to create more exchange commodities" is laughable.  When apple makes more iphones do they issues more shares of Apple thus robbing all shareholders?  Are you afraid that prices will go down when there is a supply glut?  Guess what, that is called price discovery in a marketplace and is important in a functioning economy.  Issuing new dimensionless exchange commodities thus thwarting market forces and robbing existing holders is always and without fail unmitigated disaster.    

    
557  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 13, 2015, 04:10:18 PM

You'll find that human population growth has been FASTER than exponential from roughly the year 0 onward

Are you kidding or what? The human population was roughly constant most of its history (and most here means 99.999...% of the time of its existence), even dramatically declining in the case of some natural disasters like worldwide pandemics (say, the Plague of Justinian of the 6th century), up to a point of the so-called bottleneck. Do you (fail to) see the flat line from year 1050 till 1500 in the chart that I posted earlier? Is this what you call exponential, lol?

Quote
In 2000, a Molecular Biology and Evolution paper suggested a transplanting model or a 'long bottleneck' to account for the limited genetic variation, rather than a catastrophic environmental change. This would be consistent with suggestions that in sub-Saharan Africa numbers could have dropped at times as low as 2,000, for perhaps as long as 100,000 years, before numbers began to expand again in the Late Stone Age

The rate of the population growth that started in the second half of the 20th century is unprecedented and has no match in the entire human history

Still wanna talk about the exponential growth from year 0?



That plot appears to have been made from the "Hyde 2007" data in your link, though also mostly agrees with "McEvedy & Jones" from your link.  No I never wanted to talk about your population growth as it is a complete nonsequitur.  Seriously: this has nothing at all to do with exchange commodities.  What is your point here?  


But while we're here let me help you out with basic literacy.  "Exponential" means that the slope of a function is proportional to the value of the function.  Full stop.  df/dx = k*x.  That's what an exponential is.  Logarithms are an absolutely essential part of basic math as is understanding what exactly the number "e" is.  Until you are very familiar with these concepts I would recommend avoiding use of the word "exponential".

When you plot a pure exponential function on a linear scale you see that at the far right it shoots upwards.  It doesn't "go exponential" there.  It always is exponential.

Yes, every set of data you have in your wikipedia article shows exponential and greater than exponential growth from e.g. year 0 to 1500.  







 



558  Economy / Economics / Re: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed on: December 13, 2015, 10:26:01 AM
a metric which we agree on of what that phrase means.. then we can see if individual's economic well being does or doesn't so contribute

Why should I care? I'm not very much interested in this issue since it is now evident that you are pretty much incompetent in the field, and the way you brazen it out doesn't in the least make me feel inclined to cast pearls here. Nevertheless, I have suggested that you try to coherently explain the exponential growth of population since 1950, but you apparently shrink from that. Most likely, you are afraid of making a fool of yourself by inadvertently confirming my point...

Or just failing to explain this phenomenon by mouthing some outright bullshit, lol


You'll find that human population growth has been FASTER than exponential from roughly the year 0 onward.  This is due to MANY factors, the most commonly sited are agriculture, technology, favorable growth conditions, and societal behaviors such as acceptance of large families.  The use of internal combustion engines in agriculture especially correlated with rapid growth in the last 100 years.  

Nice non-sequitur huh?  As you yourself CORRECTLY pointed out earlier in the thread, what we have been using for exchange commodities means little with regard to e.g. slavery or other societal conditions, which includes those that influence population growth.  You're not really trying to imply now that people's being robbed via exchange commodity fraud has led to population growth are you?  

      
559  Economy / Economics / Re: Yuan Joins Elite Currency Club on: December 13, 2015, 07:31:20 AM
F the IMF

OP --  this should go under altcoins - scam reports

560  Economy / Speculation / Re: How many bitcoins do I need to retire in 20 years? on: December 13, 2015, 05:24:51 AM
You need zero bitcoins to retire in 20 years.  You also need zero bitcoins to retire now.

Simply say to yourself, "I have nothing to do, nothing interests me" and lie down and do nothing.  Congratulations on your retirement. 


What the hell is this. This makes absolutely no sense. He wants to retire with some money, you know that right?

No I don't know that.  So you're saying the question is "how much money do I need to have some money?" ?

The question is broken any way you look at it.  Just retire if that's what you want to do.  If you have something else you want to do that requires some assets, then figure out how to get them and do it. 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!