Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 08:19:04 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 [239] 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 ... 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2032498 times)
brox
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 71



View Profile
March 29, 2013, 10:37:26 AM
 #4761

Could someone point me a way to installing p2pool on a raspberry pi (256 Model)?

Is that even possible or something i shouldn't do?
I managed to set it up on 512M model, but CPU load is 100%, so the whole thing is useless.
Gonna profile python code, find bottlenecks and rewrite them in C... when I will have some time

Save dolphins! Donate to 1BTC4brox2pd14QubXGsXwarp9zV9tc8CZ
Mine Bitcoins in the cloud at cex.io
1481141944
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481141944

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481141944
Reply with quote  #2

1481141944
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481141944
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481141944

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481141944
Reply with quote  #2

1481141944
Report to moderator
1481141944
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481141944

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481141944
Reply with quote  #2

1481141944
Report to moderator
1481141944
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481141944

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481141944
Reply with quote  #2

1481141944
Report to moderator
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454


View Profile
March 29, 2013, 01:36:57 PM
 #4762

Ok, continuing trying to find bugs:


2 bugs found, one regarding only avalons using avalon-branch cgminer problems with p2pool stratum, one regarding maximum difficulty:


The bug that has been reported regarding avalons, stratum, and p2pool is:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg1683442#msg1683442
"Avalon Cgminer without fix protocol connects on stratum but resends all work over and over. There's something wrong with the way it reads the stratum response. Someone, Jeff I think, said it has a problem with double byte responses that p2pool makes. On getwork, it just hammers the server and the DOA rate is >25%. Using a very high diff 3000-4000 helps a tiny bit. The highest p2pool would let me go is 6535. Any higher number just comes back as 6535.

Even soloing to a bitcoind alone will crash. It's too much. Hence the need to run a buffer like eloipool between it."

The workaround is:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg1690401#msg1690401
"So far the only thing that works is using fix-protocol and getwork with a very high diff. I've been using /4000+16. That seems the best balance. +32 is all late. You have to remember the "miners" are only 300mhash each. It will bring a 3930k running Ubuntu with 32gb of ram to its knees. It pegs 4 processors trying to keep up and eventually crashes as it runs out of memory. I also is 25-35% DOA. You loose 1/3 of your hashrate."

How it is getting fixed:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg1684865#msg1684865
Unfortunately, it appears that until avalan-branch cgminer merges into main-line cgminer it will be difficult to support. Maybe discussing this with Xiangfu ahead of time could be helpful. It might also be helpful to get forrestv/cgminer team avalons if someone cares about support for them.




Bug #2, maximum difficulty:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg1684832#msg1684832
using the username+difficulty -u flag, Aseras reported only being able to reach a maximum difficulty of 6535. I can repeat this, the maximum difficulty I can reach is 999 with both stratum and LP. This has been reported here:
https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/issues/87
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
March 29, 2013, 02:28:18 PM
 #4763


I've been running p2pool on stratum for about a week with cgminer.  I noticed the hash rate just isn't as high as it should be.  Not significantly lower (2.4gh instead of 2.6), but still lower.  Based on what was revealed about Avalon and stratum, I thought I'd try disabling stratum in cgminer.  Guess what, my hash rate is back where it should be.  Note that I don't have the hash rate degradation on a "conventional" pool with stratum.

Unfortunately while I can only salivate about the idea of having an Avalon, there does seem to be evidence that stratum isn't functioning up to par on p2pool.

M

THANK YOU! This is a legitimate starting point. This is something that can actually be looked into, do you mind filing an issue:
https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/issues?state=open
(I think forrestv does some triage on this forum as well)

I've been talking with Forrest via PM. basically it's come down to, we just need to get an avalon into a developers hands. ckolivas has offered to try and work remotely. Forrest has hinted he may be interested and has a batch 2 order he's waiting on.
PatMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....


View Profile WWW
March 29, 2013, 07:07:46 PM
 #4764

Good for you,

Did Forrest mention anything about checking the whole stratum code in p2pool?

"When one person is deluded it is called insanity - when many people are deluded it is called religion" - Robert M. Pirsig.  I don't want your coins, I want change.
Amazon UK BTC payment service - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=301229.0 - with FREE delivery!
http://www.ae911truth.org/ - http://rethink911.org/ - http://rememberbuilding7.org/
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
March 30, 2013, 08:56:31 AM
 #4765

...
How it is getting fixed:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg1684865#msg1684865
Unfortunately, it appears that until avalan-branch cgminer merges into main-line cgminer it will be difficult to support. Maybe discussing this with Xiangfu ahead of time could be helpful. It might also be helpful to get forrestv/cgminer team avalons if someone cares about support for them.
...
Just get an Avalon for ckolivas and cgminer will be hashing Avalon on all working pools as quickly as possible.
I don't want an Avalon as I have made clear for quite a while now.
So no, it's not get "cgminer team" an Avalon, it's get "ckolivas" an Avalon.

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454


View Profile
March 30, 2013, 03:17:33 PM
 #4766

Good for you,

Did Forrest mention anything about checking the whole stratum code in p2pool?

If you know of a problem, you can report it here:
https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/issues?state=open

This will help you understand how you can help most efficiently:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html

you can also find the devs on #p2pool on freenode.net irc if you'd like to discuss something specific with them.

For the sake of p2pool, please stop publicly posting that there are problems with stratum, p2pool, and standard mining software without any data (logs, error messages, debug output). I'm not saying there are no problems, just that no one has reproduced what you are saying is a problem and shared it with developers. Therefore, no one can look into fixing it. If you share your evidence, then maybe we can fix it.
PatMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....


View Profile WWW
March 30, 2013, 05:11:00 PM
 #4767

Good for you,

Did Forrest mention anything about checking the whole stratum code in p2pool?

If you know of a problem, you can report it here:
https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/issues?state=open

This will help you understand how you can help most efficiently:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html

you can also find the devs on #p2pool on freenode.net irc if you'd like to discuss something specific with them.

For the sake of p2pool, please stop publicly posting that there are problems with stratum, p2pool, and standard mining software without any data (logs, error messages, debug output). I'm not saying there are no problems, just that no one has reproduced what you are saying is a problem and shared it with developers. Therefore, no one can look into fixing it. If you share your evidence, then maybe we can fix it.

What??

That was not a post stating anything - it was a follow up question to a previous discussion. Read the previous threads. The only one shouting about problems is you - get off my freaking case.

And please refrain from sending me any more creepy apologetic pm's - it's not required & I'm really not interested. Move along.

"When one person is deluded it is called insanity - when many people are deluded it is called religion" - Robert M. Pirsig.  I don't want your coins, I want change.
Amazon UK BTC payment service - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=301229.0 - with FREE delivery!
http://www.ae911truth.org/ - http://rethink911.org/ - http://rememberbuilding7.org/
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
March 30, 2013, 08:17:27 PM
 #4768

Just get an Avalon for ckolivas and cgminer will be hashing Avalon on all working pools as quickly as possible.
I don't want an Avalon as I have made clear for quite a while now.
So no, it's not get "cgminer team" an Avalon, it's get "ckolivas" an Avalon.

This is happening next week. If plans go well.

And Kano, take what you can get. Just because you have beef with the avalon team, don't screw with everyone else. If anything we need people like you to get the avalons to operate like they should. Instead, we have this half assed build of cgminer because they wanted it all in house. Better to just cut them out and move on.

Bitcoin is going to ASIC. BFL may be close, or one post away from bankruptcy. There's no one else. Might as well get your hands on what's out there.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
March 30, 2013, 10:34:47 PM
 #4769

Just get an Avalon for ckolivas and cgminer will be hashing Avalon on all working pools as quickly as possible.
I don't want an Avalon as I have made clear for quite a while now.
So no, it's not get "cgminer team" an Avalon, it's get "ckolivas" an Avalon.
This is happening next week. If plans go well.
I should reiterate this is happening due to the generous offer from Aseras himself to provide me remote access to his units. Since p2pool is part of Aseras' concerns, I will try and address anything I can from the cgminer end but I think that will only achieve so much. Xiangfu has said that they should send me an actual unit, but he doesn't have that power himself, and thinks he should try and convince them.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
Pooled mine at kano.is, solo mine at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
stevegee58
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 783



View Profile
April 01, 2013, 01:29:26 AM
 #4770

Is there a site like p2pool.info for LTC?

You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
April 01, 2013, 09:09:27 AM
 #4771

Just get an Avalon for ckolivas and cgminer will be hashing Avalon on all working pools as quickly as possible.
I don't want an Avalon as I have made clear for quite a while now.
So no, it's not get "cgminer team" an Avalon, it's get "ckolivas" an Avalon.

This is happening next week. If plans go well.

And Kano, take what you can get. Just because you have beef with the avalon team, don't screw with everyone else. If anything we need people like you to get the avalons to operate like they should. Instead, we have this half assed build of cgminer because they wanted it all in house. Better to just cut them out and move on.

Bitcoin is going to ASIC. BFL may be close, or one post away from bankruptcy. There's no one else. Might as well get your hands on what's out there.
Sorry, I'm quite serious that I do not wish to be involved in any way with GitSyncom or the companies he is a lowly employee of.
If I had an Avalon I would be supporting them and I will not do that.

They ignored the GPL license for cgminer for a long time until they released the source and made up excuses that were unrelated to cgminer as to why they didn't release the code at first.
GitSyncom also directly stated that he thought my suggestions that hardware was required by me to properly support it was just an excuse to get "free hardware" and also that when I pointed this out to him last year his thoughts on that were:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=142083.msg1513358#msg1513358
"I'll reject you on sheer principle fucking level."

I don't mind helping Xiangfu or CKolivas with the implementation, but I will be leaving any non USB specific code directly up to them (as they of course are well able to deal with it)

I'm not motivated by money above my own conscience and since I cannot with a good conscience accept an Avalon, the monetary gain is irrelevant.
I have been offered 2 already and turned them both down. One you will see in one of the Avalon threads and the other in PM.

I'm not sure if you consider this to be yet another offer - but either way - I'm not interested in it.

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
April 01, 2013, 03:48:54 PM
 #4772

Sorry, I'm quite serious that I do not wish to be involved in any way with GitSyncom or the companies he is a lowly employee of.
If I had an Avalon I would be supporting them and I will not do that.

They ignored the GPL license for cgminer for a long time until they released the source and made up excuses that were unrelated to cgminer as to why they didn't release the code at first.
GitSyncom also directly stated that he thought my suggestions that hardware was required by me to properly support it was just an excuse to get "free hardware" and also that when I pointed this out to him last year his thoughts on that were:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=142083.msg1513358#msg1513358
"I'll reject you on sheer principle fucking level."

I don't mind helping Xiangfu or CKolivas with the implementation, but I will be leaving any non USB specific code directly up to them (as they of course are well able to deal with it)

I'm not motivated by money above my own conscience and since I cannot with a good conscience accept an Avalon, the monetary gain is irrelevant.
I have been offered 2 already and turned them both down. One you will see in one of the Avalon threads and the other in PM.

I'm not sure if you consider this to be yet another offer - but either way - I'm not interested in it.

I totally understand I watched the whole thing develop. bitsyncom was a total dick about it all. xiangfu is ok, but hes very quiet and doesn't talk much, and what he does say is quite hard to follow sometimes.

that said, i do wish you might reconsider and help US out.

ckolivas has been working all day on my units. he had a crash course in l2tp under ubuntu last night Cheesy Anyways, hes in now, and mining away while he tries out new things. they are making ~9BTC per day, so by the end of the week @ > $100/BTC he should make out, and hopefully we'll have a much better improved cgminer on avalon for it soon.
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454


View Profile
April 01, 2013, 07:09:17 PM
 #4773

...
The highest p2pool would let me go is 6535. Any higher number just comes back as 6535.
...
Better get that fixed fast ...
I think it is in getwork.py:
Code:
'target': pack.IntType(256).pack(self.share_target).encode('hex'),


Regarding minimum difficulty:
rav3n_pl has helped point me to what's going on in worker.py
Code:
       if desired_pseudoshare_target is None:
            target = 2**256-1
            if len(self.recent_shares_ts_work) == 50:
                hash_rate = sum(work for ts, work in self.recent_shares_ts_work[1:])//(self.recent_shares_ts_work[-1][0] - self.recent_shares_ts_work[0][0])
                if hash_rate:
                    target = min(target, int(2**256/hash_rate))
        else:
            target = desired_pseudoshare_target
        target = max(target, share_info['bits'].target)

The last line shows that if the desired_pseudoshare_target (that is the diff that is served to your miner and it is taken from the username+desired_pseudoshare_target log in to the server) is harder (higher difficulty or lower target) than the current p2pool network difficulty (share_info['bits'].target), the target served as work to your miner will be the current p2pool network difficulty.

rav3n_pl had the point that unless you plug something into the p2pool network that hashes at > 1000% of the current network hashrate, you will submit shares to your local p2pool instance at a rate of < 1 share per second. Most servers should be able to handle that somewhat easily.

So the difficulty "bug" does not appear to be one, unless someone else has something to add.

And thank you @Aseras for donating you machine to help get avalon working on p2pool.


EDIT: I realize that Aseras may also have been talking about the maximum difficulty returned to the p2pool network (which should have no connection to server load).
From data.py, get_transaction:
Code:
bits = bitcoin_data.FloatingInteger.from_target_upper_bound(math.clip(desired_target, (pre_target3//10, pre_target3)))
So you will return to the network the easier (lower difficulty) of the desired target from "username/desired_target" or 10 times the current p2pool network difficulty.

That's why you were getting 6535: the network difficulty was 653.5 and it wouldn't let you set a target greater than 10x harder.
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
April 01, 2013, 09:12:12 PM
 #4774

...
The highest p2pool would let me go is 6535. Any higher number just comes back as 6535.
...
Better get that fixed fast ...
I think it is in getwork.py:
Code:
'target': pack.IntType(256).pack(self.share_target).encode('hex'),


Regarding minimum difficulty:
rav3n_pl has helped point me to what's going on in worker.py
Code:
       if desired_pseudoshare_target is None:
            target = 2**256-1
            if len(self.recent_shares_ts_work) == 50:
                hash_rate = sum(work for ts, work in self.recent_shares_ts_work[1:])//(self.recent_shares_ts_work[-1][0] - self.recent_shares_ts_work[0][0])
                if hash_rate:
                    target = min(target, int(2**256/hash_rate))
        else:
            target = desired_pseudoshare_target
        target = max(target, share_info['bits'].target)

The last line shows that if the desired_pseudoshare_target (that is the diff that is served to your miner and it is taken from the username+desired_pseudoshare_target log in to the server) is harder (higher difficulty or lower target) than the current p2pool network difficulty (share_info['bits'].target), the target served as work to your miner will be the current p2pool network difficulty.

rav3n_pl had the point that unless you plug something into the p2pool network that hashes at > 1000% of the current network hashrate, you will submit shares to your local p2pool instance at a rate of < 1 share per second. Most servers should be able to handle that somewhat easily.

So the difficulty "bug" does not appear to be one, unless someone else has something to add.

And thank you @Aseras for donating you machine to help get avalon working on p2pool.


EDIT: I realize that Aseras may also have been talking about the maximum difficulty returned to the p2pool network (which should have no connection to server load).
From data.py, get_transaction:
Code:
bits = bitcoin_data.FloatingInteger.from_target_upper_bound(math.clip(desired_target, (pre_target3//10, pre_target3)))
So you will return to the network the easier (lower difficulty) of the desired target from "username/desired_target" or 10 times the current p2pool network difficulty.

That's why you were getting 6535: the network difficulty was 653.5 and it wouldn't let you set a target greater than 10x harder.

Yes I think you've found the "problem" The issue is, the asics NEED a higher difficulty, or they are going to kill the smaller miners in p2pool.

I also think as difficulty greatly increases, we are going to need a longer long-poll time as well. maybe 20 or 30 seconds.
jgarzik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


View Profile
April 02, 2013, 02:14:06 AM
 #4775

Yes I think you've found the "problem" The issue is, the asics NEED a higher difficulty, or they are going to kill the smaller miners in p2pool.

Yes, this was established the day the first Avalon arrived Smiley

Quote
I also think as difficulty greatly increases, we are going to need a longer long-poll time as well. maybe 20 or 30 seconds.

On IRC, an ASIC-only p2pool share chain idea was floated, with a higher difficulty by default and a longer time between shares.


Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
wtogami
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 263



View Profile
April 02, 2013, 02:52:18 AM
 #4776

Yes I think you've found the "problem" The issue is, the asics NEED a higher difficulty, or they are going to kill the smaller miners in p2pool.

Yes, this was established the day the first Avalon arrived Smiley

Quote
I also think as difficulty greatly increases, we are going to need a longer long-poll time as well. maybe 20 or 30 seconds.

On IRC, an ASIC-only p2pool share chain idea was floated, with a higher difficulty by default and a longer time between shares.

It sounds like forrestv is instead in favor of alternate means to extend the effective work interval through merging of parallel chains.  Various theoretical designs were discussed.

If you appreciate my work please consider making a small donation.
BTC:  1LkYiL3RaouKXTUhGcE84XLece31JjnLc3      LTC:  LYtrtYZsVSn5ymhPepcJMo4HnBeeXXVKW9
GPG: AEC1884398647C47413C1C3FB1179EB7347DC10D
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
April 02, 2013, 12:50:12 PM
 #4777

I havent talked to ckovilas today, but looking at the linux box, hes pulled p2pool down and setup a bunch of other things. He's in Poland, I'm in the USA. We are about 10 hours off from each other.

He's going to primarily bring cgminer for avalon up to the current codebase. p2pool compatibility is my special request and I'm sure we'll be screwing with it for some time.

We may end up making a fork or a frankenbuild of p2pool to fix things for testing. I don't see why in the end it would need to fork for everyone, but it would be a hard fork and everyone would need to upgrade to a version where everyone is on the same share chain.

The ball is rolling just not quickly yet Tongue

jgarzik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


View Profile
April 02, 2013, 02:47:18 PM
 #4778

It sounds like forrestv is instead in favor of alternate means to extend the effective work interval through merging of parallel chains.  Various theoretical designs were discussed.

We may end up making a fork or a frankenbuild of p2pool to fix things for testing. I don't see why in the end it would need to fork for everyone, but it would be a hard fork and everyone would need to upgrade to a version where everyone is on the same share chain.

It ultimately seems like 10 seconds is just too short, given Internet propagation, current Avalon hashrate, and the up to 1.5-second delay it can take for work to be returned from Avalons (high latency).  Thus, I argue for around 30 seconds, which would imply a hard fork at some point.

Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
April 02, 2013, 03:05:17 PM
 #4779

It sounds like forrestv is instead in favor of alternate means to extend the effective work interval through merging of parallel chains.  Various theoretical designs were discussed.

We may end up making a fork or a frankenbuild of p2pool to fix things for testing. I don't see why in the end it would need to fork for everyone, but it would be a hard fork and everyone would need to upgrade to a version where everyone is on the same share chain.

It ultimately seems like 10 seconds is just too short, given Internet propagation, current Avalon hashrate, and the up to 1.5-second delay it can take for work to be returned from Avalons (high latency).  Thus, I argue for around 30 seconds, which would imply a hard fork at some point.


I'm going to play with it today. ckolivas and xiangfu were in #cgminer today, got a new build of cgminer working with bugfixes from ckolivas. I'll see what we can come up with.

babysteps, but we are moving forward.
rav3n_pl
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1320


Don`t panic! Organize!


View Profile
April 02, 2013, 04:53:41 PM
 #4780

We are concerning about that Avalons will sky high share diff to high. Share diff is raised, when shares are showing to fast in chain.
Maybe allow Avalon (or another high power devices) users to set share diff as high as they want?
Easiest way I see is add another mark to username ie "*".
Shares found this way should be saved in chain as diff that high.
This way shares will NOT come up so much often and "normal" share diff will be on sane level for smaller miners and high hash power users will be paid more for higher diff shares.
This proposal will "only" need minor changes in code and we will not need separate share chain or hard fork.
OFC there should be "some" protection against changes in code, ie there should be at least 2 shares reported on same higher sd from same node/user/address.

1Rav3nkMayCijuhzcYemMiPYsvcaiwHni  Bitcoin stuff on my OneDrive
My RPC CoinControl for any coin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=929954
My SatoshDice bot https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897685
Pages: « 1 ... 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 [239] 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 ... 744 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!