Bitcoin Forum
July 20, 2019, 08:30:34 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 [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 ... 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2580358 times)
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 05, 2013, 09:06:34 PM
 #4581

It would be true, if we hash 10 times/day. But we have 300`000`000`000 hashes / second, so we CAN use it as fair number of tries and it "have" to balance .... in some point Smiley

The past has no outcome on future results. So, right now the current block has a 50% chance of taking between 3.4 to 4 days to find, and 50% of taking more than 4 days to find. (Median and mean are not the same in exponential probability distributions). The problem with p2pool now is that the relative variance is 27% greater than it was before ASICS (from 14 blocks per week +/- 3.7 to 9 blocks a week +/-3, poisson distribution)
1563611434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563611434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563611434
Reply with quote  #2

1563611434
Report to moderator
1563611434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563611434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563611434
Reply with quote  #2

1563611434
Report to moderator
1563611434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563611434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563611434
Reply with quote  #2

1563611434
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1563611434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563611434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563611434
Reply with quote  #2

1563611434
Report to moderator
1563611434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563611434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563611434
Reply with quote  #2

1563611434
Report to moderator
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 05, 2013, 10:36:00 PM
 #4582

And we've got a winner
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1006


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 06, 2013, 06:34:19 AM
 #4583

It would be true, if we hash 10 times/day. But we have 300`000`000`000 hashes / second, so we CAN use it as fair number of tries and it "have" to balance .... in some point Smiley

The past has no outcome on future results. So, right now the current block has a 50% chance of taking between 3.4 to 4 days to find, and 50% of taking more than 4 days to find. (Median and mean are not the same in exponential probability distributions). The problem with p2pool now is that the relative variance is 27% greater than it was before ASICS (from 14 blocks per week +/- 3.7 to 9 blocks a week +/-3, poisson distribution)

Perhaps you can help with a conundrum with which I've wrestled for a while.

The number of shares required to solve n blocks can be described by a (shifted) negative binomial CDF, where size = number of rounds and p = 1/Difficulty.

As an example, the upper tail probability of more than 1.6 x 9 x Difficulty shares being submitted in 9 rounds is 0.05.

If the 10th round is more than 1.6 x Difficulty shares, the probability of this number of shares occurring in ten rounds is less than 0.04, and if the 10th round is less than 1.6 x Difficulty shares, the probability of this number of shares occurring in ten rounds is more than 0.04.

This relates back to rav3n_pl's comment, since it does imply that for an arbitrary number of runs of n rounds where the total shares submitted for the first (n-1) rounds is very unlikely, there will be more runs where CDF for the total of n rounds is closer to the median than further from it.

This means the nth round is more likely to be shorter than longer. Not shorter than average, but just shorter, and therefore luckier.

So I think I'm misunderstanding something about the way this "paradox" should be interpreted. Where am I going wrong?




  

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 06, 2013, 04:22:20 PM
 #4584

Perhaps p2pools problem is that there are too many people observing it constantly and thus are altering the outcome.

/Schrödinger
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 06, 2013, 05:19:38 PM
 #4585

It would be true, if we hash 10 times/day. But we have 300`000`000`000 hashes / second, so we CAN use it as fair number of tries and it "have" to balance .... in some point Smiley

The past has no outcome on future results. So, right now the current block has a 50% chance of taking between 3.4 to 4 days to find, and 50% of taking more than 4 days to find. (Median and mean are not the same in exponential probability distributions). The problem with p2pool now is that the relative variance is 27% greater than it was before ASICS (from 14 blocks per week +/- 3.7 to 9 blocks a week +/-3, poisson distribution)

Perhaps you can help with a conundrum with which I've wrestled for a while.

The number of shares required to solve n blocks can be described by a (shifted) negative binomial CDF, where size = number of rounds and p = 1/Difficulty.

As an example, the upper tail probability of more than 1.6 x 9 x Difficulty shares being submitted in 9 rounds is 0.05.

If the 10th round is more than 1.6 x Difficulty shares, the probability of this number of shares occurring in ten rounds is less than 0.04, and if the 10th round is less than 1.6 x Difficulty shares, the probability of this number of shares occurring in ten rounds is more than 0.04.

This relates back to rav3n_pl's comment, since it does imply that for an arbitrary number of runs of n rounds where the total shares submitted for the first (n-1) rounds is very unlikely, there will be more runs where CDF for the total of n rounds is closer to the median than further from it.

This means the nth round is more likely to be shorter than longer. Not shorter than average, but just shorter, and therefore luckier.

So I think I'm misunderstanding something about the way this "paradox" should be interpreted. Where am I going wrong?

Good question, heading out but want to think about it a bit more later. I think it may has to do with conditional probability, which ties into gambler's fallacy (unless I'm reading this too quickly). While it is far more likely to have 1 lucky round and 9 unlucky rounds than it is to have 10 unlucky rounds, if you are sitting at the tenth round it is equally probably to have a lucky or unlucky round regardless of what happened in the past. You can also approach this as a conditional probability problem when for isolated random events (P(A given B) = P(A)P(B)/P(B) when P(A) is not affected by event B)

Here is a worked out example showing that although it is far more likely to have a certain outcome in n-tries, the probabillity of an event occuring on the nth try is independent of the previous trials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy#Explaining_why_the_probability_is_1.2F2_for_a_fair_coin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy#Explaining_why_the_probability_is_1.2F2_for_a_fair_coin
rav3n_pl
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1359
Merit: 1000


Don`t panic! Organize!


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 09:55:38 AM
 #4586

Block ETA is now 19hrs and rising, when we go over 24hrs (pool rate under 200GH) mining will become totally unprofitable...
We need more power!

1Rav3nkMayCijuhzcYemMiPYsvcaiwHni  Bitcoin stuff on my OneDrive
My RPC CoinControl for any coin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=929954
Some stuff on https://github.com/Rav3nPL/
lenny_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000


DARKNETMARKETS.COM


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 10:11:52 AM
 #4587

Block ETA is now 19hrs and rising, when we go over 24hrs (pool rate under 200GH) mining will become totally unprofitable...
We need more power!


Can you please explain in more technical way?

DARKNET MARKETS >> https://DARKNETMARKETS.COM
Subo1977
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 344
Merit: 250


Flixxo - Watch, Share, Earn!


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 11:57:58 AM
 #4588

Block ETA is now 19hrs and rising, when we go over 24hrs (pool rate under 200GH) mining will become totally unprofitable...
We need more power!


That would be difficult.

If I'm new to p2pool and i see something like this:
Pool Hashrate: 267.3 GH/sEstimated Time to Block: 19h29m Current Round: 1d11h5m

Pool L* (7 days, 30 days, 90 days): 50.4% 77.1% 90.1%

Why should i point my GH's to p2pool? at this time every share count and  every PPS Pool is better at this moment.

Why goes the L* so drastical down this time?   


X       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄██▀▀         ▀▀██▄
  ▄██▀              ▀██▄
 ▄██     ██▄▄          ██▄
▄██      █████▄▄        ██▄
██       ████████▄▄      ██
██       ███████████▄    ██
██       ██████████▀     ██
▀██      ███████▀       ██▀
 ▀██     ████▀         ██▀
  ▀██▄   █▀          ▄██▀
    ▀██▄▄         ▄▄██▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
.flixxo    X▄████████████████████▄
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
████████████▀▀███████
█████▀████░░░░░░▄████
█████░░░░░░░░░░▄█████
█████▄░░░░░░░░░░██████
██████░░░░░░░░░███████
███████░░░░░░▄████████
████▄▄░░░░▄▄██████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
▀████████████████████▀
▄████████████████████▄
██████████████████████
█████████▀█▀██████████
██████▀▀▀▀▀████████
██████▄▄░░▄▄▄░░███████
████████░░███░░███████
████████░░░░░░▀███████
████████░░███▄░░██████
██████▀▀░░▀▀▀░░░██████
██████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████
█████████▄█▄██████████
██████████████████████
▀████████████████████▀
X[[]]X
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1006


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 12:52:59 PM
 #4589

Block ETA is now 19hrs and rising, when we go over 24hrs (pool rate under 200GH) mining will become totally unprofitable...
We need more power!


That would be difficult.

If I'm new to p2pool and i see something like this:
Pool Hashrate: 267.3 GH/sEstimated Time to Block: 19h29m Current Round: 1d11h5m

Pool L* (7 days, 30 days, 90 days): 50.4% 77.1% 90.1%

Why should i point my GH's to p2pool? at this time every share count and  every PPS Pool is better at this moment.

Why goes the L* so drastical down this time?   

Variance is always higher when a pool's hashrate is a smaller proportion of the network's hashrate. p2Pool is just as likely to be extremely lucky.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008


/dev/null


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 01:34:10 PM
 #4590

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
lenny_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000


DARKNETMARKETS.COM


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 01:46:20 PM
 #4591

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

Also I think about increasing difficulty. Current share time avg. 10sec is generating 10-15% DOA/orphans. That's the main reason why people don't use p2pool - no point to do that when you see miner stats with 10% rejected rate and loosing money.
I am voting to increase share time to 30 or 60 seconds and PPLNS time to 7 days. This would decrease stale ratio and attract more miners.

DARKNET MARKETS >> https://DARKNETMARKETS.COM
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1006


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 01:49:57 PM
 #4592

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

Also I think about increasing difficulty. Current share time avg. 10sec is generating 10-15% DOA/orphans. That's the main reason why people don't use p2pool - no point to do that when you see miner stats with 10% rejected rate and loosing money.
I am voting to increase share time to 30 or 60 seconds and PPLNS time to 7 days. This would decrease stale ratio and attract more miners.

This is why PPLNS should always be in terms of the last n shares, not time. Difficulty and pool hashrate do not have an effect on the score variance if there is no termporal term in the scoring function.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008


/dev/null


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 01:50:14 PM
 #4593

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

Also I think about increasing difficulty. Current share time avg. 10sec is generating 10-15% DOA/orphans. That's the main reason why people don't use p2pool - no point to do that when you see miner stats with 10% rejected rate and loosing money.
I am voting to increase share time to 30 or 60 seconds and PPLNS time to 7 days. This would decrease stale ratio and attract more miners.
seems fine

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008


/dev/null


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 01:50:55 PM
 #4594

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

Also I think about increasing difficulty. Current share time avg. 10sec is generating 10-15% DOA/orphans. That's the main reason why people don't use p2pool - no point to do that when you see miner stats with 10% rejected rate and loosing money.
I am voting to increase share time to 30 or 60 seconds and PPLNS time to 7 days. This would decrease stale ratio and attract more miners.

This is why PPLNS should always be in terms of the last n shares, not time. Difficulty and pool hashrate do not have an effect on the score variance if there is no termporal term in the scoring function.
then rephrase it, set the PPLNS number so its rougly 7 days Wink

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1006


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 01:55:23 PM
 #4595

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

Also I think about increasing difficulty. Current share time avg. 10sec is generating 10-15% DOA/orphans. That's the main reason why people don't use p2pool - no point to do that when you see miner stats with 10% rejected rate and loosing money.
I am voting to increase share time to 30 or 60 seconds and PPLNS time to 7 days. This would decrease stale ratio and attract more miners.

This is why PPLNS should always be in terms of the last n shares, not time. Difficulty and pool hashrate do not have an effect on the score variance if there is no termporal term in the scoring function.
then rephrase it, set the PPLNS number so its rougly 7 days Wink

I know what you mean, and it would help in the short term. But id n was set to (for example) 2 x current Difficulty, then you'd never have to change it. The PPLNS shouldn't be any number of days.

What would happen if the pool's percentage of the hashrate increased significantly? You'd want to change the number of days back down in order to reduce the time it took to recieve payment.



Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008


/dev/null


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 01:57:37 PM
 #4596

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

Also I think about increasing difficulty. Current share time avg. 10sec is generating 10-15% DOA/orphans. That's the main reason why people don't use p2pool - no point to do that when you see miner stats with 10% rejected rate and loosing money.
I am voting to increase share time to 30 or 60 seconds and PPLNS time to 7 days. This would decrease stale ratio and attract more miners.

This is why PPLNS should always be in terms of the last n shares, not time. Difficulty and pool hashrate do not have an effect on the score variance if there is no termporal term in the scoring function.
then rephrase it, set the PPLNS number so its rougly 7 days Wink

I know what you mean, and it would help in the short term. But id n was set to (for example) 2 x current Difficulty, then you'd never have to change it. The PPLNS shouldn't be any number of days.

What would happen if the pool's percentage of the hashrate increased significantly? You'd want to change the number of days back down in order to reduce the time it took to recieve payment.
increasing it to a longer N would also help little miners, if they get a share and there is no block found they get nothing and are pissed, i saw that already some times.

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1006


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 02:00:54 PM
 #4597

the PPLNS system should be changed to the last 7 days.

Also I think about increasing difficulty. Current share time avg. 10sec is generating 10-15% DOA/orphans. That's the main reason why people don't use p2pool - no point to do that when you see miner stats with 10% rejected rate and loosing money.
I am voting to increase share time to 30 or 60 seconds and PPLNS time to 7 days. This would decrease stale ratio and attract more miners.

This is why PPLNS should always be in terms of the last n shares, not time. Difficulty and pool hashrate do not have an effect on the score variance if there is no termporal term in the scoring function.
then rephrase it, set the PPLNS number so its rougly 7 days Wink

I know what you mean, and it would help in the short term. But id n was set to (for example) 2 x current Difficulty, then you'd never have to change it. The PPLNS shouldn't be any number of days.

What would happen if the pool's percentage of the hashrate increased significantly? You'd want to change the number of days back down in order to reduce the time it took to recieve payment.
increasing it to a longer N would also help little miners, if they get a share and there is no block found they get nothing and are pissed, i saw that already some times.

It might seem unfair, but on average it makes no difference. Smaller miners will experience variance more on this pool especially since the share difficulty is so high for them.

PPLNS set to shares rather than hours will result in reduced variance for all miners.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008


/dev/null


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 02:03:45 PM
 #4598

yes but if the PPLNS N is changed that it is around 7 days (according to the diff rules of p2pool), then its not day nor time based.

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1006


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2013, 02:13:36 PM
 #4599

yes but if the PPLNS N is changed that it is around 7 days (according to the diff rules of p2pool), then its not day nor time based.

You mean set n to ~ 9 x Difficulty? (that's seven days shares at the moment)

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008


/dev/null


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 02:30:46 PM
 #4600

yes but if the PPLNS N is changed that it is around 7 days (according to the diff rules of p2pool), then its not day nor time based.

You mean set n to ~ 9 x Difficulty? (that's seven days shares at the moment)
something like this yes, but we would have to test it first since it means holding a bigger sharechain -> more memory/traffic being used

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
Pages: « 1 ... 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 [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 ... 814 »
  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!