Bitcoin Forum
January 21, 2018, 04:55:40 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 [110] 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 ... 224 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN]CureCoin - CURECOIN TEAM HAS TAKEN RANK 1 ON FOLDING@HOME!!!  (Read 669131 times)
Vorksholk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile WWW
June 02, 2014, 04:45:36 PM
 #2181

The fact that I still did not got any coins appearing on the pool after 2 days started to bother me a little.
No answer to my tickets on the pool either (even if they probaly did not work on sunday)
Hey boubou, what's your F@H username?
Hi, my username is "boudje"

What is your username on cryptobullionpools.com? On the Folding@Home stats, I'm seeing your username with a capital "B" spelled "Boudje", with a gain in the last 24 hours of 1674 points.

Fold Proteins, earn cryptos! CureCoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603757.0
1516553740
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1516553740

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1516553740
Reply with quote  #2

1516553740
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1516553740
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1516553740

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1516553740
Reply with quote  #2

1516553740
Report to moderator
1516553740
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1516553740

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1516553740
Reply with quote  #2

1516553740
Report to moderator
Vorksholk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile WWW
June 02, 2014, 05:14:37 PM
 #2182

The above needs to be placed on the appropriate reddit thread.
The accusations that the alleged "lead-developer" put on there are very inaccurate and damaging to this project.
Purple-monkey-dishwasher.

I'd like to post that on the reddit thread, but I don't want to create any form of flame war...



We've been fairly quiet on the threads where jcoff talks about Curecoin. To clarify a few points though, he is not the "Lead Dev" of F@H as he claims to be, he developed the NaCL (Chrome folding) client, as well as the current desktop-version client, and likely contributes some other code elsewhere in the system. He brings up a few valid points, namely the centralization of the project. To summarize a longer explanation I went into on IRC, there are essentially four main options for integrating scientific computations into a cryptocurrency:

1.) Follow the path of Primecoin/Riecoin, where you create a proof-of-work which, while having some mathematical interest, doesn't have significant adaptability. From a decentralization standpoint, this option rocks, as it keeps the creation of work decentralized. However, the results of the PoW are not particularly helpful to science, and a new coin (or a fork of the coin) would be required to attempt proofs of another related mathematical theorem, such as the frequency with which primes are created, or the patterns? they will follow.

2.) Create a coin with a proof-of-work system based around the clients themselves collecting stats from the Stanford website, and agreeing on point payouts. This proposition, while on the surface quite decentralized, is also quite susceptible to errors. A change in the formatting of the Stanford stats, a change to the way points are assigned, etc. would cause massive client panic, and the network would be inoperable for days until the majority of users adopted a hot patch created by the developers. Not something that can occur in a legitimate currency, so this idea is, naturally, removed from consideration... Additionally, this idea would not allow easy transitions to include other distributed computing projects, such as Rosetta@Home, SETI@Home, World Community Grid. . .

3.) Create a coin which, with each block, creates a subsidy that is paid out to a pool account. The pool account would collect the subsidies created, and every day the server would look at the available coin balance, and split/payout that proportionally to all users, based on their computational resources contributed. This idea makes the folding server a large target, as the subsidy would be paid out to a hard-coded address, which, if the private key was obtained for it, would compromise the folding component of the currency.

4.) The method we chose involves the folding payout coins to be premined. This has several benefits, which was the reason we chose this path: we have a constant amount of currency, so we can stabilize folding payouts by having the same exact amount paid out (total) per day, reducing the risk of slow blocks impacting folding rewards, the premine can generate PoS to give additional rewards to folders, and those coins act as a major stake in the currency, which allows PoS blocks to be created, further increasing the difficulty of performing some form of 51% attack against the network, and the coins can, similar to the above option, be seen on the blockchain, on the public ledger. Similar to option #3, this approach allows us to add additional distributed computing projects to Curecoin in the future.

Admittedly, like all the above options, option number 4 has some shortcomings. The centralization of payouts worries some people, and the fact that a large number of coins are controlled by one party is also quite concerning to many. We saw this as the best option despite these inherent flaws, and therefore made the coin with that model in mind.

That is not to say that, in the future, the coin could not be adapted to, at some point, migrate all user balances and implement alternate network rules--once the blockchain has a significant and semi-constant hashing power, one option would be to make one such migration, in which a block subsidy is introduced, and all remaining folding premine funds would either not transfer over, or would be destroyed. Another option is to implement some form of network rule for the emission of folding funds in a more predictable manner, however it would still, at some level, be reliant on block speeds. If such a modification was to be introduced to the Curecoin network, it would require quite the organizational feat, and the transition would likely by disruptive for a short period of time.

As to complaints about the speed of payouts occurring, one of the things Josh and I have been working on "behind the scenes" (and in IRC) is tightening the screws of the system, and a few days ago we shaved off nearly 14 hours from the time it takes from the submission of a WU until it is credited in the system on our end.

We've also been extremely busy with figuring out how the BTC:Chicago conference's Curecoin booth will be done, if anyone has any ideas/experience they would like to offer, either post it here, or hop on IRC!


Thank You for the detailed answer.
Now if you added this information to the OP or Curecoin.net with links to updated information about the developer team and the LCC holding the coins it would already remove so much uncertainty and add credibility to the whole operation.
 
I agree that while the premine option is far from perfect it's hard to think of a better solution for now.
Jcoffland proposed a way where Stanford would issue certificates for WU's which could be used as Proof of Work. Is this something you might look into and try to work with Stanford to maybe get it implemented ? Now that they have seen the potential benefits Curecoin will bring to F@H maybe tehy will be more willing to work more closely with you guys ?

About the conference: Have you guys considered the idea of selling Curecoin gift cards which would be a mean for people to support the F@H cause as more buy support will directly bring more power to the network ? It's something that could only work and be unique for Curecoin and could attract people previously not familiar with cryptocurrencies.

Could be something in the lines of " 100Cur will help solves 10 WU's". I guess technically it would have to be in the form of pre printed paper wallets  where the private key is scratchable like a lottery ticket or smth and the amount of Cures and WU's could be printed on at the point of the sale. You could create a fund where these would be financed from initially and buy back what ever was sold during the day from the markets at every evening. Obviously a public ledger with addresses and balances would have to be kept. Would be great if the gift card could be digital also but I dont have an idea how to deal with the private keys then.

Some sort of effort clearly has to be made to market the coin as these days it's unfortunately not working on the principle "If you build it, they will come".

I'll chat with LasersHurt today about getting some more clarity on curecoin.net for the premine holdings. Smiley

Here's what jcoffland said about certificates:

"The first thing I would ask of the CureCoin project, is to make it 100% clear to those in the folding team that they should not get angry with Folding@home if there is a problem with their points. Naturally we are happy to help and do our best to resolve problems with points but we have limited resources. We already deal regularly with people angry about points. Now that they might be worth real money there's a real possibility of people freaking out and giving us hell over the mistakes that can and do happen. This should be one of the first items on your knowledge base page.

Secondly, CureCoin should work with us to create a CureCoin 2.0 where signed certificates issued by Stanford which represent points are accepted directly into the CureCoin blockchain. This would eliminate the possibility of incorrectly allocating CureCoins on the CureCoin side. Securing the work servers could be handled by Stanford issuing an allocation of CureCoin points to work servers which they could grant to users for folding power. All secured with public-key crypto. After these changes the only point of failure would be at Stanford and could be kept under close guard. However, I must point out that I cannot guarantee that the Pande Lab will choose to allocate resources to this. That's not up to me.

If CureCoin can address the first issue ASAP and start working towards the second issue I would be greatly appeased."

As for his first point about the separation between F@H and Curecoin, I feel we have fairly well shown the distinction between the two projects, however it couldn't hurt to add some sort of thing on the pool, like a banner.


For his signed certificate idea, it appears to be quite interesting on the surface, and is actually similar to another idea I had proposed a while ago which Josh and I decided wasn't likely feasible. If the certificates representing some value of points were assigned Stanford-side, maybe introduced to the network by a trusted node setup or private/public key confirmation, they could be accepted into the blockchain. However, depending on the implementation of this idea, it could cause significant blockchain bloat. I can think of three ways this would work (though I'm sure I'm missing some awesome ideas here):

1.) Stanford signs a certificate for each submitted WU, credits the points to the username, which could be recorded in the blockchain as an alias. Obvious blockchain bloat, as blockchain size scales linearly with increases in folding power.

2.) Stanford signs a certificate daily for each user, credits the points to the username, blockchain alias, etc. Much smaller blockchain bloat, scales in a linear fashion with increase in users rather than in folding power.

3.) Stanford signs a certificate daily for total coins minted, signing those coins over to a public address. Payouts then occur from there. No benefit derived over a simple block subsidy, except keeping a consistent flow of coins.

If we were to go this route, my personal choice would be #2. A few things would need to be in place for such a system to work:
--> Central trusted method of introducing certificates to network. I'd opt for a commonly-known public key, and then certificates signed by a private key. Each certificate would be trivial to confirm authenticity of, and then a transaction could be deterministically produced and confirmed by any node on the network. An alternate method which I would suggest against would involve a centralized node structure.
--> A rewrite of various components of the coin to shift mintage over to a certificate-based and PoW hybrid system.
--> A method of migrating current balances to the new system.

There are several different options for migrating balances to the new network system. A change could be implemented which, at a certain block, hard-forked and began creating block subsidies or something of the like based off of certificates. Alternately, it may make more sense to build a brand new network, and migrate existing balances over. This could occur in a centralized manner where a premine is created on the new chain and user balances are manually converted, or the new network could use the same addressing method where private keys are valid on both networks, and as a result an automated system could crawl the curecoin blockchain at a certain, planned block for *all* balances, and send out new coins proportionally.

One other obstacle which jcoff alluded to in his post dealt with the willingness of Stanford to integrate with Curecoin. Currently, Stanford (specifically Pande Labs) views the Curecoin project in a positive light, but is, as would be expected, distancing themselves from it for the time being, and giving no official endorsement. We of course contacted Pande labs months prior to the launch of Curecoin, and at the time any integration beyond our access to public statistics was mostly ruled out. As the Curecoin project evolves, there is of course the possibility of Pande Labs being open to higher levels of integration, at which point this certificate idea would become much more feasible.

Another point to note is that such an integration would likely remove the coin's ability to add additional distributed computing projects in the future. Not a deal breaker, but something to consider.

If this certificate idea becomes integrated, it might make more sense to create an entirely new coin without basing it on existing source code, so that "Curecoin 2.0" would be built from the ground up around certificate-based coin mintage, and also to provide a simpler platform for forks of that new source to merge-fold with us. Food for thought.

We have considered the idea of selling Curecoins at the booth, but unfortunately we don't believe the sale of a digital currency like Curecoin from a central source like a booth is legal (in the USA, at least) without appropriate licensing, which we don't have. We will be giving out Curecoins at the booth though!

Fold Proteins, earn cryptos! CureCoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603757.0
ifyoubuildit
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 05:49:31 PM
 #2183

great post Vorsholk. Thanks so much for taking the time to really break that down and explain with curecoin dev is & the potential. Awesome.
primeGPU
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 05:54:05 PM
 #2184

If this certificate idea becomes integrated, it might make more sense to create an entirely new coin without basing it on existing source code, so that "Curecoin 2.0" would be built from the ground up around certificate-based coin mintage, and also to provide a simpler platform for forks of that new source to merge-fold with us. Food for thought.
It's a very bad idea. Current Curecoin 1.0 miners/folders would lose even the slightest interest in the coin. Its inevitable collapse would make Curecoin 2.0 a high-risk asset from the very beginning.
Actually, I'm afraid that even the fact the you presented such an idea in public will drive the price of Curecoin below its current low values.
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 06:26:12 PM
 #2185

Vorksholk, as was mentioned before in a previous message you express your ideas quite well and offer a lot of information people have an interest in.  I realize your time is limited but I do hope you post much more often.  So many questions whether thought or written instantly get taken care of when you post your thoughts.  Thanks for the information!

My personal feelings are that more integration and hopefully acceptance from Stanford and PL can only help legitimize CureCoin for the long term.  I don't want to alienate anyone but the fact is that many miners that became folders will leave this project when it no longer profitable to fold.  Trying to make the coin "profitable" in my view shouldn't be the point, but I know large scale miners have no choice in the matter because they have bills to pay.  Even if they are only here for a short time more WU's got done than would have otherwise been done.  So it is still a win.

I can only ask that when their hardware is no longer profitable but is still functional please redirect it back to CureCoin and folding.  Don't immediately sell your CureCoins.  Just see what happens in a couple years.  Consider it buying a lottery ticket and the work done just might save your life someday.  At least that is how I look at it.

I've read several articles where people realized they had several million dollars in Bitcoins on their hard drives.  I hope that same thing happens with my CureCoins someday.   Grin  Win, lose, or draw though, at least the processing actually did some real valuable work.

Yeah I know it is idealistic but that is what drew me to this concept in the first place.




Vorksholk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile WWW
June 02, 2014, 06:33:14 PM
 #2186

If this certificate idea becomes integrated, it might make more sense to create an entirely new coin without basing it on existing source code, so that "Curecoin 2.0" would be built from the ground up around certificate-based coin mintage, and also to provide a simpler platform for forks of that new source to merge-fold with us. Food for thought.
It's a very bad idea. Current Curecoin 1.0 miners/folders would lose even the slightest interest in the coin. Its inevitable collapse would make Curecoin 2.0 a high-risk asset from the very beginning.
Actually, I'm afraid that even the fact the you presented such an idea in public will drive the price of Curecoin below its current low values.

Hey primeGPU! Why would they lose interest? All balances from 1.0 would transfer to 2.0, but if 2.0 required some form of protocol change beyond the scope of what could be done (efficiently) by a network fork, then 2.0 would be a separate network with transferred balances. It would continue from where 1.0 stopped. Suppose I should have clarified on that point.

Vorksholk, as was mentioned before in a previous message you express your ideas quite well and offer a lot of information people have an interest in.  I realize your time is limited but I do hope you post much more often.  So many questions whether thought or written instantly get taken care of when you post your thoughts.  Thanks for the information!

My personal feelings are that more integration and hopefully acceptance from Stanford and PL can only help legitimize CureCoin for the long term.  I don't want to alienate anyone but the fact is that many miners that became folders will leave this project when it no longer profitable to fold.  Trying to make the coin "profitable" in my view shouldn't be the point, but I know large scale miners have no choice in the matter because they have bills to pay.

I can only ask that when their hardware is no longer profitable but is still functional please redirect it back to CureCoin and folding.  Don't immediately sell your CureCoins.  Just see what happens in a couple years.  Consider it buying a lottery ticket and the work done just might save your life someday.  At least that is how I look at it.

I've read several articles where people realized they had several million dollars in Bitoins on their hard drives.  I hope that same thing happens with my CureCoins someday.   Grin  Win, lose, or draw though, at least the processing actually did some real valuable work.


Thanks! Yeah, I've been more active on IRC, but I'll become more active here too. Additional integration/acceptance from Stanford/PL is definitely a large component of the coin's future success, though given the current state of cryptocurrencies, it's no surprise that they want to stay fairly separated at the moment, which we understand.

Fold Proteins, earn cryptos! CureCoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603757.0
primeGPU
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 06:44:20 PM
 #2187

If this certificate idea becomes integrated, it might make more sense to create an entirely new coin without basing it on existing source code, so that "Curecoin 2.0" would be built from the ground up around certificate-based coin mintage, and also to provide a simpler platform for forks of that new source to merge-fold with us. Food for thought.
It's a very bad idea. Current Curecoin 1.0 miners/folders would lose even the slightest interest in the coin. Its inevitable collapse would make Curecoin 2.0 a high-risk asset from the very beginning.
Actually, I'm afraid that even the fact the you presented such an idea in public will drive the price of Curecoin below its current low values.

Hey primeGPU! Why would they lose interest? All balances from 1.0 would transfer to 2.0, but if 2.0 required some form of protocol change beyond the scope of what could be done (efficiently) by a network fork, then 2.0 would be a separate network with transferred balances. It would continue from where 1.0 stopped. Suppose I should have clarified on that point.
This.
"An entirely new coin" was kinda bad wording Smiley
WilderX
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 08:01:42 PM
 #2188

We need to find A CURE!! Results man... If we do that the value will EXPLODE from the media hype

Everyone and their mothers would be folding by end of the week.

boubou
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 08:05:40 PM
 #2189

The fact that I still did not got any coins appearing on the pool after 2 days started to bother me a little.
No answer to my tickets on the pool either (even if they probaly did not work on sunday)
Hey boubou, what's your F@H username?
Hi, my username is "boudje"

What is your username on cryptobullionpools.com? On the Folding@Home stats, I'm seeing your username with a capital "B" spelled "Boudje", with a gain in the last 24 hours of 1674 points.

On the stanford site, on my profile, I did not have capital B:
Here is the copy/paste of my stats page:


boudje
Team 224497
Change Identity
I support research fighting
Any disease
Points earned
66,970 (See stats)
66,156 go to Team Curecoin's total of 4,436,318,839

As you see, there is no B in my pseudo. Sad

BEHNZiP6UZunp41vurNaQi4r2hvgG57yzi : BdG
Vorksholk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile WWW
June 02, 2014, 11:06:19 PM
 #2190

The fact that I still did not got any coins appearing on the pool after 2 days started to bother me a little.
No answer to my tickets on the pool either (even if they probaly did not work on sunday)
Hey boubou, what's your F@H username?
Hi, my username is "boudje"

What is your username on cryptobullionpools.com? On the Folding@Home stats, I'm seeing your username with a capital "B" spelled "Boudje", with a gain in the last 24 hours of 1674 points.

On the stanford site, on my profile, I did not have capital B:
Here is the copy/paste of my stats page:


boudje
Team 224497
Change Identity
I support research fighting
Any disease
Points earned
66,970 (See stats)
66,156 go to Team Curecoin's total of 4,436,318,839

As you see, there is no B in my pseudo. Sad

That's odd Sad I'm seeing you with a capital here: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=userpage&teamnum=224497&username=Boudje

Fold Proteins, earn cryptos! CureCoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603757.0
cygnusxi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 396


CureCoin Lead Dev


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2014, 01:24:50 AM
 #2191

6/2/2014 Update - Pool payouts have been changed for close to real time payment for your daily work! Fast folding payments less waiting.

The update most of you have been waiting for Wink Update was pushed through with no loss or gain in user points accuracy!

Fold Proteins, earn cryptos! CureCoin. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603757 MergeFold with FoldingCoin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=781352.0
frankkkkkkk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 549


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 01:43:56 AM
 #2192

Good luck with the project, Guys! It looks decent!

stslimited
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 02:29:09 AM
 #2193

how about a multipool that pays out in curecoin
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 02:53:27 AM
 #2194

Good luck with the project, Guys! It looks decent!

Join us if you haven't already.
tripppn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2014, 03:58:41 AM
 #2195

Hardcoreminers Curecoin Pool is open!


- DDOS Protected servers in datacenter (on hardware level)
- Enterprise grade servers hosted in Europe
- Payouts every minute
- SSL for secured browsing
- Ran by pool op with lots of experience



How to mine Curecoin & get paid for your hard work

1. Register on http://cure.hardcoreminers.com
2. Check out : http://cure.hardcoreminers.com/index.php?page=gettingstarted is has all the settings & mining software you need
3. Setup worker
4. Point your miner to stratum+tcp://stratum.eu.cure.hardcoreminers.com:3066
5. Set up your wallet address in your account to recieve payments
Optional. Rent extra hashrate here

Sit back & relax!

First block cracked!

I know where I'm mining now!!!

“You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline - it helps if you have some kind of football team, or some nuclear weapons, but in the very least you need a beer.”
― Frank Zappa
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 04:31:34 AM
 #2196

Calling Aboy68   Cheesy  

Our production is dropping off and I've been having a lot of hardware issues and instability despite under clocking the GPU's literally to their lowest possible settings (both core and speed).  If you are having similar issues try under clocking your RAM.  I got that tip directly from the F@H support and I think the guy may have nailed it!  At least I hope so!  I'll know more in about 24 hours.  I may be able to spin up the GPU's again.  They are running ridiculously under clocked right now.

Despite the bumps I'm still trying to beat you into the top 10.   Grin

Update:  GAH.  Still didn't make it three hours before two machines were down again.  LOL.  So the quest for stability continues...
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 04:36:22 AM
 #2197

6/2/2014 Update - Pool payouts have been changed for close to real time payment for your daily work! Fast folding payments less waiting.

The update most of you have been waiting for Wink Update was pushed through with no loss or gain in user points accuracy!

Well done!
mymenace
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Smile


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 07:58:05 AM
 #2198

so what is the correct symbol to use if it was to be on the curecoin logo

Asclepius - one snake
traditional symbol of medicine, the staff of Asclepius with a single serpent encircling a staff.


or

Caduceus - two snakes
The caduceus is associated with Hermes (Mercury), the messenger of the gods, also known as the god of trickery, wealth and death! Whoops.






http://www.the-symbols.net/guide/caduceus/


would really like to know

thanks


Grin
Legionnairez
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 08:22:06 AM
 #2199

I've been gone for the last week or so, anybody want to update me on interesting bits, pieces and news regarding curecoin? the amount of messages is overwhelming to read completely... Grin
ChristianVirtual
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 71


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 09:41:38 AM
 #2200

so what is the correct symbol to use

A helix ...
Pages: « 1 ... 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 [110] 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 ... 224 »
  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!