Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2016, 10:21:21 AM *
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  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 [707] 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1808598 times)
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
October 20, 2014, 09:27:12 PM
 #14121

Out of interest: Say you were given the task of designing a portfolio to survive 1000 years, what would it be comprised of?
I don't believe this is a valid question.

We don't have the slightest idea what will be valuable 1000 years from now.

I agree there will be no correct answer until those 1000 years have elapsed, but it's a perfectly valid question, giving insight into how the person answering thinks about wealth stores as long term contenders.

Myself I would stack a portfolio to last 1000 years something like this as a starting point:

50% Precious metals.
30% Bitcoin.
20% items that may be considered valuable antiques by then ( I would have to think more on that one ).

1000 years?

If the value is for me: my body will be gone by then. So most valuable will be some "hardware" for "me" to run on. Some processes by which "I" can exist. Maybe something like the ethereum blockchain and a religion around it to keep it alive and for providing sensing and actuation (humans and other means).

If the storage of value is for my family or clan, cult, sect or whatever: I'd say education and sensible goals and principles for the group would be a good investment. Also means of production and probably more importantly intelligence and modelling, planning capabilities and mechanisms for acquisition and preservance of knowledge and skills.

What the hell, quite a tangent...


Do something weird and get your name into history.


Or maybe just have children?

You're better off starting a religion then tax your followers to fund a Crusades, and if leaders ever start pursuing power or the the truth, issued an edict and confiscate their wealth.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
1481451681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481451681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481451681
Reply with quote  #2

1481451681
Report to moderator
1481451681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481451681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481451681
Reply with quote  #2

1481451681
Report to moderator
1481451681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481451681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481451681
Reply with quote  #2

1481451681
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481451681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481451681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481451681
Reply with quote  #2

1481451681
Report to moderator
1481451681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481451681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481451681
Reply with quote  #2

1481451681
Report to moderator
1481451681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481451681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481451681
Reply with quote  #2

1481451681
Report to moderator
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
October 20, 2014, 10:13:44 PM
 #14122

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

... also note Charles Hoskinson has been involved with both BitShares and Ethereum at different stages.

justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 20, 2014, 10:36:05 PM
 #14123

... also note Charles Hoskinson has been involved with both BitShares and Ethereum at different stages.
He's got quite the track record.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 20, 2014, 11:06:39 PM
 #14124

... also note Charles Hoskinson has been involved with both BitShares and Ethereum at different stages.
He's got quite the track record.

Yeah, his past public appearances have always been suspicious to my eyes ands ears.  Now we don't even see him anymore.

Most people are going to lose money investing in cryptocurrencies.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 20, 2014, 11:07:45 PM
 #14125

... also note Charles Hoskinson has been involved with both BitShares and Ethereum at different stages.
He's got quite the track record.

Which is?

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 20, 2014, 11:11:09 PM
 #14126

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 20, 2014, 11:25:26 PM
 #14127

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.


Whoa....that's really naive. See SEC vs Trendon Shavers and US vs Faeilla. Both tried to use the "but i didn't use dollars" defense. Both had their arguments easily and completely shot down.

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 20, 2014, 11:35:35 PM
 #14128

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.

it doesn't matter if no fiat is involved, even tho i fail to see how it can't be involved as i think you said one can buy btsx with USD.  but even if so, these are shares we're talking about and the SEC won't let that go unregulated.  it's very similar to how the IRS has ruled that income even tho paid in BTC needs to be taxed as ordinary income in USD.  i know this for a fact as i had to pay taxes the last couple of years for my newsletter biz as ordinary income even tho it was paid in BTC.  same as miners too.  even if it is located in HK, the long arm of the US gvt via the SEC will reach there.
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 20, 2014, 11:49:43 PM
 #14129

Here ya go Doc! I said I would get around to it.. im at work now so I was able to look into this post.. its your thread so I've highlighted your remarks in bold followed by my response.

Bitsharesx is an eco system... that allows you to create assets, some are backed by a peg and some are not.. freely traded. The ones backed by a peg (costing about 300k btsx right now)
what do you mean by this?  is this a 1x fee or something?

Yes one time fee, intentionally high so as to not dilute the marketplace with needless assets which will not be used. Pegged assets are bitGLD/bitSLV/bitUSD/bitEUR/bigGBP etc to encourage outside money from outside of the crypto sphere.

Quote
are meant to be tracked via a feed fed in through the delegates, which gets itself around security issues of POS (Delegate-POS is the algo name). Which Larimer/Buterin seem to agree is the best one moving forward away from POW.

still amazing to me Buterin raised all that BTC yet doesn't even have this fundamental strategy resolved yet

I think he's a smart guy and is taking the time to do it right and designing for testability.

Quote
Another one is bitBTC which tracks BTC... so you can go to and from BTC to BTSX.. same way as going from USD to BTSX and back.. however BTC <--> BTSX. The idea is that many businesses can use bitUSD to offer services to customers and be able to transfer these bitUSD across the chain quickly and efficiently without having to pay fees , and use the built-in bitshares privacy features for annonymous transactions etc etc you get the picture...

There are 101 oracles (and more lining up as backups incase of some going down) doing this feeding and yet it is a more decentralized model than bitcoin (in the way of large concentrated mining pools).
i'll disagree with this.  just b/c there might be larger #'s of delegates doesn't mean they're more decentralized.  many could be owned by same individual.  i don't believe voting necessarily solves this either b/c it sounds like that could be gamed.

There are costs to voting, thus it wouldn't be economical to try to "game" the system. Like I said there are safegaurds to avoid unscrupulous voting delegates, and as soon as they are detected they will be voted out faster than a mining pool can be "told" to stop doing what its doing.

Quote
These oracles or delegates get paid to sign blocks as a job. Because of this there is incentive to provide this service.. as it is profitable to do so at these prices.
of course there is incentive.  no work needs to be done.  just get the votes from either your buddies or already vested interests in the POS system then get paid to simply sign blocks.  sounds like centralization to me even worse than Bitcoin mining. btw, i think there's a chance we've seen the last time a miner gets to 50% of the network hashrate as we're getting commoditization of hardware with 10x lower prices to the small miner.  this is good and could reverse the swing of the pendulum back towards increasing decentralization as a result.  the other evidence this is happening is the hashrate is leveling off and we could be stuck at 14nm ASICS for a few years.  that's a good thing.

You make logical assumptions and try to extrapolate direction of the bitcoin mining cult in a similar way to my argument that DPOS is just as decentralized if not more decentralized than POW
Quote
.  

this is an insider club from the outset In order to become a delegate you must set up a delegate as yourself and get voted to become an official bitshares delegate.. people have to beleive in you and there is an in-chain voting mechanism used to figure out who are qualified to become delegates based on popularity of votes (there are obvious safe-gaurds to avoid people from getting them selves voted in easier).

so how can this be successful in the long run? there is a tremendous incentive to own several delegate nodes. insider club=ponzi scheme.

Anyone can join the insider-club to become a delegate and you will be voted in if others get voted out... so essentially creating a backlog of delegates ready to go on moments notice. Once you are a delegate you are part of the "in" and you want to hold your positions thus you do your best not to get voted out.
Quote

It is meant to work in conjuction of a currency as bitUSD is doing.. and bitBTC... it is not meant to work as a currency itself as the chain is used for mor ethan just a tx ledger for payments (breaking satoshi's golden rule)... however if thought about in another way that it works in partership with bit coin.. in that bitcoin may be used as a currency and bitshares may be used to issue assets/stocks/companies that operate within clearly defined rules without corruption then it makes sense on where to draw lines between bitcoin and bitshares... and IMO it is aptly named in that regard.. bitshares for share issuance and bitcoin for coin transactions and spending.

can u explain how the btcx interface with the BTC blockchain?  is it using the 40 byte op_return and for what purpose?

I believe it creates new OP codes in script for transactions similar to XCP and other altcoins like SYSCOIN do to create new services (you should read the code) I only took a few moments to peak at the code didn't even read the script or tx signing, just saw different OP's assigned during transaction creation and inferred that it must be doing what I think it's doing... however the code is pretty much rewritten, wallet implementation, web UI, CLI is all new. I think it's important to draw the distinction between using blockchain technology and altcoin. An Altcoin is following the footstep of bitcoin in code, it will try to keep up to date with bitcoin and leverage bitcoin services going forward while a non altcoin which may borrow blockchain technology to create new concepts isn't an altcoin at all. I think as people become more aware... and the smart community reps invited to speak with government officials in legislation meetings allude to that there should be a fundamental separation between these 2 concepts and when discussing Bitcoin people like Andreas speak about blockchain technologies and what they can do for you instead of bitcoin specifically. This is a system that utilizes blockchain technology for concept other than what bitcoin was intended for. I also posit going forward that some altcoins will benefit greatly from being just that an altcoin while other "non" alt-coins will suffer from not being able to keep up with bitcoin source base and all of its derivatives ie: BitCore and the likes.

Quote
You might ask why would I transfer my BTC to bitBTC? Well the incentive is that you get paid interest by holding, through a decentralized solution. If you hold atleast a few months then it is in the range of 10-15% per year right now.. better than any bank.

since eventually the original BTC needs to be paid back along with BTC interest, how does the system continue long term as BTC doesn't inflate?

It is an open market, you can buy and sell decentralized on the bitBTC/BTC exchange... you find a buyer of bitBTC if you are selling BTC and vice versa.  bitBTC is just as deflationary as BTC it is a 1:1 correlation. Someone has to pay the interest for you to gain it. The interest rate varies depending on shorting going on the exchange etc.. thus at some point interest will dry up for this pair.

Quote
It is the only true form of interest payment for bitcoins because you hold your keys.. while all other solutions cause you to send BTC to someone else thus the keys controlling your coins change... in this method you hold your bitBTC keys the same way you hold your BTC keys and essentially earn interest over time... the interest is accumulated fees that people who "short" bitUSD and other assets pay.. you can go long and short bitUSD and other assets just like any other market... market makers and arb bots do this to make money off the spreads and liquidity.. and the holders of the assets win by collecting fees.

holding bitBTC privkeys is not the same as holding BTC privkeys. be careful.

You hold both keys, and to transfer between them you must use the decentralized exchange. At no point does anyone ever read your private keys other than you. You transfer via public keys obviously and/or exchange transactions.

Quote


Other fees that are paid are used to burn coins to reduce the total overall supply so anyone holding anything in btsx will become more valuable over time.

at the very best then it sounds like someone would just want to hold btsx as its supply will be decreasing.  the whole thing sounds dicey to me.  none of these overlays will take off until Bitcoin itself is solidified and accepted as a bonafide currency/money.

Recently there is discussion to be able to infuse capital using community consensus to fund further growth.. something not possible in anything else done. With the new voting mechanism being developed you will be able to vote on new changes that will need funding (not rely on generous developers) but to find quality engineers from outside this field, to work on next generation technologies to help bitshares grow. If community deems it is acceptable the capital is infused into BTS (previously BTSX) and thus the entire ecosystem enjoys the benefit of the new technology to be developed.
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 20, 2014, 11:58:09 PM
 #14130

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.


Whoa....that's really naive. See SEC vs Trendon Shavers and US vs Faeilla. Both tried to use the "but i didn't use dollars" defense. Both had their arguments easily and completely shot down.

Wow really? What's naive is the comparison of this and the two bad case examples you gave. I quickly looked them up on google and after 2 mins I came up with the following:

Shrem was operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, money laundering conspiracy. Money transmitting license applies to anywhere FIAT or regulated money is involved. He was helping fund Silk Road so it was obvious to shut that down.  FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) has stated that the conversion of Bitcoins into U.S. currency is considered to be the transmission of money. If you are not a transmitter, it's buyer beware as of today. (When you can pay your taxes in bitcoin, then its different).

Shavers ran an obvious online ponzi scheme to sway people out of their money. If SEC can investigate and gaurantee that bts is a ponzi scheme and ByteMaster is trying to steal people's money sure... but I don't... do you?
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 12:02:01 AM
 #14131

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.

it doesn't matter if no fiat is involved, even tho i fail to see how it can't be involved as i think you said one can buy btsx with USD.  but even if so, these are shares we're talking about and the SEC won't let that go unregulated.  it's very similar to how the IRS has ruled that income even tho paid in BTC needs to be taxed as ordinary income in USD.  i know this for a fact as i had to pay taxes the last couple of years for my newsletter biz as ordinary income even tho it was paid in BTC.  same as miners too.  even if it is located in HK, the long arm of the US gvt via the SEC will reach there.

TAX yes.. regulating for the purposes of business? No, miners/developers are exempt under BitLicense. If you made gains with bitshares and get out to fiat, sure you gotta pay tax. If you made gains in BTC and still hold that BTC private key, you would be stupid to claim that and get taxed as of today...unless its traceable via an audit... I don't see how the gov't will know without logging into your admin panel and seeing the bitcoin transactions.

Where did I say that you can go onto the bitshares network and buy btsx for USD? you can buy via bitUSD not USD... there is no fiat involved in the bitshares toolkit.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 12:07:15 AM
 #14132

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.


Whoa....that's really naive. See SEC vs Trendon Shavers and US vs Faeilla. Both tried to use the "but i didn't use dollars" defense. Both had their arguments easily and completely shot down.

Wow really? What's naive is the comparison of this and the two bad case examples you gave. I quickly looked them up on google and after 2 mins I came up with the following:

Shrem was operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, money laundering conspiracy. Money transmitting license applies to anywhere FIAT or regulated money is involved. He was helping fund Silk Road so it was obvious to shut that down.  FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) has stated that the conversion of Bitcoins into U.S. currency is considered to be the transmission of money. If you are not a transmitter, it's buyer beware as of today. (When you can pay your taxes in bitcoin, then its different).

Shavers ran an obvious online ponzi scheme to sway people out of their money. If SEC can investigate and gaurantee that bts is a ponzi scheme and ByteMaster is trying to steal people's money sure... but I don't... do you?


WTF. The thesis of your previous post was that if you're not doing business in fiat, traditional securities law/regs don't apply. Those two cases above (and others) disprove the idea that you need to be using fiat for the gov the apply existing regs to you.

If I misread you, sorry; please clarify your statements about why it supposedly matters that btsx isn't government-issued fiat.


Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 12:07:46 AM
 #14133

... also note Charles Hoskinson has been involved with both BitShares and Ethereum at different stages.
He's got quite the track record.

Which is?
Bitcoin Education Project, Mastercoin, Bitshares, Ethereum.
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 12:27:45 AM
 #14134

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.


Whoa....that's really naive. See SEC vs Trendon Shavers and US vs Faeilla. Both tried to use the "but i didn't use dollars" defense. Both had their arguments easily and completely shot down.

Wow really? What's naive is the comparison of this and the two bad case examples you gave. I quickly looked them up on google and after 2 mins I came up with the following:

Shrem was operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, money laundering conspiracy. Money transmitting license applies to anywhere FIAT or regulated money is involved. He was helping fund Silk Road so it was obvious to shut that down.  FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) has stated that the conversion of Bitcoins into U.S. currency is considered to be the transmission of money. If you are not a transmitter, it's buyer beware as of today. (When you can pay your taxes in bitcoin, then its different).

Shavers ran an obvious online ponzi scheme to sway people out of their money. If SEC can investigate and gaurantee that bts is a ponzi scheme and ByteMaster is trying to steal people's money sure... but I don't... do you?


WTF. The thesis of your previous post was that if you're not doing business in fiat, traditional securities law/regs don't apply. Those two cases above (and others) disprove the idea that you need to be using fiat for the gov the apply existing regs to you.

If I misread you, sorry; please clarify your statements about why it supposedly matters that btsx isn't government-issued fiat.



But you gave two case examples of where it was obvious someone was either trying to steal money from someone in an immoral way (what would 100 people do test) and one was actually using fiat thus considered a money transmitter. If bitshares through issuing shares becomes a money transmitter then yes it must be regulated but as of now it can't be... and I believe if it happens that way.. then sending bitcoins to one another will also need a money transmitter license.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 12:53:59 AM
 #14135

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.


Whoa....that's really naive. See SEC vs Trendon Shavers and US vs Faeilla. Both tried to use the "but i didn't use dollars" defense. Both had their arguments easily and completely shot down.

Wow really? What's naive is the comparison of this and the two bad case examples you gave. I quickly looked them up on google and after 2 mins I came up with the following:

Shrem was operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, money laundering conspiracy. Money transmitting license applies to anywhere FIAT or regulated money is involved. He was helping fund Silk Road so it was obvious to shut that down.  FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) has stated that the conversion of Bitcoins into U.S. currency is considered to be the transmission of money. If you are not a transmitter, it's buyer beware as of today. (When you can pay your taxes in bitcoin, then its different).

Shavers ran an obvious online ponzi scheme to sway people out of their money. If SEC can investigate and gaurantee that bts is a ponzi scheme and ByteMaster is trying to steal people's money sure... but I don't... do you?


WTF. The thesis of your previous post was that if you're not doing business in fiat, traditional securities law/regs don't apply. Those two cases above (and others) disprove the idea that you need to be using fiat for the gov the apply existing regs to you.

If I misread you, sorry; please clarify your statements about why it supposedly matters that btsx isn't government-issued fiat.



But you gave two case examples of where it was obvious someone was either trying to steal money from someone in an immoral way (what would 100 people do test) and one was actually using fiat thus considered a money transmitter. If bitshares through issuing shares becomes a money transmitter then yes it must be regulated but as of now it can't be... and I believe if it happens that way.. then sending bitcoins to one another will also need a money transmitter license.


The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 01:09:41 AM
 #14136

Out of interest: Say you were given the task of designing a portfolio to survive 1000 years, what would it be comprised of?

I want to play!  Initial distribution, given at least $1 million:

20% ancient Greek, Roman, Chinese, & early American coins
20% Eurasian artifacts (suit of armor, Egyptian mummy, Ming vase, & Japanese sword type stuff)
15% French & Italian vineyards
15% English & Swiss orchards & farmland
10% rare books and documents
10% Enlightenment, scientific, industrial, and computer revolution collectibles/artifacts
5% US & Royal Mint bullion
5% crypto (4% Bitcoin + 1% Monero)

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Wallets - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }


Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016
Blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.  davout 2015
Blocksize is an intentionally limited resource, like the 21e6 BTC limit.  Changing it degrades the surrounding economics, creating negative incentives.  Jeff Garzik 2013


"I believed @Dashpay instamine was a bug & not a feature but then read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231
I'm not against people making money, but can't support questionable origins."
https://twitter.com/Tone_LLT/status/717822927908024320


The raison d'être of bitcoin is trustlessness. - Eric Lombrozo 2015
It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be “Above the Law”  Paul Sztorc 2015
Resiliency, not efficiency, is the paramount goal of decentralized, non-state sanctioned currency -Jon Matonis 2015

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016

Technology tends to move in the direction of making surveillance easier, and the ability of computers to track us doubles every eighteen months. - Phil Zimmerman 2013

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004

"Hard forks cannot be co
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 01:14:22 AM
 #14137

Out of interest: Say you were given the task of designing a portfolio to survive 1000 years, what would it be comprised of?

I want to play!  Initial distribution, given at least $1 million:

20% ancient Greek, Roman, Chinese, & early American coins
20% Eurasian artifacts (suit of armor, Egyptian mummy, Ming vase, & Japanese sword type stuff)
15% French & Italian vineyards
15% English & Swiss orchards & farmland
10% rare books and documents
10% Enlightenment, scientific, industrial, and computer revolution collectibles/artifacts
5% US & Royal Mint bullion
5% crypto (4% Bitcoin + 1% Monero)

100% moon land titles

sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 01:36:14 AM
 #14138

back to the Bitshares thing.  i now realize that it has its own blockchain and is just a variation of the same POS scheme.  sorry, i don't study these alts.

the fact that Daniel Larimer keeps changing the protocol is concerning, not to mention his public nature and those required of the delegate nodes.  the merger with Ethereum indicates to me that both are struggling to come up with a viable solution perhaps never to be found.

At my first reading of it, I thought it might be an SEC honeypot.  That the SEC wanted to get in on the great deal the FBI got by seizing crypto.  After more time looking at it, it seems more to be true believers, but I still haven't figured out how it can survive being crushed by cascading failures from economic attacks.  George Soros would have a field day with it, if there ever gets to be any real money involved.

More like regulatory attacks. Don't forget that rumor that came out on reddit about the SEC/FINCEN coming out with a surprise announcement soon. There's no way, imo, they are going to let share issuance go unchallenged, especially when they have public figures to attack.

There is no fiat involved... unless you can pay taxes with btsx its not liable to SEC/FINCEN rules currently.. if they change it.. it would invalidate bitcoin aswell. Share issuance only needs to be registered legally at the gateway level between bitUSD etc and USD. Those are external entities outside of bitshares.

Merger with ethereum? They simply past ideas off of each other.. and now bitshares to be turing complete and ethereum to possible go to a more DPOS solution. I think its good for everyone.. but a merger im not sure about that.

The public image (posting his real name) is great for the crypto community and it would be bad if fiat was involved so legal system can go after him to try to shut it down but the way it was designed.. it was designed in every way to comply with legal system if it ever came down to that... even to a point where the company responsible for the wallet development & downloads is based in Hong Kong on purpose and replacing the word "Dividend" and "Interest" to "Burn Rate"... these little things mean they have and are thinking ahead.. and it is in the decisions they make where we place our money as investors because it precludes any technology that they come up with, which is already proving to compete with all of the competitors if not the best solution out there for what it does.

BTW if you take a look at the code, it is not an alt coin per definition.. the code is totally rewritten. It uses OP codes similar to counter party to determine bid/asks/shorts/votes and im nto sure about asset issueing.. but I only looked at the code for 5 mins.. im sure since you are pretty interested you can read up a bit more.


Whoa....that's really naive. See SEC vs Trendon Shavers and US vs Faeilla. Both tried to use the "but i didn't use dollars" defense. Both had their arguments easily and completely shot down.

Wow really? What's naive is the comparison of this and the two bad case examples you gave. I quickly looked them up on google and after 2 mins I came up with the following:

Shrem was operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, money laundering conspiracy. Money transmitting license applies to anywhere FIAT or regulated money is involved. He was helping fund Silk Road so it was obvious to shut that down.  FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) has stated that the conversion of Bitcoins into U.S. currency is considered to be the transmission of money. If you are not a transmitter, it's buyer beware as of today. (When you can pay your taxes in bitcoin, then its different).

Shavers ran an obvious online ponzi scheme to sway people out of their money. If SEC can investigate and gaurantee that bts is a ponzi scheme and ByteMaster is trying to steal people's money sure... but I don't... do you?


WTF. The thesis of your previous post was that if you're not doing business in fiat, traditional securities law/regs don't apply. Those two cases above (and others) disprove the idea that you need to be using fiat for the gov the apply existing regs to you.

If I misread you, sorry; please clarify your statements about why it supposedly matters that btsx isn't government-issued fiat.



But you gave two case examples of where it was obvious someone was either trying to steal money from someone in an immoral way (what would 100 people do test) and one was actually using fiat thus considered a money transmitter. If bitshares through issuing shares becomes a money transmitter then yes it must be regulated but as of now it can't be... and I believe if it happens that way.. then sending bitcoins to one another will also need a money transmitter license.


The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

They hired the same lawfirm that bitshares guys are using so im sure they can leverage the same work. The fact that a crime happened was probably why they were charged but who would they go after here? Its decentralized.

Btw I think overstock wants to issue the same stocks from ny so they would somehow bring them in (i think) this that is subject to securities regulation. That wouldnt apply here either. Either way its fine and not a reason for it to fail thats for sure.
STT
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204



View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 02:46:05 AM
 #14139

Quote
5% US & Royal Mint bullion

UK tax law exempts gains from gold coins issued by royal mint, I dont think USA does ?      Out of your list I might go 100% gold if we talking 1000 years, based on president, an Indian temple was recently audited and after many centuries it was realised they have gigantic fortunes.  Unfortunately books expire over many years or take alot of care, this temple didnt even know they had this stuff.   Land title can be lost just from a new road built your way, politics overwhelms many principles but gold transports and doesnt degrade.    Bury it and redirect a river to flow over it Smiley

charleshoskinson
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826

Director of the Bitcoin Education Project


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 04:11:29 AM
 #14140

Quote
Bitcoin Education Project, Mastercoin, Bitshares, Ethereum.

I just want to clarify a few things. First, I have never been involved in the Mastercoin project in any capacity at any time. Second, while I founded Invictus Innovations with Dan Larimer back in July of last year, I left the company and have had no equity, position or say in anything they have done since early October of 2013. I was in no way involved with protoshares, angelshares or any decisions involving bitshares. Furthermore, with Ethereum, I helped bootstrap the operations of the organization including the Swiss side of things and advised them on some strategic issues. My consultancy ended in June and I haven't been involved in the project in any role since other than occasionally chatting with the founders about technical issues.

The revolution begins with the mind and ends with the heart. Knowledge for all, accessible to all and shared by all
Pages: « 1 ... 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 [707] 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 ... 1560 »
  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!