Bitcoin Forum
July 21, 2017, 02:47:12 PM *
News: The warning which may be displayed by Bitcoin Core about unknown versions is related to BIP91, and can be safely ignored.
 
   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 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1933041 times)
explorer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 07:40:40 AM
 #14121

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

Wow. That is a long time.


1000 years?  Might I suggest adding some seashells and arrow heads?  Inexpensive hedge, and all that.
1500648432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1500648432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1500648432
Reply with quote  #2

1500648432
Report to moderator
Decentralized search
Search for products or services and get paid for it
pre-sale Token CAT
25 July 50% discount
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1500648432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1500648432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1500648432
Reply with quote  #2

1500648432
Report to moderator
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 12:55:49 PM
 #14122

First, I have never been involved in the Mastercoin project in any capacity at any time
Sorry about that. My memory must have glitched.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:09:19 PM
 #14123

shhhhh.  be quiet...
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:12:49 PM
 #14124

so what would really be cool here is for the $DJT to go back up and make a new high while the $DJI fails to do the same in a counter trend bounce.  that would trigger a Dow Theory non-confirmation which in my work is seen at a majority of major tops in the stock mkt going back over a hundred years.  we did have a mini-one at the recent top but it wasn't large enough in my opinion.  stay tuned:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:14:04 PM
 #14125

so what would really be cool here is for the $DJT to go back up and make a new high while the $DJI fails to do the same in a counter trend bounce.  that would trigger a Dow Theory non-confirmation which in my work is seen at a majority of major tops in the stock mkt going back over a hundred years.  we did have a mini-one at the recent top but it wasn't large enough in my opinion.  stay tuned:



all the while Bitcoin is kicking ass.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:21:54 PM
 #14126

https://twitter.com/cypherdoc2/status/524566140895649792
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:24:00 PM
 #14127

gold breaking up with first challenge @1305:

hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:24:24 PM
 #14128

On a side note: Big Banks Start Charging Clients for Euro Deposits
http://online.wsj.com/articles/big-banks-start-charging-clients-for-euro-deposits-1413569321

Cheesy
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:26:16 PM
 #14129

On a side note: Big Banks Start Charging Clients for Euro Deposits
http://online.wsj.com/articles/big-banks-start-charging-clients-for-euro-deposits-1413569321

Cheesy

lol, what a freak show.

Bitcoin to the Moon.
Cortex7
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 02:40:36 PM
 #14130

Hey Cypherdoc,

I know Benjamin Fulford is not considered a reliable source by many, but nonetheless this makes for fascinating fiction if nothing else:

http://benjaminfulford.net/2014/10/20/did-the-dragon-family-take-control-of-the-federal-reserve-board/

If it were true then I think bitcoin (and gold) would go ballistic as folk leapt to a safe stepping stone during the transition, or do you think most would just buy yuan (if that were actually possible).

There are so many possibilities as to what may happen fairly soonish, most of them will send safety net securities to the moon if they happen.

kehtolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:53:41 PM
 #14131

Hey Cypherdoc,

I know Benjamin Fulford is not considered a reliable source by many, but nonetheless this makes for fascinating fiction if nothing else:

http://benjaminfulford.net/2014/10/20/did-the-dragon-family-take-control-of-the-federal-reserve-board/

If it were true then I think bitcoin (and gold) would go ballistic as folk leapt to a safe stepping stone during the transition, or do you think most would just buy yuan (if that were actually possible).

There are so many possibilities as to what may happen fairly soonish, most of them will send safety net securities to the moon if they happen.

Wow!

All i have to say to that is... "That's a bit mad!"

There does not seem to be much substance to it, it is all unnamed sources, heresay etc. But definitely one of the more 'out there' things I've read today.

The next 24 hours are critical!
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 02:55:26 PM
 #14132

All i have to say to that is... "That's a bit mad!"
Benjamin Fulford is not "a bit" mad...
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:18:41 PM
 #14133

...
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.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.


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: 1526


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:47:17 PM
 #14134

...
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.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!

★☆★Syscoin - Decentralized Marketplace and Multisig Platform
Pay with Bitcoin, ZCash and many more
For more visit Syscoin.org  ★☆★
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:50:09 PM
 #14135

...
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.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



there's something to be learned from GLBSE and Nefario, the first intended global stock trading system first implemented in 2011.  it got shut down after 2 attempts, the last being by the UK regulators.
kehtolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:50:29 PM
 #14136

All i have to say to that is... "That's a bit mad!"
Benjamin Fulford is not "a bit" mad...

Hehe.. ok, I didn't know him. Fully certifiably mad then, if he's like that all the time.

The next 24 hours are critical!
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 04:01:51 PM
 #14137

...
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.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!


You are confused about #1. Money Transmission regulation is distinct from SEC securities-offering regulation.

I'm not saying any of this 100% takes down bitshares or similar systems. Jurisdictional arbitrage will happen, of course. But at the same time, it's naive to think that the SEC and similar bodies in the world's largest markets, will not apply their broadly-written body of regulation to these new platforms. Again, Erik Voorhees experience is a good example. That was a tiny, niche, esoteric offering and the SEC still took enforcement action (~2 years later).



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: 1526


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 05:01:19 PM
 #14138

...
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.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!


You are confused about #1. Money Transmission regulation is distinct from SEC securities-offering regulation.

I'm not saying any of this 100% takes down bitshares or similar systems. Jurisdictional arbitrage will happen, of course. But at the same time, it's naive to think that the SEC and similar bodies in the world's largest markets, will not apply their broadly-written body of regulation to these new platforms. Again, Erik Voorhees experience is a good example. That was a tiny, niche, esoteric offering and the SEC still took enforcement action (~2 years later).



OK so in these cases, they fine Daniel for $50k/$100k for coming up with this software (IDK why this would be the case) or throw him in jail worsed case both of which don't really affect the project itself in the grand scheme of things.

There is noone to go after... it is up to the buyer... the law he was charged(Securities Act of 1933) under states:

Often referred to as the "truth in securities" law, the Securities Act of 1933 has two basic objectives:

1) require that investors receive financial and other significant information concerning securities being offered for public sale; and

2) prohibit deceit, misrepresentations, and other fraud in the sale of securities.

Who is supposed to give them information? Invictus? OK they fine Invictus and tell them that all profits must be surrendered, what profits? Its a self serving ecosystem... they take away their pts/ags/btsx, thats fine....

#2 doesn't apply.

★☆★Syscoin - Decentralized Marketplace and Multisig Platform
Pay with Bitcoin, ZCash and many more
For more visit Syscoin.org  ★☆★
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 05:14:54 PM
 #14139

...
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.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!


You are confused about #1. Money Transmission regulation is distinct from SEC securities-offering regulation.

I'm not saying any of this 100% takes down bitshares or similar systems. Jurisdictional arbitrage will happen, of course. But at the same time, it's naive to think that the SEC and similar bodies in the world's largest markets, will not apply their broadly-written body of regulation to these new platforms. Again, Erik Voorhees experience is a good example. That was a tiny, niche, esoteric offering and the SEC still took enforcement action (~2 years later).




...

#2 doesn't apply. I don't think #2 from your post applies, and I'm going to naively assume that all judges will agree with me.


FTFY

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: 1526


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 05:52:10 PM
 #14140

...
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.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!


You are confused about #1. Money Transmission regulation is distinct from SEC securities-offering regulation.

I'm not saying any of this 100% takes down bitshares or similar systems. Jurisdictional arbitrage will happen, of course. But at the same time, it's naive to think that the SEC and similar bodies in the world's largest markets, will not apply their broadly-written body of regulation to these new platforms. Again, Erik Voorhees experience is a good example. That was a tiny, niche, esoteric offering and the SEC still took enforcement action (~2 years later).




...

#2 doesn't apply. I don't think #2 from your post applies, and I'm going to naively assume that all judges will agree with me.


FTFY

I've already built the case that it doesn't apply thus I didn't think I needed to spell it out for you. Sorry I misjudged your ability to infer information.

BTW im not mr bitshares.. I jsut think it may not even be the one.... but something like it might be... something that creates more of an ecosystem. If they continue to make good decisions than I have hope for them.. it is to be seen on the recent drastic change they are proposing on how it will turn out... Chinese sold off earlier this week at the hint of dilution however the proposal is to infuse capital to raise funds (based on consensus voting using their voting technology) for new DACs which is a novel idea... however again it is to be seen on how it will look in hindsight... based on past performance I think it will be fine but I have other ideas on what an ecosystem looks like although other technical ideas are good in bitshares.

★☆★Syscoin - Decentralized Marketplace and Multisig Platform
Pay with Bitcoin, ZCash and many more
For more visit Syscoin.org  ★☆★
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 ... 1558 »
  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!