Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 06:33:11 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
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 ... 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 [1108] 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1805629 times)
domob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 936


View Profile WWW
March 22, 2015, 06:23:13 PM
 #22141

A very nice article about bitcoin and gold virtues if (when?) the dollar collapses:

When the Dollar Collapses, which is better Money, Gold or Bitcoin?
Was satoshis intent to allow for a gold backed bitcoin

No

Quote
since there is a reason he chose 21 million units based on amount of gold oz estimated that will be mined?

and no.



I might be wrong, but thought there was some programming reason why there are 100 million sats in a bitcoin. That might also be why he chose 21 million total coins.

Usually, one has to take great care when programming with monetary values - floating point numbers as they are dominantly used in computations introduce rounding errors.  And because they are based on a binary representation, they can not even store "trivial" fractions like 0.1 in an exact fashion.  The solution is to use "fixed-point numbers", which basically means computing in satoshis (as integer value) instead of bitcoins (decimal number required).  Just like Bitcoin Core does.

However, the number of satoshis in existence is (as far as I read) chosen in such a way that it still "fits" into a standard-format floating point number as used by most programming environments.  There are still rounding errors, but for all possible bitcoin amounts, the errors are just below one satoshi.  Thus, it is harder to shoot oneself into the foot when programming carelessly.  Whether or not this really is the reason for Satoshis original choice or not, I do not know.  The initial block reward of 50 BTC and the block schedule looks also "innocent", so maybe he just chose that and the 21 million figure is just what results from it.

Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID: https://nameid.org/
Donations: 1domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NCdomobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY
BM-GtQnWM3vcdorfqpKXsmfHQ4rVYPG5pKS | GPG 0xA7330737
1481135591
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481135591

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481135591
Reply with quote  #2

1481135591
Report to moderator
1481135591
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481135591

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481135591
Reply with quote  #2

1481135591
Report to moderator
1481135591
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481135591

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481135591
Reply with quote  #2

1481135591
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481135591
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481135591

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481135591
Reply with quote  #2

1481135591
Report to moderator
1481135591
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481135591

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481135591
Reply with quote  #2

1481135591
Report to moderator
1481135591
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481135591

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481135591
Reply with quote  #2

1481135591
Report to moderator
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 06:58:16 PM
 #22142


Thankfully my coins are clean so whitelisting for me would only be a disaster insofar as it would destroy any reason whatsoever for anyone to used Bitcoin and thus the solution (and my stash) would eventually die.  I'd either cash out before it dawned on people that Bitcoin was useless, or hope that a following system would start out where Bitcoin left off vis-a-vis a value base.  Probably some combination of both.


i'd bet you have a few of MyBitcoins theft in your stash:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=548508.0

Most people likely have MyBitcoin stuff (I've not read the link yet.)  I personally probably have a fair number of BTC which are closely linked to the allinvain (purported) heist.  Word is that these were up for sale on Tradehill-I at the time that I was doing some significant acquisition.  But I also have the records of my interactions with Tradehill, and the records of my interactions with the IRS when I paid my taxes.

When tainting pops up it will probably be in the form of white-listing and will probably afford the benefit of the doubt to hodlers.  Especially old-timers.  As long as Gavin does his job and Bitcoin can be controlled, there will be no reason to destroy Bitcoin and many reasons not to since it is actually quite useful to people from all over the spectrum.  And if the (false) idea that Bitcoin has any particular value when it has become a less convenient PayPal can be preserved it could also serve to detract from interest in real solutions which do have value.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 07:05:32 PM
 #22143


Thankfully my coins are clean so whitelisting for me would only be a disaster insofar as it would destroy any reason whatsoever for anyone to used Bitcoin and thus the solution (and my stash) would eventually die.  I'd either cash out before it dawned on people that Bitcoin was useless, or hope that a following system would start out where Bitcoin left off vis-a-vis a value base.  Probably some combination of both.


i'd bet you have a few of MyBitcoins theft in your stash:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=548508.0

Most people likely have MyBitcoin stuff (I've not read the link yet.)  I personally probably have a fair number of BTC which are closely linked to the allinvain (purported) heist.  Word is that these were up for sale on Tradehill-I at the time that I was doing some significant acquisition.  But I also have the records of my interactions with Tradehill, and the records of my interactions with the IRS when I paid my taxes.

When tainting pops up it will probably be in the form of white-listing and will probably afford the benefit of the doubt to hodlers.  Especially old-timers.  As long as Gavin does his job and Bitcoin can be controlled, there will be no reason to destroy Bitcoin and many reasons not to since it is actually quite useful to people from all over the spectrum.  And if the (false) idea that Bitcoin has any particular value when it has become a less convenient PayPal can be preserved it could also serve to detract from interest in real solutions which do have value.



the thing is, the gvt is not going to get involved in a situation where drug dealers steal coin from other drug dealers and then try to sell them off on an anonymous exchange in Bulgaria.  they only care if they themselves can get their hands on the BTC which in this Evo case, they cannot.  so they'll just let the community shoot it out and the final result will be just like every other theft in Bitcoinland since Day 1; nothing.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
March 22, 2015, 07:20:13 PM
 #22144

JR,

what's up with Odom leaving Monetas?
I only know one side of the story right now, so I can't really say.

Why aren't more people talking about this? OT was supposed to be huge for Bitcoin, it was Chris' baby for a long time now...

well i tried
https://github.com/FellowTraveler?tab=activity
Ivanhoe
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 841



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 07:21:19 PM
 #22145

Looks a lot like the psychology changed from "sell the tops" to "buy the dips".
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 08:06:45 PM
 #22146

Looks a lot like the psychology changed from "sell the tops" to "buy the dips".

Yes, ignore all news good or bad. The trend has changed.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 08:30:48 PM
 #22147


the thing is, the gvt is not going to get involved in a situation where drug dealers steal coin from other drug dealers and then try to sell them off on an anonymous exchange in Bulgaria.  they only care if they themselves can get their hands on the BTC which in this Evo case, they cannot.  so they'll just let the community shoot it out and the final result will be just like every other theft in Bitcoinland since Day 1; nothing.

The govt's role is super simple:

 - Mandate a license and enforce it on key retailers and service providers of the on-line wallet type (e.g., Coinbase...who probably won't take much convincing...)

 - Charter a service (e.g., CoinValidation) or two which do validation.

The licensee just uses a simple API from the validator.

When this occurs I will require that if you want to send me BTC, you do it through my Coinbase account.  Yes, I'm vehemently opposed to the whole system, but I'm not going to take a bullet by absorbing your unvalidated BTC which I may not be able to spend and have to trade to someone else who will also will value unvalidated BTC at a lower rate.

To make matters worse, anyone who is enough of a chump to accept unvalidated BTC will find people wishing to dump them beating a path to one's door.

I would also caution against assuming that a validation solution cannot work because of the difficulty of the task.  Validation need not be anything remotely precise or even accurate.  I think we'll find that the amount of liability protection afforded to a validating service in association with their charter would make the vaccine manufactures blush.

TPTB have a good friend in Mr. Andresen and thus a very strong hand.  I won't go into the game theory, but there are still a bunch of ways to overplay the hand that they have here.  A person who is on the ball, and who has a bit of luck, may be able to come out of this thing fairly well.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 09:17:39 PM
 #22148


the thing is, the gvt is not going to get involved in a situation where drug dealers steal coin from other drug dealers and then try to sell them off on an anonymous exchange in Bulgaria.  they only care if they themselves can get their hands on the BTC which in this Evo case, they cannot.  so they'll just let the community shoot it out and the final result will be just like every other theft in Bitcoinland since Day 1; nothing.

The govt's role is super simple:

 - Mandate a license and enforce it on key retailers and service providers of the on-line wallet type (e.g., Coinbase...who probably won't take much convincing...)

 - Charter a service (e.g., CoinValidation) or two which do validation.

The licensee just uses a simple API from the validator.

When this occurs I will require that if you want to send me BTC, you do it through my Coinbase account.  Yes, I'm vehemently opposed to the whole system, but I'm not going to take a bullet by absorbing your unvalidated BTC which I may not be able to spend and have to trade to someone else who will also will value unvalidated BTC at a lower rate.

To make matters worse, anyone who is enough of a chump to accept unvalidated BTC will find people wishing to dump them beating a path to one's door.

I would also caution against assuming that a validation solution cannot work because of the difficulty of the task.  Validation need not be anything remotely precise or even accurate.  I think we'll find that the amount of liability protection afforded to a validating service in association with their charter would make the vaccine manufactures blush.

TPTB have a good friend in Mr. Andresen and thus a very strong hand.  I won't go into the game theory, but there are still a bunch of ways to overplay the hand that they have here.  A person who is on the ball, and who has a bit of luck, may be able to come out of this thing fairly well.



the problem is this; you don't understand the game theory.

the cat is out of the bag on this one.  Bitcoin is global and growing rapidly overseas.  take the worse case scenario; the US turns off its internet to short circuit Bitcoin.  ok, big whoop.  the rest of the world continues on.  and given their clear tendencies, China and Russia may even embrace Bitcoin once they figure out they can't stop it and embracing could mean the end of the USD hegemony.  many of us would route around or tunnel thru via VPN's.  first off, turning off the internet will never happen.  second, if it did, it would last probably <24 hrs as the banks themselves cry Uncle from the immediate destruction of their daily business and confidence.  stock, bond, and USD markets would plummet.

there is something called accountability and credibility that the US gvt must adhere to to a degree despite what you might think.  they just got done auctioning off the 3rd tranche of BTC for cold, hard cash that they gladly accepted with open hands.  they just got done making it legal via Fincen, the IRS via tax law, the NYDFS via BitLicense, the Senate Banking Hearings, the FEC donations, and various other state laws.  

the good news is that the technology is good enough fundamentally to actually make the US eventually want to use it to maintain an upper hand in world finance.  perhaps as backing for the USD.
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:01:21 PM
 #22149

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:12:29 PM
 #22150

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:13:27 PM
 #22151

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


Looks like Alex Waters has capitulated on this. In one of the comments on reddit he flat out said that fungibility of Bitcoin was paramount to success. No white listing.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:18:59 PM
 #22152

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!



Why haven't you sold  all your coins then?

Answer: because Bitcoin just might turn out better than you think.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:30:22 PM
 #22153

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


Looks like Alex Waters has capitulated on this. In one of the comments on reddit he flat out said that fungibility of Bitcoin was paramount to success. No white listing.

I guess that settles it.  The guy who joined with Mellon and formed a company writes on reddit that he changed his mind.  I'm glad that danger passed.

Frankly, the fact that Waters and Mellon even talked about their effort in public at all sort of indicates that they are world-class idiots who probably don't have much of a chance for that reason alone.  On the other hand, the idea of whitelisting was so obvious and acceptable to so many of the main Bitcoin players at the 2013 SJ conference that I suppose it's possible that they really didn't see the brick wall of community reaction coming.  It's also the case that the only real criteria for getting a successful validation service going is to play well with the government.  The govt is the one key element that makes such a service economically viable (and probably wildly so!) and it doesn't take a lot of brain power to pull that off.

People in the community need to recognize that the movers and shakers in Bitcoin land who have the connections and resources to get things done on an industrial level are a whole different class of animal than the run-of-the-mill libertarian who populate troll-talk and the dopey little neighborhood meet-ups.  Usually not even the same species with a few exceptions for some amount of hybridization.


tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:34:16 PM
 #22154

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!


Why haven't you sold  all your coins then?

Answer: because Bitcoin just might turn out better than you think.

Sidechains could address all of these recently mentioned problems and many more.  I'm holding out to see if people come to their senses in time. 

Besides, as I've mentioned already, I don't see this as a good selling point.  You remember my strategy of buying low and selling high, right?


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:37:51 PM
 #22155

tv,

Would you mind telling me exactly how, from a technical standpoint, you would even white or black list BTC?

Given that there is no such thing as a coin but just a series of inputs and outputs, what do you taint and how is that sustainably identifiable throughout the life of a "coin"?
ssmc2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:38:45 PM
 #22156

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!


Why haven't you sold  all your coins then?

Answer: because Bitcoin just might turn out better than you think.

Sidechains could address all of these recently mentioned problems and many more.  I'm holding out to see if people come to their senses in time. 

Besides, as I've mentioned already, I don't see this as a good selling point.  You remember my strategy of buying low and selling high, right?



Speaking of, any recent news from Blockstream?
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 815



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:40:02 PM
 #22157

Decentralized exchanges will destroy any fungability worries because there will be no way to choose what kind of coins get traded to you or that you can trade to someone else.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 11:11:52 PM
 #22158

tv,

Would you mind telling me exactly how, from a technical standpoint, you would even white or black list BTC?

Given that there is no such thing as a coin but just a series of inputs and outputs, what do you taint and how is that sustainably identifiable throughout the life of a "coin"?

Just make people register.  That was Yifu's angle as a principle at CoinValidation.  UTXO's which are not registered to a known user or entity (e.g., Coinbase or blockchain.info) would halt a transaction from being valid.  Very easy to justify in the name of 'fighting terrorism and child exploitation' and whatever.  You can go before congress and argue all kinds of economic mumbo-jumbo about fungibility and freedom and what-not if you like.  Good luck with that.

Sharp eyed viewers might notice that if one does not register, one cannot pay one's taxes.  And there are well established ways to make people pay their taxes in almost all but the most failed of states.  I'll register my stash the day I'm mandated to do so (which is why my conception of the best strategy is to avoid a mandate ever being practical rather than to resist compliance after it is been mandated.)

As a function of my Coin Validation service, I'd also run a service for miners so that they can ensure that they don't waste their time mining unvalidated UTXO's as inputs and their transaction set thus remain clean.  If the choice is between taking this easy and popular step of using my government chartered service, and facing shutdown of their network support and confiscation of their gear, it will be a fairly easy decision in most cases.  It seems to me that the new inverted bloom filter thing it could be remarkably efficient for a miner to ensure that they are not wasting their time with transactions which are going to be legally invalid because they contain unvalidated inputs.  A side benefit of using a sorted transaction set.

I also find your suggestion that the likes of Russia and China are going to change their policies and welcome crypto-currencies with open arms to be laughable.  And in case you have not noticed, piss-ant countries without nukes pretty much do what they are told by whoever's sphere of influence they fall under.  Sure, there is a chance that your rosy dreams about totalitarian countries suddenly discovering the joys of individual freedom and geo-political power politics will come to pass, but I'm not betting a huge percentage of my financial statement on it.


tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 11:23:55 PM
 #22159


Sidechains could address all of these recently mentioned problems and many more.  I'm holding out to see if people come to their senses in time. 
...

Speaking of, any recent news from Blockstream?

I just checked their blog and it hasn't changed from when Iast looked a some weeks ago.  That's a little disappointing.  I've not really even researched things enough to know if they have some public code repo.  That's often a way to tell something about the activity of a project.  Lastly, I don't really out very often on troll-talk these days and don't know of any active conversations like the enjoyable one we had with Adam a few months ago.   I should follow things more closely for personal financial reasons, but I've been more interested in other things lately.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 11:29:17 PM
 #22160

tv,

Would you mind telling me exactly how, from a technical standpoint, you would even white or black list BTC?

Given that there is no such thing as a coin but just a series of inputs and outputs, what do you taint and how is that sustainably identifiable throughout the life of a "coin"?

Just make people register.  That was Yifu's angle as a principle at CoinValidation.  UTXO's which are not registered to a known user or entity (e.g., Coinbase or blockchain.info) would halt a transaction from being valid.  Very easy to justify in the name of 'fighting terrorism and child exploitation' and whatever.  You can go before congress and argue all kinds of economic mumbo-jumbo about fungibility and freedom and what-not if you like.  Good luck with that.

Sharp eyed viewers might notice that if one does not register, one cannot pay one's taxes.  And there are well established ways to make people pay their taxes in almost all but the most failed of states.  I'll register my stash the day I'm mandated to do so (which is why my conception of the best strategy is to avoid a mandate ever being practical rather than to resist compliance after it is been mandated.)

As a function of my Coin Validation service, I'd also run a service for miners so that they can ensure that they don't waste their time mining unvalidated UTXO's as inputs and their transaction set thus remain clean.  If the choice is between taking this easy and popular step of using my government chartered service, and facing shutdown of their network support and confiscation of their gear, it will be a fairly easy decision in most cases.  It seems to me that the new inverted bloom filter thing it could be remarkably efficient for a miner to ensure that they are not wasting their time with transactions which are going to be legally invalid because they contain unvalidated inputs.  A side benefit of using a sorted transaction set.

I also find your suggestion that the likes of Russia and China are going to change their policies and welcome crypto-currencies with open arms to be laughable.  And in case you have not noticed, piss-ant countries without nukes pretty much do what they are told by whoever's sphere of influence they fall under.  Sure, there is a chance that your rosy dreams about totalitarian countries suddenly discovering the joys of individual freedom and geo-political power politics will come to pass, but I'm not betting a huge percentage of my financial statement on it.



Iirc, Yifu's idea was to white list addresses, not UTXO's. So your idea is to taint UTXO'?  How do you do that given they can be split, joined ad infinitum?
Pages: « 1 ... 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 [1108] 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 ... 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!