All Categories› Poker› Area 51

You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!

RNG?

245

Comments

  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011
    My main concerns with RNG's (in general) are anti collusion software algorythms.


    Well the anti-collusion algos will likely have nothing to do with the RNG, but you do have a point...this is a far more valid concern than anything to do with the RNGs, imo.

    With that being said it's not a huge concern for me personally...even if sky had no systems in place profitable collusion is still hard to pull off. At larger stakes people will notice players colluding over time, nevermind the algo, and to make it profitable at micros you'd need dozens or hundreds of accounts. Frankly if you're the kind of person who has access to hundreds of identities and credit card details you've probably got easier ways of making money :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    Not quite. The random number assigned to each card is likely to be much higher than 1-52 simply because good RNGs tend to deal with big numbers. Even with simple timestamps you'd end up with each card assigned a number like 4094211296, 6412095051, that kind of thing. Once each of the cards has been assigned that number you then order the deck from highest to lowest (or vice versa), and you've got your starting deck. The number of starting sequences is just the same as the number with a live deck...10 to the power of something silly or whatever it is.
    Posted by DannyMcs

    Ok I take what you say but this is the bit that gets really interesting. A 64 or 128 bit system is the most common architecture used by poker sites, or so I am led to believe. 

    The problem I have is that a 128 bit system can handle 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000 combinations. When compared with the total number of possible sequences from a 52 card deck which is -
    80,658,175,170,943,878,571,660,636,856,404,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 combinations then you can see that only .0000000000001% of all possible deck sequences are produced. How can producing such a low percentage of possible sequences be regarded as random or even pseudo-random.

    The combinations are 2 to the power of 226 btw.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AMYBRAMYBR
    edited February 2011
    Yep sorry Alan.  Let me know hen you bring it round to that issue.

    But just to quickly reply to Danny: thats not the type of anti collusion software I mean.  I'll go into detail later with some direct source material quotes.

    I think its really important to have this general conversation.  Not trying to be rude or condecending to anyone but the way RNG's work really is a very involved issue that most people dont fully understand.  When questioned the "higher hand frequency = higher visibility of Bad beats" line comes up which has become too easily accepted. 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    Yep sorry Alan.  Let me know hen you bring it round to that issue. But just to quickly reply to Danny: thats not the type of anti collusion software I mean.  I'll go into detail later with some direct source material quotes. I think its really important to have this general conversation.  Not trying to be rude or condecending to anyone but the way RNG's work really is a very involved issue that most people dont fully understand.  When questioned the "higher hand frequency = higher visibility of Bad beats" line comes up which has become too easily accepted. 
    Posted by AMYBR

    Agreed but whenever this question is brought up the first defence is always the rng and the fact that it's certified as random. If this is going to be a full discussion let's take it one step at a time rather than opposing sides throwing out well worn statements with little or nothing to back it up.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011
    The problem I have is that a 128 bit system can handle 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000 combinations. When compared with the total number of possible sequences from a 52 card deck...
    Sure, a 128 bit addressing system can only generate 2^128 unique numbers (the big number beginning 340) but an RNG is not a single, closed, 128 bit system. It's a new instance of a system each time the cards are dealt. This would be a valid criticism if the site software discarded a given deck sequence forever once it was generated, but that's not how it works...we don't run out of numbers because they're generated anew each time.

    I mean, you've been playing for ages, right? I'm pretty sure you'd notice if you only ever saw .0000000000001% of all possible deck sequenceS :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    Sure, a 128 bit addressing system can only generate 2^128 unique numbers (the big number beginning 340) but an RNG is not a single, closed, 128 bit system. It's a new instance of a system each time the cards are dealt. This would be a valid criticism if the site software discarded a given deck sequence forever once it was generated, but that's not how it works...we don't run out of numbers because they're generated anew each time. I mean, you've been playing for ages, right? I'm pretty sure you'd notice if you only ever saw .0000000000001% of all possible deck sequenceS :)
    Posted by DannyMcs

    How true.

    Be back to go further along the route of sequences in a few minutes :o)



    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ALIVEHAT60ALIVEHAT60
    edited February 2011
    In Response to RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    In order for this to be discussed properly , all views from all side must be , civil & not to complex for us mere mortals . It would be great if skypoker put forward an RNG guy/gal from their side to join in this civil RNG discussion . SO TO START THE DISCUSSION GOING , IN SIMPLE TERMS , HOW DOES THE RNG WORK IN POKER SITES ? DO ALL POKER SITES USE THE SAME RNG ? P.S. COME ON DANNY BLUE TODAY,  TAKE DOWN THE GUKPT !
    Posted by IRISHROVER
    What a great idea, I'm sure it has never been discussed before???, alas,sadly I don't have the intelligence to participate in such a profoundly intellectual debate. I do hope that the Sky mods allow this thread to continue.
    It's nice when one of the good guys can bring such a thoughtful and unusual post to the attention of this forum.

    Kind regards
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • debdobs_67debdobs_67
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich : I'm pretty sure that I can just about grasp the point lol. I understand what you are saying about it being pseudo-random (dannymcs' post was most informative); what I am saying is that a RNG will still be more random than a human shuffling a deck of cards. Is complete and total randomness even possible? In reality, though, you are not going to be able to spot any patterns with a virtual shuffle from a regulated RNG, and is just about as random as something can be. Can I ask you a question as you obviously have a massive grudge against the online form of poker. Do you still play online? And if so, why?
    Posted by yb
    Im a bit amazed that someone as smart as you is missing the point here
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    Sure, a 128 bit addressing system can only generate 2^128 unique numbers (the big number beginning 340) but an RNG is not a single, closed, 128 bit system. It's a new instance of a system each time the cards are dealt. This would be a valid criticism if the site software discarded a given deck sequence forever once it was generated, but that's not how it works...we don't run out of numbers because they're generated anew each time. I mean, you've been playing for ages, right? I'm pretty sure you'd notice if you only ever saw .0000000000001% of all possible deck sequenceS :)
    Posted by DannyMcs



    The following extracts are from IBM:

    There are only 4 billion possible places on a standard random number wheel (with many random-number generation algorithms, including linear-congruent generators; all the numbers between 0 and 4,294,967,295 are generated exactly once


    Even 128-bit PRNGs are completely predictable! 

    People used to think that cracking 56-bit DES in real time would take too long to be feasible, but history has shown otherwise. In January 1997, a secret DES key was recovered in 96 days. Later efforts broke keys in 41 days, then 56 hours, and, in January 1999, in 22 hours and 15 minutes.

    I think this is the method you were alluding to:

    The shuffling algorithm used in the ASF software always starts with an ordered deck of cards, and then generates a sequence of random numbers used to reorder the deck. In a real deck of cards, there are 52! (approximately 2226) possible unique shuffles. Recall that the seed for a 32-bit random number generator must be a 32-bit number, meaning that there are just over 4 billion possible seeds. Since the deck is reinitialized and the generator reseeded before each shuffle, only 4 billion possible shuffles can result from this algorithm. Four billion possible shuffles is alarmingly less than 52!. ( in fact it is one trillionth - yes! one trillionth)

    The poker site that used this method no longer exists.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich : Im a bit amazed that someone as smart as you is missing the point here
    Posted by debdobs_67
    Miss. Reed ???
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011
    Well there you go elsa...ASF has a joke of an RNG and went out of business. Rest assured no site these days would even try using a timestamp based RNG, much less get away with it.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    Well there you go elsa...ASF has a joke of an RNG and went out of business. Rest assured no site these days would even try using a timestamp based RNG, much less get away with it.
    Posted by DannyMcs

    Agreed they use far more sophisticated seeding and build in security algorithms nowadays. I included that because you asked for a link in the first post relating to where it had happened. That doesn't take away from the basics of how many sequences can be delivered by a pRNG. It would need 256bit architecture as far as I can determine and I don't think any poker site has that sort of capability. If that is the case then the best Poker pRNG's can only randomise a minute amount of the combinations you should expect from a 52 card deck.

    On a side note - most sites used a time-based 32 bit RNG in those days. As late as 2007 some sites were using unencrypted communications between server and client, now that is a joke.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • loonytoonsloonytoons
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich : Agreed they use far more sophisticated seeding and build in security algorithms nowadays. I included that because you asked for a link in the first post relating to where it had happened. That doesn't take away from the basics of how many sequences can be delivered by a pRNG. It would need 256bit architecture as far as I can determine and I don't think any poker site has that sort of capability. If that is the case then the best Poker pRNG's can only randomise a minute amount of the combinations you should expect from a 52 card deck. On a side note - most sites used a time-based 32 bit RNG in those days. As late as 2007 some sites were using unencrypted communications between server and client, now that is a joke.
    Posted by elsadog
    but dont many of the 52 card deck combinations become invalid? What i mean is take the national lottery, the odds of getting the 6 numbers are 14million to one, but if you take all the 49 numbers there are billions of combinations, but we dont, we are only conserned with the 6, the rest are irrelevant. The same could apply with say a 6 seater table we would only require a maximum of 17 cards, 2 hole cards each and 5 community cards, the other 35 cards become irrelevant along with all the other combinations, or am i being daft?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011
    I included that because you asked for a link in the first post relating to where it had happened
    Thanks, certainly interesting to know a network was owned, even if it was in the dim and distant.
    That doesn't take away from the basics of how many sequences can be delivered by a pRNG. It would need 256bit architecture as far as I can determine and I don't think any poker site has that sort of capability. If that is the case then the best Poker pRNG's can only randomise a minute amount of the combinations you should expect from a 52 card deck.
    Nope, sorry mate, you've got the wrong end of the stick here so perhaps I didn't explain it well before.

    A 128 bit RNG can generate 2^128 unique numbers...this is far less than the total number of 52 card deck combinations as we know. But the total "space" of the system - the number of unique numbers it can hold - is largely irrelevant because the RNG is invoked for each card. Each card gets a unique number from 2^128 possible combinations.

    A simple way to think about it is to imagine a roulette wheel with 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000 numbers. That wheel is spun for each and every card. There is no chance of running out of deck sequences because a specific random number never determines the whole deck, it just places a specific card.

    I appreciate that might be getting a bit techie for some but I come back to the earlier point...if poker RNGs really were limited to providing a trillionth of possible deck combos we'd all notice it pretty quickly.

    Incidentally, I very much expect sky will be running on 64 bit infrastructure, so if that argument was valid we'd be seeing even less deck combos. But we don't, because that's not how it works :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • chew07chew07
    edited February 2011
    This sounds a very good debate, one i fear that is going way above my head. The one question i ask myself is do i think Sky Poker is bent or not,after much thought i am happy to carry on playing on this site.
            If i was not happy about this matter no amount of facts and figures would change my mind and i would be off this site straight away.I think this debate will run and run but at the end of the day every player on here has a simple question to ask do i stay on here and play or shut the door on the way out .
                                                     Regards   Mick .
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IRISHROVERIRISHROVER
    edited February 2011


     GREAT DISCUSSION ,
    REALLY WELL MANNERED & VERY DETAILED ,
     KEEP IT GOING GUYS .
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ybyb
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich : Im a bit amazed that someone as smart as you is missing the point here
    Posted by debdobs_67
    thanks for the kind words lol. Can you point out which bit I'm missing?

    xxx
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ybyb
    edited February 2011
    So basically danny the computer generates a random number for each card in the deck through the use of the seeds, and then sorts the cards in order of those numbers. Is that right? That way it doesn't matter that a computer cannot generate enough random numbers to cover all the possible sequences the cards could be in, because a random number is selected for each card, and not for the total possible number of combinations as a whole?

    Thanks again for all the info btw.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011
    That's exactly right mate.

    Another way to explain why the size of the address space doesn't really matter: imagine we've got a deck of cards, and a hat with 52 slips of paper numbered 1-52.

    Place the cards on a table in order (i.e. A-1 of each suit in sequence), then close your eyes, start drawing numbers out of the hat and placing them on cards. When you're done each card will have a number from 1-52 and you can arrange your deck accordingly. Hopefully anyone can see this will result in a decently random shuffle, and in many cases better than one dealt by all but the most experienced dealers.

    So there we've only got 52 numbers and we still get a good shuffle. We don't need an address space capable of holding all combinations of cards, we just need one big enough to assign an unique number to each card.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    Thanks, certainly interesting to know a network was owned, even if it was in the dim and distant. Nope, sorry mate, you've got the wrong end of the stick here so perhaps I didn't explain it well before. A 128 bit RNG can generate 2^128 unique numbers...this is far less than the total number of 52 card deck combinations as we know. But the total "space" of the system - the number of unique numbers it can hold - is largely irrelevant because the RNG is invoked for each card. Each card gets a unique number from 2^128 possible combinations. A simple way to think about it is to imagine a roulette wheel with 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000 numbers. That wheel is spun for each and every card. There is no chance of running out of deck sequences because a specific random number never determines the whole deck, it just places a specific card. I appreciate that might be getting a bit techie for some but I come back to the earlier point...if poker RNGs really were limited to providing a trillionth of possible deck combos we'd all notice it pretty quickly. Incidentally, I very much expect sky will be running on 64 bit infrastructure, so if that argument was valid we'd be seeing even less deck combos. But we don't, because that's not how it works :)
    Posted by DannyMcs

    First point a 128 bit rng produces 2^128 but the total deck combinations are 2^226. So we take our deck and assign one of our numbers to the first card and one to the second and so on for 2^128 numbers, and then choose our cards by ''randomly'' selecting from the assigned list. 

    A 128-bit system can only process 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000 or 1/1 trillionth of all the deck possibilities! It doesn't matter how you look at it this is a minute fraction of possibilities.

    There is also a serious question of security with the method you speak of. No matter how many numbers you are able to generate you are cycling the same 52 cards throughout. Even 4 billion individual deck sequences is better than that.

    The question of security is another but vitally important issue. What happens to the cards AFTER the pRNG has selected them is probably even more of a puzzle.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich : but dont many of the 52 card deck combinations become invalid? What i mean is take the national lottery, the odds of getting the 6 numbers are 14million to one, but if you take all the 49 numbers there are billions of combinations, but we dont, we are only conserned with the 6, the rest are irrelevant. The same could apply with say a 6 seater table we would only require a maximum of 17 cards, 2 hole cards each and 5 community cards, the other 35 cards become irrelevant along with all the other combinations, or am i being daft?
    Posted by loonytoons

    If we select cards in the same manner ie. Have a list of 52 and take out for example only 17 cards then we have to have a way of choosing them. A machine can't choose, we have to programme it to choose and therebye we lay down an easily tracked pattern. 52 wont do but 52! will. As far as I am aware most poker sites pRNG's generate sequences of cards and then choose via a complex seeding which sequence to deal. The possible exception to this is FT who re-shuffle after the flop for each subsequent card. 

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011

    First point a 128 bit rng produces 2^128 but the total deck combinations are 2^226. So we take our deck and assign one of our numbers to the first card and one to the second and so on for 2^128 numbers, and then choose our cards by ''randomly'' selecting from the assigned list.
    A 128-bit system can only process 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000 or 1/1 trillionth of all the deck possibilities! It doesn't matter how you look at it this is a minute fraction of possibilities.
    Perhaps I've misunderstood your first  point, but the rng doesn't go through 2^128 numbers each time it deals a hand. Each card in the hand is assigned a number from a 2^128 size range, but the RNG is only invoked 52 times.

    I'd point to the hat analogy above to explain why the number of possible numbers that can be assigned has nothing to do with the number of combinations that you can end up with. I can deal you a random deck with 52 numbers just as easily as I can with 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000. 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    This sounds a very good debate, one i fear that is going way above my head. The one question i ask myself is do i think Sky Poker is bent or not,after much thought i am happy to carry on playing on this site.         If i was not happy about this matter no amount of facts and figures would change my mind and i would be off this site straight away.I think this debate will run and run but at the end of the day every player on here has a simple question to ask do i stay on here and play or shut the door on the way out .                                                  Regards   Mick .
    Posted by chew07

    This isn't a debate about whether Sky is bent. :o)

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    Perhaps I've misunderstood your first  point, but the rng doesn't go through 2^128 numbers each time it deals a hand. Each card in the hand is assigned a number from a 2^128 size range, but the RNG is only invoked 52 times. I'd point to the hat analogy above to explain why the number of possible numbers that can be assigned has nothing to do with the number of combinations that you can end up with. I can deal you a random deck with 52 numbers just as easily as I can with 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,770,000,000. 
    Posted by DannyMcs

    But from a security point of view this would be a disaster. Don't you see that your method would simply be revolving the same 52 numbered sequences, and would be picked up on by any two geeks with half decent laptop. How would you prevent the RNG from picking the same cards from all those numbers. That's why they run with deck sequences not card sequences.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    The argument is pointless really because we have both missed the vital part of all this. Whether the RNg assigns it's 2^128 numbers to either cards or pre-selected deck sequences is somewhat irrelevant. The fact is that which ever it is there is a massive shortfall on each deal from the actual possible choice that should be available.  
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011
    Don't you see that your method would simply be revolving the same 52 numbered sequences, and would be picked up on by any two geeks with half decent laptop.
    What, the picking numbers out of a hat method? How are the geeks going to crack that with a laptop, do they have a webcam in the hat? :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ybyb
    edited February 2011
    elsadog even using just the hat method you would still get a 'random' shuffle, and every single combination that the cards could be in would still be possible.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DannyMcsDannyMcs
    edited February 2011
    The fact is that which ever it is there is a massive shortfall on each deal from the actual possible choice that should be available.
    That isn't the case at all and I've tried my best to explain why in straightforward terms. I'm not sure there's anything else I can say to convince you so I'll leave that particular point there, although as a parting shot I would re-iterate that if the RNG *did* only provide a trillionth of all possible deck sequences it would be very clear to anyone who had a decent sample of hands to look at.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    elsadog even using just the hat method you would still get a 'random' shuffle, and every single combination that the cards could be in would still be possible.
    Posted by yb

    Yes it would be ''random''but the range is very small and open to abuse. You cant have every combination because the pRNG is capable of only producing one trillionth of the possible sequences whichever way you choose the cards.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ybyb
    edited February 2011
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich:
    In Response to Re: RNG ( on all poker sites ) A CIVIL DISCUSSION IN GENERAL CHAT / please leave this here mod4 / bernie / & skyrich : Yes it would be ''random''but the range is very small and open to abuse. You cant have every combination because the pRNG is capable of only producing one trillionth of the possible sequences whichever way you choose the cards.
    Posted by elsadog
    The range is not very small at all. After the cards are virtually shuffled the range of combinations contains all the sequences possible, not a miniscule percentage of them. I suggest you re-read the thread if you don't understand this.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.