@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install Sky Map (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app and tap Accept, then tap OK
3. When asked to access the device's location, tap While Using The App
4. Tap somewhere on the screen to activate the menu, then tap ⁝ and select Settings
5. Disable Send Usage Statistics
6. Return to the main screen and enjoy stargazing!

ℹ️ Use the 🔍 icon in the upper toolbar to search for a specific celestial body, or tap the 👁️ icon to activate night mode

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

This piece is the first in a series that will focus on things I think are a priority if your focus is similar to mine: building a strong family and safeguarding their future.

---

Choosing the ideal place to raise a family is one of the most significant decisions you will ever make. For simplicity sake I will break down my thought process into key factors: strong property rights, the ability to grow your own food, access to fresh water, the freedom to own and train with guns, and a dependable community.

A Jurisdiction with Strong Property Rights

Strong property rights are essential and allow you to build on a solid foundation that is less likely to break underneath you. Regions with a history of limited government and clear legal protections for landowners are ideal. Personally I think the US is the single best option globally, but within the US there is a wide difference between which state you choose. Choose carefully and thoughtfully, think long term. Obviously if you are not American this is not a realistic option for you, there are other solid options available especially if your family has mobility. I understand many do not have this capability to easily move, consider that your first priority, making movement and jurisdiction choice possible in the first place.

Abundant Access to Fresh Water

Water is life. I cannot overstate the importance of living somewhere with reliable, clean, and abundant freshwater. Some regions face water scarcity or heavy regulations on usage, so prioritizing a place where water is plentiful and your rights to it are protected is critical. Ideally you should have well access so you are not tied to municipal water supplies. In times of crisis or chaos well water cannot be easily shutoff or disrupted. If you live in an area that is drought prone, you are one drought away from societal chaos. Not enough people appreciate this simple fact.

Grow Your Own Food

A location with fertile soil, a favorable climate, and enough space for a small homestead or at the very least a garden is key. In stable times, a small homestead provides good food and important education for your family. In times of chaos your family being able to grow and raise healthy food provides a level of self sufficiency that many others will lack. Look for areas with minimal restrictions, good weather, and a culture that supports local farming.

Guns

The ability to defend your family is fundamental. A location where you can legally and easily own guns is a must. Look for places with a strong gun culture and a political history of protecting those rights. Owning one or two guns is not enough and without proper training they will be a liability rather than a benefit. Get comfortable and proficient. Never stop improving your skills. If the time comes that you must use a gun to defend your family, the skills must be instinct. Practice. Practice. Practice.

A Strong Community You Can Depend On

No one thrives alone. A ride or die community that rallies together in tough times is invaluable. Seek out a place where people know their neighbors, share similar values, and are quick to lend a hand. Lead by example and become a good neighbor, people will naturally respond in kind. Small towns are ideal, if possible, but living outside of a major city can be a solid balance in terms of work opportunities and family security.

---

Let me know if you found this helpful. My plan is to break down how I think about these five key subjects in future posts.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na bitcoin-balkan.com.

---

Pregled sadržaja

1. Šta je Bitcoin?
2. Šta Bitcoin može da učini za vas?
3. Zašto ljudi kupuju Bitcoin?
4. Da li je vaš novac siguran u dolarima, kućama, akcijama ili zlatu?
5. Šta je bolje za štednju od dolara, kuća i akcija?
6. Po čemu se Bitcoin razlikuje od ostalih valuta?
7. kako Bitcoin spašava svet?
8. Kako mogu da saznam više o Bitcoin-u?

---

Bitcoin čini da štednja novca bude kul – i praktična – ponovo. Ovaj članak objašnjava kako i zašto.

Šta je Bitcoin?

Bitcoin se naziva digitalno zlato, mašina za istinu, blockchain, peer to peer mreža čvorova, energetski ponor i još mnogo toga. Bitcoin je, u stvari, sve ovo. Međutim, ova objašnjenja su često toliko tehnička i suvoparna, da bi većina ljudi radije gledala kako trava raste. Što je najvažnije, ova objašnjenja ne pokazuju kako Bitcoin ima bilo kakve koristi za vas.

iPod nije postao kulturološka senzacija jer ga je Apple nazvao „prenosnim digitalnim medijskim uređajem“. Postao je senzacija jer su ga zvali “1,000 pesama u vašem džepu.”

Ne zanima vas šta je Bitcoin. Vas zanima šta on može da učini za vas.

Baš kao i Internet, vaš auto, vaš telefon, kao i mnogi drugi uređaji i sistemi koje svakodnevno koristite, vi ne treba da znate šta je Bitcoin ili kako to funkcioniše da biste razumeli šta on može da učini za vas.

Šta Bitcoin može da učini za vas?

Bitcoin može da sačuva vaš teško zarađeni novac.

Bitcoin je stekao veliku pažnju u 2017. i 2018. godini zbog svoje spekulativne upotrebe. Mnogi ljudi su ga kupili nadajući se da će se obogatiti. Cena je naglo porasla, a zatim se srušila. Ovo nije bio prvi put da je Bitcoin uradio to. Međutim, niko nikada nije izgubio novac držeći bitcoin duže od 3,5 godine – ćak i ako je kupio na apsolutnim vrhovima.

Zašto Bitcoin konstantno raste? Ljudi počinju da shvataju koliko je Bitcoin moćan, kao način uštede novca u svetu u kojem je ’novac’ poput dolara, eura i drugih nacionalnih valuta dizajniran da gubi vrednost.

Ovo čini Bitcoin odličnom opcijom za štednju novca na nekoliko godina ili više. Bitcoin je bolji od štednje novca u dolarima, akcijama, nekretninama, pa čak i u zlatu.

Zato pokušajte da zaboravite na trenutak na razumevanje blockchaina, digitalne valute, kriptografije, seed fraza, novčanika, rudarstva i svih ostalih nerazumljivih termina. Za sada, razgovarajmo o tome zašto ljudi kupuju Bitcoin: razlog je prostiji nego što vi mislite.

Zašto ljudi kupuju Bitcoin?

Naravno, svako ima svoj razlog za kupovinu Bitcoin-a. Jedan od razloga, koji verovatno često čujete, je taj što mu vrednost raste. Ljudi žele da se obogate. Uskoče kao spekulanti, krenu u vožnju i najverovatnije ih prodaju ubrzo nakon kupovine.

Međutim, čak i kada cena krene naglo prema gore i strmoglavo padne nazad, mnogi ljudi ostanu i nakon tog pada. Otkud mi to znamo? Broj aktivnih novčanika dnevno, koji je otprilike sličan broju korisnika Bitcoin-a, nastavlja da raste. Takođe, nakon svakog balona u istoriji Bitcoin-a, cena se nikada ne vraća na svoju cenu pre balona. Uvek ostane malo višlja. Bitcoin se penje, a svaka masovna spekulativna serija dovodi sve više i više ljudi.

Broj aktivnih Bitcoin novčanika neprekidno raste

„Aktivna adresa“ znači da je neko tog dana poslao Bitcoin transakciju. Donji grafikon je na logaritamskoj skali.

Izvor: Glassnode

Cena Bitcoina se neprestano penje

Kroz istoriju Bitcoin-a možemo videti divlje kolebanje cena, ali nakon svakog balona, cena se ostaje višlja nego pre. Ovo je cena Bitcoin-a na logaritamskoj skali.

Izvor: Glassnode

To pokazuje da se ljudi zadržavaju: potražnja za Bitcoin-om se povećava. Da je svaki masovni rast cena bio samo balon koji su iscenirali prevaranti koji žele brzo da se obogate, cena bi se vratila na nivo pre balona. To se dogodilo sa lalama, ali ne i sa Bitcoin-om.

I zašto se onda cena Bitcoin-a stalno povećava? Sve veći broj ljudi čuva Bitcoin dugoročno – oni razumeju šta Bitcoin može učiniti za njihovu štednju.

Zašto ljudi štede svoj novac u Bitcoin-u umesto na štednim računima, kućama, deonicama ili zlatu? Hajde da pogledajmo sve te metode štednje, i zatim da ih uporedimo sa Bitcoin-om.

Da li je vaš novac siguran u dolarima, kućama, akcijama ili zlatu?

Tokom mnogo godina, to su bile pristojne opcije za štednju. Međutim, sistem koji podržava vrednost svega ovoga je u krizi.

Dolari, Euri, Dinari

Dolari i sve ostale „tradicionalne“ valute koje proizvode vlade, stvorene su da izgube vrednost kroz inflaciju. Banke i tradicionalni monetarni sistem uzrokuju inflaciju stalnim stvaranjem i distribucijom novog novca. Kada Američke Federalne Rezerve objave ciljanu stopu od 2% inflacije, to znači da žele da vaš novac svake godine izgubi 2% od svoje vrednosti. Čak i sa inflacijom od samo 2%, vaša štednja u dolarima izgubiće polovinu vrednosti tokom 40-godišnjeg radnog veka.

Izveštena inflacija se danas opasno povečava, uprkos rastućem „buretu sa barutom“ koji bi mogao da explodira i dovede do masivne hiperinflacije. Što je više valute u opticaju, to je više baruta u buretu.

Naše vlade su ekonomiju napunile valutama da bankarski sistem ne bi propao nakon finansijske krize koja se dogodila 2008. godine. Od tada je većina glavnih centralnih banaka postavila vrlo niske kamatne stope, što pojedincima i korporacijama omogućava dobijanje jeftinijih kredita. To znači da mnogi pojedinci i korporacije podižu ogromne kredite i koriste ih za kupovinu druge imovine poput deonica, umetničkih dela i nekretnina. Sve ovo pozajmljivanje znači da stvaramo tone novog novca i stavljamo ga u opticaj.

Računi za podsticaje (stimulus bills) COVID-19 za 2020. godinu unose trilione u sistem. Ovoliko stvaranje valuta na kraju dovodi do inflacije – velikog gubitka u vrednosti valute.

Količina američkog dolara u opticaju gotovo se udvostručila od marta 2020. godine. Izvor

Računi za podsticaje su bez presedana, toliko da je neko izmislio meme da opiše ovu situaciju.

Resurs koji vlade mogu da naprave u većem broju da bi platile svoje račune? Ne zvuči kao dobro mesto za štednju novca.

Kuće

Kuće su tokom prošlog veka bile pristojan način štednje novca. Međutim, pad cena nekretnina 2007. godine doveo je do toga da su mnogi vlasnici kuća izgubili svu ušteđevinu.

Danas su kuće gotovo nepristupačne za prosečnog čoveka. Jedan od načina da se ovo izmeri je koliko godišnjih zarada treba prosečnom čoveku da zaradi ekvivalent vrednosti prosečne kuće. Prema CityLab-u, publikaciji Bloomberg-a koja pokriva gradove, porodica može da priuštiti određenu kuću ako košta manje od 2,6 godišnjih prihoda domaćinstva te porodice.

Međutim, prema RZS (Republički zavod za statistiku) prosečan prihod porodičnog domaćinstva u Srbiji iznosi oko 570 EUR mesečno ili otprilike 7.000 EUR godišnje. Nažalost, samo najjeftinija područja van gradova imaju srednje cene kuća od oko 2,6 prosečnih godišnjih prihoda domaćinstva. U većim gradovima poput Beograda i Novog Sada srednja cena kuće je veća od 10 prosečnih godišnjih prihoda jednog domaćinstva.

Ako nekako možete sebi da priuštite kuću, ona bi mogla biti pristojna zaliha vrednosti. Dokle god ne doživimo još jedan krah i izvršitelji zaplene ovu imovinu mnogim vlasnicima kuća.

Akcije

Berza je u prošlosti takođe dobro poslovala. Međutim, sporo i stabilno povećanje tržišta događa se u dosadnom, predvidljivom svetu. Svakog dana vidimo sve manje toga. Nakon ubrzanja korona virusa, videli smo smo najbrži pad američke berze u istoriji od 25% – brži od Velike depresije.

Neki se odlučuju za ulaganje u obveznice i drugu finansijsku imovinu, ali ’prinosi’ za tu imovinu – procenat kamate zarađene na imovinu iz godine u godinu – stalno opada. Sve veći broj odredjenih imovina ima čak i negativne prinose, što znači da posedovanje te imovine košta! Ovo je veliki problem za sve koji se oslanjaju na penziju. Plus, s obzirom na to da su akcije denominovane u tradicionalnim valutama poput dolara i evra, inflacija pojede prinos koji investitor dobije.

Najgore od svega je to što ti isti ekonomski krahovi koji uzrokuju masovna otpuštanja i teško tržište rada takođe znače i nagli pad cena akcija. Čuvanje ušteđevine u akcijama može značiti i gubitak štednje i gubitak posla zbog recesije. Teška vremena mogu da vas prisile da svoje akcije prodate po vrlo malim cenama samo da biste platili svoje račune.

A to nije baš siguran način štednje novca.

Zlato

Vrednost zlata neprekidno se povećavala tokom 5000 godina, obično padajući onda kada berza obećava jače prinose.

Cena zlata

Evidencija vrednosti zlata je solidna. Međutim, zlato nosi i druge rizike. Većina ljudi poseduje zlato na papiru. Oni fizički ne poseduju zlato, već ga njihova banka čuva za njih. Zbog toga je zlato veoma podložno konfiskaciji od strane vlade.

Zašto bi vlada konfiskovala nečije zlato, a kamoli u demokratskoj zemlji u „slobodnom svetu“? Ali to se dešavalo i ranije. 1933. godine Izvršnom Naredbom 6102, predsednik Roosevelt naredio je svim Amerikancima da prodaju svoje zlato vladi u zamenu za papirne dolare. Vlada je iskoristila pretnju zatvorom za prikupljanje zlata u fizičkom obliku. Znali su da se zlato više poštuje kao zaliha vrednosti širom sveta od papirnih dolara.

Ako posedujete svoje zlato na nekoj od aplikacija za trgovanje akcijama, možete se kladiti da će vam ga država oduzeti ako joj zatreba. Čak i ako posedujete fizičko zlato, onda ga izlažete mogućnosti krađe – od strane kriminalca ili vaše vlade.

Vaša uštedjevina nije bezbedna.

Rast cena svih gore navedenih sredstava zavisi od našeg trenutnog političkog i ekonomskog sistema koji se nastavlja kao i tokom proteklih 100 godina. Međutim, danas vidimo ogromne pukotine u ovom sistemu.

Sistem ne funkcioniše dobro za većinu ljudi.

Od 1971. plate većine američkih radnika nisu rasle. S druge strane, bogatstvo koje imaju najbogatiji u društvu nalazi se na nivoima koji nisu viđeni više od 80 godina. U međuvremenu, ljudi sve manje i manje veruju institucijama poput banaka i vlada.

EPI Plate VS Produktivnost

CBPP Nejednakost Bogatstva Tokom Vremena

Edelman Studija Poverenja

Širom sveta možemo videti dokaze o slamanju sistema kroz politički ekstremizam: izbor Trampa i drugih ekstremističkih desničarskih kandidata, Bregzit, pokret Occupy, popularizacija koncepta univerzalnog osnovnog dohotka, povratak pojma „socijalizam“ nazad u modu. Ljudi na svim delovima političkog i društvenog spektra osećaju problematična vremena i posežu za sve radikalnijim rešenjima.

Šta je bolje za štednju od dolara, kuća i akcija?

Pa kako ljudi mogu da štede novac u ovim teškim vremenima? Ili ne koriste tradicionalne valute, ili kupuju sredstva koja će zadržati vrednost u teškim vremenima.

Bitcoin ima najviše potencijala da zadrži vrednost kroz politička i ekonomska previranja od bilo koje druge imovine. Na tom putu će biti rupa na kojima će se rušiti ili pumpati, međutim, njegova svojstva čine ga takvim da će verovatno preživeti previranja kada druga imovina ne bude to mogla.

Šta Bitcoin čini drugačijim?

Bitcoini su retki.

Proces ‘rudarenja’ bitcoin-a, proizvodnju bitcoin-a čini veoma skupom, a Bitcoin protokol ograničava ukupan broj bitcoin-a na 21 milion novčića. To čini Bitcoin imunim na nagle poraste ponude. Ovo se veoma razlikuje od tradicionalnih valuta, koje vlade mogu da štampaju sve više kad god one to požele. Zapamtite, povećanje ponude vrši veliki pritisak na vrednost valute.

Bitcoini nemaju drugu ugovornu stranu.

Bitcoin se takođe razlikuje od imovine kao što su obveznice, akcije i kuće, jer mu nedostaje druga ugovorna strana. Druge ugovorne strane su drugi subjekti uključeni u vrednost sredstva, koji to sredstvo mogu obezvrediti ili vam ga uzeti. Ako imate hipoteku na svojoj kući, banka je druga ugovorna strana. Kada sledeći put dođe do velikog finansijskog kraha, banka vam može oduzeti kuću. Kompanije su kvazi-ugovorne strane akcijama i obveznicama, jer mogu da počnu da donose loše odluke koje utiču na njihovu cenu akcija ili na „neizvršenje“ duga (da ga ne vraćaju vama ili drugim poveriocima). Bitcoin nema ovih problema.

Bitcoin je pristupačan.

Svako sa 5 eura i mobilnim telefonom može da kupi i poseduje mali deo bitcoin-a. Važno je da znate da ne morate da kupite ceo bitcoin. Bitcoin-i su deljivi do 100-milionite jedinice, tako da možete da kupite Bitcoin u vrednosti od samo nekoliko eura. Neuporedivo lakše nego kupovina kuće, zlata ili akcija!

Bitcoin se ne može konfiskovati.

Banke drže većinu vaših eura, zlata i akcija za vas. Većina ljudi u razvijenom svetu veruje bankama, jer većina ljudi koji žive u današnje vreme nikada nije doživela konfiskaciju imovine ili ’šišanje’ od strane banaka ili vlada. Nažalost, postoji presedan za konfiskaciju imovine čak i u demokratskim zemljama sa snažnom vladavinom prava.

Kada vlada konfiskuje imovinu, ona obično ubedi javnost da će je menjati za imovinu jednake vrednosti. U SAD-u 1930-ih, vlada je davala dolare vlasnicima zlata. Vlada je znala da uvek može da odštampa još više dolara, ali da ne može da napravi više zlata. Na Kipru 2012. godine, jedna propala banka je svojim klijentima dala deonice banke da pokrije dolare klijenata koje je banka trebala da ima. I dolari i deonice su strmoglavo opali u odnosu na imovinu koja je uzeta od ovih ljudi.

Doći do bitcoin-a koji ljudi poseduju, biće mnogo teže jer se bitcoin-i mogu čuvati u novčaniku koji ne poseduje neka treća strana, a vi možete čak i da zapamtite privatne ključeve do vašeg bitcoin-a u glavi.

Bitcoin je za štednju.

Bitcoin se polako pokazuje kao najbolja opcija za dugoročnu štednju novca, posebno s obzirom na današnju ekonomsku klimu. Posedovanje čak i malog dela, je polisa osiguranja koja se isplati ako svet i dalje nastavi da ludi. Cena Bitcoin-a u dolarima može divlje da varira u roku od godinu ili dve, ali tokom 3+ godine skoro svi vide slične ili više cene od trenutka kada su ga kupili. U stvari, doslovno niko nije izgubio novac čuvajući Bitcoin duže od 3,5 godine – čak i ako je kupio BTC na apsolutnim vrhovima tržišta.

Imajte na umu da nakon ove tačke ti ljudi više nikada nisu videli rizik od gubitka. Cena se nikada nije smanjila niže od najviše cene u prethodnom ciklusu.

Po čemu se Bitcoin razlikuje od ostalih valuta?

Bitcoin funkcioniše tako dobro kao način štednje zbog svog neobičnog dizajna, koji ga čini drugačijim od bilo kog drugog oblika novca koji je postojao pre njega. Bitcoin je digitalna valuta, prvi i verovatno jedini primer valute koja ima ograničenu ponudu dok radi na otvorenom, decentralizovanom sistemu. Vlade strogo kontrolišu valute koje danas koristimo, poput dolara i eura, i proizvode ih za finansiranje ratova i dugova. Korisnici Bitcoin-a – poput vas – kontrolišu Bitcoin protokol.

Evo šta Bitcoin razlikuje od dolara, eura i drugih valuta:

Bitcoin je otvoren sistem.

Svako može da odluči da se pridruži Bitcoin mreži i primeni pravila softverskog protokola, što je dovelo do vrlo decentralizovanog sistema u kojem nijedan pojedinac ili entitet ne može da blokira transakciju, zamrzne sredstva ili da ukrade od druge osobe.Današnji savremeni bankarski sistem se uveliko razlikuje. Nekoliko banaka je dobilo poverenje da gotovo sve valute, akcije i druge vredne predmete čuvaju na “sigurnom” za svoje klijente. Da biste postali banka, potrebni su vam milioni dolara i neverovatne količine političkog uticaja. Da biste pokrenuli Bitcoin čvor i postali „svoja banka“, potrebno vam je nekoliko stotina dolara i jedno slobodno popodne.

Tako izgleda Bitcoin čvor – Node MyNode čvor vam omogućava da postanete svoja banka za samo nekoliko minuta.

Bitcoin ima ograničenu ponudu.

Softverski protokol otvorenog koda koji upravlja Bitcoin sistemom ograničava broj novih bitcoin-a koji se mogu stvoriti tokom vremena, sa ograničenjem od ukupno 21.000.000 bitcoin-a. S druge strane, valute koje danas koristimo imaju neograničenu ponudu. Istorija i sadašnje odluke centralnih banaka govore nam da će vlade uvek štampati sve više i više valuta, sve dok valuta ne bude bezvredna. Sve ovo štampanje uzrokuje inflaciju, što pravi štetu običnim radnim ljudima i štedišama.

Tradicionalne valute su dizajnirane tako da opadaju vremenom. Svaki put kada centralna banka kaže da cilja određenu stopu inflacije, oni ustvari kažu da žele da vaš novac svake godine izgubi određeni procenat svoje vrednosti.

Bitcoin-ova ograničena ponuda znači da je on tako dizajniran da raste vremenom kako se potražnja za njim povećava.

Bitcoin putuje oko sveta za nekoliko minuta.

Svako može da pošalje bitcoin-e za nekoliko minuta širom sveta, bez obzira na granice, banke i vlade. Potrebno je manje od minuta da se transakcija pojavi na novčaniku primaoca i oko 60 minuta da se transakcija u potpunosti „obračuna“, tako da primaoc može da bude siguran da su primljeni bitcoin-i sada njegovi (6 konfirmacija bloka). Slanje drugih valuta širom sveta traje danima ili čak mesecima ako se šalju milionski iznosi, a podrazumeva i visoke naknade.

Neke vlade i novinari tvrde da ova sloboda putovanja koju pruža Bitcoin pomaže kriminalcima i teroristima. Međutim, transakciju Bitcoin-a je lakše pratiti nego većinu transakcija u dolarima ili eurima.

Bitcoin se može čuvati na “USB-u”.

Dizajn Bitcoin-a je takav da vam treba samo da čuvate privatni ključ do svojih ‘bitcoin’ adresa (poput lozinke do bankovnih računa) da biste pristupili svojim bitcoin-ima odakle god poželite. Ovaj privatni ključ možete da sačuvate na disku ili na papiru u obliku 12 ili 24 reči na engleskom jeziku. Kao rezultat toga, možete da držite Bitcoin-e vredne milione dolara u svojoj šaci.

Sve ostale valute danas možete ili da strpate u svoj dušek ili da ih poverite banci na čuvanje. Za većinu ljudi koji žive u razvijenom svetu, i koji ne osporavaju autoritet i poverenje u banku, ovo deluje sasvim dobro. Međutim, oni kojima je potrebno da pobegnu od ugnjetavačke vlade ili koji naljute pogrešne ljude, ne mogu verovati bankama. Za njih je sposobnost da nose svoju ušteđevinu bez potrebe za ogromnim koferom neprocenjiva. Čak i ako ne živite na mestu poput ovog, cena Bitcoin-a se i dalje povećava kada ih neko kome oni trebaju kupi.

Kako Bitcoin spašava svet?

Bitcoin, kao ultimativni način štednje, je cakum pakum, ali da li on pomaže u poboljšanju sveta u celini?

Kao što ćete početi da shvatate, ulazeći sve dublje i u druge sadržaje na ovoj stranici, mnogi temeljni delovi našeg današnjeg monetarnog sistema i ekonomije su duboko slomljeni. Međutim, oni koji upravljaju imaju korist od ovakvih sistema, pa se on verovatno neće promeniti bez revolucije ili mirnog svrgavanja od strane naroda. Bitcoin predstavlja novi sistem, sa nekoliko glavnih prednosti:

• Bitcoin popravlja novac, koji je milenijumima služio kao važan alat za rast i poboljšanje društva.
• Bitcoin vraća zdrav razum pozajmljivanju, uklanjanjem apsurdnih situacija poput negativnih kamatnih stopa (gde zajmitelj plaća da bi se zadužio).
• Bitcoin pokreće ulaganja u obnovljive izvore energije i poboljšava energetsku efikasnost u mreži, služeći kao „krajnji kupac“ za sve vrste energije.

Kako mogu da saznam više o Bitcoin-u?

Ovaj članak vam je dao osnovno razumevanje zašto biste trebali razmišljati o Bitcoin-u. Ako želite da saznate više, preporučujem ove resurse:

• Film Bitcoin: Kraj Novca Kakav Poznajemo
• Još uvek je rano za Bitcoin
• Zasto baš Bitcoin?
• Šta je to Bitcoin?
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper ← objavljen 2008. godine, ovo je izložio dizajn za Bitcoin.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Here’s a revised timeline of macro-level events from The Mandibles: A Family, 2029–2047 by Lionel Shriver, reimagined in a world where Bitcoin is adopted as a widely accepted form of money, altering the original narrative’s assumptions about currency collapse and economic control. In Shriver’s original story, the failure of Bitcoin is assumed amid the dominance of the bancor and the dollar’s collapse. Here, Bitcoin’s success reshapes the economic and societal trajectory, decentralizing power and challenging state-driven outcomes.

Part One: 2029–2032

• 2029 (Early Year)\ The United States faces economic strain as the dollar weakens against global shifts. However, Bitcoin, having gained traction emerges as a viable alternative. Unlike the original timeline, the bancor—a supranational currency backed by a coalition of nations—struggles to gain footing as Bitcoin’s decentralized adoption grows among individuals and businesses worldwide, undermining both the dollar and the bancor.

• 2029 (Mid-Year: The Great Renunciation)\ Treasury bonds lose value, and the government bans Bitcoin, labeling it a threat to sovereignty (mirroring the original bancor ban). However, a Bitcoin ban proves unenforceable—its decentralized nature thwarts confiscation efforts, unlike gold in the original story. Hyperinflation hits the dollar as the U.S. prints money, but Bitcoin’s fixed supply shields adopters from currency devaluation, creating a dual-economy split: dollar users suffer, while Bitcoin users thrive.

• 2029 (Late Year)\ Dollar-based inflation soars, emptying stores of goods priced in fiat currency. Meanwhile, Bitcoin transactions flourish in underground and online markets, stabilizing trade for those plugged into the bitcoin ecosystem. Traditional supply chains falter, but peer-to-peer Bitcoin networks enable local and international exchange, reducing scarcity for early adopters. The government’s gold confiscation fails to bolster the dollar, as Bitcoin’s rise renders gold less relevant.

• 2030–2031\ Crime spikes in dollar-dependent urban areas, but Bitcoin-friendly regions see less chaos, as digital wallets and smart contracts facilitate secure trade. The U.S. government doubles down on surveillance to crack down on bitcoin use. A cultural divide deepens: centralized authority weakens in Bitcoin-adopting communities, while dollar zones descend into lawlessness.

• 2032\ By this point, Bitcoin is de facto legal tender in parts of the U.S. and globally, especially in tech-savvy or libertarian-leaning regions. The federal government’s grip slips as tax collection in dollars plummets—Bitcoin’s traceability is low, and citizens evade fiat-based levies. Rural and urban Bitcoin hubs emerge, while the dollar economy remains fractured.

Time Jump: 2032–2047

• Over 15 years, Bitcoin solidifies as a global reserve currency, eroding centralized control. The U.S. government adapts, grudgingly integrating bitcoin into policy, though regional autonomy grows as Bitcoin empowers local economies.

Part Two: 2047

• 2047 (Early Year)\ The U.S. is a hybrid state: Bitcoin is legal tender alongside a diminished dollar. Taxes are lower, collected in BTC, reducing federal overreach. Bitcoin’s adoption has decentralized power nationwide. The bancor has faded, unable to compete with Bitcoin’s grassroots momentum.

• 2047 (Mid-Year)\ Travel and trade flow freely in Bitcoin zones, with no restrictive checkpoints. The dollar economy lingers in poorer areas, marked by decay, but Bitcoin’s dominance lifts overall prosperity, as its deflationary nature incentivizes saving and investment over consumption. Global supply chains rebound, powered by bitcoin enabled efficiency.

• 2047 (Late Year)\ The U.S. is a patchwork of semi-autonomous zones, united by Bitcoin’s universal acceptance rather than federal control. Resource scarcity persists due to past disruptions, but economic stability is higher than in Shriver’s original dystopia—Bitcoin’s success prevents the authoritarian slide, fostering a freer, if imperfect, society.

Key Differences

• Currency Dynamics: Bitcoin’s triumph prevents the bancor’s dominance and mitigates hyperinflation’s worst effects, offering a lifeline outside state control.
• Government Power: Centralized authority weakens as Bitcoin evades bans and taxation, shifting power to individuals and communities.
• Societal Outcome: Instead of a surveillance state, 2047 sees a decentralized, bitcoin driven world—less oppressive, though still stratified between Bitcoin haves and have-nots.

This reimagining assumes Bitcoin overcomes Shriver’s implied skepticism to become a robust, adopted currency by 2029, fundamentally altering the novel’s bleak trajectory.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Gen Z (those born between 1997 and 2012) are not rushing to stack sats, and Oliver Porter, Founder & CEO of Jippi, understands the challenge better than most. His strategy revolves around adapting Bitcoin education to fit seamlessly into the digital lives of young adults.

“We need to meet them where they are,” Oliver explains. “90% of Gen Z plays games. 70% expect to earn rewards.”

So, what will effectively introduce them to Bitcoin? In Oliver’s mind, the answer is simple: games that don’t feel preachy but still plant the orange pill.

Learn more at Jippi.app

That’s exactly what Jippi is. Based in Austin, Texas, the team has created a mobile augmented reality (AR) game that rewards players in bitcoin and sneakily teaches them why sound money matters.

“It’s Pokémon GO… but for sats,” Oliver puts it succinctly.

Jippi is like Pokemon Go, but for sats

Oliver’s Bitcoin journey, like many in the space, began long before he was ready. A former colleague had tried planting the seed years earlier, handing him a copy of The Bitcoin Standard. But the moment passed.

It wasn’t until the chaos of 2020 when lockdowns hit, printing presses roared, and civil liberties shrank that the message finally landed for him.

“The government got so good at doing reverse Robin Hood,” Oliver explains. “They steal from the working population and reward the rich.”

By 2020, though, the absurdity of the covid hysteria had caused his eyes to be opened and the orange light seemed the best path back to freedom.

He left the UK for Austin “one of the best places for Bitcoiners,” he says, and dove headfirst into the industry, working at Swan for a year before founding Jippi on PlebLab’s accelerator program.

Jippi’s flagship game lets players roam their cities hunting digital creatures, Bitcoin Beasts, tied to real-world locations. Catching them requires answering Bitcoin trivia, and the reward is sats.

No jargon. No hour-long lectures. Just gameplay with sound money principles woven right in.

The model is working. At a recent hackathon in Austin, Jippi beat out 14 other teams to win first place and $15,000 in prize money.

Oliver of Jippi won Top Builder Season 2 — PlebLab on X

“We’re backdooring Bitcoin education,” Oliver admits. “And while we’re at it, encouraging people to get outside and touch grass.”

Not everyone’s been thrilled. When Jippi team members visited one of the more liberal-leaning places in Texas, UT Austin, to test interest in Bitcoin, they found some seriously committed no-coiners on the campus.

“One young woman told me, ‘I would rather die than talk about Bitcoin,'” Oliver recalls, highlighting the cultural resistance that’s built up among younger demographics.

This resistance is backed by hard data. According to Oliver, some of the Bitcoin podcasters they met with in the space to do market research reported that less than 1% of their listeners are from Gen Z and that number is dropping.

“Unless we find a way to capture their interest in a meaningful way, there’s going to be a big problem around trying to sway Gen Z away from the siren call of s***coins and crypto casinos and towards Bitcoin,” Oliver warns.

Jippi’s next big move is Las Vegas, where they’ll launch the Beast Catch experience at the Venetian during a major Bitcoin event. To mark the occasion, they’re opening up six limited sponsorship spots for Bitcoin companies, each one tied to a custom in-game beast.

Jippi looks to launch a special event at Bitcoin 2025

“It’s real estate inside the game,” Oliver explains. “Brands become allies, not intrusions. You get a logo, company name, and call to action, so we can push people to your site or app.”

Bitcoin Well—an automatic self-custody Bitcoin platform—has claimed Beast #1. Only five exclusive spots remain for Bitcoin companies to “beastify their brand” through Jippi’s immersive AR game.

“I love the Jippi mission. I think gamified learning is how we will onboard the next generation and it’s exciting to see what the Jippi team is doing! I love working with bitcoiners towards our common mission – bullish!” said Adam O’Brien, Bitcoin Well CEO.

Jippi’s sponsorship model is simple: align incentives, respect users, and support builders. Instead of throwing ad money at tech giants, Bitcoin companies can connect with new users naturally while they’re having fun and earning sats in the process.

For Bitcoin companies looking to reach a younger demographic, this represents a unique opportunity to showcase their brand to up to 30,000 potential customers at the Vegas event.

Jippi Bitcoin Beast partnership

While Jippi’s current focus is simple, get the game into more cities, Oliver sees a future where AR glasses and AI help personalize Bitcoin education even further.

“The magic is going to really happen when Apple releases the glasses form factor,” he says, describing how augmented reality could enhance real-world connections rather than isolate users.

In the longer term, Jippi aims to evolve from a free-to-play model toward a pay-to-play version with higher stakes. Users would form “tribes” with friends to compete for substantial bitcoin prizes, creating social connections along with financial education.

Unlike VC-backed startups, Jippi is raising funds pleb style via Timestamp, an open investment platform for Bitcoin companies.

“You don’t have to be an accredited investor,” Oliver explains. “You’re directly supporting the parallel Bitcoin economy by investing in Bitcoin companies for equity.”

Anyone can invest as little as $100. Perks include early access, exclusive game content, and even creating your own beast design with your name/pseudonym and unique game lore. Each investment comes with direct ownership of an early-stage Bitcoin company like Jippi.

For Oliver, this is more than just a business. It’s about future-proofing Bitcoin adoption and ensuring Satoshi’s vision lives on, especially as many people are lured by altcoins, NFTs, and social media dopamine.

“We’re on the right side of history,” he says firmly. “I want my grandkids to know that early on in the Bitcoin revolution, games like Jippi helped make it stick.”

In a world increasingly absorbed by screens and short attention spans, Jippi’s combination of outdoor play, sats rewards, and Bitcoin education might be exactly the bridge Gen Z needs.

Interested in sponsoring a Beast or investing in Jippi? Reach out to Jippi directly by heading to their partnerships page on their website or visit their Timestamp page to invest in Jippi today.

@ 21335073:a244b1ad

The other day, I had the privilege of sitting down with one of my favorite living artists. Our conversation was so captivating that I felt compelled to share it. I’m leaving his name out for privacy.

Since our last meeting, I’d watched a documentary about his life, one he’d helped create. I told him how much I admired his openness in it. There’s something strange about knowing intimate details of someone’s life when they know so little about yours—it’s almost like I knew him too well for the kind of relationship we have.

He paused, then said quietly, with a shy grin, that watching the documentary made him realize how “odd and eccentric” he is. I laughed and told him he’s probably the sanest person I know. Because he’s lived fully, chasing love, passion, and purpose with hardly any regrets. He’s truly lived.

Today, I turn 44, and I’ll admit I’m a bit eccentric myself. I think I came into the world this way. I’ve made mistakes along the way, but I carry few regrets. Every misstep taught me something. And as I age, I’m not interested in blending in with the world—I’ll probably just lean further into my own brand of “weird.” I want to live life to the brim. The older I get, the more I see that the “normal” folks often seem less grounded than the eccentric artists who dare to live boldly. Life’s too short to just exist, actually live.

I’m not saying to be strange just for the sake of it. But I’ve seen what the crowd celebrates, and I’m not impressed. Forge your own path, even if it feels lonely or unpopular at times.

It’s easy to scroll through the news and feel discouraged. But actually, this is one of the most incredible times to be alive! I wake up every day grateful to be here, now. The future is bursting with possibility—I can feel it.

So, to my fellow weirdos on nostr: stay bold. Keep dreaming, keep pushing, no matter what’s trending. Stay wild enough to believe in a free internet for all. Freedom is radical—hold it tight. Live with the soul of an artist and the grit of a fighter. Thanks for inspiring me and so many others to keep hoping. Thank you all for making the last year of my life so special.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Graphics materials for Bitcoin Knots https://github.com/bitcoinknots branding. See below guide image for reference, a bit cleaner and scalable:

Font family "Aileron" is provided free for personal and commercial use, and can be found here: https://www.1001fonts.com/aileron-font.html

Source: https://github.com/Blissmode/bitcoinknots-gfx/tree/main

https://stacker.news/items/986624

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

Graphics materials for Bitcoin Knots https://github.com/bitcoinknots branding. See below guide image for reference, a bit cleaner and scalable:

Font family "Aileron" is provided free for personal and commercial use, and can be found here: https://www.1001fonts.com/aileron-font.html

Source: https://github.com/Blissmode/bitcoinknots-gfx/tree/main

https://stacker.news/items/986587

@ 7e6f9018:a6bbbce5

Governments and the press often publish data on the population’s knowledge of Catalan. However, this data only represents one stage in the linguistic process and does not accurately reflect the state of the language, since a language only has a future if it is used. Knowledge is a necessary step toward using a language, but it is not the final stage — that stage is actual use.

So what is the state of Catalan usage? If we look at data on regular use, we see that the Catalan language has remained stagnant over the past hundred years, with nearly the same number of regular speakers. In 1930, there were around 2.5 million speakers, and in 2018, there were 2.7 million.

Regular use of Catalan in Catalonia, in millions of speakers. The dotted segments are an estimate of the trend, based on the statements of Joan Coromines and adjusted according to Catalonia’s population growth.

These figures wouldn’t necessarily be negative if the language’s integrity were strong, that is, if its existence weren’t threatened by other languages. But the population of Catalonia has grown from 2.7 million in 1930 to 7.5 million in 2018. This means that today, regular Catalan speakers make up only 36% of Catalonia’s population, whereas in 1930, they represented 90%.

Regular use of Catalan in Catalonia, as a percentage of speakers. The dotted segments are an estimate of the trend, based on the statements of Joan Coromines and adjusted according to Catalonia’s population growth.

The language that has gained the most ground is mainly Spanish, which went from 200,000 speakers in 1930 to 3.8 million in 2018. Moreover, speakers of other foreign languages (500,000 speakers) have also grown more than Catalan speakers over the past hundred years.

Notes, Sources, and Methodology

The data from 2003 onward is taken from Idescat (source). Before 2003, there are no official statistics, but we can make interpretations based on historical evidence. The data prior to 2003 is calculated based on two key pieces of evidence:

• 1st Interpretation: In 1930, 90% of the population of Catalonia spoke Catalan regularly. Source and evidence: The Romance linguist Joan Coromines i Vigneaux, a renowned 20th-century linguist, stated in his 1950 work "El que s'ha de saber de la llengua catalana" that "In this territory [Greater Catalonia], almost the entire population speaks Catalan as their usual language" (1, 2).\ While "almost the entire population" is not a precise number, we can interpret it quantitatively as somewhere between 80% and 100%. For the sake of a moderate estimate, we assume 90% of the population were regular Catalan speakers, with the remaining 10% being immigrants and officials of the Spanish state.

• 2nd Interpretation: Regarding population growth between 1930 and 1998, on average, 60% is due to immigration (mostly adopting or already using Spanish language), while 40% is natural growth (likely to acquire Catalan language from childhood). Source and evidence: Between 1999 and 2019, when more detailed data is available, immigration accounted for 68% of population growth. From 1930 to 1998, there was a comparable wave of migration, especially between 1953 and 1973, largely of Spanish-speaking origin (3, 4, 5, 6). To maintain a moderate estimate, we assume 60% of population growth during that period was due to immigration, with the ratio varying depending on whether the period experienced more or less total growth.

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na bitcoin-balkan.com.

---

Pregled sadržaja

1. Šta je finansijski samo-suverenitet?
2. Zašto smo prestali da koristimo zlatni standard?
3. Šta fali tradicionalnoj valuti i centralnim bankama?
4. Kako mogu ljudi da mi ukradu novac ako je u banci?
5. Kako ljudi koriste moje finansijske podatke protiv mene?
6. Kako ljudi kontrolišu sa kim obavljam transakcije?
7. Kako da povratimo svoj finansijski samo-suverenitet?
8. Kako Bitcoin funkcioniše?
9. Pa onda, zašto Bitcoin?
10. Po čemu je Bitcoin bolji od sistema tradicionalnih valuta?
11. Kako Bitcoin štiti od Inflacije?
12. Kako Bitcoin štiti od Zaplene?
13. Kako Bitcoin štiti Privatnost?
14. Kako Bitcoin štiti od Cenzure?
15. Šta će vlada i banke učiniti sa Bitcoin-om?
16. Da li je vrednost Bitcoin-a nestabilna?
17. Da li je Bitcoin novac?
18. Bitcoin kao Zaliha Vrednosti
19. Bitcoin kao Sredstvo Razmene
20. Bitcoin kao Obračunska Jedinica
21. Bitcoin kao Sistem Kontrole
22. Šta je sa „Sledećim Bitcoin-om“?
23. Na kraju

---

Kratki uvod u bezbednost, privatnost i slobodu vašeg novca.

Pre nego što saznate kako morate znati zašto.

Šta je finansijski samo-suverenitet?

Zamislite da u ruci imate zlatni novčić, jedan od najjednostavnijih i najčistijih oblika finansijskog samo-suvereniteta.

Da biste držali taj zlatni novčić, ne morate da se složite sa bilo kojim Uslovima korišćenja ili Politikom privatnosti, da se pridržavate bilo kojih KYC ili AML propisa, da pokažete ličnu kartu, da navedete svoje ime ili jedinstveni matični broj.

Samo ga držite u ruci i njime možete platiti bilo šta, davanjem tog novčića nekom drugom da ga drži u ruci. To je čista sloboda.

Pored slobode onoga što kupujete svojim novčićem, niko ne može magično znati kome plaćate ili koju robu/usluge kupujete tim zlatni novčićem, jer vaša privatnost nije ugrožena sa zlatom.

A pošto imate svoju privatnost, niko ne može znati za vaše transakcije, pa niko ne može da odluči da ograniči ili kontroliše za šta koristite taj zlatni novčić.

Hiljadama godina zlato je bilo globalni standard novca.

Svi su održavali svoj finansijski samo-suverenitet, a privatnost i sloboda svačijeg novca su poštovani.

Zaista je bilo tako jednostavno.

Zašto smo prestali da koristimo zlatni standard?

Trenutni globalni bankarski sistem i sistem tradicionalnih valuta, bankari su vrlo polako implementirali u proteklih 100+ godina.

Udružili su se sa svetskim vladama koje su svima oduzele zlato pod pretnjom nasilja.

Na primer, nakon što je Federalna banka rezervi osnovana u SAD-u 1913. godine, američka vlada je nasilno oduzela svo zlato 1933. godine, prisiljavajući sve da koriste nove centralne banke i sistem novčanica Federalnih rezervi.

„Dostavite svoje celokupno zlato u naše sefove u zamenu za bezvredni papir, ili ćemo upotrebiti silu nad vama.“

Banke su u početku zamenile zlatni standard papirnim priznanicama zvane zlatni sertifikati, ali nakon što je prošlo dovoljno vremena, banke su u osnovi jednostavno prestale da ih otkupljuju za zlato.

Zlatni sertifikati izdavani od banaka (novčanice ili „gotovina“) u tom trenutku bili su samo bezvredni papir, ali zbog vladine pretnje nasiljem, svi su bili primorani da nastave da koriste novčanice Federalnih rezervi.

Od skora, banke koriste digitalnu bazu podataka, u kojoj doslovno mogu stvoriti novac ni iz čega, čak i da ga ne moraju štampati na papiru.

Predsednik Federalnih rezervi priča kako oni „štampaju“ novac.

Oni su učvrstili svoju moć da manipulišu i naduvaju globalnu novčanu masu, nadgledaju finansijske transakcije svih i kontrolišu protok svih tradicionalnih valuta u svom bankarskom sistemu.

Banke sada kontrolišu sve.

Jednom kada su centralni bankari uspešno preuzeli kontrolu nad novčanom masom u svetu, zajedno sa sposobnošću svih da slobodno vrše transakcije i trguju, svet je kolektivno izgubio bezbednost, slobodu i privatnost svog novca.

Šta fali tradicionalnoj valuti i centralnim bankama?

Nakon impelentacije trenutnog globalnog bankarskog sistema i sistema tradicionalnih valuta, svetu nije preostao drugi izbor nego da veruje bankarima i političarima da vode globalni finansijski sistem na pošten način.

„Koren problema tradicionalne valute je potpuno poverenje potrebno za njeno funkcionisanje. Centralnoj banci se mora verovati da neće devalvirati valutu, ali istorija tradicionalnih valuta je puna kršenja tog poverenja. Bankama se mora verovati da čuvaju naš novac i prenose ga elektronskim putem, ali ga daju u talasima kreditnih balona sa malim delićem rezerve. ““ — Satoshi Nakamoto

Istorija zloupotrebe tradicionalnih valuta može se grupisati u 3 kategorije:

• Bezbednost. Loši ljudi kradu vaš novac ili vrednost vašeg novca, ponekad na očigledne načine, ponekad na podle načine.

• Privatnost. Loši ljudi nadgledaju sve vaše privatne finansijske transakcije, i koriste vaše lične finansijske podatke protiv vas.

• Sloboda. Loši ljudi kontrolišu na koji način možete da trošite sopstveni novac, sa kim možete da obavljate transakcije, koliko možete da potrošite itd.

Kako mogu ljudi da mi ukradu novac ako je u banci?

Evo nekoliko primera:

• Krađa inflacijom: Ovo je primarni način na koji banke kradu vaš novac i jedan od najpodlijih. Kada centralne banke izdaju novi novac, bilo štampanjem na bezvrednom papiru, ili samo dodavanjem knjigovodstvenog unosa u bazu podataka koju kontrolišu, one naduvaju globalnu novčanu masu. Inflacija krade kupovnu moć svih koji drže deo te valute, jednostavno zato što je sada više te valute u opticaju. Zlato se ne može stvoriti, pa su bankari umesto toga izmislili sistem papirnog novca.

• Krađa zaplenom: Ovo je jedan od načina na koji vlade mogu ukrasti vaš novac. Da li ste ikada čuli za zaplenu imovine? Ako policajac posumnja da je vaša imovina korišćena u krivičnom delu, može je zapleniti, a vi se morate boriti da biste povratili vašu ukradenu imovinu. Ili, drugi primer: Pokušajte da uđete u zemlju sa više od 10.000 USD u džepu, a ne da je prijavite, i pogledajte šta će se dogoditi. Sve je isto: krađa od strane drugih ljudi sa oružjem.

• Krađa putem oporezivanja: Ovo je još jedan način na koji vam vlade kradu novac. Ne sporim da li je oporezivanje etično ili ne, samo konstatujem činjenicu da vaša vlada može da primora vašu banku da im da vaš novac, a ovo je bezbednostna ranjivost. Da bi novac bio siguran, mora biti nezaplenjiv, a vlade mogu da zaplene vaše bankovne račune.

Kako ljudi koriste moje finansijske podatke protiv mene?

Ako fizičku tradicionalnu valutu predate drugoj osobi, u obliku papirnog novca ili kovanica, relativno je lako zaštititi privatnost svoje transakcije, baš kao što bi bilo da koristite zlatnike.

Međutim, ako koristite kreditne kartice, debitne kartice, bankovne transfere, PayPal, Venmo, LINE Pay, WeChat Pay ili bilo koju drugu mrežu za plaćanje koja je centralno kontrolisana, aktivno pristajete da se odreknete privatnosti podataka svih svojih privatnih finansijskih transakcija i sve ih dajete poverljivoj trećoj strani.

Kada su svi podaci i metapodaci vaših finansijskih transakcija prijavljeni u centralnu bazu podataka, onaj ko ima pristup toj bazi podataka može da koristi vaše podatke protiv vas.

Evo nekoliko osnovnih primera:

• Ako ste kupili robu rizičnog životnog stila poput cigareta, banka može reći vašoj osiguravajućoj kompaniji da poveća vaše osiguranje.
• Ako ste kupili nešto što je ilegalno, poput droga za rekreaciju, vaša banka može reći vašoj vladi da vas zakonski goni.

Ali u slučaju nekih represivnih vlada, oni su to odveli do ekstrema. Oni centralno prikupljaju sve finansijske transakcije i druge podatke svih svojih građana i stvorili su totalitarni Sistem Socijalnih Bodova (eng. Social Credit Score):

Prepoznavanje lica je jedan od elemenata kineskih napora za praćenje

Zapisi George Orwell-a već su postali stvarnost u Kini zbog sistema tradicionalnih valuta centralne banke i platnih mreža koje su izgrađene na njemu.

Ako mislite da se to neće dogoditi u vašoj zemlji, razmislite ponovo.

To se dešava vrlo polako, ali na kraju će sve svetske vlade primeniti Sistem Socijalnih Bodova, dok je Kina to tek prva učinila.

Kako ljudi kontrolišu sa kim obavljam transakcije?

U prvom primeru sa zlatnim novčićem, kada ga predate nekom drugom kao plaćanje za robu ili uslugu, ne postoji centralizovana evidencija vaše platne transakcije i imate savršenu privatnost.

Međutim, u centralnom bankarskom sistemu, budući da banka ima i znanje o podacima o vašim transakcijama i moć da kontroliše vaša sredstva, oni mogu proceniti niz pravila da bi odlučili da li žele da dozvole vašu transakciju ili da to odbiju, takođe kao i izvršenje te odluke kontrolišući vaša sredstva.

Tako su vlade naoružale tradicionalne valute i ​​centralni bankarski sistem kao Sistem Kontrole nad svojim građanima.

Da rezimiramo: Pošto ste se odrekli bezbednosti i privatnosti svog novca, izgubili ste i svoju finansijsku slobodu.

“Privatnost nije o tome da nešto treba sakriti. Privatnost je o tome da nešto treba zaštititi.” — Edward Snowden

Kako da povratimo svoj finansijski samo-suverenitet?

Pokret Cypherpunk pokrenuli su pojedinci koji su shvatili važnost zaštite privatnosti i slobode pojedinačnih korisnika na Internetu.

Cypherpunk-ovi su verovali da se gore opisani problemi mogu rešiti samo potpuno novim novčanim sistemom, koji poštuje i štiti bezbednost, privatnost i slobodu pojedinca.

Mnogi od Cypherpunk-era pokušali su da izgrade nove etičke sisteme e-gotovine koji bi mogli da zamene tradicionalne valute i centralno bankarstvo.

Bilo je mnogo teških računarskih problema koje je trebalo prevazići u stvaranju tako istinski decentralizovanog sistema, i ako su neki od njih bili blizu cilja, svi su propali.

Odnosno, sve dok jedan pseudonim Cypherpunk-a to konačno nije shvatio 2008. godine: kombinacijom digitalnih potpisa, distribuirane knjige i peer-to-peer mreže, rođen je Bitcoin.

Kako Bitcoin funkcioniše?

Baš kao što ne treba da znate kako Internet funkcioniše da bi gledali slike mačaka na Internetu, razumevanje tehničke složenosti načina na koji Bitcoin radi „ispod haube“ nije neophodno da biste ga koristili i postigli sopstveni finansijski samo-suverenitet.

Važna stvar koju želim da saznate iz ovog članka je da iako većina novih tehnologija u početku ima loše korisničko iskustvo, Bitcoin svesno i vrlo namerno ne žrtvuje svoje osnovne filozofske principe da bi brže pridobio nove korisnike, ili da bi poboljšao korisničko iskustvo.

Najpametniji Cypherpunk-ovi rade na poboljšanju korisničkog iskustva.

Tehnologija će se sa vremenom poboljšavati, baš kao i za Internet.

Pa onda, zašto Bitcoin?

Reći ću vam zašto:

Jer Bitcoin poštuje bezbednost, privatnost i slobodu pojedinca.

Po čemu je Bitcoin bolji od sistema tradicionalnih valuta?

Za početak, Bitcoin nema Uslove korišćenja, Politiku privatnosti i Propise o usklađenosti sa KYC/AML. (Know Your Costumer & Anti-money Laundering)

Bitcoin je uspešan primer implementacije kripto-anarhije, gde su jedina pravila kriptografija, matematika i jak skup konsenzusnih pravila.

To je distribuirani i nepoverljivi sistem zasnovan na finansijskim podsticajima i nijedna osoba ili centralizovani entitet ne može da kontroliše Bitcoin.

Ono što je najvažnije, Bitcoin vam omogućava da odustanete od tradicionalnih valuta, sistema delimičnih rezervi i centralnog bankarstva rešavanjem osnovnih problema poverenja:

• Sigurnost od inflacije korišćenjem fiksnog snabdevanja
• Sigurnost od zaplene korišćenjem ključeva za kontrolu sredstava
• Privatnost plaćanja korišćenjem pseudonimnih identiteta
• Sloboda protiv cenzure korišćenjem peer to peer mreže

Kako Bitcoin štiti od Inflacije?

Jedno od najkritičnijih pravila konsenzusa o Bitcoin-u je da može postojati najviše 21,000,000 Bitcoin-a.

Nakon izdavanja svih Bitcoin-a, nikada više ne može doći do stvaranja novih Bitcoin-a.

Stoga je Bitcoin deflaciona valuta, koja sprečava ljude da ukradu vaš novac ili njegovu vrednost naduvavanjem novčane mase.

Monetarna Inflacija Bitcoin-a

Kako Bitcoin štiti od Zaplene?

Bitcoin se može preneti samo pomoću kriptografskog privatnog ključa koji kontroliše sredstva.

Nijedan bitcoin nikada ne izadje van sistema.

Nijedna vlada, banka ili sudski nalog ne mogu zapleniti ta sredstva.

Jednostavno ne postoji način da se takva odredba ili naredba sprovede od bilo kog „organa vlasti“, jer Bitcoin ne priznaje nijedno „ovlašćenje“ u svom sistemu.

Bitcoin je potpuno samo-suveren sistem i zbog svoje distribuirane prirode ne može se ugasiti.

Postoji zbog sopstvenih zasluga, samo zato što ljudi veruju u to.

Kako Bitcoin štiti Privatnost?

Bitcoin ne traži vaše ime ili druge detalje koji mogu lično da vas identifikuju.

Vaš identitet je kriptografski, a ne vaše stvarno ime.

Dakle, vaš identitet izgleda otprilike kao 1vizSAISbuiKsbt9d8JV8itm5ackk2TorC, a ne kao „Stefan Petrovič“.

Pored toga, niko ne zna ko kontroliše sredstva na datoj Bitcoin adresi, a nova tehnologija se neprestano razvija kako bi se poboljšala privatnost Bitcoin-a.

Kako Bitcoin štiti od Cenzure?

Peer-to-peer Bitcoin mreža je u potpunosti distribuirana.

To znači da ako jedan čvor pokuša da cenzuriše vašu transakciju, neće uspeti ukoliko * svaki * čvor(Node) ne izvrši cenzuru vaše transakcije.

Šta će vlada i banke učiniti sa Bitcoin-om?

Neke zemlje su pokušale da ga regulišu, kontrolišu, isključe itd., ali nijedna od njih nije uspela.

Čini se da uglavnom samo žele da koriste postojeći sistem centralnih banaka da bi kontrolisali kako ljudi trguju tradicionalnim valutama za Bitcoin, i naravno žele da oporezuju Bitcoin na bilo koji mogući način.

Evo nekoliko uobičajenih tvrdnji vlada i banaka o Bitcoin-u:

Evropska centralna banka kaže da Bitcoin nije valuta i upozorava da je vrlo nestabilna.

„Bitcoin, izgleda samo kao prevara“, rekao je gospodin Tramp. „Ne sviđa mi se jer je to još jedna valuta koja se takmiči sa dolarom.“

Da li je vrednost Bitcoin-a nestabilna?

Ako umanjite grafikon cena, videćete da Bitcoin-u neprekidno raste vrednost od kada je stvoren, trgujući sa manje od 0,01 USD i polako se penje na preko 60.000 USD na nedavnom vrhuncu početkom 2021. godine.

Cena Bitcoina od 2011. godine

To je zato što je njegova ponuda fiksna i ljudi cene njegovu nestašicu.

Sa većom potražnjom i fiksnom ponudom, cene vremenom rastu.

Kako godine odmiču, njegova vrednost će se povećavati kako novi korisnici počinju da drže Bitcoin. (U svetu Bitcoina držanju kažemo HODL. Drži bitcoin. Hodl bitcoin.)

Da li je Bitcoin novac?

Da biste odgovorili na pitanje da li je Bitcoin novac ili ne, prvo morate definisati pojam „novac“.

Nažalost, reč „novac“ koristimo da bismo opisali nekoliko vrlo različitih komplikovanih koncepata, koji su svi potpuno odvojeni.

Termin „novac“ se zapravo odnosi na:

• Zaliha Vrednosti (Store of Value)
• Sredstvo Razmene ( Medium of Exchange)
• Obračunska Jedinica (Unit of Account)
• Sistem Kontrole (System Control)

Bitcoin kao Zaliha Vrednosti

Ovaj tweet to savršeno objašnjava:

Sinov prijatelj: “Matt, šta će se dogoditi ako novčić od 1 funte usitnite na pola?”

Dobijaš dva komada bezvrednog metala. Ako zlatnik usitnite na pola, dobićete dva zlatnika, od kojih svaki vredi polovinu onoga što je novčić bio.

Sin: „… isto tako kao sa zlatom jeste sa bitcoinima“.

Bitcoin je potpuno deljiv i deluje kao izvrsna zaliha vrednosti, baš kao što je i zlato već hiljadama godina.

Bitcoin kao Sredstvo Razmene

Bitcoin je dobro služio kao sredstvo razmene za svoje rane korisnike.

Ali skaliranje Bitcoin-a na globalni nivo koji bi mogao da posluži svim ljudima je veliki izazov, jer se osnovna „blockchain“ tehnologija ne skalira na globalni nivo.

Da bi rešio ovaj problem skaliranja, Satoshi je izumeo koncept kanala plaćanja, a u kombinaciji sa malo pomoći drugih briljantnih računarskih naučnika Cipherpunk-a koji su poboljšali koncept tokom poslednjih 10 godina, sada imamo mrežu Lightning, koja omogućava da se Bitcoin koristi kao odlično Sredstvo Razmene, koje se vremenom može proširiti na globalni nivo.

Bitcoin kao Obračunska Jedinica

Najmanja obračunska jedinica Bitcoin-a nazvana je po njenom tvorcu, Satoshi-u.

Jedan Bitcoin je jednak 100.000.000 Satoshi-a.

Na kraju, kako se robe i usluge sve češće razmenjuju za Bitcoin, sve više ljudi će koristiti Bitcoin ili „Sats“ kao obračunsku jedinicu.

Konvertor Bitcoin - Satoshi

Bitcoin kao Sistem Kontrole

Budući da je Bitcoin dizajniran da poštuje i štiti ljudska prava pojedinca, posebno bezbednost, privatnost i slobodu novca; ne bi bio dobar Sistem Kontrole i ne može se koristiti za ugnjetavanje ljudi, kao što se dešava sa tradicionalnim valutama i sistemima centralnog bankarstva koji to trenutno vrlo dobro rade.

Šta je sa „Sledećim Bitcoin-om“?

Kao što može biti samo jedan „globalni“ Internet, tako može biti i samo jedan globalni novac, a stigao je i novi Bitcoin Standard.

Sve ostalo je ili direktna prevara ili gubljenje vremena.

Ako bi neko želeo da vam proda „Sledeće Zlato“, da li biste ga kupili?

Na kraju

Nadam se da vam je ovaj članak pomogao da razumete zašto je Bitcoin stvoren i kako može da pomogne svetu da se oslobodi tradicionalnih valuta i sistema centralnog bankarstva koji je veoma duboko integrisan u naše trenutno društvo.

Evo nekoliko misli koje treba poneti sa sobom:

• Bitcoin nije izmišljen radi zarade, već je izmišljen da bi promenio svet.
• Bitcoin će to učiniti poštujući korisnikovu bezbednost, privatnost i slobodu.
• Bitcoin se već koristi kao novac, na nekoliko načina na koji se novac može koristiti.
• Bitcoin nije nestabilan, njegova vrednost vremenom polako raste (odzumirajte).
• Bitcoin ima mnogo kopija i prevaranata koji će pokušati da vam prodaju svoju kopiju Bitcoin-a. Ne zavaravajte se lažnim Bitcoin-om baš kao što vas ne bi prevarili ni Lažnim Zlatom.
• Bitcoin će postati najveći prenos bogatstva u našem životu, tako da ćete možda želeti da ih uzmete pre nego kasnije.
• Ostanite skromni i skupljajte satošije.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

You’ve probably seen it before.

You open an agency’s website or a freelancer’s portfolio. At the very top of the homepage, it says:

We design for startups.

You wait 3 seconds. The last word fades out and a new one fades in:

We design for agencies.

Wait 3 more seconds:

We design for founders.

I call this design pattern The Wheel of Nothing: a rotating list of audience segments meant to impress through inclusion and draw attention through motion… for absolutely no reason.

Revered brand studio Pentagram recently launched a new website. To my surprise, the homepage features the Wheel of Nothing front and center, boldly claiming:

We design Everything for Everyone…before cycling through more specific combinations every few seconds.

Dan Mall, a husband, dad, teacher, creative director, designer, founder, and entrepreneur from Philly. I share as much as I can to create better opportunities for those who wouldn’t have them otherwise. Most recently, I ran design system consultancy SuperFriendly for over a decade.

Read more at Dans' website https://danmall.com/posts/the-wheel-of-nothing/

https://stacker.news/items/986392

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Tokyo-listed investment firm Metaplanet has officially surpassed El Salvador in bitcoin holdings after its biggest-ever single purchase of the scarce digital asset.

On May 12, 2025, the company announced it had bought 1,241 Bitcoin (BTC) for approximately $123.8 million, or ¥18.4 billion. The average price per coin was about $102,111, marking the firm’s largest purchase to date.

This latest buy brings Metaplanet’s total bitcoin reserves to 6,796 BTC, worth over $700 million.

Metaplanet on X

That puts Metaplanet ahead of El Salvador, the Central American nation that made headlines in 2021 for adopting bitcoin as legal tender. According to its National Bitcoin Office, El Salvador currently holds 6,174 BTC, worth roughly $642 million.

El Salvador bitcoin holdings — bitcoin.gob.sv

“Metaplanet now holds more bitcoin than El Salvador. From humble beginnings to rivaling nation-states, we’re just getting started,” said CEO Simon Gerovich on X after the company’s announcement.

The Japanese investment company started its bitcoin treasury strategy in April 2024 and has become the largest corporate holder of bitcoin in Asia and 11th globally. It aims to hold 10,000 BTC by the end of 2025.

Metaplanet is now the 11th largest corporate holder of bitcoin — BitcoinTreasuries

To fund these purchases, the firm has turned to bond issuances, including zero-percent bonds. In early May, Metaplanet issued $25 million worth of 0% bonds under its EVO FUND program to finance bitcoin buys without diluting shares or taking on traditional debt.

And Metaplanet’s strategy seems to be working. Its BTC Yield — a proprietary metric that measures bitcoin accumulation per share — is 38% for Q2 2025 so far. In previous quarters, the firm reported 95.6% in Q1 and a whopping 309.8% in Q4 2024.

The stock price has also gone up 1,800% since May 2024 and 51% in 2025 alone, currently trading above 550 JPY.

Metaplanet is often called “Japan’s MicroStrategy”, a reference to the U.S.-based company Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) led by Bitcoin advocate Michael Saylor. Strategy is the world’s largest corporate bitcoin holder with over 568,840 BTC in its coffers, worth more than $58 billion.

Like Strategy, Metaplanet is using creative financing tools such as convertible bonds and non-dilutive bond issuance to build a big bitcoin treasury. These financial instruments give the company the ability to fund further bitcoin purchases without diluting shareholders’ value.

Metaplanet is buying bitcoin very rapidly. This has become a trend in the corporate world, where private companies are challenging nation-states in the digital asset space.

Unlike governments which face regulatory and political hurdles, corporations like Metaplanet can move quickly and decisively. Since 2020 over 80 publicly traded companies have collectively bought more than 632,000 BTC worth over $65 billion.

This is a fundamental shift in how companies manage their treasuries — moving away from cash or bonds and towards the digital scarcity that bitcoin presents.

This creates a new form of financial power where corporations can hold a significant portion of a finite asset, unlike fiat currencies which governments can print to infinity.

@ 7e6f9018:a6bbbce5

Per les xarxes socials es parla amb efusivitat de que Bitcoin arribarà a valer milions de dòlars. El mateix Hal Finney allà pel 2009, va estimar el potencial, en un cas extrem, de 10 milions $:

\> As an amusing thought experiment, imagine that Bitcoin is successful and becomes the dominant payment system in use throughout the world. Then the total value of the currency should be equal to the total value of all the wealth in the world. Current estimates of total worldwide household wealth that I have found range from $100 trillion to $300 trillion. Withn 20 million coins, that gives each coin a value of about $10 million. <https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/bitcoin-list/threads/4/>

No estic d'acord amb els càlculs del bo d'en Hal, ja que no consider que la valoració d'una moneda funcioni així. En qualsevol cas, el 2009 la capitalització de la riquesa mundial era de 300 bilions $, avui és de 660 bilions $, és a dir ha anat pujant un 5,3% de manera anual, $$(660/300)^{1/15} = 1.053$$

La primera apreciació amb aquest augment anual del 5% és que si algú llegeix aquest article i té diners que no necessita aturats al banc (estalvis), ara és bon moment per començar a moure'ls, encara sigui amb moviments defensius (títols de deute governamental o la propietat del primer habitatge). La desagregació per actius dels 660 bilions és:

1. Immobiliari residencial = 260 bilions $

2. Títols de deute = 125 bilions $

3. Accions = 110 bilions

4. Diners fiat = 78 bilions $

5. Terres agrícoles = 35 bilions $

6. Immobiliari comercial = 32 bilions $

7. Or = 18 bilions $

8. Bitcoin = 2 bilions $

La riquesa mundial és major que 660 bilions, però aquests 8 actius crec que són els principals, ja que s'aprecien a dia d'avui. El PIB global anual és de 84 bilions $, que no són bromes, però aquest actius creats (cotxes, ordinadors, roba, aliments...), perden valor una vegada produïts, aproximant-se a 0 passades unes dècades.

Partint d'aquest nombres com a vàlids, la meva posició base respecte de Bitcoin, ja des de fa un parell d'anys, és que te capacitat per posar-se al nivell de capitalització de l'or, perquè conceptualment s'emulen bé, i perquè tot i que Bitcoin no té un valor tangible industrial com pot tenir l'or, sí que te un valor intangible tecnològic, que és pales en tot l'ecosistema que s'ha creat al seu voltant:

• Creació de tecnologies de pagament instantani: la Lightning Network, Cashu i la Liquid Network.

• Producció d'aplicacions amb l'íntegrament de pagaments instantanis. Especialment destacar el protocol de Nostr (Primal, Amethyst, Damus, Yakihonne, 0xChat...)

• Industria energètica: permet estabilitzar xarxes elèctriques i emprar energia malbaratada (flaring gas), amb la generació de demanda de hardware i software dedicat.

• Educació financera i defensa de drets humans. És una eina de defensa contra governs i estats repressius. La Human Rights Foundation fa una feina bastant destacada d'educació.

Ara posem el potencial en nombres:

• Si iguala l'empresa amb major capitalització, que és Apple, arribaria a uns 160 mil dòlars per bitcoin.

• Si iguala el nivell de l'or, arribaria a uns 800 mil dòlars per bitcoin.

• Si iguala el nivell del diner fiat líquid, arribaria a un 3.7 milions de dòlars per bitcoin.

Crec que igualar la capitalització d'Apple és probable en els pròxims 5 - 10 anys. També igualar el nivell de l'or en els pròxims 20 anys em sembla una fita possible. Ara bé, qualsevol fita per sota d'aquesta capitalització ha d'implicar tota una serie de successos al món que no sóc capaç d'imaginar. Que no vol dir que no pugui passar.

@ 51bbb15e:b77a2290

Yeah, I’m sure everything in the file is legit. 👍 Let’s review the guard witness testimony…Oh wait, they weren’t at their posts despite 24/7 survellience instructions after another Epstein “suicide” attempt two weeks earlier. Well, at least the video of the suicide is in the file? Oh wait, a techical glitch. Damn those coincidences!

At this point, the Trump administration has zero credibility with me on anything related to the Epstein case and his clients. I still suspect the administration is using the Epstein files as leverage to keep a lot of RINOs in line, whereas they’d be sabotaging his agenda at every turn otherwise. However, I just don’t believe in ends-justify-the-means thinking. It’s led almost all of DC to toss out every bit of the values they might once have had.

@ b1ddb4d7:471244e7

Starting January 1, 2026, the United Kingdom will impose some of the world’s most stringent reporting requirements on cryptocurrency firms.

All platforms operating in or serving UK customers-domestic and foreign alike-must collect and disclose extensive personal and transactional data for every user, including individuals, companies, trusts, and charities. 

This regulatory drive marks the UK’s formal adoption of the OECD’s Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), a global initiative designed to bring crypto oversight in line with traditional banking and to curb tax evasion in the rapidly expanding digital asset sector.

What Will Be Reported?

Crypto firms must gather and submit the following for each transaction:

• User’s full legal name, home address, and taxpayer identification number
• Detailed data on every trade or transfer: type of cryptocurrency, amount, and nature of the transaction
• Identifying information for corporate, trust, and charitable clients

The obligation extends to all digital asset activities, including crypto-to-crypto and crypto-to-fiat trades, and applies to both UK residents and non-residents using UK-based platforms. The first annual reports covering 2026 activity are due by May 31, 2027.

Enforcement and Penalties

Non-compliance will carry stiff financial penalties, with fines of up to £300 per user account for inaccurate or missing data-a potentially enormous liability for large exchanges. The UK government has urged crypto firms to begin collecting this information immediately to ensure operational readiness.

Regulatory Context and Market Impact

This move is part of a broader UK strategy to position itself as a global fintech hub while clamping down on fraud and illicit finance. UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves has championed these measures, stating, “Britain is open for business – but closed to fraud, abuse, and instability”. The regulatory expansion comes amid a surge in crypto adoption: the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority reported that 12% of UK adults owned crypto in 2024, up from just 4% in 2021.

Enormous Risks for Consumers: Lessons from the Coinbase Data Breach

While the new framework aims to enhance transparency and protect consumers, it also dramatically increases the volume of sensitive personal data held by crypto firms-raising the stakes for cybersecurity.

The risks are underscored by the recent high-profile breach at Coinbase, one of the world’s largest exchanges.

In May 2025, Coinbase disclosed that cybercriminals, aided by bribed offshore contractors, accessed and exfiltrated customer data including names, addresses, government IDs, and partial bank details. 

The attackers then used this information for sophisticated phishing campaigns, successfully deceiving some customers into surrendering account credentials and funds.

“While private encryption keys remained secure, sufficient customer information was exposed to enable sophisticated phishing attacks by criminals posing as Coinbase personnel.”

Coinbase now faces up to $400 million in compensation costs and has pledged to reimburse affected users, but the incident highlights the systemic vulnerability created when large troves of personal data are centralized-even if passwords and private keys are not directly compromised. The breach also triggered a notable drop in Coinbase’s share price and prompted a $20 million bounty for information leading to the attackers’ capture.

The Bottom Line

The UK’s forthcoming crypto reporting regime represents a landmark in financial regulation, promising greater transparency and tax compliance. However, as the Coinbase episode demonstrates, the aggregation of sensitive user data at scale poses a significant cybersecurity risk.

As regulators push for more oversight, the challenge will be ensuring that consumer protection does not become a double-edged sword-exposing users to new threats even as it seeks to shield them from old ones.

@ 6ad3e2a3:c90b7740

I’ve written about MSTR twice already, https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr and https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr-part-2, but I want to focus on legendary short seller James Chanos’ current trade wherein he buys bitcoin (via ETF) and shorts MSTR, in essence to “be like Mike” Saylor who sells MSTR shares at the market and uses them to add bitcoin to the company’s balance sheet. After all, if it’s good enough for Saylor, why shouldn’t everyone be doing it — shorting a company whose stock price is more than 2x its bitcoin holdings and using the proceeds to buy the bitcoin itself?

Saylor himself has said selling shares at 2x NAV (net asset value) to buy bitcoin is like selling dollars for two dollars each, and Chanos has apparently decided to get in while the getting (market cap more than 2x net asset value) is good. If the price of bitcoin moons, sending MSTR’s shares up, you are more than hedged in that event, too. At least that’s the theory.

The problem with this bet against MSTR’s mNAV, i.e., you are betting MSTR’s market cap will converge 1:1 toward its NAV in the short and medium term is this trade does not exist in a vacuum. Saylor has described how his ATM’s (at the market) sales of shares are accretive in BTC per share because of this very premium they carry. Yes, we’ll dilute your shares of the company, but because we’re getting you 2x the bitcoin per share, you are getting an ever smaller slice of an ever bigger overall pie, and the pie is growing 2x faster than your slice is reducing. (I https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr how this works in my first post.)

But for this accretion to continue, there must be a constant supply of “greater fools” to pony up for the infinitely printable shares which contain only half their value in underlying bitcoin. Yes, those shares will continue to accrete more BTC per share, but only if there are more fools willing to make this trade in the future. So will there be a constant supply of such “fools” to keep fueling MSTR’s mNAV multiple indefinitely?

Yes, there will be in my opinion because you have to look at the trade from the prospective fools’ perspective. Those “fools” are not trading bitcoin for MSTR, they are trading their dollars, selling other equities to raise them maybe, but in the end it’s a dollars for shares trade. They are not selling bitcoin for them.

You might object that those same dollars could buy bitcoin instead, so they are surely trading the opportunity cost of buying bitcoin for them, but if only 5-10 percent of the market (or less) is buying bitcoin itself, the bucket in which which those “fools” reside is the entire non-bitcoin-buying equity market. (And this is not considering the even larger debt market which Saylor has yet to tap in earnest.)

So for those 90-95 percent who do not and are not presently planning to own bitcoin itself, is buying MSTR a fool’s errand, so to speak? Not remotely. If MSTR shares are infinitely printable ATM, they are still less so than the dollar and other fiat currencies. And MSTR shares are backed 2:1 by bitcoin itself, while the fiat currencies are backed by absolutely nothing. So if you hold dollars or euros, trading them for MSTR shares is an errand more sage than foolish.

That’s why this trade (buying BTC and shorting MSTR) is so dangerous. Not only are there many people who won’t buy BTC buying MSTR, there are many funds and other investment entities who are only able to buy MSTR.

Do you want to get BTC at 1:1 with the 5-10 percent or MSTR backed 2:1 with the 90-95 percent. This is a bit like medical tests that have a 95 percent accuracy rate for an asymptomatic disease that only one percent of the population has. If someone tests positive, it’s more likely to be a false one than an indication he has the disease*. The accuracy rate, even at 19:1, is subservient to the size of the respective populations.

At some point this will no longer be the case, but so long as the understanding of bitcoin is not widespread, so long as the dollar is still the unit of account, the “greater fools” buying MSTR are still miles ahead of the greatest fools buying neither, and the stock price and mNAV should only increase.

. . .

One other thought: it’s more work to play defense than offense because the person on offense knows where he’s going, and the defender can only react to him once he moves. Similarly, Saylor by virtue of being the issuer of the shares knows when more will come online while Chanos and other short sellers are borrowing them to sell in reaction to Saylor’s strategy. At any given moment, Saylor can pause anytime, choosing to issue convertible debt or preferred shares with which to buy more bitcoin, and the shorts will not be given advance notice.

If the price runs, and there is no ATM that week because Saylor has stopped on a dime, so to speak, the shorts will be left having to scramble to change directions and buy the shares back to cover. Their momentum might be in the wrong direction, though, and like Allen Iverson breaking ankles with a crossover, Saylor might trigger a massive short squeeze, rocketing the share price ever higher. That’s why he actually welcomes Chanos et al trying this copycat strategy — it becomes the fuel for outsized gains.

For that reason, news that Chanos is shorting MSTR has not shaken my conviction, though there are other more pertinent https://www.chrisliss.com/p/mstr-part-2 with MSTR, of which one should be aware. And as always, do your own due diligence before investing in anything.

* To understand this, consider a population of 100,000, with one percent having a disease. That means 1,000 have it, 99,000 do not. If the test is 95 percent accurate, and everyone is tested, 950 of the 1,000 will test positive (true positives), 50 who have it will test negative (false negatives.) Of the positives, 95 percent of 99,000 (94,050) will test negative (true negatives) and five percent (4,950) will test positive (false positives). That means 4,950 out of 5,900 positives (84%) will be false.

@ 8aa70f44:3073d1a6

Earlier this year I launched the asknostr.site project which has been a great journey and learning experience. I had wanted to write down my goals and ideas with the project but didn't get to it yet. Primal launching the article editor was a trigger for me to go for it.

Ever since I joined Nostr i was looking for ways to apply my skillset solve a problem and help with adoption. Around Christmas I figured that a Quora/Stackoverflow alternative is something that needs to exist on Nostr.

Before I knew it I had a pretty decent prototype. And because the network already had so much awesome content, contributors and authors I was never discouraged by the challenge that kills so many good ideas -> "Where do I get the first users?".

Since the initial announcement I have received so much encouragement through zaps, likes, DM's, and maybe most of all seeing the increase in usage of the site and #asknostr content kept me going.

Current State

The current version of the site is stable and most bugs are hashed out. After logging in (remote signer, extension or nsec) you can engage with content through votes, comments and replies. Or simply ask a new question.

All content is stored in the site's own private relay and preprocessed/computed into a single data store (postgres) so the site is fast, accessible and crawl-able.

The site supports browsing hashtags, voting/commenting on answers, asking new questions and every contributor get their own profile (example). At the time of writing the site has 41k questions, almost 200k replies/comments and upwards of 5 million sats purely for #asknostr content.

What to expect/On my list

There are plenty of things and UI bugs that need love and between writing the draft of this post and hitting publish I shipped 3 minor bug fixes. Little by little, bit by bit...

In addition to all those small details here is an overview of the things on my own wish list:

• Inline Zaps: Ability to zap from the asknostr.site interface. Click the zap button, specify or pick the number of sats zap away.

• Contributor Rank: A leaderboard to add some gamification. More recognition to those nostriches that spend their time helping other people out

• Search by Keyword: Search all content by keywords. Experiment with the index to show related questions or answers

• Better User Profiles: Improve the user profile so it shows all the profile questions and answers. Quick buttons to follow or zap that person. Better insights in the topics (hashtags) the profile contributes to

• Bookmarks: Ability to bookmark questions and answers. Increase bookmark weight as a signal to rank answers.

• Smarter Scoring: Tune how answers are scored (winning answer formula). Perhaps give more weight to the question author or use WoT. Not sure yet.

All of this is happening at some point so follow me if you want to stay up to date.

Goals

To manage expectations and keep me focussed I write down the mid and long term goals of the project.

Long term

Call me cheesy but I believe that humanity will flourish through an open web and sound money. My own journey started from with bitcoin but if you asked me today if it's BTC or nostr that is going to have the most impact I wouldn't know what to answer. Chicken or egg?

The goal of the project is to offer an open platform that empowers individuals to ask questions, share expertise and access high-quality information across different topics. The project empowers anyone to monetize their experience creating a sustainable ecosystem that values and rewards knowledge sharing. This will ultimately democratize access to knowledge for all.

Mid term

The project can help a lot with onboarding new users onto the network. Once we start to rank on certain topics we can get a piece of the search traffic pie (StackOverflows 12 million, and Quora 150 million visitors per month) which is a great way to expose people to the power of the network.

First time visitors do not need to know about nostr or zaps to receive value. They can browse around, discover interesting content and perhaps even create a profile without even knowing they are on Nostr now.

Gradually those users will understand the value of the network through better rankings (zaps beats likes), a cross-client experience and a profile that can be used on any nostr site or app.

In order for the site to do that we need to make sure content is browsable by language, (sub)topics and and we double down on 'the human touch' with real contributors and not LLMs.

Short Term Goal

The first goal is to make the site really good and an important resource for existing Nostr users. Enable visitors to search and discover what they are interested in. Integrate within the existing nostr eco system with 'open in' functionality and quick links to interesting projects (followerpacks?)

One of things i want to get right is to improve user retention by making the whole Q\&A experience more sticky. I want to run some experiments (bots, award, summaries) to get more people to use asknostr.site more often and come back.

What about the name?

Finally the big question: What about the asknostr.site name? I don't like the name that much but it's what people know. I think there is a high chance that people will discover Nostr apps like Olas, Primal or Damus without needing to know what NOSTR is or means.

Therefore I think there is a good chance that the project won't be called asknostr.site forever. I guess it all depends on where we all take this.

Onwards!

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

As a product builder over too many years to mention, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen promising ideas go from zero to hero in a few weeks, only to fizzle out within months.

The problem with most finance apps, however, is that they often become a reflection of the internal politics of the business rather than an experience solely designed around the customer. This means that the focus is on delivering as many features and functionalities as possible to satisfy the needs and desires of competing internal departments, rather than providing a clear value proposition that is focused on what the people out there in the real world want. As a result, these products can very easily bloat to become a mixed bag of confusing, unrelated and ultimately unlovable customer experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

Financial products, which is the field I work in, are no exception. With people’s real hard-earned money on the line, user expectations running high, and a crowded market, it’s tempting to throw as many features at the wall as possible and hope something sticks. But this approach is a recipe for disaster.

Here’s why: https://alistapart.com/article/from-beta-to-bedrock-build-products-that-stick/

https://stacker.news/items/985285

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

May 13, 2025 – We are proud to announce that My First Bitcoin has received a $1 million grant from #startsmall. With this financial support from Jack Dorsey’s philanthropic initiative, we will continue to serve grassroots Bitcoin education initiatives worldwide.

This grant accelerates our work in the creation and distribution of free and open-source Bitcoin education materials and infrastructure.

It will not only help us improve existing resources, such as the Bitcoin Diploma, Bitcoin Intro Course, and teacher training workshops, but also to scale our digital platforms like our Online School and Community Hub. 

As a non-profit, founded in 2021, we have grown from a local project into a global movement. Besides creating curricula and frameworks, our team has directly taught tens of thousands of in-person students, as we workshop and refine our materials based on real world feedback.

In 2023, we launched the Independent Bitcoin Educators Node Network, providing a space for others to join us on our mission. The network spans 65+ projects from 35+ countries, including circular economies, meetup organizers and other grassroots projects.

All commit to the same six pillars: that their education is independent, impartial, community-led, Bitcoin-only, quality, and focused on empowerment over profit.

While we support that network, it is now self-governing. We always seek to give power-to, rather than have power-over.

John Dennehy, founder and Executive Director of My First Bitcoin, explains:

“The revolution of Bitcoin education is that it teaches students HOW to think, not WHAT to think. Funding from sources with their own incentives is the greatest vulnerability that threatens that. Education will be captured by whoever funds it.

“We will never take any government money and frequently turn down funding from corporations and companies. The subtle influence of funding has ruined fiat education and we need to create alternative models for the revolution of Bitcoin education to realize its full potential.”

Funding for Bitcoin education must be transparent.

This grant is a huge win for all of us. For Bitcoin itself, but even more for Independent Bitcoin Education as a whole. It enables us to serve the global community better than ever before. It shows everyone what can be achieved if you stay close to your values.

“My First Bitcoin is a proof-of-concept for all independent Bitcoin educators that if you stay on the mission, even when it’s challenging, then you will come out the other side even stronger,” added Dennehy.

Arnold Hubach, Director of Communications of My First Bitcoin, continued:

“Open source money deserves open source education. Over the past few years, we’ve seen growing demand for our resources around the world, and we remain committed to serving everyone in the Bitcoin space who needs support.

“This funding enables us to plan further into the future and continue being the first-stop provider of free educational tools.”

We’re grateful to #startsmall for believing in our mission and for understanding that Bitcoin education should always be free from external influence. We’re also grateful to the community for helping us arrive at this point where we are ready to receive such a grant.

You lead us to where we are today. You have been our primary funding source. You will continue to lead us forward.

We will always serve the community.

We’re also grateful for our amazing team and their proof of work. The grant will accelerate the work that they are already doing, such as curricula development, teacher training programs, the expansion of the global network, building online platforms, and providing in-person classes.

We will continue to lead by example, we will continue to push the limits, and we will continue to reimagine what’s possible.

We do not seek to please power in this world, we seek to create a proof-of-concept for a better one where the individual is empowered and able to think critically.

If you are an educator in need of tools or infrastructure; please contact us.

If you can help us continue to build out these tools and maintain this growing global movement; please contact us.

If you are aligned with our mission and are a supporter of independent Bitcoin education, please donate.

We work for the public. In public.

@ 7e6f9018:a6bbbce5

Over the last decade, birth rates in Spain have dropped by 30%, from 486,000 births in 2010 to 339,000 in 2020, a decline only comparable to that seen in Japan and the Four Asian Tigers.

The main cause seems to stem from two major factors: (1) the widespread use of contraceptive methods, which allow for pregnancy control without reducing sexual activity, and (2) women's entry into the labor market, leading to a significant shift away from traditional maternal roles.

In this regard, there is a phenomenon of demographic inertia that I believe could become significant. When a society ages and the population pyramid inverts, the burden this places on the non-dependent population could further contribute to a deeper decline in birth rates.

The more resources (time and money) non-dependent individuals have to dedicate to the elderly (dependents), the less they can allocate to producing new births (also dependents):

• An only child who has to care for both parents will bear a burden of 2 (2 ÷ 1).
• Three siblings who share the responsibility of caring for their parents will bear a burden of 0.6 (2 ÷ 3).

This burden on only children could, in many cases, be significant enough to prevent them from having children of their own.

In Spain, the generation of only children reached reproductive age in 2019(*), this means that right now the majority of people in reproductive age in Spain are only child (or getting very close to it).

If this assumption is correct, and aging feeds on itself, then, given that Spain has one of the worst demographic imbalances in the world, this phenomenon is likely to manifest through worsening birth rates. Spain’s current birth rate of 1.1 may not yet have reached its lowest point.

(*)Birth rate table and the year in which each generation reaches 32 years of age, Spain.

| Year of birth | Birth rate | Year in which the generation turns 32 | | ------------------ | -------------- | ----------------------------------------- | | 1971 | 2.88 | 2003 | | 1972 | 2.85 | 2004 | | 1973 | 2.82 | 2005 | | 1974 | 2.81 | 2006 | | 1975 | 2.77 | 2007 | | 1976 | 2.77 | 2008 | | 1977 | 2.65 | 2009 | | 1978 | 2.54 | 2010 | | 1979 | 2.37 | 2011 | | 1980 | 2.21 | 2012 | | 1981 | 2.04 | 2013 | | 1982 | 1.94 | 2014 | | 1983 | 1.80 | 2015 | | 1984 | 1.72 | 2016 | | 1985 | 1.64 | 2017 | | 1986 | 1.55 | 2018 | | 1987 | 1.49 | 2019 | | 1988 | 1.45 | 2020 | | 1989 | 1.40 | 2021 | | 1990 | 1.36 | 2022 | | 1991 | 1.33 | 2023 | | 1992 | 1.31 | 2024 | | 1993 | 1.26 | 2025 | | 1994 | 1.19 | 2026 | | 1995 | 1.16 | 2027 | | 1996 | 1.14 | 2028 | | 1997 | 1.15 | 2029 | | 1998 | 1.13 | 2030 | | 1999 | 1.16 | 2031 | | 2000 | 1.21 | 2032 | | 2001 | 1.24 | 2033 | | 2002 | 1.25 | 2034 | | 2003 | 1.30 | 2035 | | 2004 | 1.32 | 2036 | | 2005 | 1.33 | 2037 | | 2006 | 1.36 | 2038 | | 2007 | 1.38 | 2039 | | 2008 | 1.44 | 2040 | | 2009 | 1.38 | 2041 | | 2010 | 1.37 | 2042 | | 2011 | 1.34 | 2043 | | 2012 | 1.32 | 2044 | | 2013 | 1.27 | 2045 | | 2014 | 1.32 | 2046 | | 2015 | 1.33 | 2047 | | 2016 | 1.34 | 2048 | | 2017 | 1.31 | 2049 | | 2018 | 1.26 | 2050 | | 2019 | 1.24 | 2051 | | 2020 | 1.19 | 2052 |

@ c1e6505c:02b3157e

This is day two of testing the Leica Summaron 35mm f2.8 on the Fujifilm X-Pro2.

The first part of this story you can find here on StackerNews**

TL;DR: I think I’m really enjoying this lens.

I went into it thinking I’d probably just sell it since it was gifted to me - assumed I wouldn’t like it. But after just a couple of days with it mounted on the X-Pro2, I’ve been surprisingly drawn to it.

Shooting wide open at f2.8 (which is how I’m testing it - to best reveal the lens’s character), the soft roll-off is really pleasing. It feels organic. The lens is over 50 years old, so I expected some quirks-but the quality feels natural, not overly “vintage". Takes the digital edge off.

The short focus throw is also really nice. Compared to the Summicron 35mm f2 v3 I usually shoot on my M262 (which has a longer throw), the Summaron feels tighter and more responsive when zone focusing.

One gripe: the infinity lock. It’s kind of annoying. I find myself accidentally locking it too often, but I’m getting used to holding the button down as I rotate the ring. I’ve read others complain about it, so I know I’m not alone there.

Most of these shots were from a bike ride to the river - about 6 miles out to swim and enjoy the sun. Perfect day for making a few photos.

This kind of work is honestly just fun. I enjoy the process, and even more so once I’m happy with the results and can share them.

Still building confidence in my work over time. I think I’m slowly refining my style - even if the subject matter is simple. Easier said than done, as any editor/curator knows (and I say this as one through NOICE Magazine).

Let me know what you think. I’ll try to upload higher resolution versions this time around (but not too high).

*Also, I use a program called Dehancer for creating the grain in these photographs. I highly recommend the program actually, I've been using it for a long time. If you would like to try it out, I have a promo code. Use "Pictureroom" for 10% off I believe.

You can further support me and my work by sending sats to colincz\@getalby.com. Thank you.

(note* this is being publised from the updated Primal reads client)

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

There is something quietly rebellious about stacking sats. In a world obsessed with instant gratification, choosing to patiently accumulate Bitcoin, one sat at a time, feels like a middle finger to the hype machine. But to do it right, you have got to stay humble. Stack too hard with your head in the clouds, and you will trip over your own ego before the next halving even hits.

Small Wins

Stacking sats is not glamorous. Discipline. Stacking every day, week, or month, no matter the price, and letting time do the heavy lifting. Humility lives in that consistency. You are not trying to outsmart the market or prove you are the next "crypto" prophet. Just a regular person, betting on a system you believe in, one humble stack at a time. Folks get rekt chasing the highs. They ape into some shitcoin pump, shout about it online, then go silent when they inevitably get rekt. The ones who last? They stack. Just keep showing up. Consistency. Humility in action. Know the game is long, and you are not bigger than it.

Ego is Volatile

Bitcoin’s swings can mess with your head. One day you are up 20%, feeling like a genius and the next down 30%, questioning everything. Ego will have you panic selling at the bottom or over leveraging the top. Staying humble means patience, a true bitcoin zen. Do not try to "beat” Bitcoin. Ride it. Stack what you can afford, live your life, and let compounding work its magic.

Simplicity

There is a beauty in how stacking sats forces you to rethink value. A sat is worth less than a penny today, but every time you grab a few thousand, you plant a seed. It is not about flaunting wealth but rather building it, quietly, without fanfare. That mindset spills over. Cut out the noise: the overpriced coffee, fancy watches, the status games that drain your wallet. Humility is good for your soul and your stack. I have a buddy who has been stacking since 2015. Never talks about it unless you ask. Lives in a decent place, drives an old truck, and just keeps stacking. He is not chasing clout, he is chasing freedom. That is the vibe: less ego, more sats, all grounded in life.

The Big Picture

Stack those sats. Do it quietly, do it consistently, and do not let the green days puff you up or the red days break you down. Humility is the secret sauce, it keeps you grounded while the world spins wild. In a decade, when you look back and smile, it will not be because you shouted the loudest. It will be because you stayed the course, one sat at a time. \ \ Stay Humble and Stack Sats. 🫡

@ 90152b7f:04e57401

https://www.ord.io/70787182

[Analytical & Intelligence Comments]\ \ “On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.”\ \ Released on 2013-02-13 00:00 GMT Email-ID 13332210 Date 2011-05-04 16:26:59\ From jetdrive@earthlink.net To responses@stratfor.com CROYDON KEMP sent a\ message using the contact form at https://www.stratfor.com/contact\ \ Mossad ran 9/11 Arab "hijacker" terrorist operation\ \ By Wayne Madsen\ \ British intelligence reported in February 2002 that the Israeli Mossad ran the Arab hijacker cells that were later blamed by the U.S. government's 9/11 Commission for carrying out the aerial attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. WMR has received details of the British intelligence report which was suppressed by the government of then-Prime Minister Tony Blair.\ \ A Mossad unit consisting of six Egyptian- and Yemeni-born Jews infiltrated "Al Qaeda" cells in Hamburg (the Atta-Mamoun Darkanzali cell), south Florida, and Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates in the months before 9/11. The Mossad not only infiltrated cells but began to run them and give them specific orders that would eventually culminate in their being on board four regularly-scheduled flights originating in Boston, Washington Dulles, and Newark, New Jersey on 9/11.\ \ The Mossad infiltration team comprised six Israelis, comprising two cells of three agents, who all received special training at a Mossad base in the Negev Desert in their future control and handling of the "Al Qaeda" cells. One Mossad cell traveled to Amsterdam where they submitted to the operational control of the Mossad's Europe Station, which operates from the El Al complex at Schiphol International Airport. The three-man Mossad unit then traveled to Hamburg where it made contact with Mohammed Atta, who believed they were sent by Osama Bin Laden. In fact, they were sent by Ephraim Halevy, the chief of Mossad.\ \ The second three-man Mossad team flew to New York and then to southern Florida where they began to direct the "Al Qaeda" cells operating from Hollywood, Miami, Vero Beach, Delray Beach, and West Palm Beach. Israeli "art students," already under investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration for casing the offices and homes of federal law enforcement officers, had been living among and conducting surveillance of the activities, including flight school training, of the future Arab "hijacker" cells, particularly in Hollywood and Vero Beach.\ \ In August 2001, the first Mossad team flew with Atta and other Hamburg "Al Qaeda" members to Boston. Logan International Airport's security was contracted to Huntleigh USA, a firm owned by an Israeli airport security firm closely connected to Mossad — International Consultants on Targeted Security – ICTS. ICTS's owners were politically connected to the Likud Party, particularly the Netanyahu faction and then-Jerusalem mayor and future Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. It was Olmert who personally interceded with New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to have released from prison five Urban Moving Systems employees, identified by the CIA and FBI agents as Mossad agents. The Israelis were the only suspects arrested anywhere in the United States on 9/11 who were thought to have been involved in the 9/11 attacks.\ \ The two Mossad teams sent regular coded reports on the progress of the 9/11 operation to Tel Aviv via the Israeli embassy in Washington, DC. WMR has learned from a Pentagon source that leading Americans tied to the media effort to pin 9/11 on Arab hijackers, Osama Bin Laden, and the Taliban were present in the Israeli embassy on September 10, 2001, to coordinate their media blitz for the subsequent days and weeks following the attacks. It is more than likely that FBI counter-intelligence agents who conduct surveillance of the Israeli embassy have proof on the presence of the Americans present at the embassy on September 10. Some of the Americans are well-known to U.S. cable news television audiences.\ \ In mid-August, the Mossad team running the Hamburg cell in Boston reported to Tel Aviv that the final plans for 9/11 were set. The Florida-based Mossad cell reported that the documented "presence" of the Arab cell members at Florida flight schools had been established.\ \ The two Mossad cells studiously avoided any mention of the World Trade Center or targets in Washington, DC in their coded messages to Tel Aviv. Halevy covered his tracks by reporting to the CIA of a "general threat" by an attack by Arab terrorists on a nuclear plant somewhere on the East Coast of the United States. CIA director George Tenet dismissed the Halevy warning as "too non-specific." The FBI, under soon-to-be-departed director Louis Freeh, received the "non-specific" warning about an attack on a nuclear power plant and sent out the information in its routine bulletins to field agents but no high alert was ordered.\ \ The lack of a paper trail pointing to "Al Qaeda" as the masterminds on 9/11, which could then be linked to Al Qaeda's Mossad handlers, threw off the FBI. On April 19, 2002, FBI director Robert Mueller, in a speech to San Francisco's Commonwealth Club, stated: "In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper — either here in the United States, or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere — that mentioned any aspect of the September 11 plot."\ \ The two Mossad "Al Qaeda" infiltration and control teams had also helped set up safe houses for the quick exfiltration of Mossad agents from the United States. Last March, WMR reported: "WMR has learned from two El Al sources who worked for the Israeli airline at New York’s John F. Kennedy airport that on 9/11, hours after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grounded all civilian domestic and international incoming and outgoing flights to and from the United States, a full El Al Boeing 747 took off from JFK bound for Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion International Airport. The two El Al employee sources are not Israeli nationals but legal immigrants from Ecuador who were working in the United States for the airline. The flight departed JFK at 4:11 pm and its departure was, according to the El Al sources, authorized by the direct intervention of the U.S. Department of Defense. U.S. military officials were on the scene at JFK and were personally involved with the airport and air traffic control authorities to clear the flight for take-off. According to the 9/11 Commission report, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta ordered all civilian flights to be grounded at 9:45 am on September 11." WMR has learned from British intelligence sources that the six-man Mossad team was listed on the El Al flight manifest as El Al employees.\ \ WMR previously reported that the Mossad cell operating in the Jersey City-Weehawken area of New Jersey through Urban Moving Systems was suspected by some in the FBI and CIA of being involved in moving explosives into the World Trade Center as well as staging "false flag" demonstrations at least two locations in north Jersey: Liberty State Park and an apartment complex in Jersey City as the first plane hit the World Trade Center's North Tower. One team of Urban Moving Systems Mossad agents was arrested later on September 11 and jailed for five months at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. Some of their names turned up in a joint CIA-FBI database as known Mossad agents, along with the owner of Urban Moving Systems, Dominik Suter, whose name also appeared on a "Law Enforcement Sensitive" FBI 9/11 suspects list, along with the names of key "hijackers," including Mohammed Atta and Hani Hanjour, as well as the so-called "20th hijacker," Zacarias Moussaoui.\ \ Suter was allowed to escape the United States after the FBI made initial contact with him at the Urban Moving Systems warehouse in Weehawken, New Jersey, following the 9/11 attacks. Suter was later permitted to return to the United States where he was involved in the aircraft parts supply business in southern Florida, according to an informe3d source who contacted WMR. Suter later filed for bankruptcy in Florida for Urban Moving Systems and other businesses he operated: Suburban Moving & Storage Inc.; Max Movers, Inc.; Invsupport; Woodflooring Warehouse Corp.; One Stop Cleaning LLC; and City Carpet Upholstery, Inc. At the time of the bankruptcy filing in Florida, Suter listed his address as 1867 Fox Court, Wellington, FL 33414, with a phone number of 561 204-2359.\ \ From the list of creditors it can be determined that Suter had been operating in the United States since 1993, the year of the first attack on the World Trade Center. In 1993, Suter began racking up American Express credit card charges totaling $21,913.97. Suter also maintained credit card accounts with HSBC Bank and Orchard Bank c/o HSBC Card Services of Salinas, California, among other banks. Suter also did business with the Jewish Community Center of Greater Palm Beach in Florida and Ryder Trucks in Miami. Miami and southern Florida were major operating areas for cells of Israeli Mossad agents masquerading as "art students," who were living and working near some of the identified future Arab "hijackers" in the months preceding 9/11.\ \ ABC's 20/20 correspondent John Miller ensured that the Israeli connection to "Al Qaeda's" Arab hijackers was buried in an "investigation" of the movers' activities on 9/11. Anchor Barbara Walters helped Miller in putting a lid on the story about the movers and Suter aired on June 21, 2002. Miller then went on to become the FBI public affairs spokesman to ensure that Mueller and other FBI officials kept to the "Al Qaeda" script as determined by the Bush administration and the future 9/11 Commission. But former CIA chief of counter-terrorism Vince Cannistraro let slip to ABC an important clue to the operations of the Mossad movers in New Jersey when he stated that the Mossad agents "set up or exploited for the purpose of launching an intelligence operation against radical Islamists in the area, particularly in the New Jersey-New York area." The "intelligence operation" turned out to have been the actual 9/11 attacks. And it was no coincidence that it was ABC's John Miller who conducted a May 1998 rare interview of Osama Bin Laden at his camp in Afghanistan. Bin Laden played his part well for future scenes in the fictional "made-for-TV" drama known as 9/11.\ \ WMR has also learned from Italian intelligence sources that Mossad's running of "Al Qaeda" operatives did not end with running the "hijacking" teams in the United States and Hamburg. Other Arab "Al Qaeda" operatives, run by Mossad, were infiltrated into Syria but arrested by Syrian intelligence. Syria was unsuccessful in turning them to participate in intelligence operations in Lebanon. Detailed information on Bin Laden's support team was offered to the Bush administration, up to days prior to 9/11, by Gutbi al-Mahdi, the head of the Sudanese Mukhabarat intelligence service. The intelligence was rejected by the Biush White House. It was later reported that Sudanese members of "Al Qaeda's" support network were double agents for Mossad who had also established close contacts with Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh and operated in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Eritrea, as well as Sudan. The Mossad connection to Al Qaeda in Sudan was likely known by the Sudanese Mukhabarat, a reason for the rejection of its intelligence on "Al Qaeda" by the thoroughly-Mossad penetrated Bush White House. Yemen had also identified "Al Qaeda" members who were also Mossad agents. A former chief of Mossad revealed to this editor in 2002 that Yemeni-born Mossad "deep insertion" commandos spotted Bin Laden in the Hadhramaut region of eastern Yemen after his escape from Tora Bora in Afghanistan, following the U.S. invasion.\ \ French intelligence determined that other Egyptian- and Yemeni-born Jewish Mossad agents were infiltrated into Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates as radical members of the Muslim Brotherhood. However, the "Muslim Brotherhood" agents actually were involved in providing covert Israeli funding for "Al Qaeda" activities. On February 21, 2006, WMR reported on the U.S. Treasury Secretary's firing by President Bush over information discovered on the shady "Al Qaeda" accounts in the United Arab Emirates: "Banking insiders in Dubai report that in March 2002, U.S. Secretary of Treasury Paul O’Neill visited Dubai and asked for documents on a $109,500 money transfer from Dubai to a joint account held by hijackers Mohammed Atta and Marwan al Shehhi at Sun Trust Bank in Florida. O'Neill also asked UAE authorities to close down accounts used by Al Qaeda . . . . The UAE complained about O’Neill’s demands to the Bush administration. O’Neill’s pressure on the UAE and Saudis contributed to Bush firing him as Treasury Secretary in December 2002 " O'Neill may have also stumbled on the "Muslim Brotherhood" Mossad operatives operating in the emirates who were directing funds to "Al Qaeda."\ \ After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise to power of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Sharjah's ruler, Sultan bin Mohammed al-Qasimi, who survived a palace coup attempt in 1987, opened his potentate to Russian businessmen like Viktor Bout, as well as to financiers of radical Muslim groups, including the Taliban and "Al Qaeda."\ \ Moreover, this Israeli support for "Al Qaeda" was fully known to Saudi intelligence, which approved of it in order to avoid compromising Riyadh. The joint Israeli-Saudi support for "Al Qaeda" was well-known to the Sharjah and Ras al Khaimah-based aviation network of the now-imprisoned Russian, Viktor Bout, jailed in New York on terrorism charges. The presence of Bout in New York, a hotbed of Israeli intelligence control of U.S. federal prosecutors, judges, as well as the news media, is no accident: Bout knows enough about the Mossad activities in Sharjah in support of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, where Bout also had aviation and logistics contracts, to expose Mossad as the actual mastermind behind 9/11. Bout's aviation empire also extended to Miami and Dallas, two areas that were nexuses for the Mossad control operations for the "Al Qaeda" flight training operations of the Arab cell members in the months prior to 9/11.\ \ Bout's path also crossed with "Al Qaeda's" support network at the same bank in Sharjah, HSBC. Mossad's phony Muslim Brotherhood members from Egypt and Yemen controlled financing for "Al Qaeda" through the HSBC accounts in Sharjah. Mossad's Dominik Suter also dealt with HSBC in the United States. The FBI's chief counter-terrorism agent investigating Al Qaeda, John O'Neill, became aware of the "unique" funding mechanisms for Al Qaeda. It was no mistake that O'Neill was given the job as director of security for the World Trade Center on the eve of the attack. O'Neill perished in the collapse of the complex.Mossad uses a number of Jews born in Arab countries to masquerade as Arabs. They often carry forged or stolen passports from Arab countries or nations in Europe that have large Arab immigrant populations, particularly Germany, France, Britain, Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands.\ \ For Mossad, the successful 9/11 terrorist "false flag" operation was a success beyond expectations. The Bush administration, backed by the Blair government, attacked and occupied Iraq, deposing Saddam Hussein, and turned up pressure on Israel's other adversaries, including Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Hamas, and Lebanese Hezbollah. The Israelis also saw the U.S., Britain, and the UN begin to crack down on the Lebanese Shi'a diamond business in Democratic Republic of Congo and West Africa, and with it, the logistics support provided by Bout's aviation companies, which resulted in a free hand for Tel Aviv to move in on Lebanese diamond deals in central and west Africa.\ \ Then-Israeli Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu commented on the 9/11 attacks on U.S. television shortly after they occurred. Netanyahu said: "It is very good!" It now appears that Netanyahu, in his zeal, blew Mossad's cover as the masterminds of 9/11.\ \ Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. He has written for several renowned papers and blogs.\ \ Madsen is a regular contributor on Russia Today. He has been a frequent political and national security commentator on Fox News and has also appeared on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, and MS-NBC. Madsen has taken on Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity on their television shows. He has been invited to testifty as a witness before the US House of Representatives, the UN Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and an terrorism investigation panel of the French government.\ \ As a U.S. Naval Officer, he managed one of the first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy. He subsequently worked for the National Security Agency, the Naval Data Automation Command, Department of State, RCA Corporation, and Computer Sciences Corporation.\ \ Madsen is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), Association for Intelligence Officers (AFIO), and the National Press Club. He is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker

https://www.ord.io/70787182

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

American Bitcoin, a bitcoin mining company backed by President Donald Trump’s sons, is going public in a new merger deal with Gryphon Digital Mining. Investors and political observers are taking notice as it presents a mixture of Bitcoin, Wall Street and the Trump brand.

This reverse merger allows for American Bitcoin Corporation to become a publicly traded company. This will happen through a stock-for-stock merger with Gryphon Digital Mining, a small-cap bitcoin miner already listed on the Nasdaq.

Once the deal is done, the new company will be called American Bitcoin and will trade on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol ABTC. The merger is expected to close in the 3rd quarter of 2025.

Eric Trump, who will be the Co-Founder and the Chief Strategy Officer, said:

“Our vision for American Bitcoin is to create the most investable Bitcoin accumulation platform in the market.”

The Trump family’s involvement has gotten a lot of attention. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. launched American Bitcoin in March this year with digital asset infrastructure company Hut 8, which owns 80% of American Bitcoin.

American Bitcoin leadership team — Hut 8 presentation

After the merger, American Bitcoin shareholders — including the Trump brothers and Hut 8 — will own about 98% of the new company. Gryphon shareholders will own 2% even though Gryphon is the public company facilitating the merger.

Instead of an IPO (Initial Public Offering), American Bitcoin is going public through what’s called a reverse merger. This means it will take over Gryphon’s public listing.

This is often faster and simpler than a traditional IPO. It allows American Bitcoin to access public capital markets while maintaining operational and strategic control.

Hut 8 CEO Asher Genoot said the merger is a big step forward for the company. “By taking American Bitcoin public, we expect to unlock direct access to dedicated growth capital independent of Hut 8’s balance sheet,” Genoot said.

The announcement sent Gryphon’s stock soaring. Shares rose over 280% and Hut 8’s stock went up over 11%. Clearly investors are interested in bitcoin-focused public companies when the asset itself is close to its previous all-time high.

But not everyone is buying. Some investors and analysts are questioning what Gryphon is actually bringing to the table. Gryphon won’t have a seat on the board or any representation in the new management team. Their role seems to be just to provide the public listing.

Many questions remain unanswered because there are no details on mining operations and what Gryphon’s role is beyond the merger.

American Bitcoin’s goal goes far beyond just mining bitcoin. It wants to become a national bitcoin reserve builder and a major player in that space by storing large amounts of bitcoin as a strategic asset.

The company plans to take “capital-light” advantage of Hut 8’s existing infrastructure, so there won’t be any need to build massive new data centers. Hut 8 already manages over 1,000 megawatts of energy capacity, and apparently, they will handle all the mining operations.

This is happening at a tough time for the mining industry in the U.S. and globally.

Profit margins are shrinking, and companies are really feeling the pinch of high operational costs. Hut 8 just reported a 58% drop in revenue and a $134 million net loss for the first quarter of 2025.

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

The global population has been rising rapidly for the past two centuries when compared to historical trends. Fifty years ago, that trend seemed set to continue, and there was a lot of concern around the issue of overpopulation. But if you haven’t been living under a rock, you’ll know that while the population is still rising, that trend now seems set to reverse this century, and there’s every indication population could decline precipitously over the next two centuries.

Demographics is a field where predictions about the future are much more reliable than in most scientific fields. That’s because future population trends are “baked in” decades in advance. If you want to know how many fifty-year-olds there will be in forty years, all you have to do is count the ten-year-olds today and allow for mortality rates. That maximum was already determined by the number of births ten years ago, and absolutely nothing can change that now. The average person doesn’t think that through when they look at population trends. You hear a lot of “oh we just need to do more of x to help the declining birthrate” without an acknowledgement that future populations in a given cohort are already fixed by the number of births that already occurred.

As you can see, global birthrates have already declined close to the 2.3 replacement level, with some regions ahead of others, but all on the same trajectory with no region moving against the trend. I’m not going to speculate on the reasons for this, or even whether it’s a good or bad thing. Instead I’m going to make some observations about outcomes this trend could cause economically, and why. Like most macro issues, an individual can’t do anything to change the global landscape personally, but knowing what that landscape might look like is essential to avoiding fallout from trends outside your control.

The Resource Pie

Thomas Malthus popularized the concern about overpopulation with his 1798 book An Essay on the Principle of Population. The basic premise of the book was that population could grow and consume all the available resources, leading to mass poverty, starvation, disease, and population collapse. We can say in hindsight that this was incorrect, given that the global population has increased from less than a billion to over eight billion since then, and the apocalypse Malthus predicted hasn’t materialized. Exactly the opposite, in fact. The global standard of living has risen to levels Malthus couldn’t have imagined, much less predicted.

So where did Malthus go wrong? His hypothesis seems reasonable enough, and we do see a similar trend in certain animal populations. The base assumption Malthus got wrong was to assume resources are a finite, limiting factor to the human population. That at some point certain resources would be totally consumed, and that would be it. He treated it like a pie with a lot of slices, but still a finite number, and assumed that if the population kept rising, eventually every slice would be consumed and there would be no pie left for future generations. That turns out to be completely wrong.

Of course, the earth is finite at some abstract level. The number of atoms could theoretically be counted and quantified. But on a practical level, do humans exhaust the earth’s resources? I’d point to an article from Yale Scientific titled Has the Earth Run out of any Natural Resources? To quote,

> However, despite what doomsday predictions may suggest, the Earth has not run out of any resources nor is it likely that it will run out of any in the near future. > > In fact, resources are becoming more abundant. Though this may seem puzzling, it does not mean that the actual quantity of resources in the Earth’s crust is increasing but rather that the amount available for our use is constantly growing due to technological innovations. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the only resource we have exhausted is cryolite, a mineral used in pesticides and aluminum processing. However, that is not to say every bit of it has been mined away; rather, producing it synthetically is much more cost efficient than mining the existing reserves at its current value.

As it happens, we don’t run out of resources. Instead, we become better at finding, extracting, and efficiently utilizing resources, which means that in practical terms resources become more abundant, not less. In other words, the pie grows faster than we can eat it.

So is there any resource that actually limits human potential? I think there is, and history would suggest that resource is human ingenuity and effort. The more people are thinking about and working on a problem, the more solutions we find and build to solve it. That means not only does the pie grow faster than we can eat it, but the more people there are, the faster the pie grows. Of course that assumes everyone eating pie is also working to grow the pie, but that’s a separate issue for now.

Productivity and Division of Labor

Why does having more people lead to more productivity? A big part of it comes down to division of labor and specialization. The best way to get really good at something is to do more of it. In a small community, doing just one thing simply isn’t possible. Everyone has to be somewhat of a generalist in order to survive. But with a larger population, being a specialist becomes possible. In fact, that’s the purpose of money, as I explained here.

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzp0rve5f6xtu56djkfkkg7ktr5rtfckpun95rgxaa7futy86npx8yqq247t2dvet9q4tsg4qng36lxe6kc4nftayyy89kua2

The more specialized an economy becomes, the more efficient it can be. There are big economies of scale in almost every task or process. So for example, if a single person tried to build a car from scratch, it would be extremely difficult and take a very long time. However, if you have a thousand people building a car, each doing a specific job, they can become very good at doing that specific job and do it much faster. And then you can move that process to a factory, and build machines to do specific jobs, and add even more efficiency.

But that only works if you’re building more than one car. It doesn’t make sense to build a huge factory full of specialized equipment that takes lots of time and effort to design and manufacture, and then only build one car. You need to sell thousands of cars, maybe even millions of cars, to pay off that initial investment. So division of labor and specialization relies on large populations in two different ways. First, you need a large population to have enough people to specialize in each task. But second and just as importantly, you need a large population of buyers for the finished product. You need a big market in order to make mass production economical.

Think of a computer or smartphone. It takes thousands of specialized processes, thousands of complex parts, and millions of people doing specialized jobs to extract the raw materials, process them, and assemble them into a piece of electronic hardware. And electronics are relatively expensive anyway. Imagine how impossible it would be to manufacture electronics economically, if the market demand wasn’t literally in the billions of units.

Stairs Up, Elevator Down

We’ve seen exponential increases in productivity over the past few centuries, resulting in higher living standards even as population exploded. Now, facing the prospect of a drastic trend reversal, what will happen to productivity and living standards? The typical sentiment seems to be “well, there are a lot of people already competing for resources, so if population does decline, that will just reduce the competition and leave a bigger slice of pie for each person, so we’ll all be getting wealthier as a result of population decline.”

This seems reasonable at first glance. Surely dividing the economic pie into fewer slices means a bigger slice for everyone, right? But remember, more specialization and division of labor is what made the pie as big as it is to begin with. And specialization depends on large populations for both the supply of specialized labor, and the demand for finished goods. Can complex supply chains and mass production withstand population reduction intact? I don’t think the answer is clear.

The idea that it will all be okay, and we’ll get wealthier as population falls, is based on some faulty assumptions. It assumes that wealth is basically some fixed inventory of “things” that exist, and it’s all a matter of distribution. That’s typical Marxist thinking, similar to the reasoning behind “tax the rich” and other utopian wealth transfer schemes.

The reality is, wealth is a dynamic concept with strong network effects. For example, a grocery store in a large city can be a valuable asset with a large potential income stream. The same store in a small village with a declining population can be an unprofitable and effectively worthless liability.

Even something as permanent as a house is very susceptible to network effects. If you currently live in an area where housing is scarce and expensive, you might think a declining population would be the perfect solution to high housing costs. However, if you look at a place that’s already facing the beginnings of a population decline, you’ll see it’s not actually that simple. Japan, for example, is already facing an aging and declining population. And sure enough, you can get a house in Japan for free, or basically free. Sounds amazing, right? Not really.

If you check out the reason houses are given away in Japan, you’ll find a depressing reality. Most of the free houses are in rural areas or villages where the population is declining, often to the point that the village becomes uninhabited and abandoned. It’s so bad that in 2018, 13.6% of houses in Japan were vacant. Why do villages become uninhabited? Well, it turns out that a certain population level is necessary to support the services and businesses people need. When the population falls too low, specialized businesses can no longer operated profitably. It’s the exact issue we discussed with division of labor and the need for a high population to provide a market for the specialist to survive. As the local stores, entertainment venues, and businesses close, and skilled tradesmen move away to larger population centers with more customers, living in the village becomes difficult and depressing, if not impossible. So at a certain critical level, a village that’s too isolated will reach a tipping point where everyone leaves as fast as possible. And it turns out that an abandoned house in a remote village or rural area without any nearby services and businesses is worth… nothing. Nobody wants to live there, nobody wants to spend the money to maintain the house, nobody wants to pay the taxes needed to maintain the utilities the town relied on. So they try to give the houses away to anyone who agrees to live there, often without much success.

So on a local level, population might rise gradually over time, but when that process reverses and population declines to a certain level, it can collapse rather quickly from there.

I expect the same incentives to play out on a larger scale as well. Complex supply chains and extreme specialization lead to massive productivity. But there’s also a downside, which is the fragility of the system. Specialization might mean one shop can make all the widgets needed for a specific application, for the whole globe. That’s great while it lasts, but what happens when the owner of that shop retires with his lifetime of knowledge and experience? Will there be someone equally capable ready to fill his shoes? Hopefully… But spread that problem out across the global economy, and cracks start to appear. A specialized part is unavailable. So a machine that relies on that part breaks down and can’t be repaired. So a new machine needs to be built, which is a big expense that drives up costs and prices. And with a falling population, demand goes down. Now businesses are spending more to make fewer items, so they have to raise prices to stay profitable. Now fewer people can afford the item, so demand falls even further. Eventually the business is forced to close, and other industries that relied on the items they produced are crippled. Things become more expensive, or unavailable at any price. Living standards fall. What was a stairway up becomes an elevator down.

Hope, From the Parasite Class?

All that being said, I’m not completely pessimistic about the future. I think the potential for an acceptable outcome exists.

I see two broad groups of people in the economy; producers, and parasites. One thing the increasing productivity has done is made it easier than ever to survive. Food is plentiful globally, the only issues are with distribution. Medical advances save countless lives. Everything is more abundant than ever before. All that has led to a very “soft” economic reality. There’s a lot of non-essential production, which means a lot of wealth can be redistributed to people who contribute nothing, and if it’s done carefully, most people won’t even notice. And that is exactly what has happened, in spades.

There are welfare programs of every type and description, and handouts to people for every reason imaginable. It’s never been easier to survive without lifting a finger. So millions of able-bodied men choose to do just that.

Besides the voluntarily idle, the economy is full of “bullshit jobs.” Shoutout to David Graeber’s book with that title. (It’s an excellent book and one I would highly recommend, even though the author was a Marxist and his conclusions are completely wrong.) A 2015 British poll asked people, “Does your job make a meaningful contribution to the world?” Only 50% said yes, while 37% said no and 13% were uncertain.

This won’t be a surprise to anyone who’s operated a business, or even worked in the private sector in general. There are three types of jobs; jobs that accomplish something productive, jobs that accomplish nothing of value, and jobs that actually hinder people trying to accomplish something productive. The number of jobs in the last two categories has grown massively over the years. This would include a lot of unnecessary administrative jobs, burdensome regulatory jobs, useless DEI and HR jobs, a large percentage of public sector jobs, most of the military-industrial complex, and the list is endless. All these jobs accomplish nothing worthwhile at best, and actively discourage those who are trying to accomplish something at worst.

Even among jobs that do accomplish some useful purpose, the amount of time spent actually doing the job continues to decline. According to a 2016 poll, American office workers spent only 39% of their workday actually doing their primary task. The other 61% was largely wasted on unproductive administrative tasks and meetings, answering emails, and just simply wasting time.

I could go on, but the point is, there’s a lot of slack in the economy. We’ve become so productive that the number of people actually doing the work to keep everyone fed, clothed, and cared for is only a small percentage of the population. In one sense, that’s a cause for optimism. The population could decline a lot, and we’d still have enough bodies to man the economic engine, as it were.

Aging

The thing with population decline, though, is nobody gets to choose who goes first. Not unless you’re a psychopathic dictator. So populations get old, then they get small. This means that the number of dependents in the economy rises naturally. Once people retire, they still need someone to grow the food, keep the lights on, and provide the medical care. And it doesn’t matter how much money the retirees have saved, either. Money is just a claim on wealth. The goods and services actually have to be provided by someone, and if that someone was never born, all the money in the world won’t change anything.

And the aging occurs on top of all the people already taking from the economy without contributing anything of value. So that seems like a big problem.

Currently, wealth redistribution happens through a combination of direct taxes, indirect taxation through deficit spending, and the whole gamut of games that happen when banks create credit/debt money by making loans. In a lot of cases, it’s very indirect and difficult to pin down. For example, someone has a “job” in a government office, enforcing pointless regulations that actually hinder someone in the private sector from producing something useful. Their paycheck comes from the government, so a combination of taxes on productive people, and deficit spending, which is also a tax on productive people. But they “have a job,” so who’s going to question their contribution to society? On the other hand, it could be a banker or hedge fund manager. They might be pulling in a massive salary, but at the core all they’re really doing is finding creative financial ways to transfer wealth from productive people to themselves, without contributing anything of value.

You’ll notice a common theme if you think about this problem deeply. Most of the wealth transfer that supports the unproductive, whether that’s welfare recipients, retirees, bureaucrats, corporate middle managers, or weapons manufacturers, is only possible through expanding the money supply. There’s a limit to how much direct taxation the productive will bear while the option to collect welfare exists. At a certain point, people conclude that working hard every day isn’t worth it, when taxes take so much of their wages that they could make almost as much without working at all. So the balance of what it takes to support the dependent class has to come indirectly, through new money creation.

As long as the declining population happens under the existing monetary system, the future looks bleak. There’s no limit to how much money creation and inflation the parasite class will use in an attempt to avoid work. They’ll continue to suck the productive class dry until the workers give up in disgust, and the currency collapses into hyperinflation. And you can’t run a complex economy without functional money, so productivity inevitably collapses with the currency.

The optimistic view is that we don’t have to continue supporting the failed credit/debt monetary system. It’s hurting productivity, messing up incentives, and contributing to increasing wealth inequality and lower living standards for the middle class. If we walk away from that system and adopt a hard money standard, the possibility of inflationary wealth redistribution vanishes. The welfare and warfare programs have to be slashed. The parasite class is forced to get busy, or starve. In that scenario, the declining population of workers can be offset by a massive shift away from “bullshit jobs” and into actual productive work.

While that might not be a permanent solution to declining population, it would at least give us time to find a real solution, without having our complex economy collapse and send our living standards back to the 17th century.

It’s a complex issue with many possible outcomes, but I think a close look at the effects of the monetary system on productivity shows one obvious problem that will make the situation worse than necessary. Moving to a better monetary system and creating incentives for productivity would do a lot to reduce the economic impacts of a declining population.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Bitcoin-focused investment firm Twenty One Capital has made headlines after buying 4,812 BTC worth $458.7 million, making it the third-largest corporate holder of the scarce digital asset.

The move is a big and public one towards becoming the “ultimate Bitcoin investment vehicle” according to its leadership, and is turning heads in both bitcoin and tradfi world.

Tether, the issuer of the world’s largest stablecoin, bought the bitcoin on behalf of Twenty One Capital.

According to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on May 13, Tether acquired the bitcoin on May 9 at an average price of $95,319 per coin.

Twenty One Capital was launched in April 2025 through a SPAC merger with Cantor Equity Partners, a Cayman Islands-based firm affiliated with Wall Street giant Cantor Fitzgerald. The company is backed by Tether, Bitfinex exchange and Japanese investment giant SoftBank.

Related: Cantor Fitzgerald, Tether and SoftBank Launch $3B Bitcoin Venture

The firm is led by Jack Mallers, founder of the bitcoin payments app Strike, who has been vocal about bitcoin business models.

“We want to be the ultimate vehicle for the capital markets to participate in Bitcoin… building on top of Bitcoin,” said Mallers in an interview. “So we are a Bitcoin business at our core.”

At launch, Twenty One Capital had 31,500 bitcoin on the balance sheet with plans to get to at least 42,000 BTC.

The breakdown of that initial allocation was 23,950 BTC from Tether, 10,500 BTC from SoftBank and about 7,000 BTC from Bitfinex—all to be converted into equity at $10 per share.

The company is openly modeling its strategy after what Bitcoiners call “Saylorization”—a term coined after Michael Saylor, executive chairman of Strategy, who started large-scale bitcoin accumulation by corporations in 2020.

“Twenty One Capital isn’t just stacking sats,” said Bitcoin advocate Max Keiser, “It’s leading a generational shift in corporate capital allocation … Jack Mallers is taking the Saylor playbook and turning it into an arms race.”

The strategy is simple: use bitcoin per share as a metric instead of earnings per share, prioritize bitcoin accumulation over short-term profits, and use the capital markets to fund purchases. Mallers said:

“We do intend to raise as much capital as we possibly can to acquire bitcoin. We will never have bitcoin per share negative… Our intent is to make sure when you are a shareholder of Twenty One that you are getting wealthier in Bitcoin terms.”

The bitcoin purchase was made at a time of growing market momentum.

On May 14, bitcoin hit $105,000 briefly before settling at around $104,000—a 7.5% gain in the past week. Retail buying has also picked up, with purchases under $10,000 up 3.4% over two weeks, suggesting continued bullishness.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Singapore, May 14, 2025 — NEUTRON, the leading Lightning Network infrastructure provider in Asia, is announcing a new partnership with Cobo, a globally trusted digital asset custody platform.

Through this collaboration, Cobo will integrate Neutron’s Lightning Network API, enabling real-time, cost-effective Bitcoin transactions across its services.

Neutron’s mission is to make the Lightning Network the financial backbone for modern Bitcoin use, bridging traditional finance with Bitcoin’s borderless, decentralized economy.

“We’re thrilled to partner with Cobo, a trusted leader in custodial services, to further accelerate Bitcoin infrastructure across Asia,” said Albert Buu, CEO of Neutron. 

“At Neutron, we are committed to providing enterprise businesses with easy and efficient integration into the Lightning Network, enabling next-generation global real-time settlement solutions.

“This partnership will not only drive innovation but also empower businesses across Asia with the fast, secure, and cost-effective benefits of Bitcoin payments.”

Neutron: The Lightning Engine for Bitcoin Adoption

Neutron provides a comprehensive API suite that allows businesses to instantly access the power of the Lightning Network, Bitcoin’s second-layer protocol designed for high-speed, scalable, and low-fee payments.

The integration is part of Neutron’s broader vision to equip forward-thinking institutions with the tools needed to participate in the next generation of Bitcoin utility.

Lightning-Powered Custody for the Next Era of Finance

Cobo’s integration of Neutron’s API gives institutional clients an additional option for BTC settlement, making Lightning Network access more programmable and easier to integrate within their existing systems.

“At Cobo, we’ve built our custody platform to combine uncompromising security with the scalability institutions need to grow,” said Dr. Changhao Jiang, CTO and Co-Founder of Cobo.

“Integrating Neutron’s Lightning Network API allows us to offer real-time, low-cost Bitcoin settlement at scale without compromising on trust or performance. Together, we’re laying the groundwork for faster, more efficient Bitcoin infrastructure across Asia.”

About Neutron

Neutron is Asia’s leading Bitcoin infrastructure company, helping businesses and individuals unlock the power of the Lightning Network, specializing in Lightning-as-a-Service.

nThrough its scalable API platform, mobile app, and lending product, Neutron empowers businesses and individuals to send, receive, save, and build with Bitcoin.
Want to bring Lightning into your product or platform? Reach out to our team at sales@neutron.me or visit us at www.neutron.me

About Cobo

Cobo is a trusted leader in digital asset custody and wallet infrastructure, providing an all-in-one platform for organizations and developers to easily build, automate, and scale their digital asset businesses securely.

Founded in 2017 by blockchain pioneers and headquartered in Singapore, Cobo is trusted by more than 500 leading digital asset businesses globally, safeguarding billions of dollars in assets.

Today, Cobo offers the industry’s only unified wallet platform that integrates all four digital asset wallet technologies – Custodial Wallets, MPC Wallets, Smart Contract Wallets, and Exchange Wallets.

Committed to the highest security standards and regulatory compliance, Cobo has a zero-incident track record and holds ISO 27001, SOC2 (Type 1 and Type 2) certifications, as well as licenses in multiple jurisdictions.

Recognized for its industry-leading innovations, Cobo has received accolades from prestigious entities such as Hedgeweek and Global Custodian. For more information, please visit www.cobo.com

@ 4fa5d1c4:fd6c6e41

🧠 Entwickelt von OECD & EU-Kommission – jetzt zur Rückmeldung freigegeben:\ 👉 https://ailiteracyframework.org/

Das Framework beschreibt vier zentrale Domänen der KI-Kompetenz – jede mit einem klaren Profil aus Wissen, Fertigkeiten und Haltungen. Diese lassen sich hervorragend mit den vier Kompetenzbereichen verbinden:

🔹 Engaging with AI ↔ 🟢 Verstehen

Lernende erkennen KI in ihrem Alltag, verstehen ihre technischen Grundlagen (📘 Knowledge) und entwickeln die Fähigkeit, Ausgaben kritisch zu analysieren (🛠️ Skills), begleitet von einer neugierigen und verantwortungsbewussten Einstellung (🧭 Attitudes).

🔹 Creating with AI ↔ 🔵 Anwenden

Durch den kreativen Einsatz generativer KI entstehen neue Lernprodukte. Benötigt werden technisches Verständnis (📘 z. B. zu Trainingsdaten), Anwendungskompetenz (🛠️ z. B. Promptgestaltung), sowie eine innovationsorientierte Haltung (🧭 Ownership, Urheberrecht, Attribution).

🔹 Managing AI ↔ 🟠 Reflektieren

Hier geht es um bewusste Entscheidungen: Wann ist KI sinnvoll? Wie wirken sich ihre Vorschläge auf mein Denken aus? Das verlangt (📘) Orientierungswissen, (🛠️) strategisches Problemlösen und (🧭) eine ethisch begründbare Reflexion.

🔹 Designing AI ↔ 🟣 Gestalten

Lernende analysieren und entwerfen KI-Systeme: Welche Daten nutze ich? Wer profitiert? Mit welchen Folgen? Die Verbindung aus (📘) systemischem Wissen, (🛠️) Gestaltungskompetenz und (🧭) ethischer Haltung eröffnet Bildungsräume im digitalen Wandel.

📬 Rückmeldungen zum Entwurf sind willkommen – eure Expertise aus der Praxis zählt!

👉 [https://teachai.org/ailiteracy/review](https://teachai.org/ailiteracy/review)

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Ukraine is reportedly about to make history by becoming the first country in Europe to have a national bitcoin reserve, a move aimed at strengthening its economy during the war with Russia.

The plan is still in its early stages and Binance, the world’s largest digital asset exchange, is involved.

According to Incrypted, a Ukrainian digital asset news outlet, Ukrainian MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak, First Deputy Chairman of the Finance, Tax and Customs Policy Committee, confirmed that the draft law is almost ready and will be submitted to the parliament soon.

“We will soon submit a draft law from the industry allowing the creation of crypto reserves,” Zheleznyak told Incrypted.

Earlier discussions mentioned a broader “crypto reserve” but the current plan is focused on bitcoin as a strategic reserve asset. If approved, the law will allow the National Bank of Ukraine to hold bitcoin as part of the country’s official reserves.

Since the war with Russia started, Ukraine has become one of the most bitcoin-friendly countries in the world.

In 2022 and 2023 Ukraine raised over $100 million in digital asset donations for defense and humanitarian purposes. A report from Chainalysis ranked the country among the top 10 countries for bitcoin adoption globally.

A rather vague and unconfirmed report by BitcoinTreasuries.net states that “holdings of public officials” currently stand at 46,351 BTC.

Ukraine bitcoin holdings as reported by BitcoinTreasuries

Supporters of the bitcoin reserve say it will help Ukraine protect its economy from war-related instability, inflation and currency depreciation.

By going digital, the government is looking for modern tools to strengthen its financial system in uncertain times. This is not just about storing bitcoin, it’s about establishing clear laws for digital assets ownership, management and use.

Binance is playing an advisory role in the project. The company has worked with Ukraine on digital asset education and regulations in the past and is now helping to shape the legal framework for the bitcoin reserve.

Kirill Khomyakov, Binance’s regional head for Central and Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Africa, confirmed the company’s support, but warned it won’t be fast or easy.

“The creation of such a reserve will require significant changes in legislation,” Khomyakov said. “Another positive aspect is that this initiative will likely lead to greater clarity in the regulation of crypto assets in Ukraine.”

Despite the support from some officials, there are legal hurdles. Ukrainian laws don’t allow bitcoin to be in the official reserves. So the government needs to pass new laws for it to happen.

Efforts to legalize bitcoin in general have been going on for years. In 2021, a draft law on virtual assets was approved by Finance Committee but was withdrawn after the President’s Office and financial regulators objected.

Up to now, over 80 amendments have been proposed, showing how complicated the process is.

The Ministry of Digital Transformation is leading a larger reform that could introduce rules for digital asset exchanges, tax laws and anti-money laundering standards in the country.

Ukraine isn’t alone in considering bitcoin as a national reserve asset. In March 2025, the U.S. announced its own Strategic Bitcoin Reserve using BTC seized in criminal cases.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

KYC database of Coinbase, the largest U.S. digital asset exchange, has been breached and up to 1% of monthly active users, or around 100,000 customers, have had their personal info stolen.

Hackers reportedly bribed overseas customer support agents and contractors to leak internal company info and user data. They then demanded $20 million and threatened to release the stolen data if Coinbase didn’t pay.

Instead of paying the ransom, Coinbase said no and is setting up a $20 million reward fund for anyone who can help catch the hackers.

“They then tried to extort Coinbase for $20 million to cover this up. We said no,” the company said in a blog post. “Instead of paying the $20 million ransom, we’re establishing a $20 million reward fund.”

So what’s been stolen? The breach, which was first disclosed in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), did not involve any theft of customer funds, login credentials, private keys or wallets.

But the hackers did get:

• Full names
• Addresses
• Phone numbers
• Email addresses
• Last 4 digits of Social Security numbers
• Bank account numbers and some bank identifiers
• Government ID images (driver’s licenses, passports, etc.)
• Account balances and transaction history
• Internal corporate documents and training materials

Coinbase says Prime accounts were not affected and no passwords or 2FA codes were stolen.

According to Coinbase, the attackers targeted outsourced support agents in countries like India. They were offering cash bribes in exchange for access to the company’s internal customer support tools.

“What these attackers were doing was finding Coinbase employees and contractors based in India who were associated with our business process outsourcing or support operations, that kind of thing, and bribing them in order to obtain customer data,” said Philip Martin, Coinbase’s Chief Security Officer.

Coinbase said it first saw suspicious activity in January 2025 but didn’t get a direct email from the threat actors until May 11. The email had evidence of stolen data and the ransom demand.

Coinbase quickly launched an investigation, fired all the involved support agents and notified law enforcement. It also started notifying users via email on May 15.

The Coinbase data breach has hit it hard, financially and publicly. The company estimates it will spend $180-$400 million on security upgrades, reimbursements and other remediation.

Coinbase’s stock also took a hit, dropping 6.4% after the news broke, before rebounding.

Analysts say this couldn’t have come at a worse time, as Coinbase is about to be added to the S&P 500 index – a big deal for any publicly traded company.

It’s definitely an unfortunate timing. “This may push the industry to adopt stricter employee vetting and introduce some reputational risks,” said Bo Pei, analyst at U.S. Tiger Securities.

Coinbase will reimburse any customers who were tricked into sending their digital assets to the attackers as part of social engineering scams. They’ve also introduced new security measures:

• Extra ID verification for high-risk withdrawals
• Scam-awareness prompts
• A new U.S.-based support center
• Stronger insider threat monitoring
• Simulation testing for internal systems

Affected customers have already been notified and the exchange is working with U.S. and international law enforcement to track down the attackers.

This is part of a larger trend in the digital assets world. Earlier this year, Bybit, another exchange, was hit with a $1.5 billion theft, dubbed the biggest digital asset heist in history.

Research from Chainalysis shows over $2.2 billion was stolen from digital asset platforms in 2024 alone.

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

The Bitcoin price action since the US presidential election, and particularly today, November 11, has given me an excuse to revisit an idea I’ve written about before. I explained here that money doesn’t “flow into” assets, and that the terminology makes it difficult for people to understand how prices actually work.

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzp0rve5f6xtu56djkfkkg7ktr5rtfckpun95rgxaa7futy86npx8yqqhy6mmwv4uj63r0v4ekutt594fx2ctvd3uj63nvdamj6jtww3hj6stw096xs6twvukkgmt9ws6xg86ht5t

The Bitcoin market this year has been a perfect illustration of the points I tried to make, which offers another angle to explain the concept.

Back in January, the first spot Bitcoin ETFs were launched for trading in the US market. This was heralded as a great thing for the Bitcoin price, and tracking “inflows” into these ETFs became a top priority for Bitcoin market analysts. The expectation of course was that more Bitcoin purchased by these ETFs would result in higher prices for the asset.

And sure enough, over the first two months of trading, from mid-January to mid-March, the combined “inflows” to the ETFs totaled around $11 billion. Over the same time frame, the Bitcoin price rose almost 60%, from around $43,000 to $68,000. As should be expected, right?

But then, over the next seven and a half months, from mid-March to early November, the ETFs saw another $11 billion in “inflows”. The Bitcoin price in mid-March? $68,000. In early November? All the way up to… $68,000. Seven and a half months of treading water.

So how can that be? How can $11 billion dollars flowing into an asset cause a 60% price rise once, and no price change at all the next time?

If you read my previous article linked above, you’ll see that the whole idea of money “flowing into” an asset is incorrect and misleading, and this is a perfect illustration why. If you step back a bit, you’ll see the folly of that mentality. So when the ETFs buy $11 billion dollars worth of Bitcoin, where does it come from? They obviously have to buy it from someone. As always, every transaction has a buyer and a seller. In this case, the sellers are current Bitcoin holders selling through OTC desks on the spot market.

So why focus on the ETF buying rather than the Bitcoin holder selling? Instead of saying there were $11 billion in inflows to the Bitcoin ETFs, why not say there were $11 billion in outflows from spot Bitcoin holders? It’s just as valid either way.

To take it a step further, many analysts were consistently confused all summer as Bitcoin ETFs continued to see “inflows” on days that the Bitcoin price stayed flat or even fell. So let’s imagine two consecutive days of $300 million daily “inflows” into the ETFs. The first day, the Bitcoin price rises 3%. The second day, the Bitcoin price falls 3%. The first day, headlines can read Bitcoin Price Rises 3% as ETFs See $300m in Inflows. The second day, headlines can read Bitcoin Price Falls 3% as Spot Bitcoin Holders See $300m in Outflows.

See the silliness of this whole idea? Money flows aren’t the cause of price movement. They’re a fake metric used as a post hoc justification for price moves by people who want you to believe they understand markets better than you.

Moving on to today, as I write this on the evening of November 11, Bitcoin is up 30% from $68,000 to $88,000 in the week since the November 5 election. It rose from $69,000 to $75,000 on election night alone, after US markets had closed and while there were no ETF “inflows” at all. In fact, the ETFs saw over a hundred million dollars in outflows on November 5, followed by an 8% single day price increase.

So if money flows don’t move price, what does?

Investor sentiment, that’s what.

Talking about money flows at all, as illustrated by the Bitcoin ETFs, requires arbitrarily dividing a single market into different segments to disguise the fact that every transaction has both a buyer and a seller, so every transaction has an equal dollar amount of “flows” in both directions. In actuality, price is set by a convergence between the highest price any potential buyer is willing to pay, and the lowest price any potential seller is willing to accept. And that number can change without a single transaction occurring, and without a single dollar “flowing” anywhere.

If every Bitcoin holder simultaneously decided tonight that the lowest price they’re willing to accept is $200,000 per Bitcoin, and a single potential buyer decided to buy a single dollar worth of Bitcoin at that price, that would be the new Bitcoin price tomorrow morning. No ETF “inflows” or institutional buying pressure or short squeezes or liquidations required, or any of the other excuses market analysts use to confuse normal people and make it seem like they have some deep esoteric insight into the workings of markets and future price action.

Don’t overcomplicate something as simple as price. If holders of an asset demand higher prices and potential buyers are willing to pay it, prices rise. If potential buyers of an asset offer lower prices and holders are willing to sell, prices fall. The constant interplay between all those individual investors sentiments is what forms a market and a price. The transferring of money between buyers and sellers is an effect of price, not a cause.

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

Bullshit Jobs, for those unfamiliar, is the title of a 2018 book by anthropologist David Graeber. It’s well worth a read just for the fascinating research and the engaging writing style. The premise of the book is that many people work in jobs that contribute nothing to society, and would not be missed if they suddenly vanished overnight.

The data backs this up. In a 2015 British poll that asked “does your job make a meaningful contribution to the world?”, 37 percent of people said no, and another 13 percent weren’t sure. That’s fully half the population who can’t confidently say their job is even worth doing. And other polls have found similar or worse results.

The book was inspired by the overwhelming response to a 2013 article Graeber wrote titled On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs: A Work Rant. The point I’d like to address is found here.

Over the course of the last century, the number of workers employed as domestic servants, in industry, and in the farm sector has collapsed dramatically. At the same time, ‘professional, managerial, clerical, sales, and service workers’ tripled, growing ‘from one-quarter to three-quarters of total employment.’ In other words, productive jobs have, just as predicted, been largely automated away (even if you count industrial workers globally, including the toiling masses in India and China, such workers are still not nearly so large a percentage of the world population as they used to be.)

But rather than allowing a massive reduction of working hours to free the world’s population to pursue their own projects, pleasures, visions, and ideas, we have seen the ballooning of not even so much of the ‘service’ sector as of the administrative sector, up to and including the creation of whole new industries like financial services or telemarketing, or the unprecedented expansion of sectors like corporate law, academic and health administration, human resources, and public relations.

These are what I propose to call ‘bullshit jobs’.

It’s as if someone were out there making up pointless jobs just for the sake of keeping us all working. And here, precisely, lies the mystery. In capitalism, this is precisely what is not supposed to happen. Sure, in the old inefficient socialist states like the Soviet Union, where employment was considered both a right and a sacred duty, the system made up as many jobs as they had to (this is why in Soviet department stores it took three clerks to sell a piece of meat). But, of course, this is the sort of very problem market competition is supposed to fix. According to economic theory, at least, the last thing a profit-seeking firm is going to do is shell out money to workers they don’t really need to employ. Still, somehow, it happens.

While corporations may engage in ruthless downsizing, the layoffs and speed-ups invariably fall on that class of people who are actually making, moving, fixing and maintaining things; through some strange alchemy no one can quite explain, the number of salaried paper-pushers ultimately seems to expand, and more and more employees find themselves, not unlike Soviet workers actually, working 40 or even 50 hour weeks on paper, but effectively working 15 hours just as Keynes predicted, since the rest of their time is spent organizing or attending motivational seminars, updating their facebook profiles or downloading TV box-sets.

The answer clearly isn’t economic: it’s moral and political.

In the book, Graeber expands on this idea with a very entertaining description of the many flavors of bullshit jobs, based on anecdotes from readers of his article. He follows that up with theories speculating on the cause of this situation. And wraps it all up with the conclusion that basically capitalists are all big meanies and invent bullshit jobs just to torture people and prevent the arrival of the Marxist utopia where no one has to do much real work and we all sit around and sing kumbaya and discuss philosophy. That’s too harsh a criticism of a very well researched and written book, but I have to confess I was sorely disappointed the first time I read it by the author’s failure to even entertain what seems like the obvious alternative explanation.

Graeber acknowledges in the book that it’s not surprising bullshit jobs exist inside government, although he doesn’t focus strongly enough on why that is. Like he does in the article, he tries to brush it off with the excuse that the same problem exists in the private sector. As he acknowledges, this isn’t supposed to happen in capitalism. He realizes that it makes no logical economic sense for a profit-seeking firm to hire workers to do nothing productive.

But then he follows that acknowledgement with the claim that “The answer clearly isn’t economic: it’s moral and political.” I’m sorry, what? How is that clear? How do you go from stating an obvious economic fact, to denying that the problem is economic, and call it “clear”.

“Still, somehow, it happens,” is not anywhere close to a sufficient explanation to rule out an economic factor.

The economic explanation

First, some definitions.

Capitalism is defined as “an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development occurs through the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.”

A free market is “an economic system in which prices are based on competition among private businesses and are not controlled or regulated by a government: a market operating by free competition.”

Now that we made sure we’re talking about the same thing, we can analyze this issue logically.

Capitalism and free markets work through competition for customers. It’s an economic law that a customer won’t pay more for the same good or service when they could pay less. Someone can try to make obscure and esoteric objections and force me to emphasize the word “same” and analyze what the good or service being purchased actually is, but everyone else understands this intuitively. So if two companies are offering the same product for sale, all things being equal, the company offering lower prices will attract the customers. Pretty simple stuff.

Of course, the goal for the company is to generate profits. It’s literally in the definition of the word “capitalism”. So any system in which companies have a goal other than generating profits is, by definition, not capitalism.

A company can increase its profits two ways: raising prices, or lowering costs. We don’t have to get too philosophical to realize that if a company is paying someone to do nothing, the company could increase profits by firing that person and lowering their costs of production.

So the question is, why don’t they? Why do they hire people who increase their costs and lower their profits, thereby making them less competitive? And more importantly, if they do make that mistake, why don’t their competitors undercut their prices and take all the customers and bankrupt them?

I don’t think we can dismiss the economic factor as off-handedly as Graeber does. After all, making a profit is the fundamental, definitional purpose of a business or company in a capitalist economy. To say “companies in this capitalist economy are doing something completely antithetical to the very principles and definition of capitalism, so obviously they’re not doing it for economic reasons” is something of a non sequitur.

The conclusion, to me, seems obvious. We don’t have a capitalist economy. As far as I can tell, that’s true by definition. If companies aren’t even trying to achieve the goal companies must achieve to survive in a capitalist economy, and somehow they’re still surviving, that’s proof of the non-capitalist nature of the economy.

Which part of the capitalist system are we missing?

Well, let’s start with the obvious: there’s a lot of government in our economy. The government isn’t privately owned, which makes it not capitalist by definition. So any part of the economy that’s government is not capitalist.

Why is government not capitalist? Because government is not motivated to provide goods and services at a profit. Why not? Because government does not sell goods and services into a free market. Government gives away goods and services to its “customers” for free, because they’re paid for by people other than the consumers of the service. That payment comes in one of two ways: taxes, and debt. It’s not a voluntary transaction.

Which part of the capitalist system might private companies be missing?

They could be lacking competition. That is, operating a monopoly or cartel. If there’s no competing business to provide goods at lower prices, the company could hire people for useless jobs and compensate by raising prices. This places them outside the definition of capitalism, since “free competition” is part of the definition of a free market. Monopolies and cartels often develop and survive through protection by the government, which emphasizes their un-capitalistic nature.

They could be in a temporary situation where the people making the management decisions are sufficiently insulated from the market forces at play that their poor decisions can persist for a while. Many companies begin to lose their competitive edge at some point, after getting big enough to have economic inertia and for the management to be less accountable for business performance. If a company has grown big enough, they can start making poor financial decisions and absorb the lost profits, sometimes for years, before losing their market share to a smaller, more competitive rival. This isn’t really an absence of capitalism, just the natural creative destruction necessary for capitalism to function. The problem comes when a company that’s obviously uncompetitive is prevented from failing through un-capitalistic means. Maybe they’re big enough and wealthy enough to pressure the government into granting them monopoly status. This doesn’t have to be open, it’s often through creating such an impenetrable legal morass around the industry that no competitor can emerge. Or it can be in the form of a “too big to fail” direct government bailout.

The company could also be lacking that essential link between customer satisfaction and business income. In other words, maybe they aren’t selling to their customers. That can happen for various reasons.

Some companies are “private companies” but sell to the government. The government is not a customer in the capitalist sense, because the government spends money taken coercively from its subjects, not money earned voluntarily in the free market. So any company like Raytheon or Boeing that survives off government contracts can’t be accurately called a capitalist organization.

In an industry like healthcare, where the insurance companies are the middlemen in basically all transactions between patients and doctors, there are also lots of ways for bullshit jobs to proliferate. Patients don’t care how much a procedure costs, just that it helps them. Doctors don’t care how much a procedure costs, just that the insurance company will pay for it. And insurance companies don’t care whether a procedure helps the patient, they just want to collect as many premiums as possible while paying out as little for care as possible. The fact that the patient isn’t paying the doctor for their care breaks the necessary link between customer and producer that’s essential for a free market to function. That combines with the regulatory moat and cartel-like structure of the healthcare industry to prevent the competitive function of capitalism from occurring.

Companies could also be surviving off of money from someone other than their customers: bankers and investors. There’s obviously a role in a capitalist system for investors to support a new venture until it’s able to attract customers and establish a stable and profitable business model. But many companies today exist for much longer than economically reasonable without turning a profit. In the US, almost 2,000 of the 5,000 publicly traded companies with data available were classified as “zombie companies”, meaning they don’t even make enough profit to pay the interest on their debt. So they’re going deeper in the hole every year. How can this continue?

Well, the alternative to paying off your debt, is to borrow even more money to make payments on the debt you already owe. If this sounds similar to how the US government survives, then you’re beginning to get the picture.

How can banks keep loaning money to unprofitable businesses? And why would they do it? It doesn’t make sense… until you understand how banking works.

That’s really the core focus of most of my writing, and I’ve written multiple articles on money and banking explaining how the system works as I understand it. This would be a good one focused on banking specifically.

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzp0rve5f6xtu56djkfkkg7ktr5rtfckpun95rgxaa7futy86npx8yqqt4g6r994pxjeedgfsku6edf35k2tt5de4nvdtzhjwrp2

To very briefly recap, banks don’t make loans by taking in money from depositors and loaning that money to borrowers. Instead, banks create new money that never existed before out of thin air and loan that new money to borrowers. Banks make a profit by charging borrowers interest on this newly created money, which costs them nothing to create. A pretty cushy gig, if you can get it.

So from the perspective of the banks, the more loans and debt outstanding, the better. Every dollar of debt is a dollar they can collect interest on. It cost them nothing to create, so the more, the merrier. In fact, the banks would prefer that the loan principle never be repaid, because once it’s repaid, they can no longer collect interest on that loan until they make another loan to replace it. As long as the borrower keeps paying interest, the banks are happy. And if they need to lend the borrower some more money so he can afford to pay the interest, that’s fine too. Anything but letting the loan default.

Given those incentives, how do you expect a chart of the outstanding loans and credit of US commercial banks to look?

If you guessed up only, you’d be correct.

So what does this banking system have to do with bullshit jobs? Well, I’d argue that the fractionally reserved fiat banking system, in and of itself, is an anti-capitalist system. Money is the communication layer of capitalism, as I’ve previously written.

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzp0rve5f6xtu56djkfkkg7ktr5rtfckpun95rgxaa7futy86npx8yqq247t2dvet9q4tsg4qng36lxe6kc4nftayyy89kua2

When one group of people can create money out of thin air, they have the ability to reallocate wealth in the economy. As long as the money is still functional, of course. Too much money creation and wealth reallocation, and people stop trusting the money. That’s when inflation becomes hyperinflation, the money no longer functions, and the whole system implodes.

Wealth reallocation by a small select group is the essence of a centrally planned socialist/Marxist economy. And we all know how efficient those economies are. In fact, Graeber himself mentioned the inefficiency of socialist states like the Soviet Union in his original article, and was not at all surprised by the existence of bullshit jobs in such an economic system. When wealth can be reallocated by central planners without regard to people’s preferences in a free market, inefficiency is never punished, so zombie companies full of bullshit jobs never go bankrupt.

The same thing happens under our “capitalist” system. Zombie companies full of bullshit jobs can get almost unlimited funding from too-big-to-fail banks, who don’t care whether they repay the loans, as long as they stay in business and keep making the interest payments. Sometimes the funding is in the form of loans directly, sometimes it’s in the form of massive stock market bubbles inflated by the endless money creation, sometimes through junk bond issuance funded by the same bubble economics, and sometimes it’s venture capital funds flush with liquidity for the same reason. Regardless, the cause, and the outcome, are the same.

The corrupt bankers own the corrupt politicians, so when the inevitable so-called black swan event occurs and the rotten edifice starts to quiver, another bailout is promptly rolled out. The government borrows trillions from their owners over at the Federal Reserve, who create the money out of thin air. The government sends it on over to the bankers who got caught with their hand in the cookie jar once again, and they paper over the massive holes in their balance sheet caused by blowing asset bubbles and funding inefficient zombie companies. Or sometimes, the government skips the middlemen entirely and bails out Boeing or whoever it happens to be directly.

And once again, bullshit jobs that couldn’t survive free market competition are rewarded at the expense of savers and taxpayers. As always, this flood of new liquidity flows out through the economy, causing inflation and boosting income for other inefficient companies that also deserved to fail. Creative destruction, a fundamental feature of a capitalist system, is avoided once again.

In my opinion, the banking system is at the root of the problem causing the proliferation of bullshit jobs. The system itself is, by design, fundamentally anti-capitalist in nature and function. It’s really a giant privately owned economic central planning system, in which a small fraction of people determine how resources are allocated, with privatized profits and socialized losses. The Soviet technocrats would be jealous.

Unfortunately, the bankers have successfully connected their industry so tightly to the term “capitalist” that showing people they’re anything but is almost impossible. To paraphrase the well-known quote, the greatest trick the bankers ever pulled was convincing the world that they’re the real capitalists.

Until the banking and monetary system fundamentally changes, inefficiency will persist and bullshit jobs will continue to proliferate. In my opinion, the problem is very much an economic problem. And it’s not a “late-stage capitalism” problem, it’s a “capitalism left the building a century ago” problem. We don’t need to get rid of capitalism, we’ve already done that. We need to bring sound money, and with it the possibility of a capitalist economy, back again.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

What is KYC/AML?

• The acronym stands for Know Your Customer / Anti Money Laundering.
• In practice it stands for the surveillance measures companies are often compelled to take against their customers by financial regulators.
• Methods differ but often include: Passport Scans, Driver License Uploads, Social Security Numbers, Home Address, Phone Number, Face Scans.
• Bitcoin companies will also store all withdrawal and deposit addresses which can then be used to track bitcoin transactions on the bitcoin block chain.
• This data is then stored and shared. Regulations often require companies to hold this information for a set number of years but in practice users should assume this data will be held indefinitely. Data is often stored insecurely, which results in frequent hacks and leaks.  
• KYC/AML data collection puts all honest users at risk of theft, extortion, and persecution while being ineffective at stopping crime. Criminals often use counterfeit, bought, or stolen credentials to get around the requirements. Criminals can buy "verified" accounts for as little as $200. Furthermore, billions of people are excluded from financial services as a result of KYC/AML requirements.

During the early days of bitcoin most services did not require this sensitive user data, but as adoption increased so did the surveillance measures. At this point, most large bitcoin companies are collecting and storing massive lists of bitcoiners, our sensitive personal information, and our transaction history.

Lists of Bitcoiners

KYC/AML policies are a direct attack on bitcoiners. Lists of bitcoiners and our transaction history will inevitably be used against us.

Once you are on a list with your bitcoin transaction history that record will always exist. Generally speaking, tracking bitcoin is based on probability analysis of ownership change. Surveillance firms use various heuristics to determine if you are sending bitcoin to yourself or if ownership is actually changing hands.  You can obtain better privacy going forward by using collaborative transactions such as coinjoin to break this probability analysis.

Fortunately, you can buy bitcoin without providing intimate personal information. Tools such as peach, hodlhodl, robosats, azteco and bisq help; mining is also a solid option: anyone can plug a miner into power and internet and earn bitcoin by mining privately.

You can also earn bitcoin by providing goods and/or services that can be purchased with bitcoin. Long term, circular economies will mitigate this threat: most people will not buy bitcoin - they will earn bitcoin - most people will not sell bitcoin - they will spend bitcoin.

There is no such thing as KYC or No KYC bitcoin, there are bitcoiners on lists and those that are not on lists.

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ ecda4328:1278f072

An honest response to objections — and an answer to the most important question: why does any of this matter?

Last updated: May 21, 2025\ \ 📄 Document version:\ EN: https://drive.proton.me/urls/A4A8Y8A0RR#Sj2OBsBYJFr1\ RU: https://drive.proton.me/urls/GS9AS1NB30#ZdKKb5ackB5e

---

\ Statement: Deflation is not the enemy, but a natural state in an age of technological progress.\ Criticism: in real macroeconomics, long-term deflation is linked to depressions.\ Deflation discourages borrowers and investors, and makes debt heavier.\ Natural ≠ Safe.

1. “Deflation → Depression, Debt → Heavier”

This is true in a debt-based system. Yes, in a fiat economy, debt balloons to the sky, and without inflation it collapses.

But Bitcoin offers not “deflation for its own sake,” but an environment where you don’t need to be in debt to survive. Where savings don’t melt away.\ Jeff Booth said it clearly:

“Technology is inherently deflationary. Fighting deflation with the printing press is fighting progress.”

You don’t have to take on credit to live in this system. Which means — deflation is not an enemy, but an ally.

💡 People often confuse two concepts:

1. That deflation doesn’t work in an economy built on credit and leverage — that’s true.

2. That deflation itself is bad — that’s a myth.

📉 In reality, deflation is the natural state of a free market when technology makes everything cheaper.

Historical example:\ In the U.S., from the Civil War to the early 1900s, the economy experienced gentle deflation — alongside economic growth, employment expansion, and industrial boom.\ Prices fell: for example, a sack of flour cost \~$1.00 in 1865 and \~$0.50 in 1895 — and there was no crisis, because wages held and productivity increased.

Modern example:\ Consumer electronics over the past 20–30 years are a vivid example of technological deflation:\ – What cost $5,000 in 2000 (e.g., a 720p plasma TV) now costs $300 and delivers 10× better quality.\ – Phones, computers, cameras — all became far more powerful and cheaper at the same time.\ That’s how tech-driven deflation works: you get more for less.

📌 Bitcoin doesn’t make the world deflationary. It just doesn’t fight against deflation, unlike the fiat model that fights to preserve its debt pyramid.\ It stops punishing savers and rewards long-term thinkers.

Even economists often confuse organic tech deflation with crisis-driven (debt) deflation.

---

\ \ Statement: We’ve never lived in a truly free market — central banks and issuance always existed.\ Criticism: ideological statement.\ A truly “free” market is utopian.\ Banks and monetary issuance emerged in response to crises.\ A market without arbiters is not always fair, especially under imperfect competition.

2. “The Free Market Is a Utopia”

Yes, “pure markets” are rare. But what we have today isn’t regulation — it’s centralized power in the hands of central banks and cartels.

Bitcoin offers rules without rulers. 21 million. No one can change the issuance. It’s not ideology — it’s code instead of trust. And it has worked for 15 years.

💬 People often say that banks and centralized issuance emerged as a response to crises — as if the market couldn’t manage on its own.\ But if a system needs to be “rescued” again and again through money printing… maybe the problem isn’t freedom, but the system itself?

📌 Crises don’t disprove the value of free markets. They only reveal how fragile a system becomes when the price of money is set not by the market, but by a boardroom vote.\ Bitcoin doesn’t magically eliminate crises — it removes the root cause: the ability to manipulate money in someone’s interest.

---

\ \ Statement: Inflation is an invisible tax, especially on the poor and working class.\ Criticism: partly true: inflation can reduce debt burden, boost employment.\ The state indexes social benefits. Under stable inflation, compensators can work. Under deflation, things might be worse (mass layoffs, defaults).

3. “Inflation Can Help”

Theoretically — yes. Textbooks say moderate inflation can reduce debt burdens and stimulate consumption and jobs.\ But in practice — it works as a stealth tax, especially on those without assets. The wealthy escape — into real estate, stocks, funds.\ But the poor and working class lose purchasing power because their money is held in cash — and cash devalues.

💬 As Lyn Alden says:

“When your money can’t hold value, you’re forced to become an investor — even if you just want to save and live.”

The state may index pensions or benefits — but always with a lag, and always less than actual price increases.\ If bread rises 15% and your payment increase is 5%, you got poorer, even if the number on paper went up.

💥 We live in an inflationary system of everything:\ – Inflationary money\ – Inflationary products\ – Inflationary content\ – And now even inflationary minds

🧠 This is more than just rising prices — it’s a degradation of reality perception. You’re always rushing, everything loses meaning.\ But when did the system start working against you?

📉 What went wrong after 1971?

This chart shows that from 1948 to the early 1970s, productivity and wages grew together.\ But after the end of the gold standard in 1971 — the connection broke. Productivity kept rising, but real wages stalled.

👉 This means: you work more, better, faster — but buy less.

🔗 Source: wtfhappenedin1971.com

When you must spend today because tomorrow it’ll be worth less — that’s rewarding impulse and punishing long-term thinking.

Bitcoin offers a different environment:\ – Savings work\ – Long-term thinking is rewarded\ – The price of the future is calculated, not forced by a printing press

📌 Inflation can be a tool. But in government hands, it became a weapon — a slow, inevitable upward redistribution of wealth.

---

\ \ Statement: War is not growth, but a reallocation of resources into destruction.

Criticism: war can spur technological leaps (Internet, GPS, nuclear energy — all from military programs). "Military Keynesianism" was a real model.

4. “War Drives R&D”

Yes, wars sometimes give rise to tech spin-offs: Internet, GPS, nuclear power — all originated from military programs.

But that doesn’t make war a source of progress — it makes tech a byproduct of catastrophe.

“War reallocates resources toward destruction — not growth.”

Progress doesn’t happen because of war — it happens despite it.

If scientific breakthroughs require a million dead and burnt cities — maybe you’ve built your economy wrong.

💬 Even Michael Saylor said:

“If you need war to develop technology — you’ve built civilization wrong.”

No innovation justifies diverting human labor, minds, and resources toward destruction.\ War is always the opposite of efficiency — more is wasted than created.

🧠 Bitcoin, on the other hand, is an example of how real R&D happens without violence.\ No taxes. No army. Just math, voluntary participation, and open-source code.

📌 Military Keynesianism is not a model of progress — it’s a symptom of a sick monetary system that needs destruction to reboot.

Bitcoin shows that coordination without violence is possible.\ This is R&D of a new kind: based not on destruction, but digital creation.

---

Statement: Bitcoin isn’t “Gold 1.0,” but an improved version: divisible, verifiable, unseizable.

Criticism: Bitcoin has no physical value; "unseizability" is a theory;\ Gold is material and autonomous.

5. “Bitcoin Has No Physical Value”

And gold does? Just because it shines?

Physical form is no guarantee of value.\ Real value lies in: scarcity, reliable transfer, verifiability, and non-confiscatability.

Gold is:\ – Hard to divide\ – Hard to verify\ – Expensive to store\ – Easy to seize

💡 Bitcoin is the first store of value in history that is fully free from physical limitations, and yet:\ – Absolutely scarce (21M, forever)\ – Instantly transferable over the Internet\ – Cryptographically verifiable\ – Controlled by no government

🔑 Bitcoin’s value lies in its liberation from the physical.\ It doesn’t need to be “backed” by gold or oil. It’s backed by energy, mathematics, and ongoing verification.

“Price is what you pay, value is what you get.” — Warren Buffett

When you buy bitcoin, you’re not paying for a “token” — you’re gaining access to a network of distributed financial energy.

⚡️ What are you really getting when you own bitcoin?\ – A key to a digital asset that can’t be faked\ – The ability to send “crystallized energy” anywhere on Earth (it takes 10 minutes on the base L1 layer, or instantly via the Lightning Network)\ – A role in a new accounting system that runs 24/7/365\ – Freedom: from banks, borders, inflation, and force

📉 Bitcoin doesn’t require physical value — because it creates value:\ Through trust, scarcity, and energy invested in mining.\ And unlike gold, it was never associated with slavery.

---

Statement: There’s no “income without risk” in Bitcoin: just hold — you preserve; want more — invest, risk, build.

Criticism: contradicts HODL logic; speculation remains dominant behavior.

6. “Speculation Dominates”

For now — yes. That’s normal for the early phase of a new technology. Awareness doesn’t come instantly.

What matters is not the motive of today’s buyer — but what they’re buying.

📉 A speculator may come and go — but the asset remains.\ And this asset is the only one in history that will never exist again. 21 million. Forever.

📌 Look deeper. Bitcoin has:\ – No CEO\ – No central issuer\ – No inflation\ – No “off switch”\ 💡 It was fairly distributed — through mining, long before ASICs existed. In the early years, bitcoin was spent and exchanged — not hoarded. Only those who truly believed in it are still holding it today.

💡 It’s not a stock. Not a startup. Not someone’s project.\ It’s a new foundation for trust.\ It’s opting out of a system where freedom is a privilege you’re granted under conditions.

🧠 People say: “Bitcoin can be copied.”\ Theoretically — yes.\ Practically — never.

Here’s what you’d need to recreate Bitcoin:\ – No pre-mine\ – A founder who disappears and never sells\ – No foundation or corporation\ – Tens of thousands of nodes worldwide\ – 701 million terahashes of hash power\ – Thousands of devs writing open protocols\ – Hundreds of global conferences\ – Millions of people defending digital sovereignty\ – All that without a single marketing budget

That’s all.

🔁 Everything else is an imitation, not a creation.\ Just like you can’t “reinvent fire” — Bitcoin can only exist once.

---

Statements:\ **The Russia's '90s weren’t a free market — just anarchic chaos without rights protection.\ **Unlike fiat or even dollars, Bitcoin is the first asset with real defense — from governments, inflation, even thugs.\ *And yes, even if your barber asks about Bitcoin — maybe it's not a bubble, but a sign that inflation has already hit everyone.

Criticism: Bitcoin’s protection isn’t universal — it works only with proper handling and isn’t available to all.\ Some just want to “get rich.”\ None of this matters because:

1. Bitcoin’s volatility (-30% in a week, +50% in a month) makes it unusable for price planning or contracts.

2. It can’t handle mass-scale usage.

3. To become currency, geopolitical will is needed — and without the first two, don’t even talk about the third.\ Also: “Bitcoin is too complicated for the average person.”

7. “It’s Too Complex for the Masses”

It’s complex — if you’re using L1 (Layer 1). But even grandmas use Telegram. In El Salvador, schoolkids buy lunch with Lightning. My barber installed Wallet of Satoshi in minutes right in front of me — and I now pay for my haircut via Lightning.

UX is just a matter of time. And it’s improving. Emerging tools:\ Cashu, Fedimint, Fedi, Wallet of Satoshi, Phoenix, Proton Wallet, Swiss Bitcoin Pay, Bolt Card / CoinCorner (NFC cards for Lightning payments).

This is like the internet in 1995:\ It started with modems — now it’s 4K streaming.

💸 Now try sending a regular bank transfer abroad:\ – you need to type a long IBAN\ – add SWIFT/BIC codes\ – include the recipient’s full physical address (!), compromising their privacy\ – sometimes add extra codes or “purpose of payment”\ – you might get a call from your bank “just to confirm”\ – no way to check the status — the money floats somewhere between correspondent/intermediary banks\ – weekends or holidays? Banks are closed\ – and don’t forget the limits, restrictions, and potential freezes

📌 With Bitcoin, you just scan a QR code and send.\ 10 minutes on-chain = final settlement.\ Via Lightning = instant and nearly free.\ No bureaucracy. No permission. No borders.

---

8. “Can’t Handle the Load”

A common myth.\ Yes, Bitcoin L1 processes about 7 transactions per second — intentionally. It’s not built to be Visa. It’s a financial protocol, just like TCP/IP is a network protocol. TCP/IP isn’t “fast” or “slow” — the experience depends on the infrastructure built on top: servers, routers, hardware. In the ’90s, it delivered text. Today, it streams Netflix. The protocol didn’t change — the stack did.

Same with Bitcoin: L1 defines rules, security, finality.\ Scaling and speed? That’s the second layer’s job.

To understand scale:

| Network | TPS (Transactions/sec) | | --- | --- | | Visa | up to 24,000 | | Mastercard | \~5,000 | | PayPal | \~193 | | Litecoin | \~56 | | Ethereum | \~20 | | Bitcoin | \~7 |

\ ⚡️ Enter Lightning Network — Bitcoin’s “fast lane.”\ It allows millions of transactions per second, instantly and nearly free.

And it’s not a sidechain.

❗️ Lightning is not a separate network.\ It uses real Bitcoin transactions (2-of-2 multisig). You can close the channel to L1 at any time. It’s not an alternative — it’s a native extension built into Bitcoin.\ Also evolving: Ark, Fedimint, eCash — new ways to scale and add privacy.

📉 So criticizing Bitcoin for “slowness” is like blaming TCP/IP because your old modem won’t stream YouTube.\ The protocol isn’t the problem — it’s the infrastructure.

🛡️ And by the way: Visa crashes more often than Bitcoin.

---

9. “We Need Geopolitical Will”

Not necessarily. All it takes is the will of the people — and leaders willing to act. El Salvador didn’t wait for G20 approval or IMF blessings. Since 2001, the country had used the US dollar as its official currency, abandoning its own colón. But that didn’t save it from inflation or dependency on foreign monetary policy. In 2021, El Salvador became the first country to recognize Bitcoin as legal tender. Since March 13, 2024, they’ve been purchasing 1 BTC daily, tracked through their public address:

🔗 Address\ 📅 First transaction

This policy became the foundation of their Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (SBR) — a state-led effort to accumulate Bitcoin as a national reserve asset for long-term stability and sovereignty.

Their example inspired others.

In March 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order creating the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve of the USA, to be funded through confiscated Bitcoin and digital assets.\ The idea: accumulate, don’t sell, and strategically expand the reserve — without extra burden on taxpayers.

Additionally, Senator Cynthia Lummis (Wyoming) proposed the BITCOIN Act, targeting the purchase of 1 million BTC over five years (\~5% of the total supply).\ The plan: fund it via revaluation of gold certificates and other budget-neutral strategies.

📚 More: Strategic Bitcoin Reserve — Wikipedia

👉 So no global consensus is required. No IMF greenlight.\ All it takes is conviction — and an understanding that the future of finance lies in decentralized, scarce assets like Bitcoin.

---

10. “-30% in a week, +50% in a month = not money”

True — Bitcoin is volatile. But that’s normal for new technologies and emerging money. It’s not a bug — it’s a price discovery phase. The world is still learning what this asset is.

📉 Volatility is the price of entry.\ 📈 But the reward is buying the future at a discount.

As Michael Saylor put it:

“A tourist sees Niagara Falls as chaos — roaring, foaming, spraying water.\ An engineer sees immense energy.\ It all depends on your mental model.”

Same with Bitcoin. Speculators see chaos. Investors see structural scarcity. Builders see a new financial foundation.

💡 Now consider gold:

👉 After the gold standard was abandoned in 1971, the price of gold skyrocketed from around \~$300 to over $2,700 (adjusted to 2023 dollars) by 1980. Along the way, it experienced extreme volatility — with crashes of 40–60% even amid the broader uptrend.\ 💡 (\~$300 is the inflation-adjusted equivalent of about $38 in 1971 dollars)\ 📈 Source: Gold Price Chart — Macrotrends\ \ Nobody said, “This can’t be money.” \ Because money is defined not by volatility, but by scarcity, adoption, and trust — which build over time.

📊 The more people save in Bitcoin, the more its volatility fades.

This is a journey — not a fixed state.

We don’t judge the internet by how it worked in 1994.\ So why expect Bitcoin to be the “perfect currency” in 2025?

It grows bottom-up — without regulators’ permission.\ And the longer it survives, the stronger it becomes.

Remember how many times it’s been declared dead.\ And how many times it came back — stronger.

---

📊 Gold vs. Bitcoin: Supply Comparison

This chart shows the key difference between the two hard assets:

🔹 Gold — supply keeps growing.\ Mining may be limited, but it’s still inflationary.\ Each year, there’s more — with no known cap: new mines, asteroid mining, recycling.

🔸 Bitcoin — capped at 21 million.\ The emission schedule is public, mathematically predictable, and ends completely around 2140.

🧠 Bottom line:\ Gold is good.\ Bitcoin is better — for predictability and scarcity.

💡 As Saifedean Ammous said:

“Gold was the best monetary good… until Bitcoin.”

### While we argue — fiat erodes every day.

No matter your view on Bitcoin, just show me one other asset that is simultaneously:

– immune to devaluation by decree\ – impossible to print more of\ – impossible to confiscate by a centralized order\ – impossible to counterfeit\ – and, most importantly — transferable across borders without asking permission from a bank, a state, or a passport

💸 Try sending $10,000 through PayPal from Iran to Paraguay, or Bangladesh to Saint Lucia.\ Good luck. PayPal doesn't even work there.

Now open a laptop, type 12 words — and you have access to your savings anywhere on Earth.

🌍 Bitcoin doesn't ask for permission.\ It works for everyone, everywhere, all the time.

📌 There has never been anything like this before.

Bitcoin is the first asset in history that combines:

– digital nature\ – predictable scarcity\ – absolute portability\ – and immunity from tyranny

💡 As Michael Saylor said:

“Bitcoin is the first money in human history not created by bankers or politicians — but by engineers.”

You can own it with no bank.\ No intermediary.\ No passport.\ No approval.

That’s why Bitcoin isn’t just “internet money” or “crypto” or “digital gold.”\ It may not be perfect — but it’s incorruptible.\ And it’s not going away.\ It’s already here.\ It is the foundation of a new financial reality.

---

🔒 This is not speculation. This is a peaceful financial revolution.\ 🪙 This is not a stock. It’s money — like the world has never seen.\ ⛓️ This is not a fad. It’s a freedom protocol.

And when even the barber starts asking about Bitcoin — it’s not a bubble.\ It’s a sign that the system is breaking.\ And people are looking for an exit.

For the first time — they have one.

---

💼 This is not about investing. It’s about the dignity of work.

Imagine a man who cleans toilets at an airport every day.

Not a “prestigious” job.\ But a crucial one.\ Without him — filth, bacteria, disease.

He shows up on time. He works with his hands.

And his money? It devalues. Every day.

He doesn’t work less — often he works more than those in suits.\ But he can afford less and less — because in this system, honest labor loses value each year.

Now imagine he’s paid in Bitcoin.

Not in some “volatile coin,” but in hard money — with a limited supply.\ Money that can’t be printed, reversed, or devalued by central banks.

💡 Then he could:

– Stop rushing to spend, knowing his labor won’t be worth less tomorrow\ – Save for a dream — without fear of inflation eating it away\ – Feel that his time and effort are respected — because they retain value

Bitcoin gives anyone — engineer or janitor — a way out of the game rigged against them.\ A chance to finally build a future where savings are real.

This is economic justice.\ This is digital dignity.

📉 In fiat, you have to spend — or your money melts.\ 📈 In Bitcoin, you choose when to spend — because it’s up to you.

🧠 In a deflationary economy, both saving and spending are healthy:

You don’t scramble to survive — you choose to create.

🎯 That’s true freedom.

When even someone cleaning floors can live without fear —\ and know that their time doesn’t vanish... it turns into value.

---

🧱 The Bigger Picture

Bitcoin is not just a technology — it’s rooted in economic philosophy.\ The Austrian School of Economics has long argued that sound money, voluntary exchange, and decentralized decision-making are prerequisites for real prosperity.\ Bitcoin doesn’t reinvent these ideas — it makes them executable.

📉 Inflation doesn’t just erode savings.\ It quietly destroys quality of life.\ You work more — and everything becomes worse:\ – food is cheaper but less nutritious\ – homes are newer but uglier and less durable\ – clothes cost more but fall apart in months\ – streaming is faster, but your attention span collapses\ This isn’t just consumerism — it’s the economics of planned obsolescence.

🧨 Meanwhile, the U.S. debt has exceeded 3x its GDP.\ And nobody wants to buy U.S. bonds anymore — so the U.S. has to buy its own debt.\ Yes: printing money to buy the IOUs you just printed.\ This is the endgame of fiat.

🎭 Bonds are often sold as “safe.”\ But in practice, they are a weapon — especially abroad.\ The U.S. and IMF give loans to developing countries.\ But when those countries can’t repay (due to rigged terms or global economic headwinds), they’re forced to sell land, resources, or strategic assets.\ Both sides lose: the debtor collapses under the weight of debt, while the creditor earns resentment and instability.\ This isn’t cooperation — it’s soft colonialism enabled by inflation.

📌 Bitcoin offers a peaceful exit.\ A financial system where money can’t be created out of thin air.\ Where savings work.\ Where dignity is restored — even for those who clean toilets.

---

@ 90152b7f:04e57401

WikiLeaks The Global Intelligence Files

Released on 2013-03-04 00:00 GMT

| Email-ID | 296467 | | -------- | ------------------------ | | Date | 2007-10-29 20:54:22 | | From | <hrwpress@hrw.org> | | To | <responses@stratfor.com> |

Gaza: Israel's Fuel and Power Cuts Violate Laws of War\ \ For Immediate Release\ \ Gaza: Israel's Fuel and Power Cuts Violate Laws of War\ \ Civilians Should Not Be Penalized for Rocket Attacks by Armed Groups\ \ (New York, October 29, 2007) - Israel's decision to limit fuel and\ electricity to the Gaza Strip in retaliation for unlawful rocket attacks\ by armed groups amounts to collective punishment against the civilian\ population of Gaza, in violation of international law, and will worsen the\ humanitarian crisis there, Human Rights Watch said today.\ \ "Israel may respond to rocket attacks by armed groups to protect its\ population, but only in lawful ways," said Sarah Leah Whitson, director of\ Human Rights Watch's Middle East division. "Because Israel remains an\ occupying power, in light of its continuing restrictions on Gaza, Israel\ must not take measures that harm the civilian population - yet that is\ precisely what cutting fuel or electricity for even short periods will\ do."\ \ On Sunday, the Israeli Defense Ministry ordered the reduction of fuel\ shipments from Israel to Gaza. A government spokesman said the plan was to\ cut the amount of fuel by 5 to 11 percent without affecting the supply of\ industrial fuel for Gaza's only power plant.\ \ According to Palestinian officials, fuel shipments into Gaza yesterday\ fell by more than 30 percent.\ \ In response to the government's decision, a group of 10 Palestinian and\ Israeli human rights groups petitioned the Israeli Supreme Court on\ Sunday, seeking an immediate injunction against the fuel and electricity\ cuts. The court gave the government five days to respond but did not issue\ a temporary injunction. On Monday, the groups requested an urgent hearing\ before the five days expire.\ \ Last Thursday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak approved cutting electricity to\ Gaza for increasing periods in response to ongoing rocket attacks against\ civilian areas in Israel, but the government has not yet implemented the\ order.\ \ The rockets fired by Palestinian armed groups violate the international\ legal prohibition on indiscriminate attacks because they are highly\ inaccurate and cannot be directed at a specific target. Because Hamas\ exercises power inside Gaza, it is responsible for stopping indiscriminate\ attacks even when carried out by other groups, Human Rights Watch said.\ \ On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that Israel would\ respond strongly to the ongoing attacks without allowing a humanitarian\ crisis. But the UN's top humanitarian official, UN Deputy\ Secretary-General John Holmes, said that a "serious humanitarian crisis"\ in Gaza already exists, and called on Israel to lift the economic blockade\ that it tightened after Hamas seized power in June.\ \ Israel's decision to cut fuel and electricity is the latest move aimed\ ostensibly against Hamas that is affecting the entire population of Gaza.\ In September, the Israeli cabinet declared Gaza "hostile territory" and\ voted to "restrict the passage of various goods to the Gaza Strip and\ reduce the supply of fuel and electricity." Since then, Israel has\ increasingly blocked supplies into Gaza, letting in limited amounts of\ essential foodstuffs, medicine and humanitarian supplies. According to\ Holmes, the number of humanitarian convoys entering Gaza had dropped to\ 1,500 in September from 3,000 in July.\ \ "Cutting fuel and electricity obstructs vital services," Whitson said.\ "Operating rooms, sewage pumps, and water well pumps all need electricity\ to run."\ \ Israel sells to Gaza roughly 60 percent of the electricity consumed by the\ territory's 1.5 million inhabitants. In June 2006, six Israeli missiles\ struck Gaza's only power plant; today, for most residents, electricity is\ available during only limited hours.\ \ Israeli officials said they would cut electricity for 15 minutes after\ each rocket attack and then for increasingly longer periods if the attacks\ persist. Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai said Israel would\ "dramatically reduce" the power it supplied to Gaza over a period of\ weeks.\ \ Cutting fuel or electricity to the civilian population violates a basic\ principle of international humanitarian law, or the laws of war, which\ prohibit a government that has effective control over a territory from\ attacking or withholding objects that are essential to the survival of the\ civilian population. Such an act would also violate Israel's duty as an\ occupying power to safeguard the health and welfare of the population\ under occupation.\ \ Israel withdrew its military forces and settlers from the Gaza Strip in\ 2005. Nonetheless, Israel remains responsible for ensuring the well-being\ of Gaza's population for as long as, and to the extent that, it retains\ effective control over the area. Israel still exercises control over\ Gaza's airspace, sea space and land borders, as well as its electricity,\ water, sewage and telecommunications networks and population registry.\ Israel can and has also reentered Gaza for security operations at will.\ \ Israeli officials state that by declaring Gaza "hostile territory," it is\ no longer obliged under international law to supply utilities to the\ civilian population, but that is a misstatement of the law.\ \ "A mere declaration does not change the facts on the ground that impose on\ Israel the status and obligations of an occupying power," said Whitson.\ \ For more information, please contact:\ \ In New York, Fred Abrahams (English, German): +1-917-385-7333 (mobile)\ \ In Washington, DC, Joe Stork (English): +1-202-299-4925 (mobile)\ \ In Cairo, Gasser Abdel-Razek (Arabic, English): +20-2-2-794-5036 (mobile);\ or +20-10-502-9999 (mobile)

@ fa984bd7:58018f52

This post has been deleted.

@ 90152b7f:04e57401

Wikileaks - C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 JERUSALEM 002018 SIPDIS SIPDIS NEA FOR FRONT OFFICE; NEA/IPA FOR GOLDBERGER/SHAMPAINE/BELGRADE; NSC FOR ABRAMS/WATERS; TREASURY FOR SZUBIN/GRANT/HARRIS/NUGENT/HIRSON E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/17/17 TAGS: ECON, EFIN, KFTN, KWBG, IS

2007 September 26

SUBJECT: ISRAELI BANK CUTOFF PORTENDS GAZA BANK CLOSURES AND MORE PRIVATE SECTOR DIFFICULTIES Classified By: Consul General Jake Walles,

Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 1. 1. (SBU) Summary. Bank Hapoalim's decision to sever ties with banks in Gaza, and an expected move by Israel Discount Bank to do the same, could result in cash shortages, bank closures, and a suspension of commercial imports into Gaza, most of which are food, according to Palestinian banking sector representatives. Palestine Monetary Authority (PMA) Governor George Abed is discussing possible solutions with his Israeli counterpart and other Israeli officials. Banks operating in the West Bank are attempting to ascertain the impact on their activities. End summary.

----------------

Threat Made Real

----------------

2. (SBU) Bank Hapoalim announced September 25 that it is severing its ties with banks operating in the Gaza Strip, according to local press reports. The bank reportedly decided to take this action after the GOI designated Gaza a "hostile entity." Since the formation of the Hamas-led government in March 2006, Bank Hapoalim and the Israel Discount Bank (IDB) have warned that they intended to terminate their correspondent bank relationship with banks operating in the West Bank and Gaza. Both banks provide check clearing services and coordinate cash transfers, operations considered vital to the Palestinian banking sector.

--------------

Damage Control

--------------

3. (C) PMA Governor Abed told Econoff September 26 that Bank Hapoalim's decision was "not a surprise" and the PMA "is dealing with it." He explained that he had spoken to Bank of Israel Governor Fischer September 25 and is also in contact with GOI Ministry of Finance officials. Abed said that he believes the GOI is seeking to find a solution because it wants to maintain economic and financial relations with Palestinians. If IDB follows Bank Hapoalim's lead, as expected, Abed fears that the banking sector in Gaza could shutdown. Already in steep decline, banking activity there comprises only 18-20 percent of total deposits and about 15 percent of total loan portfolios of banks operating in the West Bank and Gaza, according to Abed.

4. (C) Arab Bank General Manager Mazen Abu Hamdan and Cairo-Amman Bank Regional Manager Joseph Nesnas told Econoff separately September 26 that IDB does much more business with Gaza banks than Bank Hapoalim, so if IDB severs its ties, the impact will be even more severe. Both said they will close their Gaza branch offices if IDB takes this action. Arab Bank's correspondent account is with the IDB. Both Abu Hamdan and Nesnas said they are uncertain as to exactly how and when Bank Hapoalim will implement its decision, and what the consequences will be for banks in the West Bank. Abu Hamdan suggested that Bank Hapoalim may continue to clear Gaza-origin checks in the short-term with Israeli beneficiaries, but will very soon refuse to accept any checks drawn from Gaza branches.

---------------------------------------

Cash Shortage to Further Restrict Trade

---------------------------------------

5. (C) Abed noted that Gaza merchants frequently pay cash for imports, often upon receipt of the goods at the designated crossing. If banks close, Abed continued, cash payments will be even more common. If cash transfers to Gaza are suspended, however, cash will be hoarded and increasingly unavailable to conduct trade. (Note: According to the UN, 86 percent of commercial imports into Gaza are food.) Abed and Abu Hamdan noted separately that a cash cutoff will also adversely affect the payment of PA salary payments to Gaza-based employees. Banks in Gaza need about NIS 150 million each month to make PA salary payments.

---------------------------------

Hamas Not Guarding Cash Transfers

---------------------------------

6. Abed refuted a press report alleging that Hamas is now guarding cash shipments once they enter Gaza. He said he is aware that of one instance when a bank notified Hamas of a JERUSALEM 00002018 002 OF 002 shipment, and Hamas Executive Forces may have shadowed the cash movement in reply, but in all other cases the banks handle their own security arrangements and do not communicate with Hamas. WALLES

@ 06639a38:655f8f71

Nostr-PHP

Djuri submitted quite some pull requests in the last couple of week while he was implementing a Nostr connect / login on https://satsback.com. The backend of that platform is written in PHP so the Nostr-PHP library is used for several purposes while Djuri also developed quite some new features utilizing the following NIPs:

• NIP-04
• NIP-05
• NIP-17
• NIP-44

Thank you very much Djuri for these contributions. We now can do the basic private stuff with the library. 

PR for NIP-04 and NIP-44: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/pull/84 and https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/pull/88 
Examples:

• https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/blob/main/src/Examples/nip04-encrypted-messages.php
• https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/blob/main/src/Examples/nip44-gift-wrapping.php

PR for NIP-05: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/pull/89 
Example: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/blob/main/src/Examples/nip05-lookup.php 

PR for NIP-17: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/pull/90 
Example: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/blob/main/src/Examples/nip17-private-direct-messages.php 

PR for adding more metadata profile fields: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/pull/94
Example: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/blob/main/src/Examples/fetch-profile-metadata.php 

Fetch 10050 event (dm relay list) of an given pubkey
Example: https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/blob/main/src/Examples/fetch-dm-relayslist.php 

The CLI tool is removed from the library, see PR https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php/pull/93 

Nostr-PHP documentation

While new NIPs are implemented in the Nostr-PHP library, I'm trying to keep up with the documentation at https://nostr-php.dev. For now, things are still much work in progress and I've added the AI agent Goose using the Claude LLM to bootstrap new documentation pages. Currently I'm working on documentation for

• How to direct messages with NIP-04 and NIP-17
• Encrypted payloads for event content NIP-44
• Fetch profiledata of a given pubkey
• Lookup NIP-05 data of given pubkey
• Using the NIP-19 helper class

CCNS.news

I've moved CCNS to a new domain https://ccns.news and have partly implemented the new NIP-B0 for web bookmarks. When you post a bookmark there, a kind 39701 event is transmitted to some Nostr relays (take a look at this event for example). Optionally you can also publish this content as a note to the network.

As you can see at https://ccns.news/l/censorship-resistant-publishing-and-archiving, I've listed some todo's. All this stuff is done with Javascript using the NDK Typescript library (so I'm not using any PHP stuff for this with Nostr-PHP).

Also new: https://ccns.news/global now has a global feed which fetches all the web bookmark events with kind 39701 from several public Nostr relays. I had a rough idea to compare feeds generated with NDK and Nostr-PHP (for both using the same set of relays).

Building a njump clone for this Drupal website

You can now use this URL pattern to fetch Nostr events: https://nostrver.se/e/{event_id|nevent1|note1|addr1} where you can provide a plain Nostr event ID or NIP-19 encoded identifier. 

An example, this URL https://nostrver.se/e/nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqmjxss3dld622uu8q25gywum9qtg4w4cv4064jmg20xsac2aam5nqqsqm2lz4ru6wlydzpulgs8m60ylp4vufwsg55whlqgua6a93vp2y4g3uu9lr fetches the data from one or more relays. This data is then being saved as a (Drupal) node entity (in a database on the server where this website is hosted, which is located in my office fyi). With this saved node, this data is now also available at https://nostrver.se/e/0dabe2a8f9a77c8d1079f440fbd3c9f0d59c4ba08a51d7f811ceeba58b02a255/1 where the (cached) data is server from the database instead. It's just raw data for now, nothing special about it. One of my next steps is to style this in a more prettier interface and I will need to switch the theme of this website to a custom theme. A custom theme where I will be using TailwindCSS v4 and DaisyUI v5. 

The module which is providing these Nostr features is FOSS and uses the Nostr-PHP library for doing the following:

• Request the event from one or more relays
• Decode the provided NIP-19 identifier

For now this module is way for me to utilize the Nostr-PHP library with Drupal for fetching events. This can be automated so in theory I could index all the Nostr events. But this is not my ambition as it would require quite some hardware resources to accomplish this. 
I hope I can find the time to build up a new theme first for this website, so I can start styling the data for the fetched events. On this website, there is also a small piece (powered by another module) you can find at https://nostrver.se/nostrides doing things with this NIP-113 around activity events (in my case that's cycling what interests me).

What's next

I'm already working on the following stuff:

• Implement a class to setup a persistent connection to a relay for requesting events continuously
• Extend the documentation with the recent added features

Other todo stuff:

• Review NIP-13 proof-of-work PR from Djuri
• Implement a NIP-65 lookup for fetching read and write relays for a given npub issue #91
• Build a proof-of-concept with revolt/event-loop to request events asynchronous with persistent relay connections
• Add comments to https://ccns.news

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

---

"Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age. Privacy is not secrecy.  A private matter is something one doesn't want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one doesn't want anybody to know. Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world." - Eric Hughes, A Cypherpunk's Manifesto, 1993

---

Privacy is essential to freedom. Without privacy, individuals are unable to make choices free from surveillance and control. Lack of privacy leads to loss of autonomy. When individuals are constantly monitored it limits our ability to express ourselves and take risks. Any decisions we make can result in negative repercussions from those who surveil us. Without the freedom to make choices, individuals cannot truly be free.

Freedom is essential to acquiring and preserving wealth. When individuals are not free to make choices, restrictions and limitations prevent us from economic opportunities. If we are somehow able to acquire wealth in such an environment, lack of freedom can result in direct asset seizure by governments or other malicious entities. At scale, when freedom is compromised, it leads to widespread economic stagnation and poverty. Protecting freedom is essential to economic prosperity.

The connection between privacy, freedom, and wealth is critical. Without privacy, individuals lose the freedom to make choices free from surveillance and control. While lack of freedom prevents individuals from pursuing economic opportunities and makes wealth preservation nearly impossible. No Privacy? No Freedom. No Freedom? No Wealth.

Rights are not granted. They are taken and defended. Rights are often misunderstood as permission to do something by those holding power. However, if someone can give you something, they can inherently take it from you at will. People throughout history have necessarily fought for basic rights, including privacy and freedom. These rights were not given by those in power, but rather demanded and won through struggle. Even after these rights are won, they must be continually defended to ensure that they are not taken away. Rights are not granted - they are earned through struggle and defended through sacrifice.

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 90152b7f:04e57401

U.S. troops would enforce peace under Army study

The Washington Times - September 10, 2001

by Rowan Scarborough

(image) https://www.ord.io/70787305 (text) https://www.ord.io/74522515

An elite U.S. Army study center has devised a plan for enforcing a major Israeli-Palestinian peace accord that would require about 20,000 well-armed troops stationed throughout Israel and a newly created Palestinian state.
 There are no plans by the Bush administration to put American soldiers into the Middle East to police an agreement forged by the longtime warring parties. In fact, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is searching for ways to reduce U.S. peacekeeping efforts abroad, rather than increasing such missions.
But a 68-page paper by the Army School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS) does provide a look at the daunting task any international peacekeeping force would face if the United Nations authorized it, and Israel and the Palestinians ever reached a peace agreement.
 Located at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., the School for Advanced Military Studies is both a training ground and a think tank for some of the Army’s brightest officers. Officials say the Army chief of staff, and sometimes the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ask SAMS to develop contingency plans for future military operations. During the 1991 Persian Gulf war, SAMS personnel helped plan the coalition ground attack that avoided a strike up the middle of Iraqi positions and instead executed a “left hook” that routed the enemy in 100 hours.
 The cover page for the recent SAMS project said it was done for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. But Maj. Chris Garver, a Fort Leavenworth spokesman, said the study was not requested by Washington.
“This was just an academic exercise,” said Maj. Garver. “They were trying to take a current situation and get some training out of it.”
 The exercise was done by 60 officers dubbed “Jedi Knights,” as all second-year SAMS students are nicknamed.
 The SAMS paper attempts to predict events in the first year of a peace-enforcement operation, and sees possible dangers for U.S. troops from both sides.
 It calls Israel’s armed forces a “500-pound gorilla in Israel. Well armed and trained. Operates in both Gaza . Known to disregard international law to accomplish mission. Very unlikely to fire on American forces. Fratricide a concern especially in air space management.”
 Of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, the SAMS officers say: “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”
 On the Palestinian side, the paper describes their youth as “loose cannons; under no control, sometimes violent.” The study lists five Arab terrorist groups that could target American troops for assassination and hostage-taking.
 The study recommends “neutrality in word and deed” as one way to protect U.S. soldiers from any attack. It also says Syria, Egypt and Jordan must be warned “we will act decisively in response to external attack.”
 It is unlikely either of the three would mount an attack. Of Syria’s military, the report says: “Syrian army quantitatively larger than Israeli Defense Forces, but largely seen as qualitatively inferior. More likely, however, Syrians would provide financial and political support to the Palestinians, as well as increase covert support to terrorism acts through Lebanon.”
Of Egypt’s military, the paper says, “Egyptians also maintain a large army but have little to gain by attacking Israel.”
 The plan does not specify a full order of battle. An Army source who reviewed the SAMS work said each of a possible three brigades would require about 100 Bradley fighting vehicles, 25 tanks, 12 self-propelled howitzers, Apache attack helicopters, Kiowa Warrior reconnaissance helicopters and Predator spy drones.
 The report predicts that nonlethal weapons would be used to quell unrest.
U.S. European Command, which is headed by NATO’s supreme allied commander, would oversee the peacekeeping operation. Commanders would maintain areas of operation, or AOs, around Nablus, Jerusalem, Hebron and the Gaza strip.
 The study sets out a list of goals for U.S. troops to accomplish in the first 30 days. They include: “create conditions for development of Palestinian State and security of “; ensure “equal distribution of contract value or equivalent aid” that would help legitimize the peacekeeping force and stimulate economic growth; “promote U.S. investment in Palestine”; “encourage reconciliation between entities based on acceptance of new national identities”; and “build lasting relationship based on new legal borders and not religious-territorial claims.”
 Maj. Garver said the officers who completed the exercise will hold major planning jobs once they graduate. “There is an application process” for students, he said. “They screen their records, and there are several tests they go through before they are accepted by the program. The bright planners of the future come out of this program.”
 James Phillips, a Middle East analyst at the Heritage Foundation, said it would be a mistake to put peacekeepers in Israel, given the “poor record of previous monitors.”
 “In general, the Bush administration policy is to discourage a large American presence,” he said. “But it has been rumored that one of the possibilities might be an expanded CIA role.”
“It would be a very different environment than Bosnia,” said Mr. Phillips, referring to America’s six-year peacekeeping role in Bosnia-Herzegovina. “The Palestinian Authority is pushing for this as part of its strategy to internationalize the conflict. Bring in the Europeans and Russia and China. But such monitors or peacekeeping forces are not going to be able to bring peace. Only a decision by the Palestinians to stop the violence and restart talks could possibly do that.”

https://www.ord.io/70787305

<https://www.ord.io/74522515>

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

Will not live in a pod.
Will not eat the bugs.
Will not get the chip.
Will not get a blue check.
Will not use CBDCs.

Live Free or Die.

Why did Elon buy twitter for $44 Billion? What value does he see in it besides the greater influence that undoubtedly comes with controlling one of the largest social platforms in the world? We do not need to speculate - he made his intentions incredibly clear in his first meeting with twitter employees after his takeover - WeChat of the West.

To those that do not appreciate freedom, the value prop is clear - WeChat is incredibly powerful and successful in China.

To those that do appreciate freedom, the concern is clear - WeChat has essentially become required to live in China, has surveillance and censorship integrated at its core, and if you are banned from the app your entire livelihood is at risk. Employment, housing, payments, travel, communication, and more become extremely difficult if WeChat censors determine you have acted out of line.

The blue check is the first step in Elon's plan to bring the chinese social credit score system to the west. Users who verify their identity are rewarded with more reach and better tools than those that do not. Verified users are the main product of Elon's twitter - an extensive database of individuals and complete control of the tools he will slowly get them to rely on - it is easier to monetize cattle than free men.

If you cannot resist the temptation of the blue check in its current form you have already lost - what comes next will be much darker. If you realize the need to resist - freedom tech provides us options.

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 58537364:705b4b85

คนเรามักจะเห็นคุณค่าของสิ่งใด ส่วนใหญ่ก็ใน ๒ สถานการณ์คือ หนึ่ง ตอนที่ยังไม่ได้มา หรือ สอง ตอนที่เสียไปแล้ว

อันนี้มันเป็นโศกนาฏกรรม ที่เกิดขึ้นกับผู้คนจำนวนมาก การที่คนเรามีสิ่งดีๆ แต่ว่าเราไม่เห็นคุณค่า เพราะว่าเรามองออกไปนอกตัว ไปเห็นแต่สิ่งที่ตัวเองไม่มี อยากจะได้มา

คล้ายๆ กับเรื่อง หมาคาบเนื้อในนิทานอีสป ตอนเด็กๆ เราคงจำได้ มีหมาตัวหนึ่งคาบเนื้อมา เนื้อชิ้นใหญ่เลย มันดีใจมากแล้วมันก็วิ่งไปยังที่ที่ มันจะได้กินเนื้ออย่างมีความสุข มีช่วงหนึ่งก็ต้องเดินข้ามสะพาน มันก็ชะโงกหน้าไปมองที่ลำธารหรือลำคลอง

ก็เห็นเงาตัวเอง เงานั่นมันก็ใหญ่ แล้วมันก็พบว่าในเงานั้น เนื้อในเงามันใหญ่กว่าเนื้อที่ตัวเองคาบ มันอยากได้เนื้อก้อนนั้นมากเลย เพราะว่ามันเป็นก้อนที่ใหญ่กว่า

มันก็เลยอ้าปาก เพื่อที่จะไปงับเนื้อในเงานั้น พอมันอ้าปาก ก็ปรากฏว่าเนื้อในปาก ก็หลุดตกลงแม่น้ำ แล้วเนื้อในเงานั้นก็หายไป เป็นอันว่าหมดเลย อดทั้ง 2 อย่าง .

ฉะนั้น คนเราถ้าหากเรา กลับมาเห็นคุณค่าของสิ่งที่เรามีอยู่ เราจะมีความสุขได้ง่าย อาจจะไม่ใช่สิ่งของ อาจจะไม่ใช่ผู้คน แต่อาจจะเป็นสุขภาพของเรา

อาจจะได้แก่ ลมหายใจของเรา ที่ยังหายใจได้ปกติ รวมถึงการที่ เรายังเดินเหินไปไหนมาไหนได้ การที่เรายังมองเห็น การที่เรายังได้ยิน

หลายคนมีสิ่งนี้อยู่ในตัว แต่กลับไม่เห็นค่า และไม่รู้สึกว่าตัวเองโชคดี กลับไปมองว่า ฉันยังไม่มีโน่นยังไม่มีนี่ ไม่มีบ้าน ไม่มีรถ ไม่มีเงิน

รู้สึกว่าทุกข์ระทมเหลือเกิน

ทำไมฉันจึงลำบากแบบนี้ ทั้งที่ตัวเองก็มีสิ่งดีๆ ในตัว สุขภาพ ความปกติสุข อิสรภาพที่เดินไปไหนมาไหนได้

แต่กลับไม่เห็นค่า เพราะว่ามัวแต่ไปสนใจสิ่งที่ตัวเองยังไม่มี

ซึ่งเป็นอนาคต

ถ้าเราหันกลับมาเห็นคุณค่าของสิ่งที่เรามีอยู่ แล้วก็ไม่ไปพะวงหรือให้ความสนใจกับสิ่งที่ยังไม่มี เราจะมีความสุขได้ง่าย อันนี้คือ ความหมายหนึ่งของการทำปัจจุบันให้ดีที่สุด

…

การทำปัจจุบันให้ดีที่สุด พระอาจารย์ไพศาล วิสาโล

@ 90152b7f:04e57401

Wikileaks - S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 001733 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/13/2017 TAGS: PREL, PTER, MOPS, KWBG, LE, SY, IS SUBJECT: MILITARY INTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR YADLIN COMMENTS ON GAZA, SYRIA AND LEBANON Classified By: Ambassador Richard H. Jones, Reason 1.4 (b) (d)

2007 June 13

1. (S) Summary. During a June 12 meeting with the Ambassador, IDI Director MG Amos Yadlin said that Gaza was "number four" on his list of threats, preceded by Iran, Syria, and Hizballah in that order. Yadlin said the IDI has been predicting armed confrontation in Gaza between Hamas and Fatah since Hamas won the January 2006 legislative council elections. Yadlin felt that the Hamas military wing had initiated the current escalation with the tacit consent of external Hamas leader Khalid Mishal, adding that he did not believe there had been a premeditated political-level decision by Hamas to wipe out Fatah in Gaza. Yadlin dismissed Fatah's capabilities in Gaza, saying Hamas could have taken over there any time it wanted for the past year, but he agreed that Fatah remained strong in the West Bank. Although not necessarily reflecting a GOI consensus view, Yadlin said Israel would be "happy" if Hamas took over Gaza because the IDF could then deal with Gaza as a hostile state. He dismissed the significance of an Iranian role in a Hamas-controlled Gaza "as long as they don't have a port." Regarding predictions of war with Syria this summer, Yadlin recalled the lead-up to the 1967 war, which he said was provoked by the Soviet Ambassador in Israel. Both Israel and Syria are in a state of high alert, so war could happen easily even though neither side is seeking it. Yadlin suggested that the Asad regime would probably not survive a war, but added that Israel was no longer concerned with maintaining that "evil" regime. On Lebanon, Yadlin felt that the fighting in the Nahr Al-Barid camp was a positive development for Israel since it had "embarrassed" Hizballah, adding that IDI had information that the Fatah Al-Islam terrorist group was planning to attack UNIFIL before it blundered into its confrontation with the LAF. End Summary.

Gaza Fighting Not Israel's Main Problem

---------------------------------------

2. (S) The Ambassador, accompanied by Pol Couns and DATT, called on IDI Director Major General Amos Yadlin June 12. Noting reports of fierce fighting between Hamas and Fatah in Gaza that day, the Ambassador asked for Yadlin's assessment. Yadlin described Gaza as "not Israel's main problem," noting that it ranked fourth in his hierarchy of threats, behind Iran, Syria, and Hizballah. Yadlin described Gaza as "hopeless for now," commenting that the Palestinians had to realize that Hamas offered no solution. IDI analysts, he said, had predicted a confrontation in Gaza since Hamas won the Palestinian Legislative Council elections in January 2006. Yadlin commented that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh had become personally close despite their ideological differences, but neither leader had control over those forces under them.

3. (S) Yadlin explained that both Fatah and Hamas contained many factions. The Hamas military wing had been frustrated since the signing of the Mecca Agreement in January, but there were also many armed groups in Gaza that were not under the control of either party. Yadlin cited the example of the Dughmush clan, which had shifted from Fatah to the Popular Resistance Committees to Hamas before becoming an armed entity opposed to all of them. After May 15, the Hamas military wing had sought to export the fighting to Sderot by launching waves of Qassam rockets. One week later, as a result of IDF retaliation, they realized the price was too high and reduced the Qassam attacks.

4. (S) In response to the Ambassador's question, Yadlin said he did not think that day's Hamas attacks on Fatah security forces were part of a premeditated effort to wipe out Fatah in Gaza. Instead, they probably represented an initiative of the military wing with the tacit consent of Khalid Mishal in Damascus. Mishal was still considering the costs and benefits of the fighting, but the situation had become so tense that any incident could lead to street fighting without any political decision.

Gaza and West Bank Separating

-----------------------------

5. (S) The Ambassador asked Yadlin for his assessment of reports that Fatah forces had been ordered not to fight back. Yadlin said Mohammed Dahlan had 500 men and the Presidential Guard had 1,500 more. They understand that the balance of power favors Hamas, which "can take over Gaza any time it wants to." Yadlin said he would be surprised if Fatah fights, and even more surprised if they win. As far as he was concerned, this had been the case for the past year. The situation was different in the West Bank, however, where Fatah remained relatively strong and had even started to

TEL AVIV 00001733 002 OF 002

kidnap Hamas activists. Yadlin agreed that Tawfiq Tirawi had a power base in the West Bank, but he added that Fatah was not cohesive.

6. (S) The Ambassador commented that if Fatah decided it has lost Gaza, there would be calls for Abbas to set up a separate regime in the West Bank. While not necessarily reflecting a consensus GOI view, Yadlin commented that such a development would please Israel since it would enable the IDF to treat Gaza as a hostile country rather than having to deal with Hamas as a non-state actor. He added that Israel could work with a Fatah regime in the West Bank. The Ambassador asked Yadlin if he worried about a Hamas-controlled Gaza giving Iran a new opening. Yadlin replied that Iran was already present in Gaza, but Israel could handle the situation "as long as Gaza does not have a port (sea or air)."

War with Syria "Could Happen Easily"

------------------------------------

7. (S) Noting Israeli press speculation, the Ambassador asked Yadlin if he expected war with Syria this summer. Recalling the 1967 war, Yadlin commented that it had started as a result of the Soviet Ambassador in Israel reporting on non-existing Israeli preparations to attack Syria. Something similar was happening again, he said, with the Russians telling the Syrians that Israel planned to attack them, possibly in concert with a U.S. attack on Iran. Yadlin stated that since last summer's war in Lebanon, Syria had engaged in a "frenzy of preparations" for a confrontation with Israel. The Syrian regime was also showing greater self-confidence. Some Syrian leaders appeared to believe that Syria could take on Israel military, but others were more cautious. The fact that both sides were on high alert meant that a war could happen easily, even though neither side is seeking one. In response to a question, Yadlin said he did not think the Asad regime would survive a war, but he added that preserving that "evil" regime should not be a matter of concern.

Fighting in Nahr al-Barid Positive for Israel

---------------------------------------------

8. (S) The Ambassador asked Yadlin for his views on the fighting in the Nahr al-Barid refugee camp in northern Lebanon. Although Yadlin was called to another meeting and did not have time to elaborate, he answered that the fighting was positive for Israel because it had embarrassed Hizballah, which had been unable to adopt a clear-cut position on the Lebanese Army's action, and because the Fatah al-Islam terrorist organization had been planning to attack UNIFIL and then Israel before it blundered into its current confrontation with the LAF. He also agreed that the confrontation was strengthening the LAF, in fact and in the eyes of the Lebanese people, which was also good.

9. (S) Comment: Yadlin's relatively relaxed attitude toward the deteriorating security situation in Gaza represents a shift in IDF thinking from last fall, when the Southern Command supported a major ground operation into Gaza to remove the growing threat from Hamas. While many media commentators continue to make that argument, Yadlin's view appears to be more in synch with that of Chief of General Staff Ashkenazi, who also believes that the more serious threat to Israel currently comes from the north.

********************************************* ******************** Visit Embassy Tel Aviv's Classified Website: http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/telaviv

You can also access this site through the State Department's Classified SIPRNET website. ********************************************* ******************** JONES

@ dfa02707:41ca50e3

News

• Bitcoin mining centralization in 2025. According to a blog post by b10c, Bitcoin mining was at its most decentralized in May 2017, with another favorable period from 2019 to 2022. However, starting in 2023, mining has become increasingly centralized, particularly due to the influence of large pools like Foundry and the use of proxy pooling by entities such as AntPool.

Source: b10c's blog.

• OpenSats announces the eleventh wave of Nostr grants. The five projects in this wave are the mobile live-streaming app Swae, the Nostr-over-ham-radio project HAMSTR, Vertex—a Web-of-Trust (WOT) service for Nostr developers, Nostr Double Ratchet for end-to-end encrypted messaging, and the Nostr Game Engine for building games and applications integrated with the Nostr ecosystem.
• New Spiral grantee: l0rinc. In February 2024, l0rinc transitioned to full-time work on Bitcoin Core. His efforts focus on performance benchmarking and optimizations, enhancing code quality, conducting code reviews, reducing block download times, optimizing memory usage, and refactoring code.
• Project Eleven offers 1 BTC to break Bitcoin's cryptography with a quantum computer. The quantum computing research organization has introduced the Q-Day Prize, a global challenge that offers 1 BTC to the first team capable of breaking an elliptic curve cryptographic (ECC) key using Shor’s algorithm on a quantum computer. The prize will be awarded to the first team to successfully accomplish this breakthrough by April 5, 2026.
• Unchained has launched the Bitcoin Legacy Project. The initiative seeks to advance the Bitcoin ecosystem through a bitcoin-native donor-advised fund platform (DAF), investments in community hubs, support for education and open-source development, and a commitment to long-term sustainability with transparent annual reporting.
  • In its first year, the program will provide support to Bitcoin hubs in Nashville, Austin, and Denver.
  • Support also includes $50,000 to the Bitcoin Policy Institute, a $150,000 commitment at the University of Austin, and up to $250,000 in research grants through the Bitcoin Scholars program.

"Unchained will match grants 1:1 made to partner organizations who support Bitcoin Core development when made through the Unchained-powered bitcoin DAF, up to 1 BTC," was stated in a blog post.

• Block launched open-source tools for Bitcoin treasury management. These include a dashboard for managing corporate bitcoin holdings and provides a real-time BTC-to-USD price quote API, released as part of the Block Open Source initiative. The company’s own instance of the bitcoin holdings dashboard is available here.

Source: block.xyz

• Bull Bitcoin expands to Mexico, enabling anyone in the country to receive pesos from anywhere in the world straight from a Bitcoin wallet. Additionally, users can now buy Bitcoin with a Mexican bank account.

"Bull Bitcoin strongly believes in Bitcoin’s economic potential in Mexico, not only for international remittances and tourism, but also for Mexican individuals and companies to reclaim their financial sovereignty and protect their wealth from inflation and the fragility of traditional financial markets," said Francis Pouliot, Founder and CEO of Bull Bitcoin.

• Corporate bitcoin holdings hit a record high in Q1 2025. According to Bitwise, public companies' adoption of Bitcoin has hit an all-time high. In Q1 2025, these firms collectively hold over 688,000 BTC, marking a 16.11% increase from the previous quarter. This amount represents 3.28% of Bitcoin's fixed 21 million supply.

Source: Bitwise.

• The Bitcoin Bond Company for institutions has launched with the aim of acquiring $1 trillion in Bitcoin over 21 years. It utilizes secure, transparent, and compliant bond-like products backed by Bitcoin.
• The U.S. Senate confirmed Paul Atkins as Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). At his confirmation hearing, Atkins emphasized the need for a clear framework for digital assets. He aims to collaborate with the CFTC and Congress to address jurisdiction and rulemaking gaps, aligning with the Trump administration's goal to position the U.S. as a leader in Bitcoin and blockchain finance.
• Ethereum developer Virgil Griffith has been released from custody. Griffith, whose sentence was reduced to 56 months, is now seeking a pardon. He was initially sentenced to 63 months for allegedly violating international sanctions laws by providing technical advice on using cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology to evade sanctions during a presentation titled 'Blockchains for Peace' in North Korea.
• No-KYC exchange eXch to close down under money laundering scrutiny. The privacy-focused cryptocurrency trading platform said it will cease operations on May 1. This decision follows allegations that the platform was used by North Korea's Lazarus Group for money laundering. eXch revealed it is the subject of an active "transatlantic operation" aimed at shutting down the platform and prosecuting its team for "money laundering and terrorism."
• Blockstream combats ESP32 FUD concerning Jade signers. The company stated that after reviewing the vulnerability disclosed in early March, Jade was found to be secure. Espressif Systems, the designer of the ESP32, has since clarified that the "undocumented commands" do not constitute a "backdoor."

• Bank of America is lobbying for regulations that favor banks over tech firms in stablecoin issuance. The bank's CEO Brian Moynihan is working with groups such as the American Bankers Association to advance the issuance of a fully reserved, 1:1 backed "Bank of America coin." If successful, this could limit stablecoin efforts by non-banks like Tether, Circle, and others, reports The Block.
• Tether to back OCEAN Pool with its hashrate. "As a company committed to financial freedom and open access, we see supporting decentralization in Bitcoin mining as essential to the network’s long-term integrity," said Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino.
• Bitdeer to expand its self-mining operations to navigate tariffs. The Singapore-based mining company is advancing plans to produce machines in the U.S. while reducing its mining hardware sales. This response is in light of increasing uncertainties related to U.S. trade policy, as reported by Bloomberg.
• Tether acquires $32M in Bitdeer shares. The firm has boosted its investment in Bitdeer during a wider market sell-off, with purchases in early to mid-April amounting to about $32 million, regulatory filings reveal.
• US Bitcoin miner manufacturer Auradine has raised $153 million in a Series C funding round as it expands into AI infrastructure. The round was led by StepStone Group and included participation from Maverick Silicon, Premji Invest, Samsung Catalyst Fund, Qualcomm Ventures, Mayfield, MARA Holdings, GSBackers, and other existing investors. The firm raised to over $300 million since its inception in 2022.
• Voltage has partnered with BitGo to [enable](https://www.voltage.cloud/blog/bitgo-and-voltage-team-up-to-deliver-instant-bitcoin-and-stabl

@ cae03c48:2a7d6671

Bitcoin Magazine

The Freedom Issue: Letter From the Editor

Bitcoin is freedom money, a censorship-resistant form of digital cash allowing anyone with an internet connection to send money to anyone else, regardless of nationality, borders, or other arbitrary restrictions.

I personally first heard about Bitcoin in early 2013, through friends who were buying… stuff from Silk Road, the darknet marketplace helmed by the mysterious Dread Pirate Roberts. Although Silk Road was controversial (the “stuff” most people bought and sold was, of course, illegal drugs), it represented a radical example of the form of freedom that Bitcoin provides.

Later in 2013, Silk Road was shut down by the FBI, and Ross Ulbricht was revealed as the market’s founder and the true identity behind the Dread Pirate Roberts pseudonym — although he claims several people operated the account. Ulbricht was sentenced to two life sentences plus forty years in prison without the possibility of parole.

In my view — and that of many Bitcoiners — it was excessive. Even if you believe Ulbricht was guilty of everything he was convicted of (all nonviolent crimes), he was made an example of, and didn’t actually deserve to be locked up for the rest of his days.

Fortunately, Ulbricht was granted a full and unconditional pardon from President Trump in January of this year. The founder of Silk Road, in a very literal sense, has regained his freedom.

This edition of Bitcoin Magazine celebrates and highlights the freedom aspect of Bitcoin with a range of articles and artwork focusing on the people and projects that use bitcoin to advance liberty, and those who make this possible… with a special focus on Ulbricht and Silk Road.

For other stories about bitcoin as freedom money, flip the magazine around!

Welcome to The Freedom Issue.

Aaron van Wirdum

Don’t miss your chance to own The Freedom Issue—featuring never-before-seen letters from Ross Ulbricht and his mother, Lyn. Limited run. Only available while supplies last.

This piece is the Letter from the Editor featured in the latest print edition of Bitcoin Magazine, The Freedom Issue. We’re sharing it here as an early look at the ideas explored throughout the full issue.

This post The Freedom Issue: Letter From the Editor first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Aaron Van Wirdum.

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

如果比特币发明了真正的钱，那么 Crypto 是什么？

引言

比特币诞生之初就以“数字黄金”姿态示人，被支持者誉为人类历史上第一次发明了真正意义上的钱——一种不依赖国家信用、总量恒定且不可篡改的硬通货。然而十多年过去，比特币之后蓬勃而起的加密世界（Crypto）已经远超“货币”范畴：从智能合约平台到去中心组织，从去央行的稳定币到戏谑荒诞的迷因币，Crypto 演化出一个丰富而混沌的新生态。这不禁引发一个根本性的追问：如果说比特币解决了“真金白银”的问题，那么 Crypto 又完成了什么发明？

Crypto 与政治的碰撞：随着Crypto版图扩张，全球政治势力也被裹挟进这场金融变革洪流（示意图）。比特币的出现重塑了货币信用，但Crypto所引发的却是一场更深刻的政治与治理结构实验。从华尔街到华盛顿，从散户论坛到主权国家，越来越多人意识到：Crypto不只是技术或金融现象，而是一种全新的政治表达结构正在萌芽。正如有激进论者所断言的：“比特币发明了真正的钱，而Crypto则在发明新的政治。”价格K线与流动性曲线，或许正成为这个时代社群意志和社会价值观的新型投射。

冲突结构：当价格挑战选票

传统政治中，选票是人民意志的载体，一人一票勾勒出民主治理的正统路径。而在链上的加密世界里，骤升骤降的价格曲线和真金白银的买卖行为却扮演起了选票的角色：资金流向成了民意走向，市场多空成为立场表决。价格行为取代选票，这听来匪夷所思，却已在Crypto社群中成为日常现实。每一次代币的抛售与追高，都是社区对项目决策的即时“投票”；每一根K线的涨跌，都折射出社区意志的赞同或抗议。市场行为本身承担了决策权与象征权——价格即政治，正在链上蔓延。

这一新生政治形式与旧世界的民主机制形成了鲜明冲突。bitcoin.org中本聪在比特币白皮书中提出“一CPU一票”的工作量证明共识，用算力投票取代了人为决策bitcoin.org。而今，Crypto更进一步，用资本市场的涨跌来取代传统政治的选举。支持某项目？直接购入其代币推高市值；反对某提案？用脚投票抛售资产。相比漫长的选举周期和层层代议制，链上市场提供了近乎实时的“公投”机制。但这种机制也引发巨大争议：资本的投票天然偏向持币多者（富者）的意志，是否意味着加密政治更为金权而非民权？持币多寡成为影响力大小，仿佛选举演变成了“一币一票”，巨鲸富豪俨然掌握更多话语权。这种与民主平等原则的冲突，成为Crypto政治形式饱受质疑的核心张力之一。

尽管如此，我们已经目睹市场投票在Crypto世界塑造秩序的威力：2016年以太坊因DAO事件分叉时，社区以真金白银“投票”决定了哪条链获得未来。arkhamintelligence.com结果是新链以太坊（ETH）成为主流，其市值一度超过2,800亿美元，而坚持原则的以太经典（ETC）市值不足35亿美元，不及前者的八十分之一arkhamintelligence.com。市场选择清楚地昭示了社区的政治意志。同样地，在比特币扩容之争、各类硬分叉博弈中，无不是由投资者和矿工用资金与算力投票，胜者存续败者黯然。价格成为裁决纷争的最终选票，冲击着传统“选票决胜”的政治理念。Crypto的价格民主，与现代代议民主正面相撞，激起当代政治哲思中前所未有的冲突火花。

治理与分配

XRP对决SEC成为了加密世界“治理与分配”冲突的经典战例。2020年底，美国证券交易委员会（SEC）突然起诉Ripple公司，指控其发行的XRP代币属于未注册证券，消息一出直接引爆市场恐慌。XRP价格应声暴跌，一度跌去超过60%，最低触及0.21美元coindesk.com。曾经位居市值前三的XRP险些被打入谷底，监管的强硬姿态似乎要将这个项目彻底扼杀。

然而XRP社区没有选择沉默。 大批长期持有者组成了自称“XRP军团”（XRP Army）的草根力量，在社交媒体上高调声援Ripple，对抗监管威胁。面对SEC的指控，他们集体发声，质疑政府选择性执法，声称以太坊当年发行却“逍遥法外”，只有Ripple遭到不公对待coindesk.com。正如《福布斯》的评论所言：没人预料到愤怒的加密散户投资者会掀起法律、政治和社交媒体领域的‘海啸式’反击，痛斥监管机构背弃了保护投资者的承诺crypto-law.us。这种草根抵抗监管的话语体系迅速形成：XRP持有者不但在网上掀起舆论风暴，还采取实际行动向SEC施压。他们发起了请愿，抨击SEC背离保护投资者初衷、诉讼给个人投资者带来巨大伤害，号召停止对Ripple的上诉纠缠——号称这是在捍卫全球加密用户的共同利益bitget.com。一场由民间主导的反监管运动就此拉开帷幕。

Ripple公司则选择背水一战，拒绝和解，在法庭上与SEC针锋相对地鏖战了近三年之久。Ripple坚称XRP并非证券，不应受到SEC管辖，即使面临沉重法律费用和业务压力也不妥协。2023年，这场持久战迎来了标志性转折：美国法庭作出初步裁决，认定XRP在二级市场的流通不构成证券coindesk.com。这一胜利犹如给沉寂已久的XRP注入强心针——消息公布当天XRP价格飙涨近一倍，盘中一度逼近1美元大关coindesk.com。沉重监管阴影下苟延残喘的项目，凭借司法层面的突破瞬间重获生机。这不仅是Ripple的胜利，更被支持者视为整个加密行业对SEC强权的一次胜仗。

XRP的对抗路线与某些“主动合规”的项目形成了鲜明对比。 稳定币USDC的发行方Circle、美国最大合规交易所Coinbase等选择了一条迎合监管的道路：它们高调拥抱现行法规，希望以合作换取生存空间。然而现实却给了它们沉重一击。USDC稳定币在监管风波中一度失去美元锚定，哪怕Circle及时披露储备状况也无法阻止恐慌蔓延，大批用户迅速失去信心，短时间内出现数十亿美元的赎回潮blockworks.co。Coinbase则更为直接：即便它早已注册上市、反复向监管示好，2023年仍被SEC指控为未注册证券交易所reuters.com，卷入漫长诉讼漩涡。可见，在迎合监管的策略下，这些机构非但未能换来监管青睐，反而因官司缠身或用户流失而丧失市场信任。 相比之下，XRP以对抗求生存的路线反而赢得了投资者的眼光：价格的涨跌成为社区投票的方式，抗争的勇气反过来强化了市场对它的信心。

同样引人深思的是另一种迥异的治理路径：技术至上的链上治理。 以MakerDAO为代表的去中心化治理模式曾被寄予厚望——MKR持币者投票决策、算法维持稳定币Dai的价值，被视为“代码即法律”的典范。然而，这套纯技术治理在市场层面却未能形成广泛认同，亦无法激发群体性的情绪动员。复杂晦涩的机制使得普通投资者难以参与其中，MakerDAO的治理讨论更多停留在极客圈子内部，在社会大众的政治对话中几乎听不见它的声音。相比XRP对抗监管所激发的铺天盖地关注，MakerDAO的治理实验显得默默无闻、难以“出圈”。这也说明，如果一种治理实践无法连接更广泛的利益诉求和情感共鸣，它在社会政治层面就难以形成影响力。

XRP之争的政治象征意义由此凸显： 它展示了一条“以市场对抗国家”的斗争路线，即通过代币价格的集体行动来回应监管权力的施压。在这场轰动业界的对决中，价格即是抗议的旗帜，涨跌映射着政治立场。XRP对SEC的胜利被视作加密世界向旧有权力宣告的一次胜利：资本市场的投票器可以撼动监管者的强权。这种“价格即政治”的张力，正是Crypto世界前所未有的社会实验：去中心化社区以市场行为直接对抗国家权力，在无形的价格曲线中凝聚起政治抗争的力量，向世人昭示加密货币不仅有技术和资本属性，更蕴含着不可小觑的社会能量和政治意涵。

不可归零的政治资本

Meme 币的本质并非廉价或易造，而在于其构建了一种“无法归零”的社群生存结构。 对于传统观点而言，多数 meme 币只是短命的投机游戏：价格暴涨暴跌后一地鸡毛，创始人套现跑路，投资者血本无归，然后“大家转去炒下一个”theguardian.com。然而，meme 币社群的独特之处在于——失败并不意味着终结，而更像是运动的逗号而非句号。一次币值崩盘后，持币的草根们往往并未散去；相反，他们汲取教训，准备东山再起。这种近乎“不死鸟”的循环，使得 meme 币运动呈现出一种数字政治循环的特质：价格可以归零，但社群的政治热情和组织势能不归零。正如研究者所指出的，加密领域中的骗局、崩盘等冲击并不会摧毁生态，反而成为让系统更加强韧的“健康应激”，令整个行业在动荡中变得更加反脆弱cointelegraph.com。对应到 meme 币，每一次暴跌和重挫，都是社群自我进化、卷土重来的契机。这个去中心化群体打造出一种自组织的安全垫，失败者得以在瓦砾上重建家园。对于草根社群、少数派乃至体制的“失败者”而言，meme 币提供了一个永不落幕的抗争舞台，一种真正反脆弱的政治性。正因如此，我们看到诸多曾被嘲笑的迷因项目屡败屡战：例如 Dogecoin 自2013年问世后历经八年沉浮，早已超越玩笑属性，成为互联网史上最具韧性的迷因之一frontiersin.org；支撑 Dogecoin 的正是背后强大的迷因文化和社区意志，它如同美国霸权支撑美元一样，为狗狗币提供了“永不中断”的生命力frontiersin.org。

“复活权”的数字政治意涵

这种“失败-重生”的循环结构蕴含着深刻的政治意涵：在传统政治和商业领域，一个政党选举失利或一家公司破产往往意味着清零出局，资源散尽、组织瓦解。然而在 meme 币的世界，社群拥有了一种前所未有的“复活权”。当项目崩盘，社区并不必然随之消亡，而是可以凭借剩余的人心和热情卷土重来——哪怕换一个 token 名称，哪怕重启一条链，运动依然延续。正如 Cheems 项目的核心开发者所言，在几乎无人问津、技术受阻的困境下，大多数人可能早已卷款走人，但 “CHEEMS 社区没有放弃，背景、技术、风投都不重要，重要的是永不言弃的精神”cointelegraph.com。这种精神使得Cheems项目起死回生，社区成员齐声宣告“我们都是 CHEEMS”，共同书写历史cointelegraph.com。与传统依赖风投和公司输血的项目不同，Cheems 完全依靠社区的信念与韧性存续发展，体现了去中心化运动的真谛cointelegraph.com。这意味着政治参与的门槛被大大降低：哪怕没有金主和官方背书，草根也能凭借群体意志赋予某个代币新的生命。对于身处社会边缘的群体来说，meme 币俨然成为自组织的安全垫和重新集结的工具。难怪有学者指出，近期涌入meme币浪潮的主力，正是那些对现实失望但渴望改变命运的年轻人theguardian.com——“迷茫的年轻人，想要一夜暴富”theguardian.com。meme币的炒作表面上看是投机赌博，但背后蕴含的是草根对既有金融秩序的不满与反抗：没有监管和护栏又如何？一次失败算不得什么，社区自有后路和新方案。这种由底层群众不断试错、纠错并重启的过程，本身就是一种数字时代的新型反抗运动和群众动员机制。

举例而言，Terra Luna 的沉浮充分展现了这种“复活机制”的政治力量。作为一度由风投资本热捧的项目，Luna 币在2022年的崩溃本可被视作“归零”的失败典范——稳定币UST瞬间失锚，Luna币价归零，数十亿美元灰飞烟灭。然而“崩盘”并没有画下休止符。Luna的残余社区拒绝承认失败命运，通过链上治理投票毅然启动新链，“复活”了 Luna 代币，再次回到市场交易reuters.com。正如 Terra 官方在崩盘后发布的推文所宣称：“我们力量永在社区，今日的决定正彰显了我们的韧性”reuters.com。事实上，原链更名为 Luna Classic 后，大批所谓“LUNC 军团”的散户依然死守阵地，誓言不离不弃；他们自发烧毁巨量代币以缩减供应、推动技术升级，试图让这个一度归零的项目重新燃起生命之火binance.com。失败者并未散场，而是化作一股草根洪流，奋力托举起项目的残迹。经过迷因化的叙事重塑，这场从废墟中重建价值的壮举，成为加密世界中草根政治的经典一幕。类似的案例不胜枚举：曾经被视为笑话的 DOGE（狗狗币）正因多年社群的凝聚而跻身主流币种，总市值一度高达数百亿美元，充分证明了“民有民享”的迷因货币同样可以笑傲市场frontiersin.org。再看最新的美国政治舞台，连总统特朗普也推出了自己的 meme 币 $TRUMP，号召粉丝拿真金白银来表达支持。该币首日即从7美元暴涨至75美元，两天后虽回落到40美元左右，但几乎同时，第一夫人 Melania 又发布了自己的 $Melania 币，甚至连就职典礼的牧师都跟风发行了纪念币theguardian.com！显然，对于狂热的群众来说，一个币的沉浮并非终点，而更像是运动的换挡——资本市场成为政治参与的新前线，你方唱罢我登场，meme 币的群众动员热度丝毫不减。值得注意的是，2024年出现的 Pump.fun 等平台更是进一步降低了这一循环的技术门槛，任何人都可以一键生成自己的 meme 币theguardian.com。这意味着哪怕某个项目归零，剩余的社区完全可以借助此类工具迅速复制一个新币接力，延续集体行动的火种。可以说，在 meme 币的世界里，草根社群获得了前所未有的再生能力和主动权，这正是一种数字时代的群众政治奇观：失败可以被当作梗来玩，破产能够变成重生的序章。

价格即政治：群众投机的新抗争

meme 币现象的兴盛表明：在加密时代，价格本身已成为一种政治表达。这些看似荒诞的迷因代币，将金融市场变成了群众宣泄情绪和诉求的另一个舞台。有学者将此概括为“将公民参与直接转化为了投机资产”cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.ca——也就是说，社会运动的热情被注入币价涨跌，政治支持被铸造成可以交易的代币。meme 币融合了金融、技术与政治，通过病毒般的迷因文化激发公众参与，形成对现实政治的某种映射cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.caosl.com。当一群草根投入全部热忱去炒作一枚毫无基本面支撑的币时，这本身就是一种大众政治动员的体现：币价暴涨，意味着一群人以戏谑的方式在向既有权威叫板；币价崩盘，也并不意味着信念的消亡，反而可能孕育下一次更汹涌的造势。正如有分析指出，政治类 meme 币的出现前所未有地将群众文化与政治情绪融入市场行情，价格曲线俨然成为民意和趋势的风向标cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.ca。在这种局面下，投机不再仅仅是逐利，还是一种宣示立场、凝聚共识的过程——一次次看似荒唐的炒作背后，是草根对传统体制的不服与嘲讽，是失败者拒绝认输的呐喊。归根结底，meme 币所累积的，正是一种不可被归零的政治资本。价格涨落之间，群众的愤怒、幽默与希望尽显其中；这股力量不因一次挫败而消散，反而在市场的循环中愈发壮大。也正因如此，我们才说“价格即政治”——在迷因币的世界里，价格不只是数字，更是人民政治能量的晴雨表，哪怕归零也终将卷土重来。cdn-brighterworld.humanities.mcmaster.caosl.com

全球新兴现象：伊斯兰金融的入场

当Crypto在西方世界掀起市场治政的狂潮时，另一股独特力量也悄然融入这一场域：伊斯兰金融携其独特的道德秩序，开始在链上寻找存在感。长期以来，伊斯兰金融遵循着一套区别于世俗资本主义的原则：禁止利息（Riba）、反对过度投机（Gharar/Maysir）、强调实际资产支撑和道德投资。当这些原则遇上去中心化的加密技术，会碰撞出怎样的火花？出人意料的是，这两者竟在“以市场行为表达价值”这个层面产生了惊人的共鸣。伊斯兰金融并不拒绝市场机制本身，只是为其附加了道德准则；Crypto则将市场机制推向了政治高位，用价格来表达社群意志。二者看似理念迥异，实则都承认市场行为可以也应当承载社会价值观。这使得越来越多金融与政治分析人士开始关注：当虔诚的宗教伦理遇上狂野的加密市场，会塑造出何种新范式？

事实上，穆斯林世界已经在探索“清真加密”的道路。一些区块链项目致力于确保协议符合伊斯兰教法（Sharia）的要求。例如Haqq区块链发行的伊斯兰币（ISLM），从规则层面内置了宗教慈善义务——每发行新币即自动将10%拨入慈善DAO，用于公益捐赠，以符合天课（Zakat）的教义nasdaq.comnasdaq.com。同时，该链拒绝利息和赌博类应用，2022年还获得了宗教权威的教令（Fatwa）认可其合规性nasdaq.com。再看理念层面，伊斯兰经济学强调货币必须有内在价值、收益应来自真实劳动而非纯利息剥削。这一点与比特币的“工作量证明”精神不谋而合——有人甚至断言法定货币无锚印钞并不清真，而比特币这类需耗费能源生产的资产反而更符合教法初衷cointelegraph.com。由此，越来越多穆斯林投资者开始以道德投资的名义进入Crypto领域，将资金投向符合清真原则的代币和协议。

这种现象带来了微妙的双重合法性：一方面，Crypto世界原本奉行“价格即真理”的世俗逻辑，而伊斯兰金融为其注入了一股道德合法性，使部分加密资产同时获得了宗教与市场的双重背书；另一方面，即便在遵循宗教伦理的项目中，最终决定成败的依然是市场对其价值的认可。道德共识与市场共识在链上交汇，共同塑造出一种混合的新秩序。这一全球新兴现象引发广泛议论：有人将其视为金融民主化的极致表现——不同文化价值都能在市场平台上表达并竞争；也有人警惕这可能掩盖新的风险，因为把宗教情感融入高风险资产，既可能凝聚强大的忠诚度，也可能在泡沫破裂时引发信仰与财富的双重危机。但无论如何，伊斯兰金融的入场使Crypto的政治版图更加丰盈多元。从华尔街交易员到中东教士，不同背景的人们正通过Crypto这个奇特的舞台，对人类价值的表达方式进行前所未有的实验。

升华结语：价格即政治的新直觉

回顾比特币问世以来的这段历程，我们可以清晰地看到一条演进的主线：先有货币革命，后有政治发明。比特币赋予了人类一种真正自主的数字货币，而Crypto在此基础上完成的，则是一项前所未有的政治革新——它让市场价格行为承担起了类似政治选票的功能，开创了一种“价格即政治”的新直觉。在这个直觉下，市场不再只是冷冰冰的交易场所；每一次资本流动、每一轮行情涨落，都被赋予了社会意义和政治涵义。买入即表态，卖出即抗议，流动性的涌入或枯竭胜过千言万语的陈情。Crypto世界中，K线图俨然成为民意曲线，行情图就是政治晴雨表。决策不再由少数权力精英关起门来制定，而是在全球无眠的交易中由无数普通人共同谱写。这样的政治形式也许狂野，也许充满泡沫和噪音，但它不可否认地调动起了广泛的社会参与，让原本疏离政治进程的个体通过持币、交易重新找回了影响力的幻觉或实感。

“价格即政治”并非一句简单的口号，而是Crypto给予世界的全新想象力。它质疑了传统政治的正统性：如果一串代码和一群匿名投资者就能高效决策资源分配，我们为何还需要繁冗的官僚体系？它也拷问着自身的内在隐忧：当财富与权力深度绑定，Crypto政治如何避免堕入金钱统治的老路？或许，正是在这样的矛盾和张力中，人类政治的未来才会不断演化。Crypto所开启的，不仅是技术乌托邦或金融狂欢，更可能是一次对民主形式的深刻拓展和挑战。这里有最狂热的逐利者，也有最理想主义的社群塑梦者；有一夜暴富的神话，也有瞬间破灭的惨痛。而这一切汇聚成的洪流，正冲撞着工业时代以来既定的权力谱系。

当我们再次追问：Crypto究竟是什么？ 或许可以这样回答——Crypto是比特币之后，人类完成的一次政治范式的试验性跃迁。在这里，价格行为化身为选票，资本市场演化为广场，代码与共识共同撰写“社会契约”。这是一场仍在进行的文明实验：它可能无声地融入既有秩序，也可能剧烈地重塑未来规则。但无论结局如何，如今我们已经见证：在比特币发明真正的货币之后，Crypto正在发明真正属于21世纪的政治。它以数字时代的语言宣告：在链上，价格即政治，市场即民意，代码即法律。这，或许就是Crypto带给我们的最直观而震撼的本质启示。

参考资料：

• 中本聪. 比特币白皮书: 一种点对点的电子现金系统. (2008)bitcoin.org

• Arkham Intelligence. Ethereum vs Ethereum Classic: Understanding the Differences. (2023)arkhamintelligence.com

• Binance Square (@渔神的加密日记). 狗狗币价格为何上涨？背后的原因你知道吗？binance.com

• Cointelegraph中文. 特朗普的迷因币晚宴预期内容揭秘. (2025)cn.cointelegraph.com

• 慢雾科技 Web3Caff (@Lisa). 风险提醒：从 LIBRA 看“政治化”的加密货币骗局. (2025)web3caff.com

• Nasdaq (@Anthony Clarke). How Cryptocurrency Aligns with the Principles of Islamic Finance. (2023)nasdaq.comnasdaq.com

• Cointelegraph Magazine (@Andrew Fenton). DeFi can be halal but not DOGE? Decentralizing Islamic finance. (2023)cointelegraph.com

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

This article is slightly outside my normal writing focus. But it’s something everyone deserves to know, and take advantage of if they like. Before you click away, this isn’t a sports betting “system” or “strategy”. This is for anyone living in or near a state that has legalized online sports betting. It’s a way to take advantage of the new customer sign up bonuses these online sportsbooks give, by using free online tools to convert those bonuses into $2,000 or more in cash per person, depending on your state. It doesn’t require you to know anything whatsoever about sports, gambling, sports betting, odds, math, or anything like that. It doesn’t involve taking risks with your money. All you need is some capital (around $3-5,000 would be ideal), a smartphone, a legal sports betting state, and this guide.

Concepts and Principles

Online sports betting is now legal in 30 US states. You can check legality in your state on the map here. If you’re in a state with legal mobile betting, or close enough that you’d be willing to drive there, you can benefit from this guide.

Most states with legalized betting have multiple different sports books competing for customers. To attract new customers, many of them offer various types of bonus offers when you initially sign up. The idea is that once you sign up and place a bet, you’re likely to continue betting in the future. So the sportsbook doesn’t mind losing money on your first wager, because they’ll make it back over time. That leaves an opportunity for someone to just take the free money and leave, if they want to do that. It’s completely legal, and if you follow this guide, also risk free.

The bonuses vary in size, but are usually larger the first few months after a state legalizes online betting, since sportsbooks are competing heavily to attract the new customers to their site. But most states will have a combined $3-5,000 in bonuses available at any time across 4-8 sportsbooks. You can find the available offers in your state by searching “covers sports betting promo offers \”. For example for Maryland, we’d end up up at covers.com on a page like this.

The basic concept is that we open accounts on multiple sites, sign up for their bonus offers, then bet both sides of the same sports game but on 2 different sites. That way it doesn’t matter which team wins, we collect the free bonus money with no risk.

Actually doing it is a bit more nuanced, but I’ll explain it step by step and illustrate with plenty of screenshots to make sure you can follow along.

First, you want to find the offers for your state, and sign up for the sites with the offers you want to convert. For Maryland, if we scroll on down at covers.com, we’ll find this list of offers.

The larger offers are of course more worthwhile, so if I were in Maryland, I would first sign up for Caesars, DraftKings, BetMGM, and ESPN BET. Since you’ll also want another site to hedge your bets, I’d also sign up for FanDuel. You can download their apps, set up your accounts, and familiarize yourself with the deposit methods that are available.

Risk-Free Bets

These are the most common bonus offers you’ll find. They’ll also be called No Sweat Bets, Second Chance Bets, First Bet Insurance, Bonus Bets, First Bets, etc. Always make sure you check the details of the promotion you’re using to make sure it’s a Risk-Free Bet, and what the terms and details of the offer are. The four offers from the sites above for Maryland all fall under the category of risk-free bets.

The concept of this offer is simple: you open an account, deposit some money, and make a bet. The very first bet (MAKE SURE YOU GET THIS RIGHT) will be your risk-free bet. If you win that first bet, cool, you get the winnings from that bet and can withdraw it. If you lose your first bet, the risk-free bet kicks in, and you get a free bet deposited into your account equal to the amount of your first bet. So you basically get a do-over if you lose the first one.

Now you won’t be able to just withdraw the free bet in cash if you lose and get your money back. That would be too easy. The risk-free bet is a bet, you can only use it to bet on another game. If you win that second wager, you can withdraw your winnings. But if you don’t, you can still win by hedging your bets on a different sportsbook. That’s what I’m going to show you.

To find which games to bet on and how much to bet, you’ll need to use a different free website. Go to Crazy Ninja Odds.

Go to Settings in the top right corner, uncheck the sites you aren’t using.

Now go back to Home. Click on Risk-free bet page.

Now we need to choose an offer to convert. Let’s choose our Caesars $1,000 First Bet. We can walk through the steps first, to see which game we want to bet and how much we need to deposit.

First, starting at the top, under “Reward” we’ll enter 100%. With this offer, if we lose our first bet, we get a free bonus bet of 100% of the amount of our first bet, up to $1,000.

Next, we’ll select “Free bet (70%)”. Our free bonus bet will be convertible at about 70%, but that’s not something we need to understand right now. Just check the box and move on.

Next, open “Risk Free Bet Sportsbook” and select Caesars.

Now the page should be filled out like this.

Click “Update” at the bottom. Scroll down, and you’ll see a chart like this.

If none of this means anything to you, that’s fine. I’ll walk you through exactly what to do.

The bets are sorted by ranking from best to worst value. So we always want to choose the top bets unless we have a reason not to. In this case, we are making our risk-free bet on Caesars, and we want to hedge on the site where we aren’t trying to convert any offers, FanDuel. So we want to look at the second column on the right, Hedge Bet Sportsbook. Go down the column until you find FanDuel. In that row, the third column from the left has a “Calc” button. I’ve highlighted the button here.

Click the button. You’ll get a popup that looks like this.

So this is an NHL hockey game between the Dallas Stars and the Edmonton Oilers. If you know absolutely nothing about hockey, perfect. Neither do I. The important thing is that this shows us which wagers to place, and for how much. The left column is our Risk-Free Bet on Caesars, and the right column is our Hedge on FanDuel.

Our first decision is how much to wager. You’ll see that the Caesars wager is currently set to $100. But remember, our First Bet offer is for up to $1,000. You can wager any amount up to $1,000, but you’ll only get one shot at this offer, so if you wager less than $1,000, you won’t get the full benefit of the offer, and you’ll never be able to go back and use the rest in the future. It’s one shot. So my advice is wager $1,000, there’s no good reason not to. So we’ll change the wager amount to $1,000.

Now you can see that our risk-free bet is Edmonton Oilers -1.5 for $1,000, and our hedge bet is Dallas Stars +1.5 for $1,604.93. If you don’t know what that means, that’s fine. What you need to know is that you’ll need to deposit at least $1,000 into your Caesars account, and at least $1,604.93 into your FanDuel account. When that’s done, you can check the bets on each site to make sure the odds are accurate. They change constantly, so it’s always good to check both sites just before placing a bet.

First, we’ll open up the Caesars app and search for “Edmonton Oilers.” Sure enough, the game pops up.

Then we’ll click on that game and open it up

There are four things we want to check on each bet before placing it. I’ve highlighted them above. We have the Edmonton Oilers -1.5, odds of +196, a wager of $1,000, and a payout of $2,960. If we compare that with the correct column in our Risk-Free Bet Calculator, we’ll see that everything is correct.

Now we want to do the same for the FanDuel hedge. We’ll open the FanDuels app and search for “Dallas Stars” and find the same game against the Oilers.

Here we can see the first problem. The spread we see here is -1.5, odds of +225. Our Risk-Free Bet Calculator is asking for Dallas Stars +1.5, odds -245. So we need to select a different line. Farther down the page you’ll see “Series Alternate Handicap.” Open that, and you’ll see Dallas Stars +1.5.

This is the bet we’re looking for. But you’ll also notice that the odds are -225 instead of -245. So we can select this bet, but we need to go back to our Risk-Free Bet Calculator and change the odds to get the correct amount to bet on this line.

So go back to the calculator and change -245 to -225. You’ll see this.

As you can see, the amount of the wager has changed to $1,564.62. So we can go back to FanDuel, select Dallas Stars +1.5, odds -225, and enter our updated wager amount.

As you can see, when we add the “Wager” and the “To Win” amount, we get $2,260.01. Looking at our calculator, that’s the exact number in our “Payout” row. So these are the bets we need to make.

Now that we’ve double checked everything, we can go back and make our $1,000 bet on Caesars, and immediately go make our $1,564.62 bet on FanDuel.

Awesome!

Now what? Well, our job is done. We just wait to see which team wins. Not that it matters to us either way. But which team wins will determine our next step.

Looking at our calculator again, there are two possible outcomes.

The first outcome is the Edmonton Oilers win. In that case, our Caesars bet will payout $2,960, while our FanDuel bet will be a total loss. Here’s how we do the math on that scenario.

We start with our $2,960 Caesars balance. We subtract our $1,564.62 FanDuel bet (which was a loss). Then we subtract the $1,000 we initially deposited and wagered on Caesars. This leaves us with a profit of $395.38! Not bad for a one day return on $2,564.62, while taking no risk.

Now for the second scenario. That would be if the Dallas Stars win. In that case, our Caesars bet is a total loss. Our FanDuel bet pays our $2,260.01

So to calculate our profit here, we start with our payout of $2,260.01, subtract our wager of $1,564.62, subtract our Caesars wager of $1,000 (which was a loss), and then add 70% of our free bonus Caesars bet of $1,000, or $700 (more on that in a minute). Once again, that gives us a profit of $395.39.

Now back to the free bonus bet. Since our Caesars bet lost, we qualified for the promotional payout. If we check the Caesars app, we should see a bonus bet of $1,000 in our balance. Remember I said that you can’t just withdraw the bonus bet? This situation is where that becomes an issue. So we have to place a $1,000 wager with Caesars before we can withdraw that money. The problem with that is, what if our second wager also loses? Then we lose money on the entire process. That’s where the 70% number comes in. We’ll use a similar process when making that $1,000 wager, by hedging on a second site once again. By doing that, we’ll be guaranteed to collect around 70% of the wager, or $700. I’ll explain that in the next section.

Free Bets

This is the name for the bet we get if we lose our initial bet on a site with a Risk-Free Bet offer. This is just what it sounds like, a free bet. You can bet the amount on a game, and if you win, the winnings are your money. You’re free to withdraw that cash.

How do we ensure we still make a profit, even if our free bet loses? Well, Crazy Ninja Odds can help once again. Go back to their homepage, and this time click on Free Bets instead of Risk Free Bets. This time all we need to do is enter the sportsbook, Caesars, and click “update.” We’ll get a chart like this.

You know the drill by now. We find the first option on our Hedge Bet Sportsbook, FanDuel. This time it’s highlighted on the second row. Click “Calc.”

This is a money line bet, so it’s slightly different than the first one, but you won’t have any trouble figuring it out this time. You can check Caesars, and you’ll find the money line bet of $1,000 on the Pacers at +222, with a payout of $2,220.

Make sure you select your free bonus bet when you make the wager. If you lost your initial $1,000 deposit and didn’t deposit again, that should be your only option. It will look slightly different than this, since when you use a free bet, your payout won’t include the initial $1,000 wager, so it will read $2,220 instead of $3,220. I don’t have the free offer in my account so I can’t show you the exact screenshot, but you’ll be able to figure it out.

Then jump over to the other side of the game on FanDuel.

You’ll notice that the line is -275 instead of -270 like your calculator said. By now you know how to go back and change the odds in the calculator to get this.

Once again, you’ll want to make a $1,628 wager on the Boston Celtics at -275 to hedge your $1,000 free bonus bet on the Indiana Pacers at +222.

I could go through the math again, but you know how to do it now. You can look at the profit line and see that both outcomes will pay $592. If you remember, our initial bet used 70% of $1,000, or $700, as a bonus bet profit target. So given the odds available on this particular day, you’ll end up with just over $100 less profit if you need to convert the bonus bet than you’ll make if your first Caesars bet wins. That’s unfortunate, but just a result of games and odds available on a particular day. Getting a higher conversion rate would require more complex strategies, and this guide is long enough already.

Next Steps

Once you’ve successfully completed your initial offer, you can continue to do the same process for each additional sportsbook available in your state. And as you work through the offers on one site, you can then use that site to hedge the next site you sign up for.

There are a few things to keep in mind. Your free bonus bets are usually time limited. That means if your first bet loses, you often have as little as 7 days to use the free bonus bet before it disappears. So make sure you stay on top of your offers and play them before they expire. If you aren’t sure whether you qualify for a specific promotional offer, reach out to customer support before placing any bets. They’ll be able to explain exactly which offers you qualify for and how to access them.

Once you sign up and start betting, you’ll likely start getting more offers in the apps. They might be free bets, in which case you already know how to play them. But there are other offers as well, some of which you can do in a risk free way. If this guide gets enough interest, I may write more about how to handle other types of offers.

These offers will be available once to each person. So you can play them once, and that’s it. But you can also help each member of your family or close friends sign up and show them how to play the offers, or do it for them. Just be careful with your money management, since there will be a significant capital investment up front. If you’re putting up the capital, make sure it’s someone you fully trust with control of that money.

If there’s enough interest, I may also put together a guide on how you can do this with family members or friends who live anywhere, even if they’re not in a state with legal sports betting.

Most of all, be safe, don’t tie up capital you need for your daily life, and make sure you understand each offer and how to exploit it before placing any wagers.

If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me and I’ll do my best to help you in any way I can.

Best of luck!

@ b1ddb4d7:471244e7

The upcoming Bitcoin 2025 conference, scheduled from May 27–29 at the Venetian Conference Center in Las Vegas, is set to make history with an official attempt to break the GUINNESS WORLD RECORDS® title for the most Bitcoin point-of-sale transactions in an eight-hour period.

Organized by BTC Inc, the event will showcase Bitcoin’s evolution from a digital capital asset to a practical medium of exchange, leveraging the latest advancements in payment technology.

Tap-to-Pay with Lightning-Ready Bolt Cards

To facilitate this record-setting attempt, 4,000 Lightning-ready Bolt Cards will be distributed to conference attendees.

pic.twitter.com/Iy7P361u6u

— Uncle Rockstar Developer (@r0ckstardev) May 15, 2025

These NFC-enabled cards allow users to make instant, contactless Bitcoin payments at vendor booths throughout the expo-no apps or QR codes required, just a simple tap. 

The cards are available in four collectible designs, each featuring a prominent figure in Bitcoin’s history: Senator Cynthia Lummis, Michael Saylor, Satoshi Nakamoto, and Jack Dorsey. 

Each attendee will receive a randomly assigned card, making them both functional and collectible souvenirs.

Senator Lummis: A Playful Provocation

Notably, one of the card designs features Senator Cynthia Lummis with laser eyes-a playful nod to her reputation as a leading Bitcoin advocate in US politics. 

While Lummis is known for her legislative efforts to promote Bitcoin integration, she has publicly stated she prefers to “spend dollars and save Bitcoin,” viewing BTC as a long-term store of value rather than a daily currency. 

The choice to feature her on the Bolt Card, could be suggested by Rockstar Dev of the BTC Pay Server Foundation, perhaps a lighthearted way to highlight the ongoing debate about Bitcoin’s role in everyday payments.

Nothing cracks me up quite like a senator that wants the US to buy millions of Bitcoin use dollars to buy a beer at a Bitcoin bar.

This is how unserious some of you are. pic.twitter.com/jftIEggmip

— Magoo PhD (@HodlMagoo) April 4, 2025

How Bolt Cards and the Lightning Network Work

Bolt Cards are physical cards equipped with NFC (Near Field Communication) technology, similar to contactless credit or debit cards. When linked to a compatible Lightning wallet, they enable users to make Bitcoin payments over the Lightning Network by simply tapping the card at a point-of-sale terminal. 

The Lightning Network is a second-layer protocol built on top of Bitcoin, designed to facilitate instant, low-cost transactions ideal for everyday purchases. 

This integration aims to make Bitcoin as easy to use as traditional payment methods, eliminating the need for QR code scanning or mobile apps.

A Showcase for Bitcoin’s Real-World Usability

With over 30,000 attendees, 300 exhibitors, and 500 speakers expected, the Bitcoin 2025 conference is poised to be the largest Bitcoin event of the year-and potentially the most transactional. 

The event will feature on-site activations such as the Official Bitcoin Magazine Store, where all merchandise will be available at a 21% discount for those paying with Bitcoin via the Lightning Network-a nod to Bitcoin’s 21 million coin supply limit.

By deeply integrating Lightning payments into the conference experience, organizers hope to demonstrate Bitcoin’s readiness for mainstream commerce and set a new benchmark for its practical use as a currency.

Conclusion

The Guinness World Record attempt at Bitcoin 2025 is more than a publicity stunt-it’s a bold demonstration of Bitcoin’s technological maturity and its potential to function as a modern, everyday payment method.

Whether or not the record is set, the event will serve as a milestone in the ongoing journey to make Bitcoin a truly global, user-friendly currency

@ 90152b7f:04e57401

WikiLeaks The Global Intelligence Files

Released on 2013-03-11 00:00 GMT

| Email-ID | 364528 | | -------- | --------------------------- | | Date | 2007-09-20 03:02:09 | | From | os@stratfor.com | | To | intelligence@stratfor.com |

Rice, Israeli FM discuss Israeli decision of defining Gaza as "hostile\ entity"\ 2007-09-20 00:41:16\ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-09/20/content_6756959.htm\ \ JERUSALEM, Sept. 19 (Xinhua) -- Visiting U.S. Secretary of State\ Condoleezza Rice met with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on\ Wednesday, the two discussed Israel's decision that defined the Hamas-\ controlled Gaza Strip as a "hostile entity."\ \ At a joint press conference held after their meeting, Rice told the\ reporters that the Palestinian Hamas is a "hostile entity" to U.S. as well.\ \ Israel's Security Cabinet declared the Gaza Strip a "hostile entity" on\ Wednesday ahead of Rice's visit and said it would cutoff power and fuel\ supplies to the strip.\ \ Gaza's population, largely impoverished, is almost entirely\ dependent on Israel for the supply of electricity, water and fuel, and a\ cutoff would deepen their hardship.\ \ Since the Hamas takeover in June, Israel has closed crossings with\ Gaza almost entirely, allowing in only humanitarian aid. However, Rice\ reiterated that the United States will not abandon the innocent\ Palestinians in Gaza.\ \ For her part, Livni said that Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip\ two years ago, hoping that could lead to the establishment of a\ Palestinian state, but only get almost daily rocket attacks in return.\ \ "We expect the Palestinians to understand that Israeli security is\ in their own interests," Livni said, adding that Palestinians must\ understand "supporting Hamas won't help them."\ \ The Israeli Security Cabinet's declaration of Gaza as an "hostile\ entity" could lead to the most severe retaliatory measure taken by\ Israel against Palestinian rocket fire from the strip.\ \ The crude rocket attacks have killed 12 people in southern Israel in\ the past seven years, injured dozens more and badly disrupted daily life\ in the region.\ \ Last week, a Qassam rocket hit an Israeli military base near the\ Gaza Strip, wounding over 60 soldiers in the attack. The attack then\ sparked calls for the government to take harsh response against the Gaza\ Strip, which has been under the control of Hamas since it violently took\ over the enclave in mid June.\ \ The Jewish states has been holding Hamas responsible for the attack,\ although the movement has not been directly involved in the attacks.\ Israel still accused the Islamic movement of doing little to halt them.\ \ Apart from the Palestinian issue, Rice also discussed with Livni\ issues about Iran, Lebanon and the Middle East peace progress.\ \ She said Israel and the Palestinians are showing good faith in their\ negotiations towards a "two state solution."\ \ Regarding Iranian issues, Rice told reporters that diplomatic mean\ is a part of efforts to halt the Iranian nuclear program, but stressed\ it "has to have teeth."\ \ Rice, who had visited this region in August, is also expected to\ hold separate meetings on Wednesday with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud\ Barak and the Likud party head Binyamin Netanyahu.\ \ She will then hold a dinner meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud\ Olmert.\ \ Rice is scheduled to leave here Thursday afternoon and visit the\ West Bank city of Ramallah for meetings with the Palestinian leadership\ on Thursday.

@ b1ddb4d7:471244e7

Flash, an all-in-one Bitcoin payment platform, has announced the launch of Flash 2.0, the most intuitive and powerful Bitcoin payment solution to date.

With a completely redesigned interface, expanded e-commerce integrations, and a frictionless onboarding process, Flash 2.0 makes accepting Bitcoin easier than ever for businesses worldwide.

We did the unthinkable!

Website monetization used to be super complicated.

"Buy me a coffee" — But only if we both have a bank account.

WHAT IF WE DON'T?

Thanks to @paywflash and bitcoin, it's just 5 CLICKS – and no banks!

Start accepting donations on your website… pic.twitter.com/uwZUrvmEZ1

— Flash • The Bitcoin Payment Gateway (@paywflash) May 13, 2025

Accept Bitcoin in Three Minutes

Setting up Bitcoin payments has long been a challenge for merchants, requiring technical expertise, third-party processors, and lengthy verification procedures. Flash 2.0 eliminates these barriers, allowing any business to start accepting Bitcoin in just three minutes, with no technical set-up and full control over their funds.

The Bitcoin Payment Revolution

The world is witnessing a seismic shift in finance. Governments are backing Bitcoin funds, major companies are adding Bitcoin to their balance sheets, and political figures are embracing it as the future of money. Just as Stripe revolutionized internet payments, Flash is now doing the same for Bitcoin. Businesses that adapt today will gain a competitive edge in a rapidly evolving financial landscape.

With Bitcoin adoption accelerating, consumers are looking for places to spend it. Flash 2.0 ensures businesses of all sizes can seamlessly accept Bitcoin and position themselves at the forefront of this financial revolution.

All-in-One Monetization Platform

More than just a payment gateway, Flash 2.0 is a complete Bitcoin monetization suite, providing multiple ways for businesses to integrate Bitcoin into their operations. Merchants can accept payments online and in-store, content creators can monetize with donations and paywalls, and freelancers can send instant invoices via payment links.

For example, a jewelry designer selling products on WooCommerce can now integrate Flash for online payments, use Flash’s Point-of-Sale system at trade shows, enable Bitcoin donations for her digital artwork, and lock premium content behind Flash Paywalls. The possibilities are endless.

E-Commerce for Everyone

With built-in integrations for Shopify, WooCommerce, and soon Wix and OpenCart, Flash 2.0 enables Bitcoin payments on 95% of e-commerce stores worldwide. Businesses can now add Bitcoin as a payment option in just a few clicks—without needing developers or external payment processors.

And for those looking to start selling, Flash’s built-in e-commerce features allow users to create online stores, showcase products, and manage payments seamlessly.

No Middlemen, No Chargebacks, No Limits

Unlike traditional payment platforms, Flash does not hold or process funds. Businesses receive Bitcoin directly, instantly, and securely. There are no chargebacks, giving merchants full control over refunds and eliminating fraud. Flash also remains KYC-free, ensuring a seamless experience for businesses and customers alike.

A Completely Redesigned Experience

“The world is waking up to Bitcoin. Just like the internet revolutionized commerce, Bitcoin is reshaping finance. Businesses need solutions that are simple, efficient, and truly decentralized. Flash 2.0 is more than just a payment processor—it’s a gateway to the future of digital transactions, putting financial power back into the hands of businesses.”

— Pierre Corbin, CEO at Flash.

Flash 2.0 introduces a brand-new user interface, making it easier than ever to navigate, set up payments, and manage transactions. With an intuitive dashboard, streamlined checkout, and enhanced mobile compatibility, the platform is built for both new and experienced Bitcoin users.

About Flash

Flash is an all-in-one Bitcoin payment platform that empowers businesses, creators, and freelancers to accept, manage, and grow with Bitcoin. With a mission to make Bitcoin payments accessible to everyone, Flash eliminates complexity and gives users full control over their funds.

To learn more or get started, visit www.paywithflash.com.

Press Contact:

Julien Bouvier
Head of Marketing
+3360941039

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

The credit/debt fiat money system is broken. If you haven’t been living under a rock, I’m sure you’re aware that something is really messed up in the financial system. Hopefully you’re at least somewhat aware of the reasons why and are placing blame squarely on the structure of the monetary system and not on politics or “capitalism” or “socialism” or corporations or billionaires or any of the other red herrings the bankers desperately hope to distract you with.

If you’re still obsessing over any of those things, that’s okay too, and you’re the reason I started this newsletter. It’s impossible to make good decisions without understanding the relevant information, and when it comes to money, almost no one understands the relevant information. My goal is to change that for as many people as I can reach, to grow the small group of people who are knowledgeable and empowered to make better decisions on money and finance.

Previous articles have been focused on economic theory and how money works at a conceptual level. That’s critically important to understand, and if you haven’t taken the time to read those articles, I know it will open your eyes to the world in a way you’ve never considered before. That understanding will give you a huge advantage in benefiting from what I’m about to describe. But today’s subject is strictly practical, actionable information on one specific financial instrument, and how you can use it to game the broken money system to benefit YOU.

Money Is Not Scarce

If you read my previous articles, you’ll understand that one of the biggest problems with the credit/debt money system is that money is not scarce in this system. In fact, the quantity of money is basically unlimited. That’s because money is created by banks every time they make a loan. Unlike everything you’ve ever thought, banks don’t lend out money that’s given to them by depositors. They create new money, out of thin air, with a computer keystroke, every time they make a new loan. That means in practical terms that the amount of money is only limited by the willingness of banks to make loans. And since banks profit by charging interest to loan out money they can create at zero cost, they’re incentivized to make a LOT of loans.

Now as you can easily see, things that aren’t scarce don’t have a lot of value. The less scarce and more easily available something is, the less valuable it becomes. If you and a friend were standing on the shore of Lake Michigan and you reached down and scooped up a cup full of water, turned to your friend, and said “I’ll trade you this cup of water for your Rolex watch,” he’d look at you like you lost your mind. And rightly so, since a cup of water on the shore of a giant lake is so abundant and easily accessible that it has no value compared to a Rolex watch, which are deliberately produced in very limited amounts to increase their scarcity and value.

The difference between money and the water in that example is that money is not scarce, but it is selectively scarce. If you’re a bank, you have access to as much money as you choose to loan out, at zero cost. On the other hand, if you aren’t a bank, money is only available if the bank decides to create some and loan it to you, or you work hard to earn money someone else already has.

This selective scarcity of money is the root cause of the massive wealth inequality we see today. Money is essential to survive in the modern economy, but access to that money is very unevenly distributed.

So how does this benefit certain people? You might be thinking, but don’t borrowers have to pay the loan back with interest? Of course it’s easy to see how the banks benefit, but plenty of wealthy people are not bankers. And that’s a good point. Here’s how.

Because of the incentives banks have to make loans, the amount of money in circulation tends to keep rising exponentially. The amount of most real goods in the economy, however, typically doesn’t rise as fast. When you have more money circulating in the economy without more goods available, the prices people are willing to pay for those goods will go up. That means prices of some scarce goods rise very consistently over time. Those with access to newly created money in the form of loans benefit by using that money to buy assets that are more scarce than the money they borrowed to buy the asset. So they may buy an asset for $1 million, but by the time the loan is due to be repaid, the continuous inflation caused by the increasing money supply might have pushed the price of that asset up to $1.5 million. So subtract the interest paid from $500,000, and there’s your profit, all for doing nothing but convincing a banker to create some money and let you borrow it. The concept that those closest to the source of new money will benefit the most, because they can buy things before the prices rise, is called the Cantillon effect.

Benefitting from the Cantillon Effect

So how can you benefit? You can see that borrowing a bunch of money and buying a good asset with it would be the perfect way to take advantage of the Cantillon effect. But the problem for most people is, if they go to the bank and ask to borrow a few hundred thousand dollars, they’ll be declined in a millisecond. If you’re not already wealthy, you’re going to have a really tough time getting a big loan at a low interest rate, which is what it takes to make this system work in your favor. Most people only have access to loans in the form of a credit card or personal loan, which will be for a small amount and a very high interest rate. That’s not helpful. Luckily there’s one exception, one way almost anyone can borrow a big chunk of money at a low interest rate, and buy an asset that will increase in price over time as the money supply grows: a mortgage.

If you have the income and credit to support a mortgage payment, it can be a great way to take advantage of the broken monetary system to accumulate some long term wealth. However, there are a few caveats and some simple tricks that can make all the difference.

First, while the constant demand for houses fueled by easy access to newly created money means house prices tend to rise consistently over time, there are no guarantees. The housing market often has periods of boom and bust, and falling prices can last for years. Borrowing is always risky, and you shouldn’t take a risk you don’t understand or aren’t comfortable with. While no one can time the housing market, it’s always good to at least be aware that the housing market does rise and fall in cycles, and try to avoid buying when all signs point to housing being extremely overpriced.

Second, just because houses are rising in price doesn’t mean they’re rising in value. It’s a simple concept, but one most people miss. Like Warren Buffet says, price is what you pay, value is what you get. If you buy a house today for $400,000, and in 10 years that same house sells for $700,000, how much did the value of the house change? The price went up, but the house is still the same house in the same location, it’s just a decade older. And a decade of wear and tear is a decrease in value, not an increase. Think of it this way. You can sell for $700,000 and you have $300,000 of “profit”. But if you want the same house back, you can’t buy it for $400,000 again and pocket the $300,000. You can only get the same house back for the full price you received. You haven’t increased your purchasing power at all in terms of housing with that “profit”. Your house hasn’t become more valuable, your money has just become less valuable when measured against houses. In that sense, you probably can’t increase your purchasing power by buying a house to live in, but you can at least avoid losing purchasing power. If you just save money in the bank to buy a house later, house prices will probably rise faster than you can save. That’s especially true if you’re paying rent at the same time. At least with a mortgage, if you pay long enough you own a house eventually. You can pay rent your whole life and you’ll still own nothing at the end.

Understanding Amortization

The key to making a mortgage work for you is to understand and manipulate the amount of principal and interest you pay over the term of the loan. To do this, you need to understand how a mortgage amortization schedule works. An amortization schedule is basically a big chart of your mortgage payments each month, showing how much of each payment is applied to paying down the principal and how much is paying interest. The payment size is the same each month, but the amount of principal and interest varies over the term of the loan, and that’s key to understanding how to manipulate the system.

To understand amortization, you need a good amortization calculator. There are plenty of different ones available online, but I’m going to use the one here to illustrate. In this example, I’m going to arbitrarily choose a mortgage size of $500,000 and an interest rate of 7%, but you can of course use your own numbers. When we enter this into the calculator with a loan term of 30 years and click “calculate”, we get something that looks like this.

You can see the monthly payment of $3,326.51, and the total payments over 30 years of almost $1.2 million, almost $700,000 of which is interest. So you end up paying more in interest than the total amount of principal you borrowed. Gulp.

That seems terrible, and it is. But this is where understanding the amortization schedule, that scary looking chart to the left, is going to pay big dividends. First, change the amortization schedule from an annual schedule to a monthly schedule. You’ll see something that looks like this.

So now for each month, you can see how much of the payment is interest, how much is principal, and how much of your original $500,000 balance is still outstanding. As you can see in month one, you’re paying over $2,900 in interest and only $400 in principal, leaving you with a balance of $499,590.15. The reason the interest is so high initially is that you have to pay interest on the full principal balance. As the principal gets paid down, you are now paying interest on a smaller balance. If you scroll down to year 29, you’ll see the opposite situation. In month 338 you’ll pay $2,900 of principal and only $400 of interest. That’s because you’re now paying interest on a balance of only $68,000 instead of $500,000.

As you can see, getting into the later years of the mortgage is a much better situation than paying huge amounts of interest in the first few years. Is there a way to get closer to the end fast? Yes there is, and you may be surprised how easy it is.

Go back to the annual amortization schedule. Suppose you want to take 5 years off your mortgage. How much would it cost to do, and how much would you save in interest? There are two ways to do this, and we’ll cover both.

First, the easiest way to get 5 years off your mortgage is to move straight down the amortization schedule to year 6. How can you do that? Look at the annual amortization schedule for year 5. Your ending balance is a little over $470,000. That means to get to that point in the loan repayment schedule, you need to pay $30,000 of principal. So let’s see where a lump sum payment of $30,000 gets us. Inside the box where you entered your loan terms you’ll see a little checkbox labeled “Optional: make extra payments”. Click that box. In the “Extra one-time pay” box, enter $30,000. Click calculate. You’ll see this.

And viola, with the extra payment, the loan will be paid off in 25 years, and you’ll save $172,362 in interest. Pretty amazing results for a one-time $30,000 payment.

Of course for the sake of simplicity, that’s assuming you pay the $30,000 at the very beginning of the loan. Paying the lump sum later into the loan term will change the exact amount of the savings. You can play around with other payment sizes, or even multiple lump sum payments, and see how much each one will save.

But most of you will be thinking, “Where am I going to get $30,000? That’s never going to happen.” If that’s you, don’t worry. We can do the exact same thing a different way.

Go back to your calculator, remove the lump sum payment, and leave everything else the same, except the loan term. Change the loan term to 25 years instead of 30 years. Click calculate. Now look at just one number, the payment size. You’ll see it’s $3,533.90. Don’t worry about anything else, just note that number. Now reset to your original calculation of a 30 year term. You’ll see the payment size is back down to $3,326.51. Now get out your calculator and subtract $3,326.51 from $3,533.90. You’ll get $207.39. Go back to your “make extra payments” box and enter an “extra monthly pay” of $207.39. Click calculate.

As you can see, just by paying an extra $207 of principal every month, you’ll pay the loan off 5 years faster and save $137,379 in interest.

You’ll save a little less that way than the lump sum payment, because you’re not paying the principal down as much early in the loan. But paying an extra $200 a month is much easier for most people than accumulating thousands of dollars to make a large lump sum payment. A few hundred dollars is only about 6% of the size of this mortgage payment, so it’s really a small difference. And if you can’t afford to pay a few percent of your payment size extra each month, the mortgage is probably bigger than you can reasonably afford.

You can play around with these numbers in all kinds of ways. It’s a good way to help you think about your financial decisions, and the real impact they might have over time. Say for example, you’re considering buying a new grill for the backyard. You only grill a few times a month during the summer, and a replacement model of the basic charcoal grill you have now would be perfectly serviceable. It’s available for $119 on Amazon. But your brother-in-law just bought one of those Big Green Eggs and he keeps bragging about how amazing it is. They’re $1,950, but you can afford it, you just got a nice little bonus at work. So why not?

But before you get out the checkbook, let’s take a quick look at the mortgage calculator. Let’s see how much that extra $1,831 spent on a grill you don’t really need will actually cost you. Again, input your mortgage size, term, and interest rate, and add an extra one-time payment of $1,831.

Hopefully you’re still using that Big Green Egg in 30 years, because by that time, it will have cost you almost $13,000 in additional interest payments.

You can fill in the blank with your own discretionary purchases and see whether they’re really worth the cost. It’s just another little tool to help plan your financial decisions. It’s free to do, and can make a very significant difference in your financial well-being down the road. But almost no one takes advantage of the opportunity, so you’ll have a huge leg up on most people just by knowing this simple concept.

The Bottom Line

To take advantage of the opportunity to build wealth with a mortgage, there are only two simple rules.

1. Use a mortgage to buy a reasonably priced house that you couldn’t otherwise afford.

2. Take advantage of amortization to pay that mortgage off as fast as possible, so you pay as little interest as possible while still capturing the increase in price of the house.

If you already own a home, you can use the same concept. Take out a mortgage for whatever amount you’re comfortable with, and use the money to buy an asset that will increase in price with inflation. Choose your asset wisely, and don’t take on more debt than you can afford. But if you make good decisions, you can take advantage of the broken financial system, using this little mortgage cheat code to get the Cantillon effect on your side. The wealthy are doing it every day, so don’t miss the opportunity to lock in long-term, fixed rate debt and acquire hard assets. As the debt/credit fiat system implodes, the opportunity to do this will disappear. Take advantage of it while you can.

@ b1ddb4d7:471244e7

Bitcoin FilmFest (BFF25) returns to Warsaw for its third edition, blending independent cinema—from feature films and commercials to AI-driven experimental visuals—with education and entertainment.

Hundreds of attendees from around the world will gather for three days of screenings, discussions, workshops, and networking at the iconic Kinoteka Cinema (PKiN), the same venue that hosted the festival’s first two editions in March 2023 and April 2024.

This year’s festival, themed “Beyond the Frame,” introduces new dimensions to its program, including an extra day on May 22 to celebrate Bitcoin Pizza Day, the first real-world bitcoin transaction, with what promises to be one of Europe’s largest commemorations of this milestone.

BFF25 bridges independent film, culture, and technology, with a bold focus on decentralized storytelling and creative expression. As a community-driven cultural experience with a slightly rebellious spirit, Bitcoin FilmFest goes beyond movies, yet cinema remains at its heart.

Here’s a sneak peek at the lineup, specially curated for movie buffs:

Generative Cinema –  A special slot with exclusive shorts and a thematic debate on the intersection of AI and filmmaking. Featured titles include, for example: BREAK FREE, SATOSHI: THE CREATION OF BITCOIN, STRANGE CURRENCIES, and BITCOIN IS THE MYCELIUM OF MONEY,  exploring financial independence, traps of the fiat system, and a better future built on sound money.

Upcoming Productions Preview – A bit over an hour-long block of unreleased pilots and works-in-progress. Attendees will get exclusive first looks at projects like FINDING HOME (a travel-meets-personal-journey series), PARALLEL SPACES (a story about alternative communities), and THE LEGEND OF LANDI (a mysterious narrative).

Freedom-Focused Ads & Campaigns – Unique screenings of video commercials, animations, and visual projects, culminating in “The PoWies” (Proof of Work-ies)—the first ever awards show honoring the best Bitcoin-only awareness campaigns.

To get an idea of what might come up at the event, here, you can preview 6 selected ads combined into two 2 videos:

• Unique Bitcoin-Video Ads: Part One
• Unique Bitcoin-Video Ads: Part Two

Open Pitch Competition – A chance for filmmakers to present fresh ideas and unfinished projects to an audience of a dedicated jury, movie fans and potential collaborators. This competitive block isn’t just entertaining—it’s a real opportunity for creators to secure funding and partnerships.

Golden Rabbit Awards: A lively gala honoring films from the festival’s Official Selection, with awards in categories like Best Feature, Best Story, Best Short, and Audience Choice.

BFF25 Main Screenings

Sample titles from BFF25’s Official Selection:

REVOLUCIÓN BITCOIN – A documentary by Juan Pablo, making its first screening outside the Spanish-speaking world in Warsaw this May. Three years of important work, 80 powerful minutes to experience. The film explores Bitcoin’s impact across Argentina, Colombia, Mexico, El Salvador, and Spain through around 40 diverse perspectives. Screening in Spanish with English subtitles, followed by a Q&A with the director.

UNBANKABLE – Luke Willms’ directorial debut, drawing from his multicultural roots and his father’s pioneering HIV/AIDS research. An investigative documentary based on Luke’s journeys through seven African countries, diving into financial experiments and innovations—from mobile money and digital lending to Bitcoin—raising smart questions and offering potential lessons for the West. Its May appearance at BFF25 marks its largest European event to date, following festival screenings and nominations across multiple continents over the past year.

HOTEL BITCOIN – A Spanish comedy directed by Manuel Sanabria and Carlos “Pocho” Villaverde. Four friends, 4,000 bitcoins , and one laptop spark a chaotic adventure of parties, love, crime, and a dash of madness. Exploring sound money, value, and relationships through a twisting plot. The film premiered at the Tarazona and Moncayo Comedy Film Festival in August 2024. Its Warsaw screening at BFF25 (in Spanish with English subtitles) marks its first public showing outside the Spanish-speaking world.

Check out trailers for this year’s BFF25 and past editions on YouTube.

Tickets & Info:

• Detailed program and tickets are available at bitcoinfilmfest.com/bff25.
• Stay updated via the festival’s official channels (links provided on the website).
• Use ‘LN-NEWS’ to get 10% of tickets

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

I’m Derek Ross, and I’m all-in on Nostr.

I started the Grow Nostr Initiative to help more people discover what makes Nostr so powerful: ✅ You own your identity ✅ You choose your social graph and algorithms ✅ You aren't locked into any single app or platform ✅ You can post, stream, chat, and build, all without gatekeepers

What we’re doing with Grow Nostr Initiative: 🌱 Hosting local meetups and mini-conferences to onboard people face-to-face 📚 Creating educational materials and guides to demystify how Nostr works 🧩 Helping businesses and creators understand how they can plug into Nostr (running media servers, relays, and using key management tools)

I believe Nostr is the foundation of a more open internet. It’s still early, but we’re already seeing incredible apps for social, blogging, podcasting, livestreaming, and more. And the best part is that they're all interoperable, censorship-resistant, and built on open standards. Nostr is the world's largest bitcoin economy by transaction volume and I truly believe that the purple pill helps the orange pill go down. Meaning, growing Nostr will also grow Bitcoin adoption.

If you’ve been curious about Nostr or are building something on it, or let’s talk. Whether you're just getting started or you're already deep in the ecosystem, I'm here to answer questions, share what I’ve learned, and hear your ideas. Check out https://nostrapps.com to find your next social decentralized experience.

Ask Me Anything about GNI, Nostr, Bitcoin, the upcoming #NosVegas event at the Bitcoin Conference next week, etc.!

– Derek Ross 🌐 https://grownostr.org npub18ams6ewn5aj2n3wt2qawzglx9mr4nzksxhvrdc4gzrecw7n5tvjqctp424

https://stacker.news/items/984689

@ bf47c19e:c3d2573b

Originalni tekst na bitcoin-balkan.com.

---

Pregled sadržaja

1. Definisanje novca
2. Šta je sredstvo razmene?
3. Šta je obračunska jedinica?
4. Šta je zaliha vrednosti?
5. Zašto su važne funkcije novca?
6. Novac Gubi Funkciju: Alhemičar iz Njutonije
7. Eksploatacija pomoću Novca: Agri Perle
8. Novac Gubi Funkciju 2. Deo: Kejnslandski Bankar
9. Da li nas novac danas eksploatiše?
10. Šta je novac, i zašto trebate da brinete?
11. Efikasnija Ušteda Novca
12. Zasluge
13. Molim vas da šerujete!

---

Google izveštava o stalnom povećanju interesa u svetu za pitanje „Šta je novac?“ koji se postavlja iz godine u godinu, od 2004. do 2021., a sa naglim porastom nakon finansijske krize 2008. godine.

I izgleda se da niko nema dobar odgovor za to.

Godišnji proseci mesečnih interesa za pretragu. 100 predstavlja najveći interes za pretragu tokom čitavog perioda, koji se dogodio u decembru 2019. Podaci sa Google Trends-a.

Međutim, odgovaranje na ovo naizgled jednostavno pitanje pomoći će vam da razjasnite ulogu novca u vašem životu. Jednom kada shvatite kako novac funkcioniše, tačno ćete videti i zašto svet danas ludi – i šta učiniti povodom toga. Zato hajde da se udubimo u to.

Na pitanje šta je novac, većina ljudi otvori svoje novčanike i pokaže nekoliko novčanica – “evo, ovo je novac!”

Ali po čemu se ove novčanice razlikuju od stranica vaše omiljene knjige? Pa, naravno, zavod za izradu novčanica te zemlje je odštampao te novčanice iz vašeg novčanika kako bi se oduprla falsifikovanju, i svi ih koriste da bi kupili odredjene stvari.

Međutim, Nemačka Marka imala je sva ova svojstva u prošlosti – ali preduzeća danas ne prihvataju te novčanice. Zapravo, građani Nemačke su početkom dvadesetih godina prošlog veka spaljivali papirne Marke kako bi grejali svoje domove. Marka je imala veću vrednost kao papir za potpalu nego kao novac!

1923. nemačka valuta poznata kao Marka bila je jeftinija od uglja i drveta!

Pa šta to čini novac, novcem?

Ispostavilo se da ovo nije pitanje na koje je lako dati odgovor.

Definisanje novca

Novac nije fizička stvar poput novčanice dolara. Novac je društveni sistem koji koristimo da bismo olakšali trgovinu robom i uslugama. Međutim, tokom istorije fizička monetarna dobra igrala su ključnu ulogu u društvenom sistemu novca, često kao znakovi koji predstavljaju vrednost u monetarnom sistemu. Ovaj sistem ima tri funkcije: 1) Sredstvo Razmene, 2) Obračunsku Jedinicu i 3) Zalihu Vrednosti.

Odakle dolaze ove funkcije, i zašto su one vredne?

Šta je sredstvo razmene?

Sredstvo razmene je neko dobro koje se obično razmenjuje za drugo dobro. Najčešće objašnjenje za to kako su se pojavila sredstva razmene glasi otprilike ovako: Boris ima ječam i želeo bi da kupi ovcu od Marka. Marko ima ovce, ali želi samo piliće. Ana ima piliće, ali ona ne želi ječam ili ovce.

To se naziva problem sticaja potreba: dve strane moraju da žele ono što druga ima da bi mogle da trguju. Ako se želje dve osobe ne podudaraju, oni moraju da pronađu druge ljude sa kojima će trgovati dok svi ne pronađu dobro koje žele.

Ljudi koji trguju robom i uslugama moraju da imaju potrebe koje se podudaraju.

Vremenom, veoma je verovatno da će se određena vrsta robe, poput pšenice, pojaviti kao sredstvo razmene jer su je mnogi ljudi želeli. Uzimajući pšenicu kao primer: pšenica je rešila “sticaje potreba” u mnogim zanatima, jer čak i ako onaj koji prima pšenicu a nije želeo da je koristi za sebe, znao je da će je neko drugi želeti.

Ovo nazivamo prodajnost imovine.

Pšenica je dobar primer dobra za prodaju jer svi moraju da jedu, a od pšenice se pravi hleb. Pšenica ima vrednost kao sastojak hleba i kao dobro koje olakšava trgovinu rešavanjem problema „sticaja potreba“.

Razmislite o svojoj želji da dobijete više novčanica u eurima ili drugoj valuti. Ne možete da jedete novčanice da biste preživeli, a i ne bi vam bile od velike koristi ako poželite da ih koristite kao građevinski materijal za vašu kuću. Međutim, znate da sa tim novčanicama možete da kupite hranu i kuću.

Stvarne fizičke novčanice su beskorisne za vas. Novčanice su vam dragocene samo zato što će ih drugi prihvatiti za stvari koje su vama korisne.

Tokom dugog perioda istorije, novac je evoluirao do te mere da monetarno dobro može imati vrednost, a da to dobro ne služi za bilo koju drugu ‘suštinsku’ upotrebu, poput hrane ili energije. Umesto toga, njegova upotreba je zaliha vrednosti i jednostavna zamena za drugu robu u bilo kom trenutku koji poželite.

Šta jedno dobro čini poželjnijim i prodajnijim od drugog dobra?

Deljivost

Definicija: Sposobnost podele dobra na manje količine.

Loš Primer: Dijamante je teško podeliti na manje komade. Za zajednicu od hiljada ljudi koji dnevno izvrše milione transakcija, dijamanti čine loše sredstvo razmene. Previše su retki i nedeljivi da bi se koristili za mnoge transakcije.

Potrebno je puno obuke da bi izrezali dijamant.

Ujednačenost

Definicija: Sličnost pojedinačnih jedinica odredjenog dobra.

Loš Primer: Krave nisu ujednačene – neke su veće, neke manje, neke bolesne, neke zdrave. Sa druge strane, unca čistog zlata je jednolična – jedna unca je potpuno ista kao sledeća. Ovo svojstvo se takođe često naziva zamenljivost.

Svaka je jedinstvena na svoj način.

Prenosivost

Definicija: Lakoća transporta dobra.

Loš Primer: Krava nije baš prenosiva. Zlatnici su prilično prenosivi. Papirne novčanice su još prenošljivije. Knjiga u kojoj se jednostavno beleži vlasništvo nad tim vrednostima (poput Rai kamenog sistema ili digitalnog bankovnog računa) je neverovatno prenosiva, jer nema fizičkog dobra koje treba nositi sa sobom za kupovinu. Postoji samo sistem za evidentiranje vlasništva nad tim vrednostima u nematerijalnom obliku.

Novac star 5000 godina VS novac star 13 godina

Kako dobro postaje sredstvo razmene?

Dobra postaju, i ostaju sredstva razmene zbog svoje univerzalne potražnje, takođe poznate kao njihova prodajnost, čemu pomažu svojstva koja su gore nabrojana.

Mnogo različitih dobara mogu u različitoj meri delovati kao sredstva razmene u ekonomiji. Danas, naša globalna ekonomija koristi valute koje izdaju države, zlato, pa čak i robu poput nafte kao sredstvo razmene.

---

Šta je obračunska jedinica?

Stvari se komplikuju kada u ekonomiji postoji mnogo robe koja se prodaje. Čak i sa samo 5 dobara, postoji 10 “kurseva razmene” između svake robe kojih svi u ekonomiji moraju da se sete: 1 svinja se menja za 15 pilića, 1 pile se menja za 15 litara mleka, desetak jaja se menja za 15 litara mleka, i tako dalje. Ako ekonomija ima 50 dobara, među njima postoji 1.225 “kurseva razmene”!

Sredstvo za merenje vrednosti

Zamislite obračunsku jedinicu kao sredstvo za merenje vrednosti. Umesto da se sećamo vrednosti svakog dobra u poredjenju sa drugim dobrima, mi samo treba da se setimo vrednosti svakog dobra u poredjenju sa jednim dobrom – obračunskom jedinicom.

Umesto da se setimo 1.225 kurseva razmene kada imamo 50 proizvoda na tržištu, mi treba da zapamtimo samo 50 cena.

Na primer, ne treba da se sećamo da litar mleka vredi 1/15 piletine ili desetak jaja, možemo da se samo setimo da litar mleka košta 1USD.

Mnogo opcija, sve u istoj obračunskoj jedinici.

Poređenje dobara je lakše sa obračunskom jedinicom

Obračunska jedinica takođe olakšava upoređivanje vrednosti i donošenje odluka. Zamislite da pokušavate da kupite par Nike Air Jordan patika kada ih jedan prodavac prodaje za jedno pile, a drugi za 50 klipova kukuruza.

Šta je zaliha vrednosti?

Do sada smo gledali samo primere transakcija koje se odvijaju u određenom trenutku u vremenu.

Međutim, ljudi vrše transakcije tokom vremena – oni štede novac i troše ga kasnije. Da bi odredjeno dobro moglo da funkcioniše pravilno kao monetarno dobro, ono treba da održi vrednost tokom vremena.

Novac koji vremenom dobro drži vrednost daje njegovom imaocu više izbora kada će taj novac da potroši.

To znači da prodajnost dobra uključuje njegovu sposobnost da održi vrednost tokom vremena.

Šta jedno dobro čini boljom zalihom vrednosti od drugog dobra?

Trajnost

Definicija: Sposobnost dobra da vremenom zadrži svoj oblik.

Loš Primer: Jagode čine lošu zalihu vrednosti jer se lako oštete i brzo trunu.

Odluka je daleko lakša ako jedan prodavac naplaćuje 150 USD, a drugi 200 USD – odmah je očigledno koja je bolja ponuda jer su vrednosti izražene u istoj jedinici.

Nije sjajna forma novca.

Teške za Proizvodnju

Definicija: Teškoće koje ljudi imaju u proizvodnji veće količine dobra.

Loš Primer: Papirne novčanice predstavljaju lošu zalihu vrednosti jer banke i vlade mogu jeftino da ih naprave.

Sa zlatom je suprotno – u ponudi se nalazi ograničena količina uprkos velikoj potražnji za njim, jednostavno zato što ga je vrlo teško iskopati iz zemlje. Ova ograničena ponuda osigurava da svaka jedinica zlata održi vrednost tokom vremena.

Traženje zlata je spora i teška aktivnost. Obično se ne pronađe puno!

Kako dobra postaju zalihe vrednosti?

Dobro postaje zaliha vrednosti ako se vremenom pokaže trajnim i teškim za proizvodnju.

Samo će vreme pokazati da li je neko dobro zaista trajno i da li ga je teško proizvesti. Zbog toga neki oblici novca su postojali vekovima pre nego što je neko otkrio način da ih proizvede više, i na kraju se to dobro više nije koristilo kao novac.

Ovo je priča o školjkama, Rai kamenju i mnogim drugim oblicima novca tokom istorije.

Zlato je primer dobra koje je hiljadama godina služilo kao dobra zaliha vrednosti. Zlato se ne razgrađuje tokom vremena i još uvek ga je teško proizvesti. Hiljadama godina alhemičari su bezuspešno pokušavali da sintetišu zlato iz jeftinih materijala.

Čak i sa današnjim naprednim rudarskim tehnikama, svake godine svi svetski rudnici zlata zajedno mogu da proizvedu samo 2% od ukupne ponude zlata u prometu.

Teškoće u proizvodnji zlata daju izuzetno visok odnos “zaliha i protoka”: zaliha je broj postojećih jedinica, a protok su nove jedinice stvorene tokom određenog vremenskog perioda. Svake godine se stvori vrlo malo novih jedinica zlata, iako je potražnja za zlatom obično vrlo velika.

Kombinujući ovo sa deljivošću, ujednačenošću i prenosivošću zlata, nije ni čudo što je zlato čovečanstvu služilo kao monetarno dobro tokom poslednjih 5.000 godina. Pošto je zlato teško proizvesti, možemo ga nazvati teškim novcem (hard money).

Kao rezultat toga, svoju vrednost je u velikoj meri zadržao kroz milenijume. Cena većine dobara i usluga u pogledu zlata zapravo se vremenom smanjivala kao rezultat tehnoloških inovacija, koje sve proizvode čine jeftinijim.

Uzmimo na primer cene hrane prema praćenju Kancelarije za hranu i poljoprivredu UN-a: sa obzirom na skokove u poljoprivrednoj tehnologiji tokom poslednjih 60 godina, cene hrane drastično su pale kada se procenjuju u zlatu. To čak i važi uprkos činjenici da obični ljudi retko koriste zlato za kupovinu stvari.

Cene hrane su padale u pogledu zlata tokom proteklih 60 godina, i mnogo pre toga (FAO Indeks Cena Hrane u Zlatu)

Zaliha vrednosti omogućava ljudima da uštede novac kako bi mogli da ga ulažu u pokretanje preduzeća i obrazovanje, povećavajući produktivnost društva.

Monetarna dobra koja dobro čuvaju vrednost takođe podstiču dugoročniji pogled na život, ili kratke vremenske preference. Pojedinac može da radi 10 godina, uštedi odredjeno monetarno dobro koje je dobra zaliha vrednosti, i nema potrebe da se plaši da će njegova ušteđevina biti izbrisana krahom tržišta ili povećanjem ponude tog dobra.

Zašto su važne funkcije novca?

Kada neki oblik novca izgubi bilo koju od svojih važnih funkcija kao što su sredstvo razmene, obračunska jedinica i zaliha vrednosti, celokupna ekonomija i društvo mogu da se rastrgnu.

Tokom istorije često vidimo grupe ljudi koje eksploatišu druge iskorišćavajući nesporazume o novcu i važnosti njegovih funkcija.

Sledeće, proći ću kroz istoriju novca, prvo hipotetički da bih ilustrovao poentu, a zatim ću preći na stvarne istorijske primere. Kroz ove primere videćemo štetne efekte na društva u slučajevima kada se izgubi samo jedna od tih ključnih funkcija novca.

Novac Gubi Funkciju: Alhemičar iz Njutonije

Kroz istoriju, mnoga dobra su dolazila i odlazila kao oblici novca. Na žalost, kada se neki oblik novca ukine, ponekad postoji grupa ljudi koja eksploatiše drugi oblik manipulišući tim novcem.

Hajde da pogledamo hipotetičko selo zvano Njutonija da bismo razumeli kako dolazi do ove eksploatacije.

Zelene perle postaju Novac

Tokom stotina godina ribolova u obližnjoj reci, stanovnici Njutonije sakupljali su zelene perle iz vode. Zrnca su mala, lagana, izdržljiva, jednolična i retko se pojavljuju u reci. Ljudi prvo priželjkuju perle zbog svoje lepote. Na kraju, seljani shvataju da svi drugi žele perle – one se vrlo lako mogu prodati. Zrnca uskoro postaju sredstvo razmene i obračunska jedinica u selu: pile je 5 zrna, vreća jabuka 2 zrna, krava 80 zrna.

Ukupna ponuda perli je prilično konstantna i cene se vremenom ne menjaju mnogo. Seoski starešina je uveren da može da se opustiti u poslednjim danima živeći od svoje velike zalihe perli.

Alhemičar stvara više perli

Seoski alhemičar je poželeo da bude bogat čovek, ali nije voleo da vredno radi na tome. Umesto da traži perle u reci ili da prodaje vrednu robu drugim seljanima, on sedeo je u svojoj laboratoriji. Na kraju je otkrio kako da lako stvori stotine perli sa malo peska i vatre.

Seljani koji su tragali za perlama u reci bili su srećni ako bi svaki dan pronašli po 1 zrno. Alhemičar je mogao da proizvede stotine uz malo napora.

Alhemičar troši svoje perle

Budući da je bio prilično zao, alhemičar nije svoj metod pravljenja zrna delio ni sa kim drugim. Stvorio je sebi još više perli i počeo da ih troši za dobra na tržištu u Njutoniji. Tokom sledećih meseci, alhemičar je kupio farmu pilića, nekoliko krava, finu svilu, posteljine i ogromno imanje. On je imao priliku da kupi ova dobra po normalnim cenama na tržištu.

Alhemičarevo trošenje ostavljalo je seljanima mnogo perli, ali malo njihove vredne robe.

Svi seljani su se osećali bogatima – imali su tone perli! Međutim, polako su primetili da i svi ostali takodje imaju tone.

Cene počinju da rastu

Uzgajivač pilića primetio je da sva roba koju je trebalo da kupi na pijaci poskupela. Džak jabuka sada se prodaje za 100 perli – 50 puta više od njihove cene pre nekoliko meseci!

Iako je sada imao hiljade perli, uskoro bi mogao da ostane bez njih zbog ovih cena. Pitao se – da li zaista može sebi da priušti da prodaje svoje piliće za samo 5 perli po komadu? Morao je i on da podigne svoje cene.

Jednostavno rečeno, kao rezultat alhemičarevog trošenja njegovih novostvorenih perli, bilo je previše perli koje su jurile premalo dobara – pa su cene porasle.

Kupci robe bili su spremni da potroše više perli da bi kupili potrebna dobra. Prodavci robe su trebali da naplate više da bi bili sigurni da su zaradili dovoljno da kupe potrebna dobra za sebe.

Budući da su cene svih dobara porasle, možemo reći da se vrednost svake perle smanjila.

Nejednakost bogatstva raste

Seoski starešina, koji je vredno radio da sačuva hiljade perli, sada se našao osiromašenim i gladnim. U međuvremenu, alhemičar je udobno sedeo na svom velikom imanju sa kravama, pilićima i slugama koji su se brinuli za svaki njegov hir.

Alhemičar je efikasno ukrao bogatstvo celog sela, tako što je jeftino proizvodio perle i koristio ih za kupovinu vredne robe.

Ono što je najvažnije, kupio je robu pre nego što je tržište shvatilo da je više perli u opticaju i da ima manje robe, što je dovelo do rasta cena. Ova dodatna proizvodnja perli nije dodala korisnu robu ili usluge selu.

Eksploatacija pomoću Novca: Agri Perle

Nažalost, priča o alhemičaru iz Njutonije nije u potpunosti hipotetička. Ovaj prenos bogatstva kroz stvaranje novca ima istorijske i moderne presedane.

Na primer, afrička plemena su nekada koristila staklene perle, poznate kao “agri perle”, kao sredstvo razmene. U to vreme plemenskim ljudima je bilo veoma teško da prave staklene perle, i one su predstavljale težak novac unutar njihovog plemenskog društva.

Niko nije mogao jeftino da proizvede perle i koristiti ih za kupovinu skupe, vredne robe poput kuća, hrane i odeće.

Perle proizvedene u Gani

Sve se promenilo kada su stigli Evropljani, i primetili upotrebu staklenih perli kao novca.

U to vreme, Evropljani su mogli jeftino da stvaraju staklo u velikim količinama. Kao rezultat toga, Evropljani su počeli tajno da uvoze perle i koriste ih za kupovinu dobara, usluga i robova od Afrikanaca.

Peć za izradu stakla u Muranu, Italija. Ovo ostrvo izvan Venecije proizvodi staklo od 15. veka.

Vremenom se iz Afrike izvlačila vredna roba i ljudi, dok je plemenima ostajalo mnogo perli i malo robe.

Perle su izgubile veći deo vrednosti zbog inflacije uzrokovane snabdevanjem od strane Evropljana.

Rezultat je bio osiromašenje afričkih plemena i bogaćenje Evropljana, kako to ovde objašnjava monetarni istoričar Bezant Denier.

Dragocena roba je kupljena jeftino proizvedenim monetarnim dobrom.

Profitiranje na proizvodnji novca: Emisiona dobit

Ova priča ilustruje kako se bogatstvo prenosi kada jedna grupa može jeftino da proizvodi monetarno dobro.

Razlika između troškova proizvodnje monetarnog dobra i vrednosti tog monetarnog dobra poznata je kao emisiona dobit, eng. seignorage.

Kada je monetarno dobro mnogo vrednije od troškova proizvodnje, ljudi će proizvesti više od monetarnog dobra da bi uhvatili profit od emisione dobiti.

Na kraju će ova povećana ponuda dovesti do pada vrednosti monetarnog dobra. To je zbog zakona ponude i potražnje: kada se ponuda povećava, cena (poznata i kao vrednost) dobra opada.

Novac Gubi Funkciju 2. Deo: Kejnslandski Bankar

U priči o Njutoniji, alhemičar je otkrio način da se od malo peska jeftino stvori više zelenih perli. To se u stvarnosti odigralo kroz trgovinu između Evropljana i Afrikanaca, pričom o agri perlama. Međutim, ove priče su pomalo zastarele – mi više ne trgujemo robom za perle.

Da bismo nas doveli do modernog doba, hajde da promenimo neka imena u našoj priči:

1. Selo Njutonija postaje država koja se zove Kejnsland
2. Alhemičar postaje bankar
3. Seoski starešina postaje penzioner
4. Zelene perle postaju zlato, koje niko ne može jeftinije da stvori – čak ni bankar.

Bankar Menja Papirne Novčanice za Zlato

Kao i u stvarnosti, bankar u ovoj priči nema formulu ili trik da stvori više zlata. Međutim, bankar bezbedno čuva zlato u vlasništvu svakog građanina Kejnslanda. Bankar daje svakom građaninu po jednu potvrdu za svaku uncu zlata koje ima u svom trezoru.

Te potvrde se mogu iskoristiti u bilo koje vreme za stvarno zlato. Papirne potvrde ili novčanice su mnogo pogodnije za plaćanje nego nošenje zlata kroz supermarket.

Građani su srećni – oni imaju prikladno sredstvo plaćanja u vidu bankarevih novčanica, i znaju da niko ne može da ukrade njihovo bogatstvo falsifikujući više zlata.

Građani na kraju počinju da plaćaju u potpunosti papirnim novčanicama, ne trudeći se nikad da zamene svoje novčanice za zlato. Na kraju, novčanice postaju “dobre kao i zlato” – svaka predstavlja fiksnu količinu zlata u bankarevom trezoru.

Ukupno kruži 1.000.000 novčanica, od kojih je svaka otkupljiva za jednu uncu zlata. 1.000.000 unci zlata sedi u bankarevom trezoru. Svaka novčanica je u potpunosti podržana u zlatu.

Starešina koji je sačuvao sve svoje perle u priči o Njutoniji sada je penzioner u Kejnslandu, koji svoje zlato drži u banci i planira da ugodno živi od novčanica koje je dobio zauzvrat.

Hajde da u ovu priču dodamo i novi lik: premijera Kejnslanda. Premijer naplaćuje porez od građana i koristi ga za plaćanje javnih usluga poput policije i vojske. Premijer takođe drži vladino zlato kod bankara.

Bankar Menja Papirne Novčanice za Dug

Premijer želi da osigura da nacionalno zlato ostane na sigurnom, pa banku štiti policijom. Bankar i premijer se zbog toga zbližavaju, pa premijer traži uslugu. Traži od bankara da kreira 200.000 novčanica za premijera, uz obećanje da će mu premijer vratiti za pet godina. Premijeru su novčanice potrebne za finansiranje rata. Građani Kejnslanda borili su se protiv većih poreza zbog finansiranja rata, pa je morao da se obrati bankaru.

Bankar se slaže da izradi novčanice, ali pod jednim uslovom: bankar uzima deo od 10.000 novčanica za sebe. Premijer prihvata posao kojim bankar ’kupuje državni dug’. Sada je u opticaju 1.200.000 novčanica, potpomognutih kombinacijom 1.000.000 unci zlata i ugovorom o dugu sa vladom za 200.000 novčanica.

Premijer troši svoje nove novčanice na bombe kupujući ih od dobavljača iz domaće vojne industrije, a bankar sebi kupuje veliki luksuzni stan.

Dobavljač iz vojne industrije koristi sve nove novčanice koje je dobio od premijera da kupi amonijum nitrat (đubrivo koje se koristi u bombama) za proizvodnju bombi. Sve njegove kupovine povećavaju cenu đubriva za uzgajivače pšenice u Kejnslandu, pa oni podižu cenu pšenice.

Kao uzrok toga, pekar koji kupuje pšenicu treba da podigne cenu svog hleba da bi ostao u poslu. Na taj način cene u Kejnslandu počinju da rastu, baš kao što su to činile u Njutoniji kada su nove perle ušle u opticaj.

Papirne Novčanice Više Ne Predstavljaju Zlato

Penzioner nailazi na finansijski časopis u kojem se pominje premijerov dogovor da se zaduži za finansiranje rata. Obzirom da je mudar, on zna da bombe loše vraćaju ulaganje i sumnja da će premijer ikada da vrati svoj dug.

Ako on ‘podmiri’ svoj dug, to bi ostavilo 1.200.000 novčanica u opticaju sa samo 1.000.000 unci zlata da bi ih podržalo, obezvređujući njegovu ušteđevinu. Već oseća stisak u džepu zbog porasta cena, i on odlučuje da se uputi u lokalnu banku i preda svoje novčanice i zameni ih za zlato, koje niko ne može da napravi u većoj količini.

Kada penzioner stigne u banku, on zatiče i mnoge druge okupljene oko banke. Svi oni se nadaju da će uzeti zlato koje predstavljaju njihove novčanice. Građani Kejnslanda sa pravom se plaše da njihove novčanice gube na vrednosti – oni to već osećaju zbog porasta cena.

Vrata su zaključana, sa obaveštenjem bankara na njima:

Po nalogu premijera, onom koji se plaši za stabilnost ove bankarske institucije, ova banka više neće podržavati konvertibilnost papirnih novčanica u zlato. Hvala vam!

Gomila se razilazi, ostavljena sa jednim izborom: da zadrže svoje novčanice, koje sada vrede manje od 1 unce zlata. Građani sa dovoljno finansijske stabilnosti odlučuju da ulože svoje novčanice u kupovinu akcija banke i kompanija vojne industrije, koje dobro posluju jer mogu da kupuju stvari pre nego što se povećaju tržišne cene.

Mnogi ljudi nisu u mogućnosti da investiraju – oni moraju da gledaju kako njihove zarade stagniraju i kako njihova ušteđevina polako ali sigurno gubi vrednost.

Penzioner, koji se nadao da će živeti od novčanica koje je zaradio tokom svojih 40 radnih godina, sada 40 sati nedeljno provodi iza kase u lokalnoj prodavnici, pitajući se gde je sve pošlo po zlu.

Dug Nikada Nije Otplaćen

Prošlo je nekoliko godina, a premijerov dug prema banci dolazi na naplatu. Budući da je potrošio svih 200.000 novčanica na bombe, koje nemaju baš dobar povraćaj ulaganja, on nema novčanice koje može da vrati banci. Plus, premijer želi da kupi još bombi za svoj rat.

Bankar uverava premijera da je sve u redu. Bankar će napraviti novi ugovor o dugu za 600.000 novčanica, koji bi trebao da stigne na naplatu u narednih 5 godina. Premijer može da iskoristi 200.000 od tih novih 600.000 novčanica da vrati svoj prvobitni dug prema banci, zadrži još 300.000 da kupi još bombi i da 100.000 bankaru da bi mu platio njegove usluge.

To nastavlja da se dešava – svaki put kada dug dospeva na naplatu, bankar stvara više novčanica za vraćanje starijih dugova i daje premijeru još više novca za trošenje. Ovaj ciklus se nastavlja.

Šta se dešava u Kejnslandu?

• Oni koji prvi dobiju nove novčanice, gledaju kako se njihovo bogatstvo povećava
• To uključuje bankara, premijera, vladu i sve one koji mogu da pristupe mogućnostima za investiranje u preduzeća koja prva dobiju nove novčanice (finansijske, vojne itd.).
• Cene roba rastu
• Cene se ne povećavaju ravnomerno – one se povećavaju gde god nove novčanice prvo uđu u ekonomiju i od tog trenutka imaju efekat talasa na tržišta. U našem primeru prvo raste cena amonijum nitrata, zatim cena pšenice, pa cena hleba. A tek na kraju zarade običnih ljudi.
• Štednja i životni standard opšte populacije se smanjuju
• Najviše pate oni koji žive od plate do plate i ne mogu da ulažu. Čak i oni koji su u mogućnosti da investiraju podložni su hirovima tržišta. Mnogi su prisiljeni da prodaju svoje investicije po niskim cenama tokom pada tržišta samo da bi platili svoje dnevne potrebe.
• Razlika u prihodima i bogatstvu između bogatih i siromašnih se povećava
• Bogatstvo opšte populacije se smanjuje, dok se bogatstvo onih koji su blizu mesta gde se troše nove novčanice povećava. Rezultat je disparitet koji se vremenom samo proširuje.

Da li nas novac danas eksploatiše?

Priča o Njutoniji i stvarna priča o agri perlama u Africi deluju pomalo zastarelo. Priča o Kejnslandu, međutim, deluje neobično poznato. U našem svetu cene robe uvek rastu, i vidimo rekordne nivoe nejednakosti u bogatstvu.

U poslednjem odeljku ovog našeg članka Šta je novac, proći ću kroz nastanak bankarstva i korake koji su bili potrebni da se dođe do današnjeg sistema, gde banke i vlade sarađuju u kontroli ekonomije i samog novca.

Šta su banke, i odakle su one došle?

Pojava bankarstva verovatno se dogodila da bi olakšala poljoprivrednu trgovinu i da bi povećala pogodnosti. Iako su se mnoga društva na kraju konvergirala ka upotrebi zlata i srebra kao novca, ovi metali su bili teški i opasni za nošenje kao tovar. Međutim, u mnogim slučajevima ih nije ni trebalo prevoziti. Uzmite ovaj primer:

Grad treba da plati poljoprivrednicima na selu za žito, a poljoprivrednici gradskoj vojsci za zaštitu od varvara. U ovom dogovoru zlato se kreće u oba smera: prema poljoprivrednicima u selu kako bi im se platilo žito, i nazad u grad da bi se platila vojska. Da bi olakšali ove transakcije, preduzetnici su stvorili koncept banke. Banka je zlato čuvala u sigurnom trezoru i izdavala novčanice od papira. Svaka priznanica je predstavljala potvrdu da njen imaoc poseduje određenu količinu zlata u banci. Imaoc novčanice je u svako doba mogao da uzme svoje zlato nazad vraćanjem te novčanice banci.

Korisnici banke mogli su lakše da trguju sa novčanicama od papira, i onaj koji poseduje novčanice mogao je da preuzme njihovo fizičko zlato u bilo kom trenutku. To je te novčanice učinilo “dobrim kao i zlato”.

Banke su izdržavale svoje poslovanje naplaćujući od kupaca naknadu za skladištenje zlata ili pozajmljivanjem dela zlata i zaračunavanjem kamata na njega. Trgovina na ovaj način je mogla da se odvija sa laganim novčanicama od papira umesto sa teškim vrećama zlatnika.

Ovakva praksa sa transakcijama, korišćenjem papirne valute potpomognute monetarnim dobrima, verovatno je započela u Kini u 7. veku.

Na kraju se proširila Evropom 1600-ih, a svoj zalet dobila je u Holandiji sa bankama poput Amsterdamske Wisselbanke. Novčanice Wisselbank-e često su vredele više od zlata koje ih je podržavalo, zbog dodane vrednosti njihovih pogodnosti.

Uspon nacionalnih ‘centralnih banaka’

Tokom vekova, zlato je počelo da se sakuplja u trezorima banaka, jer su ljudi više voleli pogodnosti transakcija sa novčanicama.

Na kraju, nacionalne banke u vlasništvu vlada preuzele su ulogu čuvanja zlata od privatnih banaka koje su započeli preduzetnici.

Nacionalne papirne valute potpomognute zlatnim rezervama u nacionalnim bankama zamenile su novčanice iz privatnih banaka. Sve nacionalne valute bile su jednostavno potvrde za zlato koje se nalazilo u trezoru nacionalne banke.

Ovaj sistem je poznat kao zlatni standard – sve valute su jednostavno predstavljale različite težine zlata.

U gornjem levom uglu novčanice možete videti da piše da je novčanica “zamenljiva za zlato”. Savremeni dolari nemaju ovaj natpis, ali inače izgledaju vrlo slično. Izvor

Zlatni sistem je postojao veći deo vremena, sve do Prvog svetskog rata. Vladama je bilo teško da prikupe novac za ovaj rat putem poreza, pa su morale da budu kreativne.

Kada vlade troše više nego što zarađuju na porezima, to se naziva deficitna potrošnja.

Kako vlade mogu ovo da urade? Vlade to rade tako što pozajmljuju novac prodavajući svoj dug.

Tokom Prvog svetskog rata, vlade su građanima i preduzećima prodavale vrstu duga koja se naziva ratna obveznica. Kada građanin kupi ratnu obveznicu, on preda svoj novac vladi i dobije papir u kojem je stajalo vladino obećanje da će vlasniku obveznice vratiti novac, plus kamate, za nekoliko godina.

Plakat koji obaveštava građane, tražeći od njih da kupe ratne obveznice – što predstavlja zajam vladi. Izvor

Centralne banke ‘monetizuju’ državni dug

Međutim, građani i preduzeća nisu bili voljni da kupe dovoljno ratnih obveznica za finansiranje Prvog svetskog rata.

Vlade se nisu predale – pa su zatražile od svojih nacionalnih ‘centralnih banaka’ da one kupe ove obveznice. Centralne banke su otkupile obveznice, ali ih nisu platile valutom potpomognutom postojećim zlatnim rezervama, kao što su to činili građani i banke prilikom kupovine obveznica.

Centralne banke su umesto toga davale vladi novu, sveže štampanu papirnu valutu potpomognutu samo obveznicom. Ovu valutu podržalo je samo obećanje da će im vlada vratiti dugove. Ovo je poznato kao monetizacija duga.

Budući da su ratne obveznice i valuta samo komadi papira, one su lake i jeftine za proizvodnju i mogu se napraviti u ogromnim količinama. Ono što ograničava proizvodnju i jednog i drugog je poverenje.

Ima smisla da se neko rastane od svog teško stečenog novca da kupi državnu obveznicu, samo ako veruje da će vlada da vrati svoj dug, plus kamate. Centralna banka je “krajnji kupac”, što znači da će ona da kupi državne obveznice kada to niko drugi neće da uradi.

Zapamtite, centralnu banku gotovo da ništa ne košta da kupi državne obveznice, jer oni sami štampaju valutu da bi ih kupili.

Zamislite da pridjete najskupljem automobilu u autosalonu – koji košta 100.000 USD. Mislite da je automobil lep, ali taj novac biste radije potrošili na lepši stan – tako da ste spremni da platite samo 40.000 USD za taj auto.

Sada, hajde da zamislimo da imate štampač za novac i da vas košta samo 50 USD za mastilo i papir da bi ištampali 1.000.000 USD. Vi biste odmah kupili auto, čak i ako biste morali da se cenkate sa drugim čovekom, i da ga na kraju platite 150.000 USD!

Ista stvar se dešava kada centralna banka kupuje obveznice (dugove) od vlade. Centralna banka može da stvori valutu toliko jeftino, da su spremni da plate i više nego što bi drugi platili ove obveznice i nastaviće da ih kupuju čak i kada niko drugi ne bude želeo.

Monetizacija duga uzrokuje inflaciju

Kada centralne banke monetizuju državni dug, funkcija novca kao zalihe vrednosti počinje da se nagriza. Vlada troši novi novac koji je dobila od svoje centralne banke na ratnu robu, obroke i još mnogo toga.

Cene roba rastu od ove novoštampane valute koja kruži kroz ekonomiju. Kada se cene povećavaju, to znači da se vrednost svake jedinice valute smanjuje. Svi koji drže valutu sada imaju manje vrednosti. Danas to nazivamo sporim gubitkom funkcije zalihe vrednosti u novčanoj inflaciji.

Za Nemačku nakon Prvog svetskog rata monetizacija duga izazvala je totalni slom Nemačke ekonomije i stvorila uslove za rast fašizma.

Kao deo sporazuma o prekidu vatre koji je okončao Prvi svetski rat, Nemačka je pobednicima morala da plati ogroman novac. Nemačkoj vladi je bio preko potreban novac, pa su prodale obveznice (dug) Rajhsbanci, nemačkoj centralnoj banci.

Ovaj postupak doveo je do toga da je vlada štampala toliko maraka (tadašnja nemačka valuta) da je tempo inflacije u Nemačkoj ubrzan u hiperinflaciju početkom 1920-ih. Cena vekne hleba za samo 4 godine popela se sa 1,2 marke na 428 biliona maraka.

Tokom i posle Prvog svetskog rata, SAD, Britanija, Francuska i mnoge druge vlade pratile su Nemačku u štampanju valute potpomognute državnim dugom.

To je dovelo do toga da su građani želeli da svoju papirnu valutu zamene za zlato, baš kao i penzioner iz priče o Kejnslandu.

Međutim, mnoge vlade su suspendovale konvertibilnost svojih valuta u zlato. Ovim potezom vlade su primorale svoje građane da drže nacionalnu papirnu valutu i gledaju kako se njihova ušteda smanjuje u vrednosti.

Da bi mogle da nastave da štampaju novac i da bi ga trošile na nepopularne programe za koje nisu mogle da skupljaju poreze za finansiranje – poput ratova.

Bretton Woods: Novi monetarni sistem

Nakon razaranja koja su donela dva svetska rata, vlade su uspostavile novi globalni monetarni sistem prema Bretton Woods-ovom sporazumu iz 1944. godine.

Prema ovom sporazumu, valuta svake države konvertovala se po fiksnom kursu sa američkim dolarom. Američki dolar je zauzvrat predstavljao zlato po stopi od 35 USD za jednu trojsku uncu zlata*.

Sve globalne valute su stoga još uvek bile jednostavna reprezentacija zlata, putem američkih dolara kao posrednika. Redovni građani više nisu mogli da otkupljuju svoje valute za zlato iz Sjedinjenih Država. Međutim, strane centralne banke mogle bi da dođu u Sjedinjene Države da bi zamenile dolare za zlato po stopi od 35 USD za jednu uncu zlata.

Međutim, vlada Sjedinjenih Država nije uvek držala dovoljno zlata da podrži sve dolare u opticaju. Američka vlada nastavila je da finansira proširene socijalne i vojne programe prodajom državnog duga svojoj centralnoj banci, Federalnim rezervama, koja je povećala ponudu dolara bez povećanja ponude zlata koja podupire te dolare.

*Trojna unca je standardna mera čistog zlata i ima malo veću težinu od normalne unce.

Propast Bretton Woods-a

Tokom 1970-ih, sve veći troškovi rata u Vijetnamu i stranih vlada koje su otkupljivale svoje dolare za zlato, stvorili su pritisak na Trezor Sjedinjenih Država.

Ponuda dolara je porasla, dok je zlato u posedu Sjedinjenih Država opalo. Od 1950. pa do početka 1970-ih, rezerve zlata koje je držala vlada Sjedinjenih Država smanjile su se za više od 50%, sa 20 metričkih tona na samo 8 metričkih tona.

Godine 1970. država je imala zlata u vrednosti od samo 12 biliona dolara po zvaničnom kursu od 35 dolara za trojsku uncu zlata. Tokom ovog istog vremenskog perioda, ukupna ponuda američkih dolara otišla je sa oko 32 biliona USD na skoro 70 biliona USD.

Zvanične rezerve zlata u SAD-u su naglo padale od 1950. do 1970. godine, dok su se dolari u opticaju povećavali. Izvor: Wikipedia, DollarDaze.org

Američka vlada nije bila u stanju da potkrepi dolare zlatom od 35 dolara po trojnoj unci, što dovelo do rizika za čitav globalni monetarni sistem.

Početkom sedamdesetih godina, trojna unca zlata trebala je da vredi 200 USD da bi u potpunosti podržala sve američke dolare u opticaju. Rečeno na drugi način, Sjedinjene Države su pokušavale da kažu svetu da jedan dolar vredi 1/35 trojne unce zlata, ali u stvarnosti dolar je vredeo samo 1/200 trojne unce.

Kad su strane vlade trebale da pribave dolare za međunarodnu trgovinu i rezerve, bile su opelješene. Francuska vlada je to shvatila šezdesetih godina prošlog veka i počela je da prodaje svoje američke dolare za zlato po zvaničnom kursu od 35 dolara za trojsku uncu zlata.

Zemlje su počinjale da se bude iz šeme američke vlade. SAD su krale bogatstvo putem emisione dobiti, prodajući dolare za 1/35 trojne unce zlata, kada su vredeli samo 1/200 trojske unce.

Nixonov Šok ulazi u ’tradicionalni’ novac

Da bi kuća od karata mogla da ostane na mestu, predsednik Nixon je 1971. najavio da će američka vlada privremeno da obustavi konvertibilnost dolara u zlato.

Strane vlade više nisu mogle da polažu pravo na zlato svojim papirnim dolarima, a dolar više nije bio “poduprt” zlatom. Nixon je tvrdio da će ovo stabilizovati dolar.

50 godina kasnije, kristalno je jasno da je ovo samo pomoglo dolaru da izgubi vrednost i da ovaj “privremeni” program još uvek traje.

Pre 1971. godine, sve globalne valute bile su vezane za američki dolar putem Bretton Woods-ovog sporazuma. Kada je Nixon promenio američki dolar iz dolara podržanog u zlatu u dolar podržan dugom, ovim je promenio i svaku drugu valutu na Zemlji.

Sam je učinio da se celokupna svetska ekonomija zasniva na dugovima. Valute više nisu predstavljale zlato, već su predstavljale vrednost državnog duga.

Zlatni Standard se nikada nije vratio

Konvertibilnost američkih dolara u zlato – zlatni standard – nikada se nije vratio.

Od 1971. godine, čitav globalni monetarni sistem pokreće se tradicionalnim “fiat” valutama: poverenjem u vladine institucije da održavaju valutni sistem.

Većina valuta podržana je kombinacijom duga njihove vlade i drugih tradicionalnih valuta poput dolara i evra. Papirne valute više nisu podržane zlatom, imovinom koja je više od 5000 godina služila kao težak novac.

Danas vas vlade prisiljavaju da plaćate porez u njihovoj valuti i manipulišu saznanjima oko novca kako bi osigurale da potražnja za njihovom valutom ostane velika.

To im omogućava da neprestano štampaju više valuta, da bi je potrošili na vladine projekte, uzrokujući inflaciju cena koja jede i smanjuje bogatstvo i plate.

Američka vlada sada prodaje državne obveznice (dugove), poznate kao obveznice Trezora SAD, eng. US Treasuries, komercijalnim bankama u zamenu za američke dolare.

Vlada koristi te dolare za finansiranje svog budžetskog deficita. Komercijalne banke prodaju mnoge obveznice Trezora SAD, koje su kupile, američkoj centralnoj banci, Federalnim Rezervama.

Federalne rezerve plaćaju komercijalnim bankama sveže štampanim novcem “pomoću računara i upisivanjem količine na račun”, kako je rekao bivši predsednik Fed-a Ben Bernanke.

Ove komercijalne banke često zarađuju samo kupujući obveznice Trezora SAD od države i prodajući ih centralnoj banci. Kupujte nisko, prodajte visoko.

Centralne banke ovaj proces kupovine državnog duga – odnosno pozajmljivanja novca državi – nazivaju operacijama otvorenog tržišta.

Kada centralna banka odjednom kupi velike iznose duga, oni to nazivaju kvantitativnim ublažavanjem. Centralne banke javno najavljuju kupovinu državnog duga, ali vrlo malo ljudi razume šta to zapravo znači.

Euro, jen i svaka druga valuta koja se danas koristi funkcionišu slično kao američki dolar.

Da li će SAD ikada vratiti svoj nacionalni dug? Neobična stvar u vezi sa državnim dugom SAD-a je ta što vlada poseduje štampariju potrebnu za njegovu otplatu.

Kao rezultat toga, kada vlada duguje novac, oni samo pozajme još više novca da bi otplatile taj dug, povećavajući nacionalni dug.

Ako vam ovo zvuči kao Ponzijeva piramidalna šema, to je zato što ona to i jeste – najveća Ponzijeva šema u istoriji. Kao i svaka Ponzijeva šema, nastaviće se sve dok su ljudi koji kupuju Ponzijevu šemu budu uvereni da će im biti plaćeno nazad.

Ako ljudi i nacije prestanu da se zadužuju i koriste američke dolare jer nemaju poverenja u američku vladu ili vide da cena robe raste (tj. dolar postaje sve manje vredan), potražnja za dolarom će opadati, što će izazvati začaranu spiralu.

Ova spirala često završi u hiperinflaciji, kao što smo videli u novijoj istoriji sa Jugoslavijom, Venecuelom, Argentinom, Zimbabveom i mnogim drugim državama.

Ovo je način kako funkcioniše novac na vašem bankovnom računu. Novac svake nacije na svetu pati od istih problema kao i perle i novčanice u pričama o Njutoniji i Kejnslandu.

Kako banke i vlade kradu tvoj novac?

Tokom vekova, stigli smo do monetarnog sistema u kojem banke i vlade mogu da štampaju novu valutu za finansiranje svojih operacija i svojih prijatelja u zločinu, dok kradu bogatstvo svojih građana.

Šta će se desiti sa svetom kada novac bude mogao da štampa svaki narod na planeti?

• Bogatstvo onih koji su blizu pravljenja nove valute se povećava
• Vlada i politički povlašćena klasa ljudi, imaju pristup novoštampanom novcu pre svih ostalih, pa mogu da ga potroše pre nego što cene porastu. Na ovaj efekat pokazao je ekonomista Richard Cantillon sredinom 1700-ih i poznat je kao Cantillonov Efekat.
• Cena robe raste (poznato kao inflacija)
• Ne raste sve roba istovremeno u ceni. Roba blizu mesta gde se proizvodi nova valuta – finansijski sektor i vlada – prva raste, i odatle uzrokuje efekt talasa na cene.
• Inflacija se često predstavlja kao promena cene potrošačke korpe, poznata kao Indeks Potrošačkih Cena, eng. Consumer Price Index (CPI). Vlada ima alate za manipulisanje ovim brojem kako bi osigurala da se ona čini niskom i stabilnom, kao što je objašnjeno u našem članku o inflaciji.
• Finansijska imovina često primećuje ogromnu inflaciju, ali bankari to ne nazivaju inflacijom – oni kažu da naša ekonomija cveta! Nakon što su američke Federalne rezerve učetvorostručile ponudu američkih dolara u šest godina nakon finansijske krize 2008. godine, banke koje su dobile te nove dolare, kupile su akcije i obveznice, stvarajući ogroman balon u cenama ove imovine.
• Štednja i životni standard stanovništva se smanjuju
• Plate su jedna od poslednjih “cena” u ekonomiji koja se prilagođava, jer se često povećavaju samo jednom godišnje. U međuvremenu, cene dnevnih potrepština te osobe koja zaradjuje platu neprestano rastu kako novi novac kruži ekonomijom.
• Najviše su pogođeni oni koji žive od plate do plate – a to je 70% Amerikanaca.
• Razlike u prihodima između bogatih i siromašnih se povećavaju, kao što se vidi na grafikonu ispod.

Koncentracija Dohotka na Vrhu Naglo je Porasla od 1970-ih (Udeo u ukupnom prihodu pre oporezivanja u domaćinstvima sa najvišim dohotkom (uključujući kapitalne dobitke), 1913-2018)

Zašto i dalje imamo isti monetarni sistem?

Ako ovaj sistem bogate još više obogaćuje, a siromašne još više osiromašuje, dovodeći do političke nestabilnosti, zašto ga onda ne bismo promenili?

Najveći razlog zašto se ništa ne menja je verovatno to što puno toga ne znamo o samom sistemu. Svi svakodnevno koristimo valute svojih vlada, ali većina nas ne razume kako sistem funkcioniše i šta on čini našim društvima.

Obrazovni sistem, mediji i finansijski stručnjaci neprestano nam govore da je monetarni sistem previše komplikovan da bi ga normalni ljudi razumeli. Mnogi od nas se zato i ne trude da pokušaju.

Još nekoliko razloga zašto ovaj sistem nastavlja da opstaje:

• Mnogo je ljudi koji imaju direktnu korist od štampanja novog novca.
• Ti ljudi ne žele nikakve promene i bore se da zadrže tu moć.
• Nacionalne valute su često pogodne
• Kreditne kartice, online bankarstvo i još mnogo toga čine upravljanje nacionalnim valutama i njihovo trošenje lakim i jednostavnim.
• Građani moraju da plaćaju porez u svojoj nacionalnoj valuti
• To stvara potražnju za tom valutom od svih građana, povećavajući njenu vrednost.
• Glavna međunarodna tržišta, poput nafte, denominirana su u dolarima.
• Nafta je potrebna svakoj zemlji na planeti, ali pošto mnogi ne mogu da je proizvode, moraju da je kupuju na međunarodnim berzama. Od 1970-ih na ovim berzama gotovo sva nafta se prodaje za dolare, što stvara potražnju za dolarima. Da bi se odmaknule od ovog sistema, zemlje bi trebale da pronađu novu valutu ili robu za trgovinu naftom, što zahteva vreme i rizike.
• Nije postojala dobra alternativa
• Uz globalnu ekonomiju u realnom vremenu, naš sistem digitalnog bankarstva koji koristi nacionalne valute je pogodan. Transakcija u tvrdom novcu poput zlata bila bi previše nezgrapna za današnji svet. Digitalna valuta pod nazivom Bitcoin, predstavljena 2009. godine, je rastuća alternativa koja nudi čvrst novac koji se kreće brzinom interneta.

Šta je novac, i zašto trebate da brinete?

Novac je alat koji olakšava razmenu dobara. Kao i svako drugo dobro, novac se pridržava zakona ponude i potražnje – povećanje potražnje povećaće njegovu vrednost, a povećanje ponude smanjiće njegovu vrednost.

Na ovaj način novac se ne razlikuje od kuće ili piletine. Međutim, velika prodajnost novca znači da je potražnja za njim uvek velika. Kao rezultat, novac mora biti težak za proizvodnju (a samim tim i ograničen u ponudi) ili će ga onaj ko ga može napraviti, stvoriti toliko, da vremenom više neće služiti kao zaliha vrednosti. Uskoro će izgubiti svoje funkcije kao sredstvo razmene i obračunske jedinice.

Najbolji novac u datoj ekonomiji je onaj koji se najslobodnije kreće – svi ga žele, lako je obaviti transakcije sa njim i koji sa vremenom dobro drži svoju vrednost. Nijedan novac nije savršen u svemu ovome, a neki ističu jednu funkciju novca na štetu drugih.

Iako se istorija ne ponavlja, ona se rimuje, a usponi i padovi monetarnih sistema imaju jasne ritmove. Uspon i pad monetarnog sistema često sledi opšti obrazac koji smo videli u pričama o agri perlama i Kejnslandu: pojavljuje se odredjenji oblik novca koji pomaže ljudima da efikasnije trguju i štede, ali na kraju gubi na vrednosti kada neko shvati kako da ga jeftino stvori u velikoj količini. Međutim, tokom dugog perioda vremena, monetarni sistemi su se poboljšali u sve tri funkcije novca.

Na primer, zlato je tokom vremena dobro služilo kao zaliha vrednosti. Međutim, naša međusobno povezana ekonomija ne bi mogla efikasno da funkcioniše ako bi trebalo da fizičko zlato zamenimo robom i uslugama. Mnogo je lakše kretati se na papirnom i digitalnom novcu, ali istorija nam govori da su vlade i bankari iskoristili ove oblike novca za krađu bogatstva putem inflacije.

Današnji globalni monetarni sistem je vrlo zgodan, a digitalna plaćanja i kreditne kartice olakšavaju trošenje novca. Ovo skriva stalnu inflaciju koja nagriza vrednost svake jedinice novca i dovodi do sve većeg jaza u bogatstvu.

Nadam se da je ovaj članak proširio vaše razumevanje novca i njegove uloge u društvu. Ovo je samo početak svega što treba istražiti o novcu: za kasnije su sačuvane teme o inflaciji, kamatnim stopama, pozajmljivanju, poslovnim ciklusima i još mnogo toga.

Efikasnija Ušteda Novca

Možda se pitate kako zaštititi svoju štednju kada svaki oblik često korišćenog novca i investicija pati od inflacije ponude – koja umanjuje vrednost i prenosi bogatstvo onima koji mogu da stvore novac ili investiciju. Možda se čini da se ništa na planeti danas ne može kvalifikovati kao ‘težak’ novac, ali dve stvari ipak ostaju: zlato i njegov noviji rođak Bitcoin. Obe ove stvari je neverovatno teško proizvesti, a jedna od njih se kreće brzinom interneta i može se čuvati u vašem mozgu.

Ako želite da saznate više o Bitcoin-u kao sredstvu za zaštitu vaše ušteđevine, pročitajte ovde. Ako ste već spremni za kupovinu Bitcoin-a, pogledajte moj vodič za kupovinu Bitcoin-a. Možete početi sa investiranjem sa samo 5 ili 10 €.

Zasluge

Hvala svima koji su pomogli u izradi i uređivanju ove serije o novcu: @ck_SNARKS, @CryptoRothbard, Neil Woodfine, Emil Sandstedt, Taylor Pearson, Parker Lewis, Jason Choi, mojoj porodici i mnogim drugima.

Hvala svima koji su ovo inspirisali i razvili ključne ideje koje su ovde primenjene: Friedrich Hayek, Carl Menger, Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Saifedean Ammous, Dan Held, Pierre Rochard, Stephan Livera, Michael Goldstein, i mnogi drugi.

Molim vas da šerujete! Ako vam je ovaj članak otvorio oči o tome kako funkcioniše naš novac i finansijski sistem, kontaktirajte me ili ostavite komentar!

Ako vam se sviđa moj rad, molim vas da ga podelite sa svojim prijateljima i porodicom. Cilj mi je da svima pružim pogled u ekonomiju i na to kako ona utiče na njihov život.

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

In our culture today, people like to have “my truth” as opposed to “your truth.” They want to have teachers who tell them what they want to hear and worship in the way they desire. The Bible predicted these times.

For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. (2 Timothy 4:3)

My question is, “do we get to choose what we want to believe about God and how we want to worship Him, or does God tell us what we are to believe and how we are to worship Him?”

The Bible makes it clear that He is who He says He is and He expects obedience and worship according to His commands. We do not get to decide for ourselves.

The woman said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and you people say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.” Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:19-24) {emphasis mine}

In this passage, Jesus gently corrects the woman for worshipping what she does not know. He also says, “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” He states what God is (spirit) and how He must be worshipped “in spirit and truth.” We don’t get to define God however we wish, and we don’t get to worship Him any way we wish. God is who He has revealed Himself to be and we must obey Him and worship Him the way He has commanded.

In this next passage, God makes clear that He is holy and we do not get to worship Him any way we wish. We are to interact with Him in the prescribed manner.

Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took their respective firepans, and after putting fire in them, placed incense on it and offered strange fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them. And fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord. Then Moses said to Aaron, “It is what the Lord spoke, saying,

‘By those who come near Me I will be treated as holy,\ And before all the people I will be honored.’ ”

So Aaron, therefore, kept silent. (Leviticus 10:1-3) {emphasis mine}

God had prescribed a particular way to approach Him and only those whom He had chosen (priests of the lineage of Aaron). Nadab and Abihu chose to “do it their way” and paid the price for ignoring God’s command. God set an example with them.

God has been gracious enough to reveal Himself, His character, His power, and His commands to us. If we have truly submitted ourselves to His rule, we should hunger for God’s words so we can know Him better and honor Him in obedience.

But now I come to You; and these things I speak in the world so that they may have My joy made full in themselves. I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth. (John 17:13-17) {emphasis mine}

In today’s culture, everybody likes to claim their own personal truth, but that isn’t how truth works. The truth is not determined by an individual for themselves. It isn’t even determined by a consensus or majority vote. The truth is the truth even if not one person on earth believes it. God speaks truth and God is truth. Our belief or lack thereof doesn’t change the truth, but our lack of belief in the truth, especially the truth as revealed by God in His word, can negatively affect our relationship with God.

God expects us to study His word so we can obey His commands.

For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you will be My people; and you will walk in all the way which I command you, that it may be well with you.’ Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but walked in their own counsels and in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and went backward and not forward. Since the day that your fathers came out of the land of Egypt until this day, I have sent you all My servants the prophets, daily rising early and sending them. Yet they did not listen to Me or incline their ear, but stiffened their neck; they did more evil than their fathers. (Jeremiah 7:22-26) {emphasis mine}

Today you rarely see someone bowing down to a golden idol, but that doesn’t mean that we are any better at obeying God’s commands or submitting to His will. We still try to make God in our own image so He is a convenience to us and how we want to live our lives. We still put other things ahead of God — family, work, entertainment, fame, etc. Most of us aren’t any more faithful to God than the Israelites were. Just like the Israelites, we put on the trappings of faith but don’t live according to faith and faithfulness.

And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:

‘This people honors Me with their lips,\ But their heart is far away from Me.\ **But in vain do they worship Me,\ Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’\ Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”

He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. (Mark 7:6-9) {emphasis mine}

How many “churches” and “Christian” leaders teach people according to the culture instead of according to the Word of God? How many tell people what they want to hear and what makes them feel good instead of what they need to hear — the truth as spoken through the Bible? How many church attenders follow a “Christian” leader more than they follow their Creator, Savior, and God? How many church attenders can recite the words of their leaders better than the Holy Scriptures?

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. But you, be sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry. (2 Timothy 4:1-5) {emphasis mine}

How can we know if a church leader is rightly preaching God’s word? We can only know if we have read the Bible and studied it. We should be like the Bereans:

Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. (Acts 17:11)

Honestly, I don’t trust any spiritual leader who doesn’t encourage me to search the Scriptures to see whether their words are true. Any leader who puts their own word above the Scriptures is a false teacher. Sadly there are many, maybe more than faithful teachers. Some false teachers are intentionally so, but many have been misled by other false teachers. Their guilt is less, but they don’t do any less harm than those who intentionally mislead.

We need to seek trustworthy teachers who speak according to the Word of God, who quote the Bible to support their opinions, and who seek the good of their followers rather than the submission of their followers.

Do not harden your hearts, as at Meribah,\ As in the day of Massah in the wilderness,

“When your fathers tested Me,\ They tried Me, though they had seen My work.\ For forty years I loathed that generation,\ And said they are a people who err in their heart,\ And they do not know My ways.\ Therefore I swore in My anger,\ Truly they shall not enter into My rest.” (Psalm 95:8-11) {emphasis mine} *Teach me good discernment and knowledge,\ For I believe in Your commandments*.\ Before I was afflicted I went astray,\ But now I keep Your word.\ You are good and do good;\ Teach me Your statutes.\ The arrogant have forged a lie against me;\ *With all my heart I will observe Your precepts*.\ Their heart is covered with fat,\ But I delight in Your law.\ It is good for me that I was afflicted,\ That I may learn Your statutes.\ The law of Your mouth is better to me\ Than thousands of gold and silver pieces. (Psalm 119:66-72) {emphasis mine}

May our Creator God teach us the truth. May He fill our hearts with the desire to be in His word daily and to seek His will. May He do what is necessary to get our attention and turn our hearts and minds fully to Him, so we can learn His statutes and serve Him faithfully, so one day we are blessed to hear, “Well done! Good and faithful servant.”

Trust Jesus.

FYI, I see lack of knowledge of truth and God’s word as one of the biggest problems in the church today; however, it is possible to know the Bible in depth, but not know God. As important as knowledge of Scriptures is, this knowledge (without faith, submission, obedience, and love) is meaningless. Knowledge doesn’t get us to heaven. Even obedience doesn’t get us to heaven. Only faith and submission to our creator God leads to salvation and heaven. That being said, we can’t faithfully serve our God without knowledge of Him and His commands. Out of gratefulness for who He is and what He has done for us, we should seek to know and please Him.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

For years American bitcoin miners have argued for more efficient and free energy markets. It benefits everyone if our energy infrastructure is as efficient and robust as possible. Unfortunately, broken incentives have led to increased regulation throughout the sector, incentivizing less efficient energy sources such as solar and wind at the detriment of more efficient alternatives.

The result has been less reliable energy infrastructure for all Americans and increased energy costs across the board. This naturally has a direct impact on bitcoin miners: increased energy costs make them less competitive globally.

Bitcoin mining represents a global energy market that does not require permission to participate. Anyone can plug a mining computer into power and internet to get paid the current dynamic market price for their work in bitcoin. Using cellphone or satellite internet, these mines can be located anywhere in the world, sourcing the cheapest power available.

Absent of regulation, bitcoin mining naturally incentivizes the build out of highly efficient and robust energy infrastructure. Unfortunately that world does not exist and burdensome regulations remain the biggest threat for US based mining businesses. Jurisdictional arbitrage gives miners the option of moving to a friendlier country but that naturally comes with its own costs.

Enter AI. With the rapid development and release of AI tools comes the requirement of running massive datacenters for their models. Major tech companies are scrambling to secure machines, rack space, and cheap energy to run full suites of AI enabled tools and services. The most valuable and powerful tech companies in America have stumbled into an accidental alliance with bitcoin miners: THE NEED FOR CHEAP AND RELIABLE ENERGY.

Our government is corrupt. Money talks. These companies will push for energy freedom and it will greatly benefit us all.

@ b1ddb4d7:471244e7

This article was originally published on aier.org

Even after eleven years experience, and a per Bitcoin price of nearly $20,000, the incredulous are still with us. I understand why. Bitcoin is not like other traditional financial assets.

Even describing it as an asset is misleading. It is not the same as a stock, as a payment system, or a money. It has features of all these but it is not identical to them.

What Bitcoin is depends on its use as a means of storing and porting value, which in turn rests of secure titles to ownership of a scarce good. Those without experience in the sector look at all of this and get frustrated that understanding why it is valuable is not so easy to grasp. 

In this article, I’m updating an analysis I wrote six years ago. It still holds up. For those who don’t want to slog through the entire article, my thesis is that Bitcoin’s value obtains from its underlying technology, which is an open-source ledger that keeps track of ownership rights and permits the transfer of these rights. Bitcoin managed to bundle its unit of account with a payment system that lives on the ledger. That’s its innovation and why it obtained a value and that value continues to rise. 

Consider the criticism offered by traditional gold advocates, who have, for decades, pushed the idea that sound money must be backed by something real, hard, and independently valuable. Bitcoin doesn’t qualify, right? Maybe it does. 

Bitcoin first emerged as a possible competitor to national, government-managed money in 2009. Satoshi Nakamoto’s white paper was released October 31, 2008. The structure and language of this paper sent the message: This currency is for computer technicians, not economists nor political pundits. The paper’s circulation was limited; novices who read it were mystified. 

But the lack of interest didn’t stop history from moving forward. Two months later, those who were paying attention saw the emergence of the “Genesis Block,” the first group of bitcoins generated through Nakamoto’s concept of a distributed ledger that lived on any computer node in the world that wanted to host it.

Here we are all these years later and a single bitcoin trades at $18,500. The currency is held and accepted by many thousands of institutions, both online and offline. Its payment system is very popular in poor countries without vast banking infrastructures but also in developed countries. And major institutions—including the Federal Reserve, the OECD, the World Bank, and major investment houses—are paying respectful attention and weaving blockchain technology into their operations.

Enthusiasts, who are found in every country, say that its exchange value will soar even more in the future because its supply is strictly limited and it provides a system vastly superior to government money. Bitcoin is transferred between individuals without a third party. It is relatively low-cost to exchange. It has a predictable supply. It is durable, fungible, and divisible: all crucial features of money. It creates a monetary system that doesn’t depend on trust and identity, much less on central banks and government. It is a new system for the digital age.

Hard lessons for hard money

To those educated in the “hard money” tradition, the whole idea has been a serious challenge. Speaking for myself, I had been reading about bitcoin for two years before I came anywhere close to understanding it. There was just something about the whole idea that bugged me. You can’t make money out of nothing, much less out of computer code. Why does it have value then? There must be something amiss. This is not how we expected money to be reformed.

There’s the problem: our expectations. We should have been paying closer attention to Ludwig von Mises’ theory of money’s origins—not to what we think he wrote, but to what he actually did write. 

In 1912, Mises released The Theory of Money and Credit. It was a huge hit in Europe when it came out in German, and it was translated into English. While covering every aspect of money, his core contribution was in tracing the value and price of money—and not just money itself—to its origins. That is, he explained how money gets its price in terms of the goods and services it obtains. He later called this process the “regression theorem,” and as it turns out, bitcoin satisfies the conditions of the theorem.

Mises’ teacher, Carl Menger, demonstrated that money itself originates from the market—not from the State and not from social contract. It emerges gradually as monetary entrepreneurs seek out an ideal form of commodity for indirect exchange. Instead of merely bartering with each other, people acquire a good not to consume, but to trade. That good becomes money, the most marketable commodity.

But Mises added that the value of money traces backward in time to its value as a bartered commodity. Mises said that this is the only way money can have value.

The theory of the value of money as such can trace back the objective exchange value of money only to that point where it ceases to be the value of money and becomes merely the value of a commodity…. If in this way we continually go farther and farther back we must eventually arrive at a point where we no longer find any component in the objective exchange value of money that arises from valuations based on the function of money as a common medium of exchange; where the value of money is nothing other than the value of an object that is useful in some other way than as money…. Before it was usual to acquire goods in the market, not for personal consumption, but simply in order to exchange them again for the goods that were really wanted, each individual commodity was only accredited with that value given by the subjective valuations based on its direct utility.

Mises’ explanation solved a major problem that had long mystified economists. It is a narrative of conjectural history, and yet it makes perfect sense. Would salt have become money had it otherwise been completely useless? Would beaver pelts have obtained monetary value had they not been useful for clothing? Would silver or gold have had money value if they had no value as commodities first? The answer in all cases of monetary history is clearly no. The initial value of money, before it becomes widely traded as money, originates in its direct utility. It’s an explanation that is demonstrated through historical reconstruction. That’s Mises’ regression theorem.

Bitcoin’s Use Value

At first glance, bitcoin would seem to be an exception. You can’t use a bitcoin for anything other than money. It can’t be worn as jewelry. You can’t make a machine out of it. You can’t eat it or even decorate with it. Its value is only realized as a unit that facilitates indirect exchange. And yet, bitcoin already is money. It’s used every day. You can see the exchanges in real time. It’s not a myth. It’s the real deal.

It might seem like we have to choose. Is Mises wrong? Maybe we have to toss out his whole theory. Or maybe his point was purely historical and doesn’t apply in the future of a digital age. Or maybe his regression theorem is proof that bitcoin is just an empty mania with no staying power, because it can’t be reduced to its value as a useful commodity.

And yet, you don’t have to resort to complicated monetary theory in order to understand the sense of alarm surrounding bitcoin. Many people, as I did, just have a feeling of uneasiness about a money that has no basis in anything physical. Sure, you can print out a bitcoin on a piece of paper, but having a paper with a QR code or a public key is not enough to relieve that sense of unease.

How can we resolve this problem? In my own mind, I toyed with the issue for more than a year. It puzzled me. I wondered if Mises’ insight applied only in a pre-digital age. I followed the speculations online that the value of bitcoin would be zero but for the national currencies into which it is converted. Perhaps the demand for bitcoin overcame the demands of Mises’ scenario because of a desperate need for something other than the dollar.

As time passed—and I read the work of Konrad Graf, Peter Surda, and Daniel Krawisz—finally the resolution came. Bitcoin is both a payment system and a money. The payment system is the source of value, while the accounting unit merely expresses that value in terms of price. The unity of money and payment is its most unusual feature, and the one that most commentators have had trouble wrapping their heads around.

We are all used to thinking of currency as separate from payment systems. This thinking is a reflection of the technological limitations of history. There is the dollar and there are credit cards. There is the euro and there is PayPal. There is the yen and there are wire services. In each case, money transfer relies on third-party service providers. In order to use them, you need to establish what is called a “trust relationship” with them, which is to say that the institution arranging the deal has to believe that you are going to pay.

This wedge between money and payment has always been with us, except for the case of physical proximity.

If I give you a dollar for your pizza slice, there is no third party. But payment systems, third parties, and trust relationships become necessary once you leave geographic proximity. That’s when companies like Visa and institutions like banks become indispensable. They are the application that makes the monetary software do what you want it to do.

The hitch is that

@ e39333da:7c66e53a

::youtube{#prPOncMkV6c}

Tara Gaming has announced The Age of Bhaarat, a dark fantasy action RPG, with a cinematic and gameplay trailer, showcasing what seems like early footage of the game. The game will release on PC via Steam.

@ b1ddb4d7:471244e7

Breez, a leader in Lightning Network infrastructure, and Spark, a bitcoin-native Layer 2 (L2) platform, today announced a groundbreaking collaboration to empower developers with tools to seamlessly integrate self-custodial bitcoin payments into everyday applications.

The partnership introduces a new implementation of the Breez SDK built on Spark’s bitcoin-native infrastructure, accelerating the evolution of bitcoin from “digital gold” to a global, permissionless currency.

The Breez SDK is expanding

We’re joining forces with @buildonspark to release a new nodeless implementation of the Breez SDK — giving developers the tools they need to bring Bitcoin payments to everyday apps.

→ https://t.co/iWjZhWRwsx

Bitcoin-Native
Powered by Spark’s…

— Breez (@Breez_Tech) May 22, 2025

A Bitcoin-Native Leap for Developers

The updated Breez SDK leverages Spark’s L2 architecture to deliver a frictionless, bitcoin-native experience for developers.

Key features include:

• Universal Compatibility: Bindings for all major programming languages and frameworks.
• LNURL & Lightning Address Support: Streamlined integration for peer-to-peer transactions.
• Real-Time Interaction: Instant mobile notifications for payment confirmations.
• No External Reliance: Built directly on bitcoin via Spark, eliminating bridges or third-party consensus.

This implementation unlocks use cases such as streaming content payments, social app monetization, in-game currencies, cross-border remittances, and AI micro-settlements—all powered by Bitcoin’s decentralized network.

Quotes from Leadership

Roy Sheinfeld, CEO of Breez:
“Developers are critical to bringing bitcoin into daily life. By building the Breez SDK on Spark’s revolutionary architecture, we’re giving builders a bitcoin-native toolkit to strengthen Lightning as the universal language of bitcoin payments.”

Kevin Hurley, Creator of Spark:
“This collaboration sets the standard for global peer-to-peer transactions. Fast, open, and embedded in everyday apps—this is bitcoin’s future. Together, we’re equipping developers to create next-generation payment experiences.”

David Marcus, Co-Founder and CEO of Lightspark:
“We’re thrilled to see developers harness Spark’s potential. This partnership marks an exciting milestone for the ecosystem.”

Collaboration Details
As part of the agreement, Breez will operate as a Spark Service Provider (SSP), joining Lightspark in facilitating payments and expanding Spark’s ecosystem. Technical specifications for the SDK will be released later this year, with the full implementation slated for launch in 2025.

About Breez
Breez pioneers Lightning Network solutions, enabling developers to embed self-custodial bitcoin payments into apps. Its SDK powers seamless, secure, and decentralized financial interactions.

About Spark
Spark is a bitcoin-native Layer 2 infrastructure designed for payments and settlement, allowing developers to build directly on Bitcoin’s base layer without compromises.

@ 000002de:c05780a7

I'm mostly curious about how Tapper can do this with a straight face.

https://stacker.news/items/986926

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Donald Trump’s recent four-day visit took the President to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. This visit has intertwined diplomatic relations with business interests, while simultaneously influencing the bitcoin market.

In Qatar, the President met with Emir Tanim bin Hamad Al Thani, resulting in over $243 billion in deals including major defense agreements, according to Bloomberg.

On May 15, the President made his visit to the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque in Abu Dhabi alongside Crown Prince Khaled bin Mohamed Al Nahyan. This occurs as the Trump family expands its business presence in the Middle East.

The Trump Organization is developing luxury properties across the region, including Trump Tower Dubai, real estate projects in Riyadh, and development in Jeddah and Oman.

Donald Trump and Mohammed bin Salman in King Khalid International Airport — NBCNews

Eric Trump publicly announced construction plans for Trump Tower Dubai just last month, highlighting the family’s ongoing commercial footprint in the region.

These business connections extend into the digital asset ecosystem as UAE-backed investment firm MGX recently announced it would use USD1, World Liberty Financial’s stablecoin to support a $2 billion investment in Binance, the world’s largest digital asset exchange, according to APNews.

This connection between Trump-aligned interests and major digital asset investments creates a potential avenue for market influence. 

Historically, stability in the Middle East, especially among oil-rich nations, reduces global market volatility. This encourages risk appetite among investors, often leading to increased allocations to digital assets like bitcoin.

Middle East diplomacy directly affects global oil prices. Stable oil prices can lower inflation expectations and lead to interest rate cuts by the Fed. Lower rates lead to an increase in liquidity, having positive effects on bitcoin, an asset that benefits from money printing.

Related: Fed Rate Cuts Could Lead to Major Price Swings for Bitcoin

On the investment front, Abu Dhabi’s Wealth Fund, Mubadala Investment Company, has been focused on increasing their shares in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT).

According to a 13F filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Mubdala held 8.7 million IBIT shares, totaling $408.5 million as of March 31, 2025. 

The Abu Dhabi Wealth Fund increased its shares by 500,000 since its last filing in December of 2024.

Back in March, the United States created a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The executive order states that the U.S. will not sell the bitcoin they already hold, and will create budget-neutral ways to increase their holdings.

The time has come where governments and wealth funds alike are jumping on board the Bitcoin train.

Trump’s recent visit to the Middle East illustrates how financial, diplomatic, and personal interests are becoming increasingly intertwined with Bitcoin and digital assets, serving as a new axis of influence in the U.S.-Middle East relations.

The combination of diplomatic progress and business expansion has heightened short-term volatility and trading volumes in the bitcoin market.

Trump’s business and digital asset ties in the region may further boost institutional interest and create an opportunity for more players to enter the market.

@ 70c48e4b:00ce3ccb

Dear readers,

“The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is generally employed only by small children and large nations.” — David Friedman

What If we could enforce promises without force?

David Friedman, in his book The Machinery of Freedom, tosses out a pretty wild idea: that people can build systems of cooperation and justice without needing a government at all. These systems rely on voluntary agreements, social reputation, and mutual incentives. In such a world, contracts hold value because honoring a promise brings greater rewards than breaking it.

From Friedman to Bitcoin

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/e8zsFTV94bw/maxresdefault.jpg

This vision shaped the thinking behind Angor, a funding tool built on Bitcoin. Friedman’s ideas showed that systems of cooperation could work without central authority, and Bitcoin now provides the foundation to build them. It records transactions in a public and tamper-proof way. With features like Taproot, people can set clear rules for funding and accountability. Angor uses these tools to help founders and backers create agreements that are transparent and easy to verify.

The result is a new kind of marketplace where follow-through is visible, and reputation becomes a real asset. Instead of relying on enforcement from above, trust is earned through action and built into the system itself.

What happens after the project succeeds?

One important question kept returning throughout our work: what happens after a project succeeds? The founder raises the funds, delivers the product, and begins earning revenue. What mechanism ensures that revenue is shared as promised? How can investors protect their interests in an environment that relies on voluntary structure rather than external authority?

To explore possible answers, we looked at how libertarian thinkers approach contracts in stateless systems.

How libertarian thinkers approach contracts without the state?

Friedman, along with other libertarian thinkers like Murray Rothbard and Bruce Benson, describes voluntarily created legal systems where people make binding agreements and use private mechanisms to enforce them. These mechanisms include:

• Reputational risk
• Collateralized performance
• Community arbitration
• Decentralized insurance

Such tools can replace state-backed enforcement when trust is earned and incentives are aligned.

If founders are anonymous:

When a founder chooses to remain pseudonymous, legal enforcement is not available. In this case, the agreement between the founder and investor can rely on cryptographic mechanisms such as performance bonds, revenue proofs, and public reputation systems.

1. Performance Bonds

• Founders deposit additional Bitcoin into a separate, time-locked contract. As they meet revenue-sharing milestones, they are allowed to unlock specific portions of this bond.

• If a revenue allocation is missed or a deadline passes without fulfillment, the contract redirects the bond to investors through a Taproot clause i.e. a feature in Bitcoin that lets you set up ‘if-this-then-that’ rules directly into a transaction, but privately. This creates a clear and automatic consequence, reinforcing accountability through financial incentives.

1. Revenue Proofs and Oracles

• Most founders, especially those running small businesses like cafes, games, or services, do not earn revenue in Bitcoin. Their income flows through fiat systems, which means automatic on-chain revenue streaming is not an option. The only way to maintain transparency is to prove income after the fact. This starts with exporting a sales report from a platform such as Stripe, Revolut, or a point-of-sale system. The founder hashes the file and posts that hash to the Bitcoin blockchain as a timestamped public reference.

• An oracle plays the role of a neutral verifier. This could be a trusted accountant or an observer chosen by the investor community. Their job is simple: compare the actual report with the hash recorded on-chain. If the data matches, the oracle signs a message that triggers the revenue-share payout using a Discreet Log Contract (DLC).

A DLC is similar to a smart contract, but built for Bitcoin. It allows two parties to agree on a specific outcome, such as how much revenue was made, and only releases funds when that outcome is confirmed by the oracle.

This process does not depend on central enforcement. Instead, it works through mutual agreement and the oracle’s reputation, or any collateral they may have provided in advance.

1. Reputation as collateral

• Every revenue-share payout is recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain, making it publicly visible and verifiable. Community-run indexers can scan the chain and track whether a founder consistently delivers payments on time. This performance history is then summarized into what is known as a “contract streak,” which refers to the number of consecutive payouts completed without delay.

• These streaks are published as signed events through protocols like Nostr, allowing anyone to verify a founder’s track record. A strong, uninterrupted streak builds credibility and can improve the chances of raising funds for future projects. In contrast, a broken streak signals risk, which discourages new investment and reduces access to support from the Angor community.

If founders are public:

When a founder uses a real identity, the parties can combine legal agreements with on-chain contracts. These hybrid arrangements allow for tools like enforceable smart contracts, voluntary arbitration, and potentially community-backed insurance.

1. Legally binding smart contracts

• This type of agreement formally identifies the founder’s legal entity and clearly links it to specific Taproot addresses used in the project. It outlines the rules for revenue sharing, describes what constitutes a breach, and specifies how disputes should be resolved. Because it is a formal legal document, it can be enforced in any relevant jurisdiction where the founder has a presence or assets.

1. Private arbitration

• During the contract setup, both parties can agree to a neutral arbitrator who will step in if a dispute arises. If a revenue payout is delayed or missed, the arbitrator reviews all relevant data, including on-chain records, oracle confirmations, and supporting documentation. Based on this evidence, the arbitrator issues a decision that determines whether funds should be released, held, or redirected. This method provides a clear resolution process without involving courts, while still maintaining a fair and structured outcome.

1. Equity sharing and traditional securities

• When founders are publicly identified and operating under a registered entity, they can also offer equity in the company as part of the funding arrangement. This can take the form of direct share issuance, convertible notes, or tokenized equity, depending on jurisdictional frameworks and investor preferences.

While Angor does not facilitate equity transfers directly, the on-chain agreement can reference these arrangements clearly. Investors may receive shares documented in a cap table, with accompanying legal agreements that govern dividend rights, voting power, or exit terms.

This method provides a more conventional form of investor alignment and is often well-understood by experienced backers. It can also be combined with on-chain revenue-sharing mechanisms to create hybrid models that balance transparency with long-term equity value.

Final Thought: Alignment Over Authority

The ideas in The Machinery of Freedom show how people can build cooperative systems without relying on centralized authority. Angor puts those ideas into action by applying them to decentralized crowdfunding. Each campaign becomes a contract. Each payout becomes a public signal of integrity. Reputation is built over time, through visible and verifiable performance.

This approach shifts enforcement from force to alignment. It rewards honesty and transparency while making misuse costly. By designing systems where trust is earned through action and recorded on-chain, we move toward a more resilient model of funding. This model is grounded in consent, shaped by shared incentives, and supported by the open logic of Bitcoin.

Bitcoin itself works this way. Miners follow the rules not because they are told to, but because breaking them wastes energy, time, and opportunity. The cost of cheating is built into the system. Angor adopts the same principle: integrity is not enforced from above, it is embedded in the architecture.

If you are building on Angor or exploring similar ideas, reach out. The tools are evolving, and the community is growing.

https://docs.angor.io/images/tools/hub.png

Have you tried Angor yet?

Thank you & Ciao. Guest writer: Paco nostr:npub1v67clmf4jrezn8hsz28434nc0y5fu65e5esws04djnl2kasxl5tskjmjjk

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

หลายคนอาจแปลกใจว่า ทำไมน้ำมันจากผลไม้แบบอโวคาโดถึงกล้าขึ้นชั้น “ไขมันดี” ไปเทียบกับน้ำมันมะกอกได้ ทั้งที่ฟังดูไม่หรูเท่า แต่ความจริงแล้ว น้ำมันอโวคาโดคือหนึ่งในไม่กี่ชนิดของน้ำมันพืชที่สกัดจาก “เนื้อผล” ไม่ใช่เมล็ด ทำให้มีโครงสร้างไขมันที่ต่างจาก seed oils ทั่วไป ทั้งในแง่กรดไขมัน สารต้านอนุมูลอิสระ และวิธีที่มันตอบสนองต่อความร้อน

น้ำมันอโวคาโดมีกรดไขมันไม่อิ่มตัวตำแหน่งเดียว (MUFA) เป็นหลัก โดยเฉพาะ กรดโอเลอิก (Oleic acid) ซึ่งคิดเป็นประมาณ 65–70% ของไขมันทั้งหมด ใกล้เคียงน้ำมันมะกอกเลย แต่เหนือกว่าเล็กน้อยในแง่ของ ค่าควัน (smoke point) ที่สูงถึง 250°C (แบบ refined) และราว 190–200°C (แบบ cold-pressed) ทำให้เหมาะกับการผัดหรือทอดแบบเบา ๆ โดยไม่ทำให้เกิดสารพิษจากไขมันไหม้เร็วเท่าน้ำมันที่ค่าควันต่ำ

นอกจาก MUFA แล้ว น้ำมันอโวคาโดยังมี PUFA อยู่เล็กน้อย ประมาณ 10–14% ส่วนใหญ่คือ โอเมก้า-6 (linoleic acid) ซึ่งก็มีปริมาณไม่มากจนถึงขั้นต้องห่วงเรื่องการอักเสบ เหมือนที่เจอกับพวกน้ำมันรำข้าวหรือถั่วเหลืองที่ PUFA พุ่งสูงเกิน 50% ขึ้นไป และที่สำคัญ...โอเมก้า-3 ในอโวคาโดก็มีอยู่บ้างในรูปของ ALA แม้ไม่เยอะ แต่ก็บอกได้ว่าโครงสร้างโดยรวมของมันสมดุลพอควร ถ้ามองในรูปแบบพลังงานไขมัน ก็ถือว่าใช้ได้เลย

อโวคาโดออยล์แบบไม่ผ่านกระบวนการ (unrefined) ยังมีพวก วิตามินอี (tocopherols) ในระดับประมาณ 13–20 มก. ต่อ 100 กรัม และสารโพลีฟีนอลบางชนิดราวๆ 30–50 mg GAE/100 กรัม เช่น catechins และ procyanidins อยู่บ้าง ซึ่งช่วยลดการเกิดอนุมูลอิสระตอนเจอความร้อน และยังดีต่อผิวหนังในมิติของ skincare ด้วยนะ

ถ้าใช้แบบ cold-pressed, unrefined กลิ่นมันจะออกคล้ายอะโวคาโดสุก ๆ หน่อย มีความเขียวอ่อน ๆ และครีมมี่เล็ก ๆ ซึ่งเหมาะกับการคลุกหรือปรุงแบบ low heat มากกว่าการทอดแรง ส่วนถ้าจะใช้ทำอาหารจริงจัง น้ำมันอโวคาโดแบบ refined ก็จะกลิ่นอ่อนลง สีใสขึ้น และทนไฟได้ดีขึ้นมาก เหมาะจะเอาไปทำ steak หรือผัดไฟกลางได้แบบไม่กังวล อันนี้ก็แล้วแต่จะเลือกนะครับ

ถ้าจะพูดให้ตรง… น้ำมันอโวคาโดคือ “ไขมันผลไม้สายกลาง” ที่ทั้งทนไฟพอใช้ ทำครัวได้หลากหลาย และไม่บิดเบือนสัดส่วนไขมันในร่างกายเราจนเกินไป และถ้าเลือกแบบที่ผลิตดี ไม่โดนสารเคมี ไม่โดนไฮโดรเจนเสริม ก็ถือว่าเป็นน้ำมันดีอีกตัวที่วางใจได้ในครัวจริง ๆ

ใครอยากลองทำเองที่บ้านก็ได้นะ แบบง่ายๆแค่มีผ้าขาวบาง https://youtu.be/gwHGgoMuRnI?si=ehcQceabdbMGfkwG

นอกจากนี้บางคนอาจเคยเห็นโฆษณาสินค้าที่มีน้ำมันจากเมล็ดและเปลือกด้วยใช่ไหมครับ

เมล็ดอโวคาโดนั้นอุดมไปด้วย ไขมันน้อยกว่ามาก เมื่อเทียบกับเนื้อผล แต่มีสารพฤกษเคมีบางชนิดที่นักวิจัยสนใจ เช่น ฟีนอลิกส์ (phenolics), ฟลาโวนอยด์, สารต้านจุลชีพ และ ไฟเบอร์ละลายน้ำสูง การสกัดน้ำมันจากเมล็ดมักจะใช้ ตัวทำละลาย (solvent extraction) หรือ วิธี supercritical CO₂ ไม่ค่อยทำแบบ cold-pressed เพราะน้ำมันน้อยเกิน ปริมาณน้ำมันจากเมล็ดนั้นต่ำมาก คือไม่ถึง 5% ของน้ำหนักแห้ง ทำให้ไม่ค่อยนิยมในเชิงพาณิชย์ น้ำมันจากเมล็ดมักไม่ได้เอาไว้ปรุงอาหาร แต่เอาไปใช้ ด้านเวชสำอาง หรือ functional food มากกว่า เช่น ครีมทาผิว แชมพู หรือผลิตภัณฑ์ชะลอวัย

เปลือกอโวคาโดมี สารต้านจุลชีพและสารต้านออกซิเดชัน บางชนิดเช่นกัน แต่มีไขมันน้อยมากแทบจะไม่มีเลย บางงานวิจัยพยายามสกัดพวก polyphenols หรือสารสีธรรมชาติจากเปลือก เพื่อใช้ในอาหารเสริม หรือผลิตภัณฑ์สุขภาพ ไม่ได้สกัดน้ำมันโดยตรง แบบเนื้อผล แต่ใช้เปลือกเป็นวัตถุดิบเสริมมากกว่า เช่น ผสมในน้ำมันหลักเพื่อเพิ่มคุณสมบัติด้านสุขภาพ

ส่วนตัวคิดว่าไม่ต้องทำเองหรอกครับ ซื้อกินเหอะ 555 เจ้านี้ดีนะ อยู่คู่วงการสุขภาพมาแต่แรกๆเลย https://s.shopee.co.th/8zsnEsLrvh

#pirateketo #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ม้วนหางสิลูก #siamstr

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Bahrain-based Al Abraaj Restaurants Group has made history by becoming the first publicly-traded company in the Middle East to add bitcoin to its corporate treasury. This is a major step forward for regional bitcoin adoption.

On May 15, 2025, Al Abraaj Restaurants Group, a well-known restaurant chain listed on the Bahrain Bourse, announced it had bought 5 bitcoin (BTC) as part of a new treasury strategy. This makes the company the first in Bahrain, the GCC and the Middle East to officially hold bitcoin as a reserve asset.

Al Abraaj adds bitcoin to its treasury — Zawya

This is a growing trend globally where companies are treating bitcoin not just as an investment but as a long-term store of value. Major companies like Strategy, Tesla and Metaplanet have already done this — and now Al Abraaj is following suit.

Metaplanet recently added 1,241 BTC to its treasury, boosting the company’s holdings above El Salvador’s.

Related: Metaplanet Overtakes El Salvador in Bitcoin Holdings After $126M Purchase

“Our initiative towards becoming a Bitcoin Treasury Company reflects our forward-thinking approach and dedication to maximizing shareholder value,” said Abdulla Isa, Chairman of the Bitcoin Treasury Committee at Al Abraaj.

Al Abraaj’s move is largely inspired by Michael Saylor, Executive Chairman of Strategy, the world’s largest corporate holder of bitcoin. Saylor’s strategy of allocating billions to bitcoin has set a model that other companies — now including Al Abraaj — are following.

A photo shared by the company even showed a meeting between an Al Abraaj representative and Saylor, with the company calling itself the “MicroStrategy of the Middle East”.

“We believe that Bitcoin will play a pivotal role in the future of finance, and we are excited to be at the forefront of this transformation in the Kingdom of Bahrain,” Isa added.

To support its bitcoin initiative, Al Abraaj has partnered with 10X Capital, a New York-based investment firm that specializes in digital assets.

10X Capital has a strong track record in bitcoin treasury strategies, and recently advised Nakamoto Holdings on a $710 million deal — the largest of its kind.

With 10X’s help, Al Abraaj looks to raise more capital and increase its bitcoin holdings over time to maximize bitcoin-per-share for its investors. The company will also develop Sharia-compliant financial instruments so Islamic investors can get exposure to bitcoin in a halal way.

“Bahrain continues to be a leader in the Middle East in Bitcoin adoption,” said Hans Thomas, CEO of 10X Capital. He noted, with a combined GDP of $2.2 trillion and over $6 trillion in sovereign wealth, the GCC now has its first publicly listed bitcoin treasury company.

This is not just a first for Al Abraaj — it’s a first for the region. Bahrain has been positioning itself as a fintech hub and Al Abraaj’s move will encourage more non-fintech companies in the region to look into bitcoin.

The company said the decision was made after thorough due diligence and is in line with the regulations set by the Central Bank of Bahrain (CBB). Al Abraaj will be fully compliant with all digital asset transaction rules, including transparency, security and governance.

A special Bitcoin Committee has been formed to oversee the treasury strategy. It includes experienced bitcoin investors, financial experts and portfolio managers who will manage risk, monitor market conditions and ensure best practices in custody and disclosure.

The initial purchase was 5 BTC, but Al Abraaj sees this as just the beginning. The company stated that there are plans in motion to allocate a significant portion of their treasury into bitcoin over time.

According to the company’s reports, Al Abraaj is financially sound with $12.5 million in EBITDA in 2024. This strong financial foundation gives the company the confidence to explore new strategies like bitcoin investment.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Steak ‘n Shake recently made headlines by officially accepting bitcoin payments via the Lightning Network across all its U.S. locations. The integration of Bitcoin payments at over 500 locations is a monumental moment for both the fast food industry and the broader retail sector.

This is not just something that Steak ‘n Shake is testing in a handful of locations, they are doing a full-scale rollout, fully embracing Bitcoin. 

With more than 100 million customers a year, Steak ‘n Shake’s integration of Lightning—Bitcoin’s fast, low-fee payment layer—makes it easier than ever to use Bitcoin in day-to-day life. Buying a burger and a shake with sats? That’s now a real option.

The process is straightforward. Customers simply scan a Lightning QR code at the register, completing their payment in seconds, while Steak ‘n Shake receives instant USD conversion, ensuring price stability and ease of use.

So what does this mean for Bitcoin and E-commerce?

For starters, Steak ‘n Shake becomes the first of eventually many to fully embrace a digital world. As Bitcoin continues to grow, consumers will continue to realize the benefits of saving in a currency that is truly scarce and decentralized.

This is a huge step forward for Bitcoin as it shows it is not just for holding, it’s for spending, too. And by using the Lightning Network, Steak n’ Shake is helping prove that Bitcoin can scale for everyday transactions. 

This now creates a seamless checkout experience, making bitcoin a viable alternative to credit cards and cash.

More importantly, it signals a significant shift in mainstream attitudes towards Bitcoin. As a well-known brand across America, this move serves as a powerful endorsement, likely to influence other chains and retailers to consider similar integrations.

Related: Spar Supermarket in Switzerland Now Accepts Bitcoin Via Lightning

What can this mean for your business? 

Accepting bitcoin as payment can open the door to a new demographic of tech-savvy, financially engaged consumers who prefer digital assets.

As we know, companies that adopt Bitcoin receive a fascinating amount of love from the Bitcoin community and I would assume Steak n’ Shake will be receiving the same amount of attention.

From a business perspective, accepting bitcoin has become more than just a payment method—it’s a marketing tool. It sets your business apart and gets people talking. And in a crowded market, that kind of edge matters.

Steak ‘n Shake’s embrace of Bitcoin is likely to accelerate the adoption of digital assets in both physical retail and e-commerce.

As more businesses witness the operational and marketing benefits, industry experts anticipate a ripple effect that will increase interaction between consumers and digital currencies, further regulatory clarity, and bring continued innovation in payment technology.

Steak ‘n Shake’s nationwide Bitcoin payments rollout is more than a novelty. It’s a pivotal development for digital payments, setting a precedent for other retailers and signaling the growing integration of digital assets into everyday commerce.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Donald Trump’s recent four-day visit took the President to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. This visit has intertwined diplomatic relations with business interests, while simultaneously influencing the bitcoin market.

In Qatar, the President met with Emir Tanim bin Hamad Al Thani, resulting in over $243 billion in deals including major defense agreements, according to Bloomberg.

On May 15, the President made his visit to the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque in Abu Dhabi alongside Crown Prince Khaled bin Mohamed Al Nahyan. This occurs as the Trump family expands its business presence in the Middle East.

The Trump Organization is developing luxury properties across the region, including Trump Tower Dubai, real estate projects in Riyadh, and development in Jeddah and Oman.

Donald Trump and Mohammed bin Salman in King Khalid International Airport — NBCNews

Eric Trump publicly announced construction plans for Trump Tower Dubai just last month, highlighting the family’s ongoing commercial footprint in the region.

These business connections extend into the digital asset ecosystem as UAE-backed investment firm MGX recently announced it would use USD1, World Liberty Financial’s stablecoin to support a $2 billion investment in Binance, the world’s largest digital asset exchange, according to APNews.

This connection between Trump-aligned interests and major digital asset investments creates a potential avenue for market influence. 

Historically, stability in the Middle East, especially among oil-rich nations, reduces global market volatility. This encourages risk appetite among investors, often leading to increased allocations to digital assets like bitcoin.

Middle East diplomacy directly affects global oil prices. Stable oil prices can lower inflation expectations and lead to interest rate cuts by the Fed. Lower rates lead to an increase in liquidity, having positive effects on bitcoin, an asset that benefits from money printing.

Related: Fed Rate Cuts Could Lead to Major Price Swings for Bitcoin

On the investment front, Abu Dhabi’s Wealth Fund, Mubadala Investment Company, has been focused on increasing their shares in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT).

According to a 13F filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Mubdala held 8.7 million IBIT shares, totaling $408.5 million as of March 31, 2025. 

The Abu Dhabi Wealth Fund increased its shares by 500,000 since its last filing in December of 2024.

Back in March, the United States created a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The executive order states that the U.S. will not sell the bitcoin they already hold, and will create budget-neutral ways to increase their holdings.

The time has come where governments and wealth funds alike are jumping on board the Bitcoin train.

Trump’s recent visit to the Middle East illustrates how financial, diplomatic, and personal interests are becoming increasingly intertwined with Bitcoin and digital assets, serving as a new axis of influence in the U.S.-Middle East relations.

The combination of diplomatic progress and business expansion has heightened short-term volatility and trading volumes in the bitcoin market.

Trump’s business and digital asset ties in the region may further boost institutional interest and create an opportunity for more players to enter the market.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Panama City may be the next Latin American city to adopt bitcoin, after El Salvador.

Panama City Mayor Mayer Mizrachi has got the bitcoin world excited after hinting that the city might have a bitcoin reserve. The speculation started on May 16 when Mizrachi posted a simple but powerful message on X:

Two words. That’s it. What makes it special is that it came after a high-profile meeting with Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert, two key figures behind El Salvador’s bitcoin strategy.

Keiser is an advisor to El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele and Herbert leads the country’s Bitcoin Office.

El Salvador became the first country to adopt bitcoin as legal tender back in 2021. Since then, it has been building a national bitcoin reserve, currently holding 6,179 BTC worth around $640 million. It’s also using geothermal energy to power bitcoin mining in an eco-friendly way.

El Salvador’s bitcoin treasury — Bitcoin.gob.sv

Mizrachi’s meeting with Keiser and Herbert was about how Panama could do the same. While the details of the conversation are private, Keiser shared on social media that the two countries will play a big role in the future of Bitcoin.

“Bitcoin is transforming Central America,” Keiser wrote. “El Salvador’s geothermal & Panama’s hydro-electric will power the Bitcoin revolution.”

Max Keiser on X

Panama with its hydroelectric power could be a hub for green bitcoin mining.

Mizrachi has not announced a bitcoin reserve plan nor submitted a proposal to the National Assembly. But his post and public appearances suggest it’s being considered.

He will be speaking at the upcoming Bitcoin 2025 Conference in Las Vegas just days after his social media post. Many expect he will share more about Panama City’s bitcoin plans during his talk.

If Mizrachi pushes for a bitcoin reserve, he will need to work with national lawmakers to pass new legislation. So far, there is no evidence of that.

Even without a bitcoin reserve, Panama City is already going big on digital assets.

In April 2025, the city council approved a measure to allow residents to pay taxes, fees, fines and permits with digital currencies. Supported tokens are bitcoin (BTC), ethereum (ETH), USD Coin (USDC) and Tether (USDT).

To comply with financial laws, the city has partnered with a bank that instantly converts these digital assets into U.S. dollars. According to Mizrachi, this way it’s easier for residents to use digital assets and the city’s financial operations will be transparent and legal.

Another part of the meeting with El Salvador’s advisors was education.

Stacy Herbert confirmed that Panama City will be integrating El Salvador’s financial literacy book, “What is Money?” into their digital library system. The goal is to help students, teachers and the general public understand bitcoin and digital currencies in modern finance.

This is a trend in Latin America where countries are looking for alternatives to traditional banking systems. Inflation, economic instability and the rise of decentralized finance are forcing governments to look into new financial tools.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Bahrain-based Al Abraaj Restaurants Group has made history by becoming the first publicly-traded company in the Middle East to add bitcoin to its corporate treasury. This is a major step forward for regional bitcoin adoption.

On May 15, 2025, Al Abraaj Restaurants Group, a well-known restaurant chain listed on the Bahrain Bourse, announced it had bought 5 bitcoin (BTC) as part of a new treasury strategy. This makes the company the first in Bahrain, the GCC and the Middle East to officially hold bitcoin as a reserve asset.

Al Abraaj adds bitcoin to its treasury — Zawya

This is a growing trend globally where companies are treating bitcoin not just as an investment but as a long-term store of value. Major companies like Strategy, Tesla and Metaplanet have already done this — and now Al Abraaj is following suit.

Metaplanet recently added 1,241 BTC to its treasury, boosting the company’s holdings above El Salvador’s.

Related: Metaplanet Overtakes El Salvador in Bitcoin Holdings After $126M Purchase

“Our initiative towards becoming a Bitcoin Treasury Company reflects our forward-thinking approach and dedication to maximizing shareholder value,” said Abdulla Isa, Chairman of the Bitcoin Treasury Committee at Al Abraaj.

Al Abraaj’s move is largely inspired by Michael Saylor, Executive Chairman of Strategy, the world’s largest corporate holder of bitcoin. Saylor’s strategy of allocating billions to bitcoin has set a model that other companies — now including Al Abraaj — are following.

A photo shared by the company even showed a meeting between an Al Abraaj representative and Saylor, with the company calling itself the “MicroStrategy of the Middle East”.

“We believe that Bitcoin will play a pivotal role in the future of finance, and we are excited to be at the forefront of this transformation in the Kingdom of Bahrain,” Isa added.

To support its bitcoin initiative, Al Abraaj has partnered with 10X Capital, a New York-based investment firm that specializes in digital assets.

10X Capital has a strong track record in bitcoin treasury strategies, and recently advised Nakamoto Holdings on a $710 million deal — the largest of its kind.

With 10X’s help, Al Abraaj looks to raise more capital and increase its bitcoin holdings over time to maximize bitcoin-per-share for its investors. The company will also develop Sharia-compliant financial instruments so Islamic investors can get exposure to bitcoin in a halal way.

“Bahrain continues to be a leader in the Middle East in Bitcoin adoption,” said Hans Thomas, CEO of 10X Capital. He noted, with a combined GDP of $2.2 trillion and over $6 trillion in sovereign wealth, the GCC now has its first publicly listed bitcoin treasury company.

This is not just a first for Al Abraaj — it’s a first for the region. Bahrain has been positioning itself as a fintech hub and Al Abraaj’s move will encourage more non-fintech companies in the region to look into bitcoin.

The company said the decision was made after thorough due diligence and is in line with the regulations set by the Central Bank of Bahrain (CBB). Al Abraaj will be fully compliant with all digital asset transaction rules, including transparency, security and governance.

A special Bitcoin Committee has been formed to oversee the treasury strategy. It includes experienced bitcoin investors, financial experts and portfolio managers who will manage risk, monitor market conditions and ensure best practices in custody and disclosure.

The initial purchase was 5 BTC, but Al Abraaj sees this as just the beginning. The company stated that there are plans in motion to allocate a significant portion of their treasury into bitcoin over time.

According to the company’s reports, Al Abraaj is financially sound with $12.5 million in EBITDA in 2024. This strong financial foundation gives the company the confidence to explore new strategies like bitcoin investment.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

Bank run on every crypto bank then bank run on every "real" bank.

— ODELL (@ODELL) December 14, 2022

The four main banks of bitcoin and “crypto” are Signature, Prime Trust, Silvergate, and Silicon Valley Bank. Prime Trust does not custody funds themselves but rather maintains deposit accounts at BMO Harris Bank, Cross River, Lexicon Bank, MVB Bank, and Signature Bank. Silvergate and Silicon Valley Bank have already stopped withdrawals. More banks will go down before the chaos stops. None of them have sufficient reserves to meet withdrawals.

Bitcoin gives us all the ability to opt out of a system that has massive layers of counterparty risk built in, years of cheap money and broken incentives have layered risk on top of risk throughout the entire global economy. If you thought the FTX bank run was painful to watch, I have bad news for you: every major bank in the world is fractional reserve. Bitcoin held in self custody is unique in its lack of counterparty risk, as global market chaos unwinds this will become much more obvious.

The rules of bitcoin are extremely hard to change by design. Anyone can access the network directly without a trusted third party by using their own node. Owning more bitcoin does not give you more control over the network with all participants on equal footing.

Bitcoin is:
- money that is not controlled by a company or government
- money that can be spent or saved without permission
- money that is provably scarce and should increase in purchasing power with adoption

Bitcoin is money without trust. Whether you are a nation state, corporation, or an individual, you can use bitcoin to spend or save without permission. Social media will accelerate the already deteriorating trust in our institutions and as this trust continues to crumble the value of trust minimized money will become obvious. As adoption increases so should the purchasing power of bitcoin.

A quick note on "stablecoins," such as USDC - it is important to remember that they rely on trusted custodians. They have the same risk as funds held directly in bank accounts with additional counterparty risk on top. The trusted custodians can be pressured by gov, exit scam, or caught up in fraud. Funds can and will be frozen at will. This is a distinctly different trust model than bitcoin, which is a native bearer token that does not rely on any centralized entity or custodian.

Most bitcoin exchanges have exposure to these failing banks. Expect more chaos and confusion as this all unwinds. Withdraw any bitcoin to your own wallet ASAP.

Simple Self Custody Guide: https://werunbtc.com/muun
More Secure Cold Storage Guide: https://werunbtc.com/coldcard

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

The former seems to have found solid product market fit. Expect significant volume, adoption, and usage going forward.

The latter's future remains to be seen. Dependence on Tor, which has had massive reliability issues, and lack of strong privacy guarantees put it at risk.

— ODELL (@ODELL) October 27, 2022

The Basics

• Lightning is a protocol that enables cheap and fast native bitcoin transactions.
• At the core of the protocol is the ability for bitcoin users to create a payment channel with another user.
• These payment channels enable users to make many bitcoin transactions between each other with only two on-chain bitcoin transactions: the channel open transaction and the channel close transaction.
• Essentially lightning is a protocol for interoperable batched bitcoin transactions.
• It is expected that on chain bitcoin transaction fees will increase with adoption and the ability to easily batch transactions will save users significant money.
• As these lightning transactions are processed, liquidity flows from one side of a channel to the other side, on chain transactions are signed by both parties but not broadcasted to update this balance.
• Lightning is designed to be trust minimized, either party in a payment channel can close the channel at any time and their bitcoin will be settled on chain without trusting the other party.

There is no 'Lightning Network'

• Many people refer to the aggregate of all lightning channels as 'The Lightning Network' but this is a false premise.
• There are many lightning channels between many different users and funds can flow across interconnected channels as long as there is a route through peers.
• If a lightning transaction requires multiple hops it will flow through multiple interconnected channels, adjusting the balance of all channels along the route, and paying lightning transaction fees that are set by each node on the route.

Example: You have a channel with Bob. Bob has a channel with Charlie. You can pay Charlie through your channel with Bob and Bob's channel with User C.

• As a result, it is not guaranteed that every lightning user can pay every other lightning user, they must have a route of interconnected channels between sender and receiver.

Lightning in Practice

• Lightning has already found product market fit and usage as an interconnected payment protocol between large professional custodians.
• They are able to easily manage channels and liquidity between each other without trust using this interoperable protocol.
• Lightning payments between large custodians are fast and easy. End users do not have to run their own node or manage their channels and liquidity. These payments rarely fail due to professional management of custodial nodes.
• The tradeoff is one inherent to custodians and other trusted third parties. Custodial wallets can steal funds and compromise user privacy.

Sovereign Lightning

• Trusted third parties are security holes.
• Users must run their own node and manage their own channels in order to use lightning without trusting a third party. This remains the single largest friction point for sovereign lightning usage: the mental burden of actively running a lightning node and associated liquidity management.
• Bitcoin development prioritizes node accessibility so cost to self host your own node is low but if a node is run at home or office, Tor or a VPN is recommended to mask your IP address: otherwise it is visible to the entire network and represents a privacy risk.
• This privacy risk is heightened due to the potential for certain governments to go after sovereign lightning users and compel them to shutdown their nodes. If their IP Address is exposed they are easier to target.
• Fortunately the tools to run and manage nodes continue to get easier but it is important to understand that this will always be a friction point when compared to custodial services.

The Potential Fracture of Lightning

• Any lightning user can choose which users are allowed to open channels with them.
• One potential is that professional custodians only peer with other professional custodians.
• We already see nodes like those run by CashApp only have channels open with other regulated counterparties. This could be due to performance goals, liability reduction, or regulatory pressure.

• Fortunately some of their peers are connected to non-regulated parties so payments to and from sovereign lightning users are still successfully processed by CashApp but this may not always be the case going forward.

Summary

• Many people refer to the aggregate of all lightning channels as 'The Lightning Network' but this is a false premise. There is no singular 'Lightning Network' but rather many payment channels between distinct peers, some connected with each other and some not.
• Lightning as an interoperable payment protocol between professional custodians seems to have found solid product market fit. Expect significant volume, adoption, and usage going forward.
• Lightning as a robust sovereign payment protocol has yet to be battle tested. Heavy reliance on Tor, which has had massive reliability issues, the friction of active liquidity management, significant on chain fee burden for small amounts, interactivity constraints on mobile, and lack of strong privacy guarantees put it at risk.

---

If you have never used lightning before, use this guide to get started on your phone.

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

The newly proposed RESTRICT ACT - is being advertised as a TikTok Ban, but is much broader than that, carries a $1M Fine and up to 20 years in prison️! It is unconstitutional and would create massive legal restrictions on the open source movement and free speech throughout the internet.

The Bill was proposed by: Senator Warner, Senator Thune, Senator Baldwin, Senator Fischer, Senator Manchin, Senator Moran, Senator Bennet, Senator Sullivan, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Collins, Senator Heinrich, and Senator Romney. It has broad support across Senators of both parties.

Corrupt politicians will not protect us. They are part of the problem. We must build, support, and learn how to use censorship resistant tools in order to defend our natural rights.

The RESTRICT Act, introduced by Senators Warner and Thune, aims to block or disrupt transactions and financial holdings involving foreign adversaries that pose risks to national security. Although the primary targets of this legislation are companies like Tik-Tok, the language of the bill could potentially be used to block or disrupt cryptocurrency transactions and, in extreme cases, block Americans’ access to open source tools or protocols like Bitcoin.

The Act creates a redundant regime paralleling OFAC without clear justification, it significantly limits the ability for injured parties to challenge actions raising due process concerns, and unlike OFAC it lacks any carve-out for protected speech. COINCENTER ON THE RESTRICT ACT

Full Text of Bill

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

Bank run on every crypto bank then bank run on every "real" bank.

— ODELL (@ODELL) December 14, 2022

Good morning.

It looks like PacWest will fail today. It will be both the fifth largest bank failure in US history and the sixth major bank to fail this year. It will likely get purchased by one of the big four banks in a government orchestrated sale.  

March 8th - Silvergate Bank
March 10th - Silicon Valley Bank
March 12th - Signature Bank
March 19th - Credit Suisse
May 1st - First Republic Bank
May 4th - PacWest Bank?

PacWest is the first of many small regional banks that will go under this year. Most will get bought by the big four in gov orchestrated sales. This has been the playbook since 2008. Follow the incentives. Massive consolidation across the banking industry. PacWest gonna be a drop in the bucket compared to what comes next.

First, a hastened government led bank consolidation, then a public/private partnership with the remaining large banks to launch a surveilled and controlled digital currency network. We will be told it is more convenient. We will be told it is safer. We will be told it will prevent future bank runs. All of that is marketing bullshit. The goal is greater control of money. The ability to choose how we spend it and how we save it. If you control the money - you control the people that use it.

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Steak ‘n Shake recently made headlines by officially accepting bitcoin payments via the Lightning Network across all its U.S. locations. The integration of Bitcoin payments at over 500 locations is a monumental moment for both the fast food industry and the broader retail sector.

This is not just something that Steak ‘n Shake is testing in a handful of locations, they are doing a full-scale rollout, fully embracing Bitcoin. 

With more than 100 million customers a year, Steak ‘n Shake’s integration of Lightning—Bitcoin’s fast, low-fee payment layer—makes it easier than ever to use Bitcoin in day-to-day life. Buying a burger and a shake with sats? That’s now a real option.

The process is straightforward. Customers simply scan a Lightning QR code at the register, completing their payment in seconds, while Steak ‘n Shake receives instant USD conversion, ensuring price stability and ease of use.

So what does this mean for Bitcoin and E-commerce?

For starters, Steak ‘n Shake becomes the first of eventually many to fully embrace a digital world. As Bitcoin continues to grow, consumers will continue to realize the benefits of saving in a currency that is truly scarce and decentralized.

This is a huge step forward for Bitcoin as it shows it is not just for holding, it’s for spending, too. And by using the Lightning Network, Steak n’ Shake is helping prove that Bitcoin can scale for everyday transactions. 

This now creates a seamless checkout experience, making bitcoin a viable alternative to credit cards and cash.

More importantly, it signals a significant shift in mainstream attitudes towards Bitcoin. As a well-known brand across America, this move serves as a powerful endorsement, likely to influence other chains and retailers to consider similar integrations.

Related: Spar Supermarket in Switzerland Now Accepts Bitcoin Via Lightning

What can this mean for your business? 

Accepting bitcoin as payment can open the door to a new demographic of tech-savvy, financially engaged consumers who prefer digital assets.

As we know, companies that adopt Bitcoin receive a fascinating amount of love from the Bitcoin community and I would assume Steak n’ Shake will be receiving the same amount of attention.

From a business perspective, accepting bitcoin has become more than just a payment method—it’s a marketing tool. It sets your business apart and gets people talking. And in a crowded market, that kind of edge matters.

Steak ‘n Shake’s embrace of Bitcoin is likely to accelerate the adoption of digital assets in both physical retail and e-commerce.

As more businesses witness the operational and marketing benefits, industry experts anticipate a ripple effect that will increase interaction between consumers and digital currencies, further regulatory clarity, and bring continued innovation in payment technology.

Steak ‘n Shake’s nationwide Bitcoin payments rollout is more than a novelty. It’s a pivotal development for digital payments, setting a precedent for other retailers and signaling the growing integration of digital assets into everyday commerce.

@ bbb5dda0:f09e2747

My week 19 started with a celebration of 80 years of liberation from the Germans (we love you guys now tho 🫶🏼). It feels conflicting, we're celebrating freedom, whilst cutting down those freedoms day by day more rapidly as time progresses. Should we still celebrate...?

The current path back to freedom can be mundane in the day to day but I wouldn't wanna have it any other way. These last couple weeks I've continued working on our TollGate pipelines to facilitate our release cycle, make it faster and easier to release in quick succession. There's been a lot of details to get right, because our releases are nostr based and once people start relying on the structure of the events we can't easily change it.

A TollGateOS release event now looks like this NIP-94 file metadata event:

json { "id": "a867f15ca7edc95a69e1557539a624466147584f68c62a16c47fe9bca3778312", "pubkey": "5075e61f0b048148b60105c1dd72bbeae1957336ae5824087e52efa374f8416a", "created_at": 1747475980, "kind": 1063, "tags": [ [ "url", "https://blossom.swissdash.site/9e5e8c48810a1b59cf10fa56486f311e048a0305eb58444992b6133fd19fcb3e.bin" ], [ "m", "application/octet-stream" ], [ "x", "9e5e8c48810a1b59cf10fa56486f311e048a0305eb58444992b6133fd19fcb3e" ], [ "ox", "9e5e8c48810a1b59cf10fa56486f311e048a0305eb58444992b6133fd19fcb3e" ], [ "architecture", "aarch64_cortex-a53" ], [ "device_id", "glinet_gl-mt3000" ], [ "supported_devices", "glinet,gl-mt3000 glinet,mt3000-snand" ], [ "openwrt_version", "24.10.1" ], [ "tollgate_os_version", "v0.0.2" ], [ "release_channel", "stable" ] ], "content": "TollGate OS Firmware for glinet_gl-mt3000", "sig": "1d050233428304685d202e954cb48714c800a7ca5f2d6a8d8fd657a775b9c51bf83364505311859c846e25098168a8ff309af2308712aafe634fcbdc96fcd84a" }

One of the missing links was the supported_devices tag. That is because the installer checks the device name by ssh-ing into the router and it returns the glinet,gl-mt3000 which doesn't properly translate into the device_id, which is what's used for compiling the OS. So this helps us to do the lookups and compatibility checks in the installer.

I also worked on: - getting the versioning of the tollgate-basic package's naming in line with the OpenWRT naming convention. - Rework versioning for dev builds into [branchname].[commit_height].[commit_hash] which will show up on the dev release_channel releases. - Getting an initial release of the tollgate-installer done, so we can easily flash a bunch of routers to become TollGates.

Bright minds in Prague

I met up with some bright minds from the space in Prague where @cobrador and i did a workshop on turning routers into TollGates and start earning sats. As is part of building things, things break and people make us aware of issues that we wouldn't foresee. Like for some reason Minibits cashu tokens being rejected, which is likely because of the memo's but we still need to dive into that issue.

Also we released [v0.0.2] of TollGate OS, which now includes an updater feature, again for faster release cycles. Currently we're focussing on getting a v0.0.3 out quickly with fixes for the user feedback we've gathered so far!

Receipt.Cash

I also, kind of unplanned, saw an opportunity to shill Receipt.Cash. I'd made a few improvements recently and it's ready enough for reckless people to try it out ;).

| | | | | | Payer Scans any fiat receipt & Share link with friends | Friends tap what they had, price is auto-converted to sats, then pay by Lightning or Cashu. | If you want to try it, BE CAREFUL! It is highly experimental and you might lose your sats, no refunds!

Source Code here.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

@matt_odell don't you even dare not ask about nostr!

— Kukks (Andrew Camilleri) (@MrKukks) May 18, 2021

Nostr first hit my radar spring 2021: created by fellow bitcoiner and friend, fiatjaf, and released to the world as free open source software. I was fortunate to be able to host a conversation with him on Citadel Dispatch in those early days, capturing that moment in history forever. Since then, the protocol has seen explosive viral organic growth as individuals around the world have contributed their time and energy to build out the protocol and the surrounding ecosystem due to the clear need for better communication tools.

nostr is to twitter as bitcoin is to paypal

As an intro to nostr, let us start with a metaphor:

twitter is paypal - a centralized platform plagued by censorship but has the benefit of established network effects

nostr is bitcoin - an open protocol that is censorship resistant and robust but requires an organic adoption phase

Nostr is an open communication protocol that can be used to send messages across a distributed set of relays in a censorship resistant and robust way.
 - Anyone can run a relay.
 - Anyone can interact with the protocol.
 - Relays can choose which messages they want to relay.
 - Users are identified by a simple public private key pair that they can generate themselves.

Nostr is often compared to twitter since there are nostr clients that emulate twitter functionality and user interface but that is merely one application of the protocol. Nostr is so much more than a mere twitter competitor. Nostr clients and relays can transmit a wide variety of data and clients can choose how to display that information to users. The result is a revolution in communication with implications that are difficult for any of us to truly comprehend.

Similar to bitcoin, nostr is an open and permissionless protocol. No person, company, or government controls it. Anyone can iterate and build on top of nostr without permission. Together, bitcoin and nostr are incredibly complementary freedom tech tools: censorship resistant, permissionless, robust, and interoperable - money and speech protected by code and incentives, not laws.

As censorship throughout the world continues to escalate, freedom tech provides hope for individuals around the world who refuse to accept the status quo. This movement will succeed on the shoulders of those who choose to stand up and contribute. We will build our own path. A brighter path.

---

My Nostr Public Key: npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

Nostr is an open communication protocol that can be used to send messages across a distributed set of relays in a censorship resistant and robust way.

---

If you missed my nostr introduction post you can find it here. My nostr account can be found here.

---

We are nearly at the point that if something interesting is posted on a centralized social platform it will usually be posted by someone to nostr.

We are nearly at the point that if something interesting is posted exclusively to nostr it is cross posted by someone to various centralized social platforms.

We are nearly at the point that you can recommend a cross platform app that users can install and easily onboard without additional guides or resources.

As companies continue to build walls around their centralized platforms nostr posts will be the easiest to cross reference and verify - as companies continue to censor their users nostr is the best censorship resistant alternative - gradually then suddenly nostr will become the standard. 🫡

Current Nostr Stats

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Panama City may be the next Latin American city to adopt bitcoin, after El Salvador.

Panama City Mayor Mayer Mizrachi has got the bitcoin world excited after hinting that the city might have a bitcoin reserve. The speculation started on May 16 when Mizrachi posted a simple but powerful message on X:

Two words. That’s it. What makes it special is that it came after a high-profile meeting with Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert, two key figures behind El Salvador’s bitcoin strategy.

Keiser is an advisor to El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele and Herbert leads the country’s Bitcoin Office.

El Salvador became the first country to adopt bitcoin as legal tender back in 2021. Since then, it has been building a national bitcoin reserve, currently holding 6,179 BTC worth around $640 million. It’s also using geothermal energy to power bitcoin mining in an eco-friendly way.

El Salvador’s bitcoin treasury — Bitcoin.gob.sv

Mizrachi’s meeting with Keiser and Herbert was about how Panama could do the same. While the details of the conversation are private, Keiser shared on social media that the two countries will play a big role in the future of Bitcoin.

“Bitcoin is transforming Central America,” Keiser wrote. “El Salvador’s geothermal & Panama’s hydro-electric will power the Bitcoin revolution.”

Max Keiser on X

Panama with its hydroelectric power could be a hub for green bitcoin mining.

Mizrachi has not announced a bitcoin reserve plan nor submitted a proposal to the National Assembly. But his post and public appearances suggest it’s being considered.

He will be speaking at the upcoming Bitcoin 2025 Conference in Las Vegas just days after his social media post. Many expect he will share more about Panama City’s bitcoin plans during his talk.

If Mizrachi pushes for a bitcoin reserve, he will need to work with national lawmakers to pass new legislation. So far, there is no evidence of that.

Even without a bitcoin reserve, Panama City is already going big on digital assets.

In April 2025, the city council approved a measure to allow residents to pay taxes, fees, fines and permits with digital currencies. Supported tokens are bitcoin (BTC), ethereum (ETH), USD Coin (USDC) and Tether (USDT).

To comply with financial laws, the city has partnered with a bank that instantly converts these digital assets into U.S. dollars. According to Mizrachi, this way it’s easier for residents to use digital assets and the city’s financial operations will be transparent and legal.

Another part of the meeting with El Salvador’s advisors was education.

Stacy Herbert confirmed that Panama City will be integrating El Salvador’s financial literacy book, “What is Money?” into their digital library system. The goal is to help students, teachers and the general public understand bitcoin and digital currencies in modern finance.

This is a trend in Latin America where countries are looking for alternatives to traditional banking systems. Inflation, economic instability and the rise of decentralized finance are forcing governments to look into new financial tools.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

For years American bitcoin miners have argued for more efficient and free energy markets. It benefits everyone if our energy infrastructure is as efficient and robust as possible. Unfortunately, broken incentives have led to increased regulation throughout the sector, incentivizing less efficient energy sources such as solar and wind at the detriment of more efficient alternatives.

The result has been less reliable energy infrastructure for all Americans and increased energy costs across the board. This naturally has a direct impact on bitcoin miners: increased energy costs make them less competitive globally.

Bitcoin mining represents a global energy market that does not require permission to participate. Anyone can plug a mining computer into power and internet to get paid the current dynamic market price for their work in bitcoin. Using cellphone or satellite internet, these mines can be located anywhere in the world, sourcing the cheapest power available.

Absent of regulation, bitcoin mining naturally incentivizes the build out of highly efficient and robust energy infrastructure. Unfortunately that world does not exist and burdensome regulations remain the biggest threat for US based mining businesses. Jurisdictional arbitrage gives miners the option of moving to a friendlier country but that naturally comes with its own costs.

Enter AI. With the rapid development and release of AI tools comes the requirement of running massive datacenters for their models. Major tech companies are scrambling to secure machines, rack space, and cheap energy to run full suites of AI enabled tools and services. The most valuable and powerful tech companies in America have stumbled into an accidental alliance with bitcoin miners: THE NEED FOR CHEAP AND RELIABLE ENERGY.

Our government is corrupt. Money talks. These companies will push for energy freedom and it will greatly benefit us all.

---

Microsoft Cloud hiring to "implement global small modular reactor and microreactor" strategy to power data centers: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/microsoft-cloud-hiring-to-implement-global-small-modular-reactor-and-microreactor-strategy-to-power-data-centers/

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ eb0157af:77ab6c55

A group of users has filed a class action lawsuit against Coinbase, claiming that its identity verification checks violate the state’s biometric privacy law.

According to plaintiffs Scott Bernstein, Gina Greeder, and James Lonergan in the lawsuit filed on May 13 in a federal court, Coinbase’s “indiscriminate collection” of facial biometric data for Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements breaches Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA).

The group argued that the exchange failed to notify users in writing about the collection, storage, or sharing of their biometric data, as well as the purpose and retention schedule for such data. “Coinbase does not publicly provide a retention schedule or guidelines for permanently destroying Plaintiffs’ biometric identifiers as specified by BIPA,” they alleged.

The complaint claims that Coinbase requires users to verify their identity by uploading a government-issued ID and a selfie, which is then sent to third-party facial recognition software to scan and extract facial geometry. This process captures biometric identifiers without the users’ informed written consent, thus violating BIPA, according to the lawsuit.

Additionally, the group alleged that Coinbase unlawfully shared biometric data with third-party verification providers such as Jumio, Onfido, Au10tix, and Solaris without users’ consent. “Coinbase ‘obtains’ biometric data in violation of [BIPA] because it explicitly directed the Third Party Verification Providers to use its software to verify and authenticate users, including Plaintiffs, and its software does so by collecting biometric data,” the complaint read.

The group also stated that over 10,000 individuals have filed arbitration demands on these issues with the American Arbitration Association, but Coinbase allegedly refused to pay the required arbitration fees, causing the claims to be dismissed.

Legal demands

The lawsuit brings three counts of biometric privacy law violations and one count of consumer fraud under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. The group seeks $5,000 for each intentional or reckless violation, $1,000 for each negligent violation, along with injunctive relief and litigation costs.

Coinbase was also recently hit by at least six lawsuits following the May 15 disclosure that some of its customer support agents were allegedly bribed to leak user data.

The post Lawsuit against Coinbase for biometric privacy violations in Illinois appeared first on Atlas21.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Ed Suman, a 67-year-old retired artist who helped create large sculptures like Jeff Koons’ Balloon Dog, reportedly lost his entire life savings — over $2M in digital assets — in a sophisticated scam.

The incident is believed to be tied to the major data breach at Coinbase, one of the world’s largest digital asset exchanges.

Suman’s story is part of a bigger wave of attacks on digital asset holders using stolen personal info, and has triggered lawsuits, regulatory concerns and questions about digital security in the Bitcoin space.

In March 2025, Suman got a text message about suspicious activity on his Coinbase account. After Suman reported he was unaware of any unauthorized activity regarding his account, he got a call from a man who introduced himself as Brett Miller from Coinbase Security.

The guy sounded legit — he knew Suman’s setup, including that he used a Trezor Model One hardware wallet, a device meant to keep bitcoin and other digital assets offline and safe.

Suman told Bloomberg the guy knew everything, including the exact amount of digital assets he had.

The attacker persuaded Suman that his Trezor One hardware wallet and its funds were at risk and walked him through a “security procedure” that involved entering his seed phrase into a website that looked exactly like Coinbase, in order to “link his wallet to Coinbase”.

Nine days later, another guy called and repeated the process, saying the first one didn’t work.

And then, all of Suman’s digital assets — 17.5 bitcoin and 225 ether — were gone. At the time, bitcoin was around $103,000 and ether around $2,500, so the stolen stash was worth over $2 million.

Suman turned to digital assets after retiring from a decades-long art career. He stored his assets in cold storage to avoid the risks of online exchanges. He thought he did everything right.

Suman’s attackers didn’t pick his name out of a hat.

It looks like his personal info may have been leaked in the major breach at Coinbase. The company confirmed on May 15 that some of its customer service reps in India were bribed to access internal systems and steal customer data.

The stolen data included names, phone numbers, email addresses, balances and partial Social Security numbers.

According to Coinbase’s filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the breach may have started as early as January and affected nearly 1% of the company’s active monthly users — tens of thousands of people.

Hackers demanded $20M from Coinbase to keep the breach quiet but the company refused to pay. Coinbase says it fired the compromised agents and is setting aside $180M to $400M to reimburse affected users.

But so far, Suman hasn’t been told if he’ll be reimbursed.

Since the breach was disclosed, Coinbase has been hit with at least six lawsuits.

The lawsuits claim the company failed to protect user data and handled the aftermath poorly. One lawsuit filed in New York federal court on May 16 says Coinbase’s response was “inadequate, fragmented, and delayed.”

“Users were not promptly or fully informed of the compromise,” the complaint states, “and Coinbase did not immediately take meaningful steps to mitigate further harm.”

Some lawsuits are seeking damages, others are asking Coinbase to purge user data and improve its security. Coinbase has not commented on the lawsuits but pointed reporters to a blog post about its response.

Suman’s case is a cautionary tale across the Bitcoin world. He used a hardware wallet (considered the gold standard of Bitcoin security) and was still tricked through social engineering. Even the strongest security is useless if you don’t understand how Bitcoin works.

It’s never too early for Bitcoiners to start learning more about Bitcoin, especially on how to keep their stash safe. And the first lesson is “never ever share your seed phrase with anyone”.

Related: Bitcoin Hardware Wallet Hacks: What You Need to Know

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

JPMorgan Chase, the biggest bank in the U.S., is now allowing its clients to buy bitcoin — a big change of heart for an institution whose CEO, Jamie Dimon, has been a long-time critic of the scarce digital asset.

Dimon made the announcement on the bank’s investor day, which came as a shift in JPMorgan’s approach to digital assets. “We are going to allow you to buy it,” he said. “We’re not going to custody it. We’re going to put it in statements for clients.”

That means clients can buy BTC through JPMorgan but the bank won’t hold or store the digital asset. Instead it will provide access and include the BTC purchases in client statements.

According to multiple reports and posts, JPMorgan has been blocking transactions from digital asset exchanges, with several people complaining about their experience on social media.

Source

Source

There is even an official notice on the company’s UK website that explicitly says customers cannot use their funds to purchase digital assets.

JPMorgan Chase UK website — Source

It’s a big change because Dimon has been one of Bitcoin’s biggest critics. Over the years he’s called it “worthless”, a “fraud” and even compared it to a “pet rock”.

He’s repeatedly expressed concern over digital assets’ use in illegal activities such as money laundering, terrorism, sex trafficking and tax evasion. A role that his critics say the U.S. dollar is playing on a much larger scale.

Related: Jamie Dimon Would “Close Down” Bitcoin If He Had Government Role

“The only true use case for it is criminals, drug traffickers … money laundering, tax avoidance,” he told lawmakers during a Senate hearing in 2023. At the 2024 World Economic Forum in Davos, he doubled down, “Bitcoin does nothing. I call it the pet rock.”

Despite his personal views, Dimon says the bank is responding to client demand. “I don’t think you should smoke, but I defend your right to smoke,” he said. “I defend your right to buy bitcoin.”

It’s worth noting JPMorgan isn’t fully embracing digital assets. The bank won’t be offering direct custody services or launching its own exchange.

Instead, it’s offering access to digital asset exchanges. There are even reports that the bank also plans to facilitate access to bitcoin ETFs and possibly other investment vehicles. Until recently, JPMorgan had limited its bitcoin exposure to futures-based products.

Other big financial firms have already taken similar steps.

Morgan Stanley, for example, has been offering some clients access to bitcoin ETFs since August 2024. Its CEO, Ted Pick, said earlier this year that the firm is working closely with regulators to explore ways to get into the digital assets space.

Dimon does like blockchain, though — the technology that underpins it. JPMorgan has its own blockchain projects including JPM Coin and recently ran a test transaction on a public blockchain of tokenized U.S. Treasuries.

Many criticize this view, saying that the most powerful aspect of Bitcoin is its decentralization. So, a centralized blockchain is just useless. This might be the reason Dimon has grown weary of all JPMorgan’s blockchain initiatives, because they offered nothing of value.

He said he might have given blockchain too much credit during his investor day comments: “We have been talking about blockchain for 12 to 15 years,” he said. “We spend too much on it. It doesn’t matter as much as you all think.”

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Blackstone, the world’s largest alternative asset manager, has entered the Bitcoin space with a $1.08 million investment in BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF. This is a big deal for both Wall Street and the Bitcoin world.

Blackstone has made its first direct investment in bitcoin through regulated financial products. A May 20, 2025, SEC filing revealed that the firm purchased 23,094 shares of the iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), BlackRock’s spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF).

BlackStone has bought 23,094 shares of BlackRock’s IBIT — SEC

While $1.08 million is a small drop in the bucket compared to Blackstone’s $1.2 trillion in assets under management, this is a big deal for the private equity giant which has been skeptical of bitcoin in the past.

In 2019, the company’s CEO, Steve Schwarzman, said he didn’t understand Bitcoin. “I was raised in a world where someone needs to control currencies,” he said, admitting he struggled to understand the technology.

Fast forward to 2025, and it is now one of the many institutional investors taking bitcoin seriously — but doing so through cautious, regulated channels.

The investment was made through Blackstone’s $2.63 billion Alternative Multi-Strategy Fund (BTMIX), which invests in a wide range of financial instruments.

Instead of buying bitcoin directly, Blackstone chose to get exposure through a bitcoin ETF — which is how many large institutions are approaching the digital asset. Spot Bitcoin ETFs like IBIT allow investors to track the price of bitcoin without having to hold the digital asset itself.

There are several advantages to this approach. ETFs trade like stocks, are regulated by the SEC and take care of complex issues like custody and compliance. This makes them more attractive for firms that are new to Bitcoin or still wary of the risks.

Related: Bitcoin ETFs Provide Convenient Price Exposure, But At What Cost?

Blackstone’s choice of a bitcoin ETF shows how effective these products are at connecting traditional finance to the digital age.

In addition to IBIT, Blackstone also disclosed smaller investments in two other digital-asset-related companies:

• 9,889 shares of the ProShares Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITO), valued at about $181,166.
• 4,300 shares of Bitcoin Depot Inc. (BTM), a bitcoin ATM operator, worth approximately $6,300.

Together, these are a tiny fraction of Blackstone’s portfolio but show growing interest and exploration into the space.

Since its launch in January 2024, BlackRock’s IBIT ETF has become the top-performing Bitcoin ETF in the U.S. As of mid-May 2025, the fund has seen over $46.1 billion in net inflows with no outflows since early April.

IBIT is ahead of other major ETFs like Fidelity’s FBTC and ARK’s 21Shares Bitcoin ETF.

But the trend is clear: big firms are getting comfortable with regulated bitcoin products. Industry insiders see Blackstone’s move as part of a broader shift in institutional sentiment towards bitcoin.

This is a small investment but it matters because of who is making it. Blackstone is known for being conservative and risk-averse.

Its decision to put even a tiny amount of capital into Bitcoin ETFs means tradfi companies are getting more confident in bitcoin as an asset class. Blackstone is dipping its toe in the water, and even a small step is significant given its size and influence.

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

I recently listened to an episode of The Progressive Bitcoiner podcast featuring guest Scott Santens discussing the topic of universal basic income, or UBI. It was an excellent show, and I’d encourage everyone to check it out here. The hosts, Trey Walsh and Margot Paez, and their guest definitely don’t share my worldview, so it’s always interesting and challenging to hear a different perspective. I’m going to share a few salient points that stood out to me from the episode, and explain how I agree and disagree.

The concept of UBI has been around for a long time, but recently had a resurgence in popular exposure by presidential candidate Andrew Yang. The buzz died down since his campaign, but the topic is once again getting some airtime in relation to the potential labor market disruptions caused by AI. So I think it’s worth taking a look at the topic, since it will probably become a political issue again at some point.

Why Consider UBI?

When discussing a complex topic like this, I think it’s important to establish a foundational baseline of goal or purpose first. That provides an opportunity to really define a vision, and make sure that vision is fundamentally solid and valid. Otherwise it’s easy to blindly head down the path toward a destination we don’t actually want. I was a little disappointed this wasn’t discussed in more depth, but here’s what host Trey Walsh had to say on the topic of why we need UBI.

You know, we wanna assist people who need it. We wanna make sure that people have their basic needs met, especially in somewhere like the United States. People shouldn't be in poverty. There shouldn't be the homeless crisis that we're dealing with, all of these things. Right?

All that sounds well and good on the surface. Of course no one wants more poverty. That’s the quintessential strawman of collectivist politics, “I’m against poverty.” Well of course, so is every non-psychopath on the planet. The implication, of course, is that if you disagree with them in any way, you must be for poverty, and therefore a murderous and uncaring psychopath.

I reject that framing. Here’s why.

The world operates by cause and effect. Outcomes are the result of actions. People shouldn’t be in poverty, not in a perfect situation. People also shouldn’t be locked in a cage and have all their freedoms restricted. Yet we incarcerate people every day. People shouldn’t be killed. Yet we execute people regularly. And rational people are aware of and support these things, with of course disagreement on the details. Why? Because people take actions that have consequences, and sometimes those consequences can be as serious as socially enforced prison or even death.

But most consequences aren’t enforced by people in that way, they’re enforced by the laws of the universe itself. You touch the hot stove, you get burned. You jump into the deep end without knowing how to swim, you drown. You waste time being unproductive while spending too much, you fall into poverty.

So while nobody wants more poverty, the reality is that sometimes poverty is a result of choices made. You can argue how often it’s a justified consequence versus how often it’s an unfortunate outcome of tragic events outside someone’s control. But the thing is, UBI doesn’t differentiate. That’s the whole point. UBI attempts to solve the poverty “problem” by making it impossible for anyone to ever be in poverty.

This is the economic equivalent of solving the pain “problem” by injecting everyone with a dose of morphine every day. It fails to acknowledge that poverty and pain are not only problems, but often a warning that suboptimal actions were taken, and changes need to be made in the future to achieve desired outcomes. Sure, you could “solve” your pain with a shot of morphine. But it’s really just telling you to take your hand off the stove before your skin burns away, or get that nagging headache checked out to make sure it’s just allergies and not a brain tumor.

Same with poverty, it’s often just a reminder and motivator to get off the couch and do something useful, or put in more than 32 hours at work, or stop buying those cigarettes and lotto tickets when you have $10k in credit card debt and rent due tomorrow. Again, I’m not insinuating that every person in poverty makes those choices. But the idea behind UBI is that if they do, they shouldn’t feel the pain of consequences. I fundamentally disagree with that premise. I believe incentives strongly determine outcomes, and distorting natural incentives in a large-scale way like UBI does, is going to lead to some very undesirable outcomes.

Incentives

It’s not that Scott doesn’t understand incentives. He goes on to say this:

So when it comes to traditional welfare benefits, what usually happens is let's say you wanna make sure that only those in need get this assistance. So then you have some kind of test. You say, okay, if the poverty line is $12,000 per year, then we wanna make sure that we only get this assistance to those who are earning less than $12,000 a year. So that sounds like on its face, like, a good idea. Like, you just wanna make sure that it goes to people in need.

But there are a couple outcomes from that. One of them is actually something that conservatives tend to understand pretty well, which is that there's a disincentive effect from welfare. So if you only get something if you have an income under $12,000 per year, then you're essentially encouraged to keep your income below $12,000 a year in order to keep getting it.

This has been a common theme among UBI advocates. They promote UBI as a solution to the disincentive to productivity caused by traditional welfare, while denying that UBI is also a disincentive to productivity.

The typical argument is anecdotal, pointing to trials or experiences showing that UBI recipients are more likely to start a business or do something unpaid like volunteer work or additional school. But to me this isn’t a convincing argument. For one, starting a business is not an automatic net good. A lot of businesses fail. The alleged benefit of UBI is that it encourages more people to start a business in spite of the risk of failure, knowing that if it does fail they’ll still be able to survive off the UBI payment. The thing is, businesses fail because they don’t provide value. If they provide value as determined by the market, they’ll make a profit and succeed. The fact that they fail is just proof that more value was being consumed than produced, so the enterprise was a net detriment to society. So starting a business should carry significant real risk to entrepreneurs, because it carries the potential of wasting a lot of resources if it doesn’t serve a real demand in the market.

As Scott goes on to say:

Whereas with UBI, if you have a $1,000 per month at UBI and a job offers you a $1,000 per month, you've just doubled your income. And that's where the incentive comes from to work, which is also why if you look at all the pilots, all the evidence shows that work does not decrease significantly at all with basic income and actually often increases, like, with the entrepreneurship impacts. You see just a lot of people starting up their businesses. That's one of the main impacts is that even if people work less in wage labor, a lot of the impact goes to self employment and even doing something like unpaid care work or school where it makes an investment in future work or actually focusing on unpaid work that isn't recognized as work.

Again, this is just assuming that the self employment or unpaid work or school are automatically a net good. If those things aren’t bringing in enough income to justify without the UBI, what’s the basis for concluding that they’re a net benefit to society and something we want to incentivize? It all comes back to the central planning, collectivist mindset, the idea that my particular assessment of what is and isn’t valuable outweighs the opinion of every market actor as determined by what is and isn’t profitable. The fact that anecdotally some of the businesses started because of UBI are successful, doesn’t make the whole enterprise a net benefit. So to me, it’s an unconvincing argument overall.

If people are currently in poverty, of course excluding those who are actually unable to work, then the reality of poverty isn’t a strong enough incentive to change their production or consumption behavior enough to afford the basics of life. If affording basic necessities isn’t enough incentive, how will affording slightly nicer non-necessities be an incentive when UBI provides the necessities without requiring any effort at all? I’m skeptical.

Inflation

Scott lists three main objections to UBI.

So the the three primary, oppositional arguments to basic income are that people will stop working, that it will cause inflation, and that we can't afford it.

On inflation, he starts by arguing that inflation won’t be an issue because it hasn’t been in Alaska, and they have an annual dividend payment to each resident of $1-2,000 per year. Of course this is significantly less than the $1,000 or more per month he uses as a UBI example throughout the conversation. But putting that aside, his explanation for why Alaska hasn’t seen increased inflation directly contradicts his explanation for why the US as a whole has seen significant inflation recently.

And every year when the dividend sales go out, businesses actually drop their prices. They have, you know, dividend sales and they're all trying to compete over people to spend at their business instead of some other business. You know, it's just like with Christmas where you think, you know, everyone wants to spend money and you can think that, well, businesses should actually raise their prices because everyone has money to spend and they're willing to spend it now. No. They actually lower prices because of competition.

So one element of this, of course, is that competitive aspect. You know, competition does matter. And, if you raise your prices because people have more money, then your competitor could lower their prices or not raise their prices and then could actually put you out of business, because you decided to do that.

But then, talking about US inflation the past few years:

And what we didn't do, and one one of the reasons why we saw this inflation too was the result of not doing something like a windfall tax or, you know, excess inflation tax or excess profits tax. And that's the kind of tax that isn't about, you know, raising revenue. It's about just discouraging companies from seeking excess profits. You know, a bunch of what we saw with sellers inflation, which is that businesses in this environment of inflation due to lower supply and therefore costlier components, they raise their prices way beyond what they actually needed to do because why not? You know, if prices are going up anyways because they need to, might as well capture a much larger percentage of your profits by raising your prices even more. We could have discouraged that. We just didn't do that.

These types of contradictory arguments are frustrating to respond to. So which is it? Extra money doesn’t cause inflation in Alaska because businesses lower their prices to stay competitive, but when we see inflation in the US after massive stimulus payments it’s because businesses just raised their prices because why wouldn’t they? You can’t have it both ways. Either businesses respond to market incentives and charge as much as possible while still remaining competitive, or businesses just do whatever they want without regard to market incentives and the whole concept of economics is a fraud.

Earlier in the conversation Scott pointed out that UBI can increase demand for goods and services, but at the time he was using that as a potential benefit. He uses the example of a woman who used her UBI payment to start a baking business.

But the basic income meant that her entire village was full of customers, full of people that had money to actually buy her goods. And if she had gotten this in a vacuum where, you know, she just got a start up loan, would she have succeeded in a village full of people that couldn't buy her stuff? Well, arguably, she likely could have failed or at least she would have done a lot worse. But because everyone in the village had basic income too, then they were all able to buy her stuff and they loved her baked goods and that ended up leading to her income from her business being, I think it was 3 or 4 times the amount of the basic income.

Lower supply and higher demand both act to move prices up. So arguing that lower supply during the past few years was the main cause of higher prices, and UBI wouldn’t have the same effect, while simultaneously touting the increased demand as a benefit of UBI, doesn’t compute. You can’t use the effects of market forces to argue in favor of UBI, and then act like that effect doesn’t exist when you’re downplaying objections to UBI.

Overall, I remain unconvinced by the arguments made as to why UBI wouldn’t cause inflation.

Freedom and Homesteading

The podcast also touches on the empowerment UBI would provide in the job market.

But, you know, a lot what I find really fascinating about a lot of people who claim to be libertarians is that they overlook the authoritarian coercive aspect of the employer employee relationship. And it's really interesting because it's not just, you know, true freedom is not just freedom from coercion from your government. It ought to be freedom from coercion from all forms of oppression. Right? And in the job, in the workplace, and in the labor market, if you're going to be on an equal footing with the employer, you ought to have a way to say no and to exercise your right to escape that type of coercion from being forced to take a job or to take hours with wages that are not suitable for you. And what you're saying, Scott, to me, is like liberty maximization on the across the board, to create an even playing field within all all markets in a market system. You can't refuse domination without an empowered status, and that's what basic income provides.

This seems like a reasonable argument. My objection on this point would be that it once again assumes that market forces don’t work. Because in the labor market, you do have a way to say no to your employer. It’s very simple, you just quit that job and take a job elsewhere. If the pay being offered is less than the value of your work, you can offer your work to the market somewhere else and get what it’s actually worth. By definition. If you don’t think that’s true, you’re arguing that the market doesn’t work. That’s a different argument.

You could say the UBI provides the security to be able to quit your job and survive while finding a better job elsewhere. But if you’re really so undercompensated, you can easily find a better offer before quitting your current job. That’s the normal practice. And when it comes to worry about being fired, we already have generous unemployment compensation for precisely that reason. I don’t see what role UBI fills in increasing freedom in the marketplace, except to provide support and remove incentive for those who aren’t contributing sufficient value to be successful in the labor market.

UBI just shifts dependency from the incentives of the market to the choices of the state. Instead of depending on the compensation the market provides for your effort, you’re depending on the goodwill of the central planners to keep sending that check every month. Of course this provides a strong incentive to support the apparatus of the state, which is a huge unspoken benefit of UBI to those who favor increased centralized control over the economy by central planners at the state level.

Then there’s this point:

This actually leads into another libertarian argument is that we kind of remove the ability for people to live just like off the land, you know, doing their own kind of work. What we did is if you go back to, like, the enclosures, you know, you look at the common land, you know, even back in the day in the US, when everyone was, like, moving west, you could actually, with homestead grants, you could actually just claim land as yours, and it was just free. And you could actually just live off the land. That was an option. Now there is no such thing. Like, you can't just claim land as yours. It belongs to someone else.

And in this kind of situation, it's the owners of the land that have that power over you. They can say, no. You're like, if you work for me, then I will give you access to what the land provides. And is that freedom? No. Like, as soon as we enclosed the land and prevented people from actually sustaining themselves off of it with the fruit of their own, you know, enjoying the fruits of their own labor and making it so that it was the choice between the the non owners being dominated by the owners.

So the argument is that we need UBI now as a replacement for the ability to just get free land and homestead the American West. It would be amazing if there were a way to interview an 1800’s homesteader today and get their opinion on this theory. My guess is they’d laugh themselves sick. I have to conclude that people have no concept of what was involved in surviving as a homesteader, and what kind of lifestyle you could expect even if you managed to do it successfully.

Suffice to say that anyone who puts in the amount of effort today that it took to survive on a parcel of “free” land in the 1800’s, will be far wealthier than any UBI check could ever make them. Realistically, most of the people living in “poverty” today in the US have a lifestyle of ease and luxury an 1800’s homesteader couldn’t even imagine, much less achieve. It certainly wasn’t something you’d just decide to do as an easy way to get by between jobs, it was backbreaking physical labor from daylight to dark, and a lifestyle of the barest subsistence at best, and complete failure and the prospect of actual death if the weather didn’t cooperate or the grasshoppers or hail destroyed the wheat crop or the Indians attacked and destroyed your homestead or you cut your hand and got an infection or a million other things the modern “poor” never have to worry about.

Votes in the Market

The way that the markets are supposed to work and that we imagined were the reason that markets do work is that essentially, money acts as like a vote. And that, you know, if one business is doing something that you like, then you go there, you vote for that business with your dollars, and that business can continue to do business. And then a business that doesn't have any people voting for it, that goes out of business, and then a new business pops up, and then people get to vote. Do you like that business or don't you?

So that's the way that that markets work. But, of course, the kind of underlying mechanism is this vote, which is the dollar. And so we don't actually have a system where everybody can vote, but we have a system where some people can vote and they can vote, like, a lot. Like, they have, like, all kinds they have billions of ballots that they can use to vote. And, it's very disproportionate.

They go on to discuss how UBI would be beneficial by giving everyone some “votes” in the market, so the market could fill their demand.

The part that’s ignored is that these votes work both ways. In a free market, having a lot of money is a result of a lot of people “voting” to support the work and business you’re doing. Not having money is the result of people “voting” that what you’re doing isn’t valuable enough. You’re the same as the business that doesn’t have any people voting for it, which like he says, goes out of business and gets replaced by a business people are willing to support. So the UBI argument, once again, contradicts itself. How is giving free “votes” to people who haven’t provided value in the economy good, while allowing a business to fail or be forced to adapt because of a lack of market support is also good? They’re both a result of the same market forces. And if a business does a good job and gets a lot of “votes”, that’s going to result in the business owner becoming wealthy, and everything staying just as disproportionate as before. See how this is illogical? How is the market supposed to function by this “voting” system if the “votes” don’t actually mean anything because we continuously take the money away from the “vote” winners and redistribute it equally back to everyone through UBI?

One could argue that those who have a lot of money haven’t earned it by fulfilling market demands, but by corruption of the money system, regulatory capture, corporate/government collusion, etc. I completely agree, but that’s a problem of a lack of market forces, not a problem caused by market forces. The solution is to eliminate things that interfere with market forces, not to add even more market-distorting effects in the form of wealth redistribution through UBI.

Redistribution

In relation to a discussion about who should benefit from AI and tech advancements, Trey had this to say:

But, really quick with what Scott said, I think that is one of the things that I'm curious your thoughts on this. For someone to come to UBI, I think there might be one stipulation. And I think that stipulation would be what you just said, that we believe that we should live in a world where everyone is kind of a part of creating this world that has been throughout the variety of ways that are typically taken for granted. And everyone deserves a fair contribution of that, whatever that looks like. Because some people coming to the table or some folks in Bitcoin that I might disagree with on this point think, well, they didn't do x y z, so they don't deserve x y z. Right? And I can quote Marx, and they'll dismiss me and and all of this stuff. Right?

So I think that might be one condition to being open to this conversation is do we want or do we believe we should live in a world where that sort of system exists, whether you call it redistribution of some kind or whatever. I almost view it as kind of a fact of life at this point as we were talking about.

And Scott responds,

Yeah. It's funny that you mentioned redistribution again. It's definitely like a bad word. You know, we've come to the point where, you just don't say redistribution. You know that people oppose that.

And Alaska's dividend, a lot of Alaskans see this as a form of predistribution. And the way that they see that as predistribution is that because money goes directly from the government to people, you know, it doesn't first go to politicians and then to people. You know, it doesn't go to politicians for them to decide where it should go. Instead, it's distributed directly to people, and then people get to spend it in ways that whatever they wish. And that's money that the government isn't deciding for them.

So I would say that the redistribution is when it's, like, gone through the process of going through a politician. You know, it's like welfare as a form of redistribution because it's going through a politician, and the politician sets up a bureaucracy, and the bureaucracy says, this person deserves it. This person doesn't. This comes with these conditions.

So they’re well aware that people oppose wealth redistribution, and no quotes from Marx will convince them to support it. So they’re trying to reframe the word and argue that UBI isn’t redistribution, because the government doesn’t decide who deserves it and how they can use it.

But earlier in the episode, Scott said,

There's again kind of a misunderstanding of basic income, in regards to, like, yes, it's true that everyone universally receives whatever the basic income is.

And let's say it's $1200 per month is the basic income. That does not mean that everyone's disposable income has increased by $1200 per month. That depends on the taxes that have been paired with it, the welfare reforms that have been paired with it, the tax expenditure reforms. It means that there's some amount of net increase or decrease after taxes that has to be taken into account. So in a case of, like, Bill Gates, Elon Musk and, you know, the other billionaires, like, yes, they'll get the $1200 per month, but their taxes would have gone up much further than $1200 per month.

They will not see a disposable income boost. Then if you look at, you know, there's, depending on design, there's some, you know, person, that is receiving just as much in UBI as they're paying in additional new taxes. And, so let's say that person is around, $120,000 or something where they are receiving $1200 per month in EBI, but their new taxes are $1200 per month. So they are 0. They don't benefit from basic income financially, and they don't pay higher taxes either on net. Instead, they're like the you know, they experience the greater security of basic income.

They don't see a boost. And so then go below that. So everyone below that net neutral point are receiving some amount of disposable income boost. And for the middle class, that won't be $1200 per month. It'll be, you know, something like, say, $600 per month or $500 or something, on net.

And with only those earning 0, getting the full amount of net benefit.

If everyone gets the same UBI check, that doesn’t mean it’s not redistribution. Not even according to their own redefining of the word. Not if it’s paired with tax increases on the wealthy, which Scott is admitting it will be. Because if you give someone a monthly check, but then tax them for more than the amount of the check, that’s not really what we’ve been sold as UBI, is it? At the end of the day, as Scott admits, it’s the net change in disposable income that matters. If you give everyone an equal monthly check, but then raise taxes on the wealthy by more than they receive, and don’t raise taxes on the poor, what have you achieved? The net change in disposable income is identical to just raising taxes on the wealthy and redistributing it to the poor through different sized monthly checks based on income. In other words, exactly the same as every other wealth redistributing welfare program we already have.

This completely obliterates the argument that UBI won’t reduce the incentive to work like income based welfare payments do. It’s the net change in disposable income that matters. So having more of your UBI taxed away because you increased your income creates identical incentives to having your welfare payments reduced because you increased your income.

I don’t know what else to say on this. If you want to discuss whether wealth redistribution is good or bad, that’s a different conversation. If you quote Marx as a credible source, I already have a good idea how that conversation will go. But it’s intellectually dishonest to claim that UBI is anything other than the standard collectivist wealth redistribution scheme, just because you try to compartmentalize away the increased progressive taxes it’s inevitably paired with. As far as I’m concerned, this is as damning an argument against UBI as anyone could make.

Earlier in the show Scott pointed out that income taxes are not the best form of taxes. I completely agree, I think the incentives of income taxes are absolutely awful. But when it comes down to the mechanics of funding UBI, Scott seems to admit that it will be funded by higher taxes on the wealthy. Well of course, because that’s the only way to gain support for it. There are a lot fewer wealthy people than poor and middle class people, so UBI sells with the same marketing campaign every other economic proposal relies on: we’ll take money away from “the rich” and give it to you for free. Of course that’s going to be popular with voters. That doesn’t make it a good idea though. In fact, it’s exactly the type of idea that makes pure democracy an unsustainable and short-lived form of government.

Control

One of the common concerns about UBI is that is could lead to a threatening level of government control and coercion, if a large percentage of the population is dependent on the monthly UBI payment. This is addressed in the episode as well.

One of the most annoying things to me most recently is, how, like, coming out of the pandemic, you've got, like, the conspiracy crowd who have decided that basic income is, like, some kind of control mechanism tool, you know, that was created by elites and pushed by, like, the World Economic Forum or something.

And that the entire point of it is to, like, control people. And they'll even say stuff like, you know, a basic income will have conditions. And that's so frustrating to me because, I mean, definitionally speaking, a basic income can't have conditions. It's like they're afraid of welfare, and welfare has all sorts of conditions, and we know that.

But, like, the entire point of a basic income is to remove the conditions. So if it has conditions, then we haven't won basic income, and we should still keep fighting for basic income. You know, it's just if you're concerned about that, it's just all the more reason to be for actual basic income, not for fake basic income.

That sounds well and good. But building on the previous point, how can you say there are no conditions if you’re funding the UBI with progressive taxation to determine who actually gets a boost in net disposable income and who doesn’t? I already made the point that this is no different than the current welfare system and the conditions it entails.

You could argue that you’re going to fund the UBI with some other form of taxes. Maybe like Margot suggested,

And I think that solves a lot of concerns around how can we afford a UBI, how do we, you know, avoid inflating the money supply in order to provide money for everyone at this basic level? And I think that's really great because then I think about climate change, and then I think, well, we should just tax 100% of profits from all fossil fuel companies and then use that for UBI because they have truly benefited in ways using those natural resources like fossil fuels in a way that has been extremely detrimental to society and to the environment, and this is one way to pay back what is owed to everyone for the damage that has been done.

So UBI has no conditions, except that if you’re producing “fossil fuels” we’re going to tax away every bit of your profits and redistribute it through UBI? This isn’t the place to get into a whole conversation about “climate change” and the claim that using coal, oil, and natural gas “has been extremely detrimental to society and to the environment,” but suffice to say that this kind of ideological market control and manipulation is exactly what people are concerned about when they look at UBI proposals and how they might be funded.

Or even more concerning, something like Scott’s proposal:

When it comes to the environment, I also think carbon taxes make a lot of sense to do, because, again, you want to discourage people from having a large carbon footprint, and it would be hugely impactful to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to tax that. The issue is that, you know, usually so many people push against carbon taxes because, yeah, it would raise prices of stuff. You know, if you make this gasoline more expensive, then that means that also it may be more expensive to get to and from work. But now transport's more expensive, which means everything transported goes up in price, which means foods go up, which means all these other goods go up and services go up.

So it causes higher prices. But if you have a basic income component that's paired with the carbon tax, then that means that usually depending on design, about the bottom two-thirds actually end up receiving more in the basic income than, you know, they pay in this carbon tax. And, again, it depends on design. But only those at the top, those ones who have the largest carbon footprints are the ones who are paying more in taxes than getting back in basic income. That, I think, makes all the sense in the world.

So now we’re not just taxing “fossil fuel” companies, we’re all the way to the globalist wet dream: a universal carbon tax paired with UBI, so that if you use too much energy, you get taxed and have your wealth redistributed to people who use less energy, through the mechanism of a UBI system. If that isn’t government control and coercion, I don’t know what is. Again, I’m not going to debate the premise here. If you think CO2 is a real, serious threat and this level of coercion is acceptable in an attempt to “solve” it, that’s up to you. I’d just like to point out that this is exactly the outcome critics of UBI object to, and claiming UBI won’t be a control mechanism rings very hollow when you propose a system like this.

Final Thoughts

There are more points I could touch on here, but this article is long enough already. I encourage everyone to go listen to the episode yourself. Agree or disagree, this is an issue that’s going to come up again and again in the political discourse, and it’s worth understanding the mindset of supporters and proponents of UBI.

For myself, I’m opposed to the idea. I tried to address some of my main criticisms, based on views and comments taken from the episode.

The main point in favor of UBI that I could support unfortunately wasn’t addressed at all, at least not that I heard. That’s the idea that UBI could reduce waste in welfare program administration by eliminating the need to have a bunch of complex overlapping programs with massive overhead costs. Welfare reform was mentioned in passing, but what I’m talking about requires welfare elimination. It’s pretty clear that’s not on the table for most UBI proponents.

And I think the reason comes out in the redistribution and control sections: UBI is essentially just a cover story for an expansion and entrenchment of the welfare system. As described, it would be redistributive, would have conditions, would require more government control and coercion, and at the end of the day isn’t fundamentally different than the existing welfare system. If you look at the actual net changes in purchasing power, it’s the same model we already have, and not the fundamentally new and different system we’re being sold. In fact, I find it ironic that once you strip away the “same size monthly check to everyone” obfuscation and focus on net purchasing power, the UBI system that’s described doesn’t even meet the definition of “real UBI” given by the proponents themselves.

@ 9ca447d2:fbf5a36d

Austin, Texas – May 22, 2025 — Jippi, a pioneering mobile augmented reality (AR) game developer, is set to transform Bitcoin education with the launch of its flagship game at the Bitcoin Conference 2025, held at The Venetian Resort in Las Vegas from May 27-29.

In collaboration with six leading Bitcoin companies—Bitcoin Well, Beyond The Checkout, Bitcoin Trading Cards, Geyser, SHAmory, and 21M Communications—Jippi introduces an innovative blend of outdoor adventure, Bitcoin rewards, and gamified financial education designed to captivate.

At the Bitcoin Conference, Jippi’s six partners have sponsored custom “Bitcoin Beasts” tied to specific locations around The Venetian. Each sponsored Beast offers players exclusive rewards and trivia, transforming brand interactions into immersive, non-intrusive experiences.

With an expected attendance of over 30,000 at the conference, sponsors gain unparalleled exposure to a tech-savvy, Bitcoin-centric audience.  Players will be rewarded 1k sats for each catch, making the total reward for catching them all 6k sats.

Jippi is redefining how young adults engage with Bitcoin by combining the thrill of location-based AR gameplay, reminiscent of Pokémon GO, with real-world bitcoin rewards (sats) and bite-sized lessons on sound money principles.

Players explore real-world locations to hunt digital creatures called Bitcoin Beasts, answering Bitcoin-related trivia to capture them and earn sats, the smallest unit of bitcoin.

The game’s seamless integration of education and entertainment makes learning about Bitcoin fun, accessible, and rewarding.

“We’re meeting Gen Z where they are—90% play mobile games, and 70% expect rewards for their time,” said Oliver Porter, Founder and CEO of Jippi.

“Jippi backdoors Bitcoin education through an immersive, reward-driven experience while offering our partners a unique branding opportunity. It’s a win-win for players, sponsors, and the Bitcoin ecosystem.”

“Jippi’s mission to gamify Bitcoin education is a game-changer for onboarding the next generation,” said Adam O’Brien, CEO of Bitcoin Well, a leading automatic self-custody Bitcoin platform and “Beast” sponsor.

“Their AR game makes learning about Bitcoin intuitive and engaging, aligning perfectly with our vision of financial empowerment. From a branding perspective, partnering with Jippi to engage and acquire new customers is a no brainer.”

In March 2025, Jippi clinched the top prize in PlebLab’s prestigious Top Builder competition, a three-month hackathon designed to spotlight innovative Bitcoin startups.

Backed by over a year of development, on-site surveys, and university testing, Jippi is a leading innovator in the Bitcoin industry looking to onboard the next generation.

Jippi invites brands, investors, and media to explore sponsorship and investment opportunities. Visit Jippi’s Partnerships Page for sponsorship details or Jippi’s Timestamp Page for investment inquiries. 

For media inquiries, please contact Phil@21mcommunications.com

About Jippi

Jippi is a mobile AR gaming company dedicated to making Bitcoin education accessible and engaging. By combining location-based gameplay with bitcoin rewards and financial literacy, Jippi empowers the next generation to embrace sound money principles. Learn more at https://jippi.app. 

Bitcoin Beast Sponsors

About Bitcoin Well

Beast #1 – Bitcoin Well – All bitcoin bought at Bitcoin Well are delivered directly to your personal bitcoin wallet. Your Bitcoin Well account gives you the convenience of modern banking, with the benefits of bitcoin. Join the platform that enables independence at bitcoinwell.com.

About Bitcoin Trading Cards

Beast #2 – Bitcoin Trading Cards – Bitcoin Trading Cards is bringing Bitcoin to the masses one pack at a time, making your Bitcoin journey fun and exciting for everyone.

About Beyond The Checkout

Beast #3 – Beyond The Checkout – Beyond The Checkout transforms everyday products into Bitcoin-powered experiences — rewarding customers, collecting real-time insights, and redefining post-purchase engagement.

About Geyser 

Beast #4 – Geyser – Geyser is a Bitcoin-native crowdfunding platform enabling grassroots projects to raise funds via Lightning, globally and permissionlessly.

About SHAmory

Beast #5 – SHAmory – We make Bitcoin fun for all ages! Explore our bitcoin games, books, and more today at shamory.com.

About 21M Communications

Beast #6 – 21 Communications – 21 Communications helps Bitcoin companies get the media attention they deserve. As a Bitcoin-only PR Agency, 21M Comms believes Bitcoin is imperative and is committed to supporting the companies that are advancing the mission.

About Bitcoin Conference 2025

The Bitcoin Conference is the world’s largest gathering of Bitcoin enthusiasts, industry leaders, and innovators. Held annually, it showcases cutting-edge developments in the Bitcoin ecosystem. For more information, visit www.bitcoinconference.com.

@ bc6ccd13:f53098e4

The global population has been rising rapidly for the past two centuries when compared to historical trends. Fifty years ago, that trend seemed set to continue, and there was a lot of concern around the issue of overpopulation. But if you haven’t been living under a rock, you’ll know that while the population is still rising, that trend now seems set to reverse this century, and there’s every indication population could decline precipitously over the next two centuries.

Demographics is a field where predictions about the future are much more reliable than in most scientific fields. That’s because future population trends are “baked in” decades in advance. If you want to know how many fifty-year-olds there will be in forty years, all you have to do is count the ten-year-olds today and allow for mortality rates. That maximum was already determined by the number of births ten years ago, and absolutely nothing can change that now. The average person doesn’t think that through when they look at population trends. You hear a lot of “oh we just need to do more of x to help the declining birthrate” without an acknowledgement that future populations in a given cohort are already fixed by the number of births that already occurred.

As you can see, global birthrates have already declined close to the 2.3 replacement level, with some regions ahead of others, but all on the same trajectory with no region moving against the trend. I’m not going to speculate on the reasons for this, or even whether it’s a good or bad thing. Instead I’m going to make some observations about outcomes this trend could cause economically, and why. Like most macro issues, an individual can’t do anything to change the global landscape personally, but knowing what that landscape might look like is essential to avoiding fallout from trends outside your control.

The Resource Pie

Thomas Malthus popularized the concern about overpopulation with his 1798 book An Essay on the Principle of Population. The basic premise of the book was that population could grow and consume all the available resources, leading to mass poverty, starvation, disease, and population collapse. We can say in hindsight that this was incorrect, given that the global population has increased from less than a billion to over eight billion since then, and the apocalypse Malthus predicted hasn’t materialized. Exactly the opposite, in fact. The global standard of living has risen to levels Malthus couldn’t have imagined, much less predicted.

So where did Malthus go wrong? His hypothesis seems reasonable enough, and we do see a similar trend in certain animal populations. The base assumption Malthus got wrong was to assume resources are a finite, limiting factor to the human population. That at some point certain resources would be totally consumed, and that would be it. He treated it like a pie with a lot of slices, but still a finite number, and assumed that if the population kept rising, eventually every slice would be consumed and there would be no pie left for future generations. That turns out to be completely wrong.

Of course, the earth is finite at some abstract level. The number of atoms could theoretically be counted and quantified. But on a practical level, do humans exhaust the earth’s resources? I’d point to an article from Yale Scientific titled Has the Earth Run out of any Natural Resources? To quote,

> However, despite what doomsday predictions may suggest, the Earth has not run out of any resources nor is it likely that it will run out of any in the near future. > > In fact, resources are becoming more abundant. Though this may seem puzzling, it does not mean that the actual quantity of resources in the Earth’s crust is increasing but rather that the amount available for our use is constantly growing due to technological innovations. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the only resource we have exhausted is cryolite, a mineral used in pesticides and aluminum processing. However, that is not to say every bit of it has been mined away; rather, producing it synthetically is much more cost efficient than mining the existing reserves at its current value.

As it happens, we don’t run out of resources. Instead, we become better at finding, extracting, and efficiently utilizing resources, which means that in practical terms resources become more abundant, not less. In other words, the pie grows faster than we can eat it.

So is there any resource that actually limits human potential? I think there is, and history would suggest that resource is human ingenuity and effort. The more people are thinking about and working on a problem, the more solutions we find and build to solve it. That means not only does the pie grow faster than we can eat it, but the more people there are, the faster the pie grows. Of course that assumes everyone eating pie is also working to grow the pie, but that’s a separate issue for now.

Productivity and Division of Labor

Why does having more people lead to more productivity? A big part of it comes down to division of labor and specialization. The best way to get really good at something is to do more of it. In a small community, doing just one thing simply isn’t possible. Everyone has to be somewhat of a generalist in order to survive. But with a larger population, being a specialist becomes possible. In fact, that’s the purpose of money, as I explained here.

<https://primal.net/f0xr/_-MfVPUpEA4G_6ulVi_HB>

The more specialized an economy becomes, the more efficient it can be. There are big economies of scale in almost every task or process. So for example, if a single person tried to build a car from scratch, it would be extremely difficult and take a very long time. However, if you have a thousand people building a car, each doing a specific job, they can become very good at doing that specific job and do it much faster. And then you can move that process to a factory, and build machines to do specific jobs, and add even more efficiency.

But that only works if you’re building more than one car. It doesn’t make sense to build a huge factory full of specialized equipment that takes lots of time and effort to design and manufacture, and then only build one car. You need to sell thousands of cars, maybe even millions of cars, to pay off that initial investment. So division of labor and specialization relies on large populations in two different ways. First, you need a large population to have enough people to specialize in each task. But second and just as importantly, you need a large population of buyers for the finished product. You need a big market in order to make mass production economical.

Think of a computer or smartphone. It takes thousands of specialized processes, thousands of complex parts, and millions of people doing specialized jobs to extract the raw materials, process them, and assemble them into a piece of electronic hardware. And electronics are relatively expensive anyway. Imagine how impossible it would be to manufacture electronics economically, if the market demand wasn’t literally in the billions of units.

Stairs Up, Elevator Down

We’ve seen exponential increases in productivity over the past few centuries, resulting in higher living standards even as population exploded. Now, facing the prospect of a drastic trend reversal, what will happen to productivity and living standards? The typical sentiment seems to be “well, there are a lot of people already competing for resources, so if population does decline, that will just reduce the competition and leave a bigger slice of pie for each person, so we’ll all be getting wealthier as a result of population decline.”

This seems reasonable at first glance. Surely dividing the economic pie into fewer slices means a bigger slice for everyone, right? But remember, more specialization and division of labor is what made the pie as big as it is to begin with. And specialization depends on large populations for both the supply of specialized labor, and the demand for finished goods. Can complex supply chains and mass production withstand population reduction intact? I don’t think the answer is clear.

The idea that it will all be okay, and we’ll get wealthier as population falls, is based on some faulty assumptions. It assumes that wealth is basically some fixed inventory of “things” that exist, and it’s all a matter of distribution. That’s typical Marxist thinking, similar to the reasoning behind “tax the rich” and other utopian wealth transfer schemes.

The reality is, wealth is a dynamic concept with strong network effects. For example, a grocery store in a large city can be a valuable asset with a large potential income stream. The same store in a small village with a declining population can be an unprofitable and effectively worthless liability.

Even something as permanent as a house is very susceptible to network effects. If you currently live in an area where housing is scarce and expensive, you might think a declining population would be the perfect solution to high housing costs. However, if you look at a place that’s already facing the beginnings of a population decline, you’ll see it’s not actually that simple. Japan, for example, is already facing an aging and declining population. And sure enough, you can get a house in Japan for free, or basically free. Sounds amazing, right? Not really.

If you check out the reason houses are given away in Japan, you’ll find a depressing reality. Most of the free houses are in rural areas or villages where the population is declining, often to the point that the village becomes uninhabited and abandoned. It’s so bad that in 2018, 13.6% of houses in Japan were vacant. Why do villages become uninhabited? Well, it turns out that a certain population level is necessary to support the services and businesses people need. When the population falls too low, specialized businesses can no longer operated profitably. It’s the exact issue we discussed with division of labor and the need for a high population to provide a market for the specialist to survive. As the local stores, entertainment venues, and businesses close, and skilled tradesmen move away to larger population centers with more customers, living in the village becomes difficult and depressing, if not impossible. So at a certain critical level, a village that’s too isolated will reach a tipping point where everyone leaves as fast as possible. And it turns out that an abandoned house in a remote village or rural area without any nearby services and businesses is worth… nothing. Nobody wants to live there, nobody wants to spend the money to maintain the house, nobody wants to pay the taxes needed to maintain the utilities the town relied on. So they try to give the houses away to anyone who agrees to live there, often without much success.

So on a local level, population might rise gradually over time, but when that process reverses and population declines to a certain level, it can collapse rather quickly from there.

I expect the same incentives to play out on a larger scale as well. Complex supply chains and extreme specialization lead to massive productivity. But there’s also a downside, which is the fragility of the system. Specialization might mean one shop can make all the widgets needed for a specific application, for the whole globe. That’s great while it lasts, but what happens when the owner of that shop retires with his lifetime of knowledge and experience? Will there be someone equally capable ready to fill his shoes? Hopefully… But spread that problem out across the global economy, and cracks start to appear. A specialized part is unavailable. So a machine that relies on that part breaks down and can’t be repaired. So a new machine needs to be built, which is a big expense that drives up costs and prices. And with a falling population, demand goes down. Now businesses are spending more to make fewer items, so they have to raise prices to stay profitable. Now fewer people can afford the item, so demand falls even further. Eventually the business is forced to close, and other industries that relied on the items they produced are crippled. Things become more expensive, or unavailable at any price. Living standards fall. What was a stairway up becomes an elevator down.

Hope, From the Parasite Class?

All that being said, I’m not completely pessimistic about the future. I think the potential for an acceptable outcome exists.

I see two broad groups of people in the economy; producers, and parasites. One thing the increasing productivity has done is made it easier than ever to survive. Food is plentiful globally, the only issues are with distribution. Medical advances save countless lives. Everything is more abundant than ever before. All that has led to a very “soft” economic reality. There’s a lot of non-essential production, which means a lot of wealth can be redistributed to people who contribute nothing, and if it’s done carefully, most people won’t even notice. And that is exactly what has happened, in spades.

There are welfare programs of every type and description, and handouts to people for every reason imaginable. It’s never been easier to survive without lifting a finger. So millions of able-bodied men choose to do just that.

Besides the voluntarily idle, the economy is full of “bullshit jobs.” Shoutout to David Graeber’s book with that title. (It’s an excellent book and one I would highly recommend, even though the author was a Marxist and his conclusions are completely wrong.) A 2015 British poll asked people, “Does your job make a meaningful contribution to the world?” Only 50% said yes, while 37% said no and 13% were uncertain.

This won’t be a surprise to anyone who’s operated a business, or even worked in the private sector in general. There are three types of jobs; jobs that accomplish something productive, jobs that accomplish nothing of value, and jobs that actually hinder people trying to accomplish something productive. The number of jobs in the last two categories has grown massively over the years. This would include a lot of unnecessary administrative jobs, burdensome regulatory jobs, useless DEI and HR jobs, a large percentage of public sector jobs, most of the military-industrial complex, and the list is endless. All these jobs accomplish nothing worthwhile at best, and actively discourage those who are trying to accomplish something at worst.

Even among jobs that do accomplish some useful purpose, the amount of time spent actually doing the job continues to decline. According to a 2016 poll, American office workers spent only 39% of their workday actually doing their primary task. The other 61% was largely wasted on unproductive administrative tasks and meetings, answering emails, and just simply wasting time.

I could go on, but the point is, there’s a lot of slack in the economy. We’ve become so productive that the number of people actually doing the work to keep everyone fed, clothed, and cared for is only a small percentage of the population. In one sense, that’s a cause for optimism. The population could decline a lot, and we’d still have enough bodies to man the economic engine, as it were.

Aging

The thing with population decline, though, is nobody gets to choose who goes first. Not unless you’re a psychopathic dictator. So populations get old, then they get small. This means that the number of dependents in the economy rises naturally. Once people retire, they still need someone to grow the food, keep the lights on, and provide the medical care. And it doesn’t matter how much money the retirees have saved, either. Money is just a claim on wealth. The goods and services actually have to be provided by someone, and if that someone was never born, all the money in the world won’t change anything.

And the aging occurs on top of all the people already taking from the economy without contributing anything of value. So that seems like a big problem.

Currently, wealth redistribution happens through a combination of direct taxes, indirect taxation through deficit spending, and the whole gamut of games that happen when banks create credit/debt money by making loans. In a lot of cases, it’s very indirect and difficult to pin down. For example, someone has a “job” in a government office, enforcing pointless regulations that actually hinder someone in the private sector from producing something useful. Their paycheck comes from the government, so a combination of taxes on productive people, and deficit spending, which is also a tax on productive people. But they “have a job,” so who’s going to question their contribution to society? On the other hand, it could be a banker or hedge fund manager. They might be pulling in a massive salary, but at the core all they’re really doing is finding creative financial ways to transfer wealth from productive people to themselves, without contributing anything of value.

You’ll notice a common theme if you think about this problem deeply. Most of the wealth transfer that supports the unproductive, whether that’s welfare recipients, retirees, bureaucrats, corporate middle managers, or weapons manufacturers, is only possible through expanding the money supply. There’s a limit to how much direct taxation the productive will bear while the option to collect welfare exists. At a certain point, people conclude that working hard every day isn’t worth it, when taxes take so much of their wages that they could make almost as much without working at all. So the balance of what it takes to support the dependent class has to come indirectly, through new money creation.

As long as the declining population happens under the existing monetary system, the future looks bleak. There’s no limit to how much money creation and inflation the parasite class will use in an attempt to avoid work. They’ll continue to suck the productive class dry until the workers give up in disgust, and the currency collapses into hyperinflation. And you can’t run a complex economy without functional money, so productivity inevitably collapses with the currency.

The optimistic view is that we don’t have to continue supporting the failed credit/debt monetary system. It’s hurting productivity, messing up incentives, and contributing to increasing wealth inequality and lower living standards for the middle class. If we walk away from that system and adopt a hard money standard, the possibility of inflationary wealth redistribution vanishes. The welfare and warfare programs have to be slashed. The parasite class is forced to get busy, or starve. In that scenario, the declining population of workers can be offset by a massive shift away from “bullshit jobs” and into actual productive work.

While that might not be a permanent solution to declining population, it would at least give us time to find a real solution, without having our complex economy collapse and send our living standards back to the 17th century.

It’s a complex issue with many possible outcomes, but I think a close look at the effects of the monetary system on productivity shows one obvious problem that will make the situation worse than necessary. Moving to a better monetary system and creating incentives for productivity would do a lot to reduce the economic impacts of a declining population.

@ eb0157af:77ab6c55

According to the ECB Executive Board member, the launch of the digital euro depends on the timing of the EU regulation.

The European Central Bank (ECB) is making progress in preparing for the digital euro. According to Piero Cipollone, ECB Executive Board member and coordinator of the project, the technical phase “is proceeding quickly and on schedule,” but moving to operational implementation still requires political approval of the regulation at the European level.

Speaking at the ‘Voices on the Future’ event organized by Ansa and Asvis, Cipollone outlined a possible timeline:

“If the regulation is approved at the start of 2026 — in the best-case scenario for the European legislative process — we could see the first transactions with the digital euro by mid-2028.”

Cipollone also highlighted Europe’s current dependence on electronic payment systems managed by non-European companies:

“Today in Europe, whenever we don’t use cash, any transaction online or at the supermarket has to go through credit cards, with their fees. The payment system relies on companies that aren’t based in Europe. You can see why it would make sense to have a system fully under our control.”

For the ECB board member, the digital euro would act as a direct alternative to cash in the digital world, working like “a banknote you can spend anywhere in Europe for any purpose.”

The digital euro project is part of the ECB’s broader strategy to strengthen the independence of Europe’s financial system. According to Cipollone and the Central Bank, Europe’s digital currency would be a key step toward greater autonomy in electronic payments, reducing reliance on infrastructure and services outside the European Union.

The post ECB: digital euro by mid-2028, says Cipollone appeared first on Atlas21.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

The former seems to have found solid product market fit. Expect significant volume, adoption, and usage going forward.

The latter's future remains to be seen. Dependence on Tor, which has had massive reliability issues, and lack of strong privacy guarantees put it at risk.

— ODELL (@ODELL) October 27, 2022

The Basics

• Lightning is a protocol that enables cheap and fast native bitcoin transactions.
• At the core of the protocol is the ability for bitcoin users to create a payment channel with another user.
• These payment channels enable users to make many bitcoin transactions between each other with only two on-chain bitcoin transactions: the channel open transaction and the channel close transaction.
• Essentially lightning is a protocol for interoperable batched bitcoin transactions.
• It is expected that on chain bitcoin transaction fees will increase with adoption and the ability to easily batch transactions will save users significant money.
• As these lightning transactions are processed, liquidity flows from one side of a channel to the other side, on chain transactions are signed by both parties but not broadcasted to update this balance.
• Lightning is designed to be trust minimized, either party in a payment channel can close the channel at any time and their bitcoin will be settled on chain without trusting the other party.

There is no 'Lightning Network'

• Many people refer to the aggregate of all lightning channels as 'The Lightning Network' but this is a false premise.
• There are many lightning channels between many different users and funds can flow across interconnected channels as long as there is a route through peers.
• If a lightning transaction requires multiple hops it will flow through multiple interconnected channels, adjusting the balance of all channels along the route, and paying lightning transaction fees that are set by each node on the route.

Example: You have a channel with Bob. Bob has a channel with Charlie. You can pay Charlie through your channel with Bob and Bob's channel with User C.

• As a result, it is not guaranteed that every lightning user can pay every other lightning user, they must have a route of interconnected channels between sender and receiver.

Lightning in Practice

• Lightning has already found product market fit and usage as an interconnected payment protocol between large professional custodians.
• They are able to easily manage channels and liquidity between each other without trust using this interoperable protocol.
• Lightning payments between large custodians are fast and easy. End users do not have to run their own node or manage their channels and liquidity. These payments rarely fail due to professional management of custodial nodes.
• The tradeoff is one inherent to custodians and other trusted third parties. Custodial wallets can steal funds and compromise user privacy.

Sovereign Lightning

• Trusted third parties are security holes.
• Users must run their own node and manage their own channels in order to use lightning without trusting a third party. This remains the single largest friction point for sovereign lightning usage: the mental burden of actively running a lightning node and associated liquidity management.
• Bitcoin development prioritizes node accessibility so cost to self host your own node is low but if a node is run at home or office, Tor or a VPN is recommended to mask your IP address: otherwise it is visible to the entire network and represents a privacy risk.
• This privacy risk is heightened due to the potential for certain governments to go after sovereign lightning users and compel them to shutdown their nodes. If their IP Address is exposed they are easier to target.
• Fortunately the tools to run and manage nodes continue to get easier but it is important to understand that this will always be a friction point when compared to custodial services.

The Potential Fracture of Lightning

• Any lightning user can choose which users are allowed to open channels with them.
• One potential is that professional custodians only peer with other professional custodians.
• We already see nodes like those run by CashApp only have channels open with other regulated counterparties. This could be due to performance goals, liability reduction, or regulatory pressure.

• Fortunately some of their peers are connected to non-regulated parties so payments to and from sovereign lightning users are still successfully processed by CashApp but this may not always be the case going forward.

Summary

• Many people refer to the aggregate of all lightning channels as 'The Lightning Network' but this is a false premise. There is no singular 'Lightning Network' but rather many payment channels between distinct peers, some connected with each other and some not.
• Lightning as an interoperable payment protocol between professional custodians seems to have found solid product market fit. Expect significant volume, adoption, and usage going forward.
• Lightning as a robust sovereign payment protocol has yet to be battle tested. Heavy reliance on Tor, which has had massive reliability issues, the friction of active liquidity management, significant on chain fee burden for small amounts, interactivity constraints on mobile, and lack of strong privacy guarantees put it at risk.

---

If you have never used lightning before, use this guide to get started on your phone.

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ eb0157af:77ab6c55

A new study reveals: 4 out of 5 Americans would like the US to convert some of its gold into Bitcoin.

A recent survey conducted by the Nakamoto Project revealed that a majority of Americans support converting a portion of the United States’ gold reserves into Bitcoin. The survey, carried out online by Qualtrics between February and March 2025, involved 3,345 participants with demographic characteristics representative of US census standards. Most respondents expressed a desire to convert between 1% and 30% of the gold reserves into BTC.

Troy Cross, co-founder of the Nakamoto Project, stated:

“When given a slider and asked to advise the US government on the right proportion of Bitcoin and gold, subjects were very reluctant to put that slider on 0% Bitcoin and 100% gold. Instead, they settled around 10% Bitcoin.”

One significant finding from the research is the correlation between age and openness to Bitcoin: younger respondents showed a greater inclination toward the cryptocurrency compared to older generations.

A potential US strategy

Bo Hines, a White House advisor, is promoting an initiative for the Treasury Department to acquire Bitcoin by selling off a portion of its gold. Under the proposed plan, the government could acquire up to 1 million BTC over the next five years.

To finance these purchases, the government plans to sell Federal Reserve gold certificates. The proposal aligns with Senator Cynthia Lummis’ 2025 Bitcoin Act, which aims to declare Bitcoin a critical national strategic asset.

Currently, the United States holds 8,133 metric tons of gold, valued at over $830 billion, and about 200,000 BTC, valued at $21 billion.

The post The majority in the US wants to convert part of the gold reserves into Bitcoin appeared first on Atlas21.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

Bank run on every crypto bank then bank run on every "real" bank.

— ODELL (@ODELL) December 14, 2022

The four main banks of bitcoin and “crypto” are Signature, Prime Trust, Silvergate, and Silicon Valley Bank. Prime Trust does not custody funds themselves but rather maintains deposit accounts at BMO Harris Bank, Cross River, Lexicon Bank, MVB Bank, and Signature Bank. Silvergate and Silicon Valley Bank have already stopped withdrawals. More banks will go down before the chaos stops. None of them have sufficient reserves to meet withdrawals.

Bitcoin gives us all the ability to opt out of a system that has massive layers of counterparty risk built in, years of cheap money and broken incentives have layered risk on top of risk throughout the entire global economy. If you thought the FTX bank run was painful to watch, I have bad news for you: every major bank in the world is fractional reserve. Bitcoin held in self custody is unique in its lack of counterparty risk, as global market chaos unwinds this will become much more obvious.

The rules of bitcoin are extremely hard to change by design. Anyone can access the network directly without a trusted third party by using their own node. Owning more bitcoin does not give you more control over the network with all participants on equal footing.

Bitcoin is:
- money that is not controlled by a company or government
- money that can be spent or saved without permission
- money that is provably scarce and should increase in purchasing power with adoption

Bitcoin is money without trust. Whether you are a nation state, corporation, or an individual, you can use bitcoin to spend or save without permission. Social media will accelerate the already deteriorating trust in our institutions and as this trust continues to crumble the value of trust minimized money will become obvious. As adoption increases so should the purchasing power of bitcoin.

A quick note on "stablecoins," such as USDC - it is important to remember that they rely on trusted custodians. They have the same risk as funds held directly in bank accounts with additional counterparty risk on top. The trusted custodians can be pressured by gov, exit scam, or caught up in fraud. Funds can and will be frozen at will. This is a distinctly different trust model than bitcoin, which is a native bearer token that does not rely on any centralized entity or custodian.

Most bitcoin exchanges have exposure to these failing banks. Expect more chaos and confusion as this all unwinds. Withdraw any bitcoin to your own wallet ASAP.

Simple Self Custody Guide: https://werunbtc.com/muun
More Secure Cold Storage Guide: https://werunbtc.com/coldcard

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ eb0157af:77ab6c55

The exchange reveals the extent of the breach that occurred last December as federal authorities investigate the recent data leak.

Coinbase has disclosed that the personal data of 69,461 users was compromised during the breach in December 2024, according to documentation filed with the Maine Attorney General’s Office.

The disclosure comes after Coinbase announced last week that a group of hackers had demanded a $20 million ransom, threatening to publish the stolen data on the dark web. The attackers allegedly bribed overseas customer service agents to extract information from the company’s systems.

Coinbase had previously stated that the breach affected less than 1% of its user base, compromising KYC (Know Your Customer) data such as names, addresses, and email addresses. In a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the company clarified that passwords, private keys, and user funds were not affected.

Following the reports, the SEC has reportedly opened an official investigation to verify whether Coinbase may have inflated user metrics ahead of its 2021 IPO. Separately, the Department of Justice is investigating the breach at Coinbase’s request, according to CEO Brian Armstrong.

Meanwhile, Coinbase has faced criticism for its delayed response to the data breach. Michael Arrington, founder of TechCrunch, stated that the stolen data could cause irreparable harm. In a post on X, Arrington wrote:

“The human cost, denominated in misery, is much larger than the $400m or so they think it will actually cost the company to reimburse people. The consequences to companies who do not adequately protect their customer information should include, without limitation, prison time for executives.”

Coinbase estimates the incident could cost between $180 million and $400 million in remediation expenses and customer reimbursements.

Arrington also condemned KYC laws as ineffective and dangerous, calling on both regulators and companies to better protect user data:

“Combining these KYC laws with corporate profit maximization and lax laws on penalties for hacks like these means these issues will continue to happen. Both governments and corporations need to step up to stop this. As I said, the cost can only be measured in human suffering.”

The post Coinbase: 69,461 users affected by December 2024 data breach appeared first on Atlas21.

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

The newly proposed RESTRICT ACT - is being advertised as a TikTok Ban, but is much broader than that, carries a $1M Fine and up to 20 years in prison️! It is unconstitutional and would create massive legal restrictions on the open source movement and free speech throughout the internet.

The Bill was proposed by: Senator Warner, Senator Thune, Senator Baldwin, Senator Fischer, Senator Manchin, Senator Moran, Senator Bennet, Senator Sullivan, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Collins, Senator Heinrich, and Senator Romney. It has broad support across Senators of both parties.

Corrupt politicians will not protect us. They are part of the problem. We must build, support, and learn how to use censorship resistant tools in order to defend our natural rights.

The RESTRICT Act, introduced by Senators Warner and Thune, aims to block or disrupt transactions and financial holdings involving foreign adversaries that pose risks to national security. Although the primary targets of this legislation are companies like Tik-Tok, the language of the bill could potentially be used to block or disrupt cryptocurrency transactions and, in extreme cases, block Americans’ access to open source tools or protocols like Bitcoin.

The Act creates a redundant regime paralleling OFAC without clear justification, it significantly limits the ability for injured parties to challenge actions raising due process concerns, and unlike OFAC it lacks any carve-out for protected speech. COINCENTER ON THE RESTRICT ACT

Full Text of Bill

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ 8bad92c3:ca714aa5

Marty's Bent

It's been a hell of a week in Austin, Texas. The Texas Energy & Mining Summit was held at Bitcoin Park Austin on Tuesday and yesterday. Around 200 people from across the energy sector and the mining sector convened to discuss the current state of bitcoin mining, how it integrates with energy systems, and where things are going in the near to medium term. Representatives from ERCOT, Halliburton, and some of the largest mining companies in the world were in attendence. Across town, Bitcoin++ is holding their conference on mempools, which is fitting considering there is currently an ongoing debate about mempool policy and whether or not Bitcoin Core should eliminate the data limit on OP_RETURN.

I've had the pleasure of participating in both events. At the Texas Energy & Mining Summit I opened up the two-day event with the opening panel on why Texas is perfectly suited not only for bitcoin mining but for the bitcoin industry in general. Texas is a state that highly values private property rights, low taxes, and free market competition. It's become clear to me over the four years that I've lived in Texas that it is an incredible place to start a bitcoin business. The energy down here (pun intended) is palpable.

I also hosted the ending panel with Nick Gates from Priority Power, Will Cole from Zaprite and Jay Beddict from Foundry about what we have to look forward to through the rest of the year. I think the consensus was pretty clear on the panel, there's never been a more bullish setup for bitcoin historically. The political support we're getting here in the United States, the institutional adoption that we're seeing, and the fervor around protocol level development are all pointing in the right direction. Even though the discussions around protocol development can be contentious at times, it's a signal that people really care about this open source monetary protocol that we're all building on. We all agreed that Bitcoin has never been more de-risked than it is today. That is not to say that there aren't any risk.

We also discussed the problem with mining pool centralization and the FPPS payout scheme and why people need to be paying attention to it. But I think overall, things are looking pretty good right now.

Yesterday I also had the pleasure of running the live desk at Bitcoin++ speaking with many of the developers building out the protocol layer and layers above bitcoin. It's always extremely humbling to sit down and speak with the developers because they are so damn smart. Brilliant people who really care deeply about bitcoin. Even though many of them have very different views about the state of bitcoin and how to build it out moving forward. I view my role on the live desk is simply to try to get everybody's perspective. Not only on the OP_RETURN discussion, but on the future of bitcoin and how the protocol progresses from a technical perspective.

I had many conversations. The first with Average Gary and VNPRC, who are working on hashpools, which are attempting to solve the mining pool centralization and privacy problems that exists by using ecash. Hashpool gives miners the ability to exchange hash shares for ehash tokens. that are immediately liquid and exchangeable for bitcoin over the lightning network. Solving the consistent payout and liquidity problem that miners are always trying to solve. Currently FPPS payout schemes are the way they solve these problems. I'm incredibly optimistic about the hashpools project.

I also had the pleasure of speaking with SuperTestNet and Dusty Daemon, who are both focused on making bitcoin more inherently private at the protocol layer and on the lightning network. I think Dusty's work on splicing is very underappreciated right now and is something that you should all look into. Dusty also explained an idea he has that would make CoinJoin coordination much easier by creating a standardized coordination protocol. I'm going to butcher the explanation here, But I think the general idea is to create a way for people to combine inputs by monitoring the lightning network and looking for individual actors who are looking to rebalance channels and opportunistically set up a collaborative transaction with them. This is something I think everyone should look into and champion because I think it would be incredibly beneficial to on-chain privacy. As Bitcoin scales and gets adopted by millions and billions of people over the next few decades.

I also had the pleasure of speaking with Andrew Poelstra and Boerst about cryptography and block templates. For those of you who are unaware, Andrew Poelstra the Head of Research at Blockstream and on the cutting edge of the cryptography that bitcoin uses and may implement in the future. We had a wide ranging discussion about OP_RETURN, FROST, Musig2, Miniscript, quantum. resistant cryptographic libraries, and how Bitcoin Core actually works as a development project.

I also spoke with Liam Egan from Alpen Labs. He's working on ZK rollups on Bitcoin. Admittedly, this is an area I haven't explored too deeply, so it was awesome to sit down with Liam and get his perspective. Alpen Labs is leveraging BitVM to enable their rollups.

I highly recommend if and when you get the time to check out the YouTube stream of the Live Desk. A lot of very deep, technical conversations, but if you're really interested to learn how bitcoin actually works and some of the ideas that are out there to make it better, this is an incredible piece of content to watch. I'm about to head over for day two of Bitcoin++ to run the Live Desk again. So if you get this email before we go live make sure you subscribe to the YouTube channel and tune in for the day.

One thing I will say. Last night, there was a debate about OP_RETURN and I think it's important to note that despite how vitriolic people may get on Twitter, it's always interesting to see people with diametrically opposed views get together and have civil debates. It's obvious that everyone involved cares deeply about bitcoin. Having these tough conversations in person is very important. Particularly, civil conversations. I certainly think yesterday's debate was civil. Though, I will say I think that as bitcoiners, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard of decorum when debates like this are had.

Tyler Campbell from Unchained mentioned that it is insane that there was such a small group of people attending this particular debate about the future of a two trillion dollar protocol. Bitcoin is approaching $100,000 again as I type and no one in big tech, no one in big finance outside of people looking for bitcoin treasury plays is really paying attention to what's happening at the protocol level. This is simply funny to observe and probably a good thing in the long run. But, Meta, Stripe, Apple, Visa, Mastercard and the Teslas of the world are all asleep at the wheel as we build out the future of money.

The $1 Trillion Basis Trade Time Bomb

The massive basis trade currently looming over financial markets represents a systemic risk that dwarfs previous crises. As James Lavish warned during our conversation, approximately $1 trillion in leveraged positions exist within this trade - ten times larger than those held by Long-Term Capital Management before its 1998 collapse. These trades employ staggering leverage ratios between 20x to 100x just to make minuscule basis point differences profitable. The Brookings Institution, which Lavish describes as a "tacit research arm of the Fed," has published a paper explicitly warning about this trade's dangers.

"The Brookings Institution came out with a solution... instead of printing money this time, the Fed will just take the whole trade off of the hedge funds books. Absolutely, utterly maniacal. The thought of the Fed becoming a hedge fund... it's nuts." - James Lavish

What makes this situation particularly alarming is how an unwind could trigger cascading margin calls throughout interconnected financial markets. As Lavish explained, when positions begin unwinding, prices move dramatically, triggering more margin calls that force more selling. This "powder keg behind the scenes" is being closely monitored by sophisticated investors who understand its destructive potential. Unlike a controlled demolition, this unwinding could quickly become chaotic, potentially forcing unprecedented Fed intervention.

Check out the full podcast here for more on Bitcoin's role as the neutral reserve asset, nation-state mining strategies, and the repeal of SAB 121's impact on banking adoption.

Headlines of the Day

Panama City Signs Deal for Bitcoin Municipal Payments - via X

U.S. Economy Polls Show Falling Confidence in Trump Leadership - via CNBC

Jack Mallers's Bitcoin Bank Targets $500 Trillion Market - via X

Bitcoin Decouples From Markets With 10% Gain Amid Asset Slump - via X

---

Looking for the perfect video _to push the smartest person you know from zero to one on bitcoin? Bitcoin, Not Crypto is a three-part master class from Parker Lewis and Dhruv Bansal that cuts through the noise—covering why 2

@ 0e9491aa:ef2adadf

@matt_odell don't you even dare not ask about nostr!

— Kukks (Andrew Camilleri) (@MrKukks) May 18, 2021

Nostr first hit my radar spring 2021: created by fellow bitcoiner and friend, fiatjaf, and released to the world as free open source software. I was fortunate to be able to host a conversation with him on Citadel Dispatch in those early days, capturing that moment in history forever. Since then, the protocol has seen explosive viral organic growth as individuals around the world have contributed their time and energy to build out the protocol and the surrounding ecosystem due to the clear need for better communication tools.

nostr is to twitter as bitcoin is to paypal

As an intro to nostr, let us start with a metaphor:

twitter is paypal - a centralized platform plagued by censorship but has the benefit of established network effects

nostr is bitcoin - an open protocol that is censorship resistant and robust but requires an organic adoption phase

Nostr is an open communication protocol that can be used to send messages across a distributed set of relays in a censorship resistant and robust way.
 - Anyone can run a relay.
 - Anyone can interact with the protocol.
 - Relays can choose which messages they want to relay.
 - Users are identified by a simple public private key pair that they can generate themselves.

Nostr is often compared to twitter since there are nostr clients that emulate twitter functionality and user interface but that is merely one application of the protocol. Nostr is so much more than a mere twitter competitor. Nostr clients and relays can transmit a wide variety of data and clients can choose how to display that information to users. The result is a revolution in communication with implications that are difficult for any of us to truly comprehend.

Similar to bitcoin, nostr is an open and permissionless protocol. No person, company, or government controls it. Anyone can iterate and build on top of nostr without permission. Together, bitcoin and nostr are incredibly complementary freedom tech tools: censorship resistant, permissionless, robust, and interoperable - money and speech protected by code and incentives, not laws.

As censorship throughout the world continues to escalate, freedom tech provides hope for individuals around the world who refuse to accept the status quo. This movement will succeed on the shoulders of those who choose to stand up and contribute. We will build our own path. A brighter path.

---

My Nostr Public Key: npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx

---

If you found this post helpful support my work with bitcoin.

@ da8b7de1:c0164aee

TVA SMR-építési engedélykérelem Clinch Riverben

A Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) benyújtotta az első kis moduláris reaktor (SMR) építési engedélykérelmet az Egyesült Államokban, a Clinch River-i telephelyre. Ez a lépés mérföldkő az amerikai nukleáris ipar számára, hiszen a BWRX-300 típusú SMR-rel a TVA célja a szén-dioxid-mentes energiatermelés bővítése és az innovatív nukleáris technológia bevezetése.

ČEZ új nukleáris telephelyet jelölt ki Csehországban

A cseh ČEZ energetikai vállalat kijelölte a Tušimice-i telephelyet egy új atomerőmű számára, ahol várhatóan kis moduláris reaktorokat (SMR) telepítenek. Ez a lépés segíti az országot az energiafüggetlenség és a szénalapú energiatermelés kivezetése felé vezető úton.

Urenco USA új dúsító kaszkádot indított

Az Urenco USA New Mexicóban elindította új gázcentrifuga kaszkádját, amely 15%-kal növeli az amerikai dúsított urán kapacitást. Ez kulcsfontosságú az orosz uránimporttól való függetlenedés és az amerikai atomerőművek ellátásbiztonsága szempontjából.

Fiatal szakemberek sürgetik a nukleáris energia központi szerepét Európában

Európai fiatal nukleáris szakemberek nyílt levélben hívták fel a döntéshozók figyelmét arra, hogy a nukleáris energia kapjon központi szerepet a kontinens dekarbonizációs stratégiájában. Kiemelték a kutatás-fejlesztés, a befektetési környezet javítása és a társadalmi elfogadottság növelésének fontosságát.

Zeno Power 50 millió dolláros befektetést szerzett

Az amerikai Zeno Power startup 50 millió dolláros befektetést jelentett be nukleáris akkumulátorok fejlesztésére, amelyek extrém környezetekben – például az űrben vagy tenger alatt – biztosítanak megbízható energiát. A cég célja, hogy 2027-re kereskedelmi forgalomba hozza első rendszereit.

További globális nukleáris fejlemények

Több ország – például India, Kína, Belgium, Kanada, Brazília – is új nukleáris projekteket jelentett be, miközben a nemzetközi konferenciák az ellátási láncok megerősítését és a nukleáris kapacitások bővítését helyezik előtérbe.

---

Hivatkozások

• tva.com
• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ČEZ_Group
• urencousa.com
• zenopower.com
• fisa-euradwaste2025.ncbj.gov.pl
• world-nuclear.org
• nucnet.org

@ c9badfea:610f861a

1. Install YTDLnis (it's free and open source)
2. Launch the app and allow notifications and storage access if prompted
3. Go to any supported website or use the YouTube, Instagram, X, or Facebook app
4. Tap Share on the post or website URL and select YTDLnis as the sharing destination
5. Adjust the settings if desired and tap Download
6. You'll be notified when the download finishes
7. Enjoy uninterrupted watching!

ℹ️ This app uses yt-dlp internally and it's also available as a standalone CLI tool