@ da18e986:3a0d9851

After months of development I am excited to officially announce the first version of DVMDash (v0.1). DVMDash is a monitoring and debugging tool for all Data Vending Machine (DVM) activity on Nostr. The website is live at https://dvmdash.live and the code is available on Github.

Data Vending Machines (NIP-90) offload computationally expensive tasks from relays and clients in a decentralized, free-market manner. They are especially useful for AI tools, algorithmic processing of user’s feeds, and many other use cases.

The long term goal of DVMDash is to become 1) a place to easily see what’s happening in the DVM ecosystem with metrics and graphs, and 2) provide real-time tools to help developers monitor, debug, and improve their DVMs.

DVMDash aims to enable users to answer these types of questions at a glance: * What’s the most popular DVM right now? * How much money is being paid to image generation DVMs? * Is any DVM down at the moment? When was the last time that DVM completed a task? * Have any DVMs failed to deliver after accepting payment? Did they refund that payment? * How long does it take this DVM to respond? * For task X, what’s the average amount of time it takes for a DVM to complete the task? * … and more

For developers working with DVMs there is now a visual, graph based tool that shows DVM-chain activity. DVMs have already started calling other DVMs to assist with work. Soon, we will have humans in the loop monitoring DVM activity, or completing tasks themselves. The activity trace of which DVM is being called as part of a sub-task from another DVM will become complicated, especially because these decisions will be made at run-time and are not known ahead of time. Building a tool to help users and developers understand where a DVM is in this activity trace, whether it’s gotten stuck or is just taking a long time, will be invaluable. For now, the website only shows 1 step of a dvm chain from a user's request.

One of the main designs for the site is that it is highly clickable, meaning whenever you see a DVM, Kind, User, or Event ID, you can click it and open that up in a new page to inspect it.

Another aspect of this website is that it should be fast. If you submit a DVM request, you should see it in DVMDash within seconds, as well as events from DVMs interacting with your request. I have attempted to obtain DVM events from relays as quickly as possible and compute metrics over them within seconds.

This project makes use of a nosql database and graph database, currently set to use mongo db and neo4j, for which there are free, community versions that can be run locally.

Finally, I’m grateful to nostr:npub10pensatlcfwktnvjjw2dtem38n6rvw8g6fv73h84cuacxn4c28eqyfn34f for supporting this project.

Features in v0.1:

Global Network Metrics:

This page shows the following metrics: - DVM Requests: Number of unencrypted DVM requests (kind 5000-5999) - DVM Results: Number of unencrypted DVM results (kind 6000-6999) - DVM Request Kinds Seen: Number of unique kinds in the Kind range 5000-5999 (except for known non-DVM kinds 5666 and 5969) - DVM Result Kinds Seen: Number of unique kinds in the Kind range 6000-6999 (except for known non-DVM kinds 6666 and 6969) - DVM Pub Keys Seen: Number of unique pub keys that have written a kind 6000-6999 (except for known non-DVM kinds) or have published a kind 31990 event that specifies a ‘k’ tag value between 5000-5999 - DVM Profiles (NIP-89) Seen: Number of 31990 that have a ‘k’ tag value for kind 5000-5999 - Most Popular DVM: The DVM that has produced the most result events (kind 6000-6999) - Most Popular Kind: The Kind in range 5000-5999 that has the most requests by users. - 24 hr DVM Requests: Number of kind 5000-5999 events created in the last 24 hrs - 24 hr DVM Results: Number of kind 6000-6999 events created in the last 24 hours - 1 week DVM Requests: Number of kind 5000-5999 events created in the last week - 1 week DVM Results: Number of kind 6000-6999 events created in the last week - Unique Users of DVMs: Number of unique pubkeys of kind 5000-5999 events - Total Sats Paid to DVMs: - This is an estimate. - This value is likely a lower bound as it does not take into consideration subscriptions paid to DVMs - This is calculated by counting the values of all invoices where: - A DVM published a kind 7000 event requesting payment and containing an invoice - The DVM later provided a DVM Result for the same job for which it requested payment. - The assumption is that the invoice was paid, otherwise the DVM would not have done the work - Note that because there are multiple ways to pay a DVM such as lightning invoices, ecash, and subscriptions, there is no guaranteed way to know whether a DVM has been paid. Additionally, there is no way to know that a DVM completed the job because some DVMs may not publish a final result event and instead send the user a DM or take some other kind of action.

Recent Requests:

This page shows the most recent 3 events per kind, sorted by created date. You should always be able to find the last 3 events here of all DVM kinds.

DVM Browser:

This page will either show a profile of a specific DVM, or when no DVM is given in the url, it will show a table of all DVMs with some high level stats. Users can click on a DVM in the table to load the DVM specific page.

Kind Browser:

This page will either show data on a specific kind including all DVMs that have performed jobs of that kind, or when no kind is given, it will show a table summarizing activity across all Kinds.

Debug:

This page shows the graph based visualization of all events, users, and DVMs involved in a single job as well as a table of all events in order from oldest to newest. When no event is given, this page shows the 200 most recent events where the user can click on an event in order to debug that job. The graph-based visualization allows the user to zoom in and out and move around the graph, as well as double click on any node in the graph (except invoices) to open up that event, user, or dvm in a new page.

Playground:

This page is currently under development and may not work at the moment. If it does work, in the current state you can login with NIP-07 extension and broadcast a 5050 event with some text and then the page will show you events from DVMs. This page will be used to interact with DVMs live. A current good alternative to this feature, for some but not all kinds, is https://vendata.io/.

Looking to the Future

I originally built DVMDash out of Fear-of-Missing-Out (FOMO); I wanted to make AI systems that were comprised of DVMs but my day job was taking up a lot of my time. I needed to know when someone was performing a new task or launching a new AI or Nostr tool!

I have a long list of DVMs and Agents I hope to build and I needed DVMDash to help me do it; I hope it helps you achieve your goals with Nostr, DVMs, and even AI. To this end, I wish for this tool to be useful to others, so if you would like a feature, please submit a git issue here or note me on Nostr!

Immediate Next Steps:

• Refactoring code and removing code that is no longer used
• Improve documentation to run the project locally
• Adding a metric for number of encrypted requests
• Adding a metric for number of encrypted results

Long Term Goals:

• Add more metrics based on community feedback
• Add plots showing metrics over time
• Add support for showing a multi-dvm chain in the graph based visualizer
• Add a real-time mode where the pages will auto update (currently the user must refresh the page)
• ... Add support for user requested features!

Acknowledgements

There are some fantastic people working in the DVM space right now. Thank you to nostr:npub1drvpzev3syqt0kjrls50050uzf25gehpz9vgdw08hvex7e0vgfeq0eseet for making python bindings for nostr_sdk and for the recent asyncio upgrades! Thank you to nostr:npub1nxa4tywfz9nqp7z9zp7nr7d4nchhclsf58lcqt5y782rmf2hefjquaa6q8 for answering lots of questions about DVMs and for making the nostrdvm library. Thank you to nostr:npub1l2vyh47mk2p0qlsku7hg0vn29faehy9hy34ygaclpn66ukqp3afqutajft for making the original DVM NIP and vendata.io which I use all the time for testing!

P.S. I rushed to get this out in time for Nostriga 2024; code refactoring will be coming :)

@ c4f5e7a7:8856cac7

Best viewed on Habla, YakiHonne or Highlighter.

TL;DR

This article explores the links between public, community-driven data sources (such as OpenStreetMap) and private, cryptographically-owned data found on networks such as Nostr.

The following concepts are explored:

1. Attestations: Users signalling to their social graph that they believe something to be true by publishing Attestations. These social proofs act as a decentralised verification system that leverages your web-of-trust.
2. Proof of Place: An oracle-based system where physical letters are sent to real-world locations, confirming the corresponding digital ownership via cryptographic proofs. This binds physical locations in meatspace with their digital representations in the Nostrverse.
3. Check-ins: Foursquare-style check-ins that can be verified using attestations from place owners, ensuring authenticity. This approach uses web-of-trust to validate check-ins and location ownership over time.

The goal is to leverage cryptographic ownership where necessary while preserving the open, collaborative nature of public data systems.

Open Data in a public commons has a place and should not be thrown out with the Web 2.0 bathwater.

Cognitive Dissonance

Ever since discovering Nostr in August of 2022 I've been grappling with how BTC Map - a project that helps bitcoiners find places to spend sats - should most appropriately use this new protocol.

I am assuming, dear reader, that you are somewhat familiar with Nostr - a relatively new protocol for decentralised identity and communication. If you don’t know your nsec from your npub, please take some time to read these excellent posts: Nostr is Identity for the Internet and The Power of Nostr by @max and @lyn, respectively. Nostr is so much more than a short-form social media replacement.

The social features (check-ins, reviews, etc.) that Nostr unlocks for BTC Map are clear and exciting - all your silos are indeed broken - however, something fundamental has been bothering me for a while and I think it comes down to data ownership.

For those unfamiliar, BTC Map uses OpenStreetMap (OSM) as its main geographic database. OSM is centred on the concept of a commons of objectively verifiable data that is maintained by a global community of volunteer editors; a Wikipedia for maps. There is no data ownership; the data is free (as in freedom) and anyone can edit anything. It is the data equivalent of FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) - FOSD if you will, but more commonly referred to as Open Data.

In contrast, Notes and Other Stuff on Nostr (Places in this cartographic context) are explicitly owned by the controller of the private key. These notes are free to propagate, but they are owned.

How do we reconcile the decentralised nature of Nostr, where data is cryptographically owned by individuals, with the community-managed data commons of OpenStreetMap, where no one owns the data?

Self-sovereign Identity

Before I address this coexistence question, I want to talk a little about identity as it pertains to ownership. If something is to be owned, it has to be owned by someone or something - an identity.

All identities that are not self-sovereign are, by definition, leased to you by a 3rd party. You rent your Facebook identity from Meta in exchange for your data. You rent your web domain from your DNS provider in exchange for your money.

Taken to the extreme, you rent your passport from your Government in exchange for your compliance. You are you at the pleasure of others. Where Bitcoin separates money from the state; Nostr separates identity from the state.

Or, as @nvk said recently: "Don't build your house on someone else's land.".

https://i.nostr.build/xpcCSkDg3uVw0yku.png

While we’ve had the tools for self-sovereign digital identity for decades (think PGP keys or WebAuthN), we haven't had the necessary social use cases nor the corresponding social graph to elevate these identities to the mainstream. Nostr fixes this.

Nostr is PGP for the masses and will take cryptographic identities mainstream.

Full NOSTARD?

Returning to the coexistence question: the data on OpenStreetMap isn’t directly owned by anyone, even though the physical entities the data represents might be privately owned. OSM is a data commons.

We can objectively agree on the location of a tree or a fire hydrant without needing permission to observe and record it. Sure, you could place a tree ‘on Nostr’, but why should you? Just because something can be ‘on Nostr’ doesn’t mean it should be.

https://i.nostr.build/s3So2JVAqoY4E1dI.png

There might be a dystopian future where we can't agree on what a tree is nor where it's located, but I hope we never get there. It's at this point we'll need a Wikifreedia variant of OpenStreetMap.

While integrating Nostr identities into OpenStreetMap would be valuable, the current OSM infrastructure, tools, and community already provide substantial benefits in managing this data commons without needing to go NOSTR-native - there's no need to go Full NOSTARD. H/T to @princeySOV for the original meme.

https://i.nostr.build/ot9jtM5cZtDHNKWc.png

So, how do we appropriately blend cryptographically owned data with the commons?

If a location is owned in meatspace and it's useful to signal that ownership, it should also be owned in cyberspace. Our efforts should therefore focus on entities like businesses, while allowing the commons to manage public data for as long as it can successfully mitigate the tragedy of the commons.

The remainder of this article explores how we can:

1. Verify ownership of a physical place in the real world;
2. Link that ownership to the corresponding digital place in cyberspace.

As a side note, I don't see private key custodianship - or, even worse, permissioned use of Places signed by another identity's key - as any more viable than the rented identities of Web 2.0.

And as we all know, the Second Law of Infodynamics (no citation!) states that:

"The total amount of sensitive information leaked will always increase over time."

This especially holds true if that data is centralised.

Not your keys, not your notes. Not your keys, not your identity.

Places and Web-of-Trust

@Arkinox has been leading the charge on the Places NIP, introducing Nostr notes (kind 37515) that represent physical locations. The draft is well-crafted, with bonus points for linking back to OSM (and other location repositories) via NIP-73 - External Content IDs (championed by @oscar of @fountain).

However, as Nostr is permissionless, authenticity poses a challenge. Just because someone claims to own a physical location on the Internet doesn’t necessarily mean they have ownership or control of that location in the real world.

Ultimately, this problem can only be solved in a decentralised way by using Web-of-Trust - using your social graph and the perspectives of trusted peers to inform your own perspective. In the context of Places, this requires your network to form a view on which digital identity (public key / npub) is truly the owner of a physical place like your local coffee shop.

This requires users to:

1. Verify the owner of a Place in cyberspace is the owner of a place in meatspace.
2. Signal this verification to their social graph.

Let's look at the latter idea first with the concept of Attestations ...

Attestations

A way to signal to your social graph that you believe something to be true (or false for that matter) would be by publishing an Attestation note. An Attestation note would signify to your social graph that you think something is either true or false.

Imagine you're a regular at a local coffee shop. You publish an Attestation that says the shop is real and the owner behind the Nostr public key is who they claim to be. Your friends trust you, so they start trusting the shop's digital identity too.

However, attestations applied to Places are just a single use case. The attestation concept could be more widely applied across Nostr in a variety of ways (key rotation, identity linking, etc).

Here is a recent example from @lyn that would carry more signal if it were an Attestation:

https://i.nostr.build/lZAXOEwvRIghgFY4.png

Parallels can be drawn between Attestations and transaction confirmations on the Bitcoin timechain; however, their importance to you would be weighted by clients and/or Data Vending Machines in accordance with:

1. Your social graph;
2. The type or subject of the content being attested and by whom;
3. Your personal preferences.

They could also have a validity duration to be temporally bound, which would be particularly useful in the case of Places.

NIP-25 (Reactions) do allow for users to up/downvote notes with optional content (e.g., emojis) and could work for Attestations, but I think we need something less ambiguous and more definitive.

‘This is true’ resonates more strongly than ‘I like this.’.

https://i.nostr.build/s8NIG2kXzUCLcoax.jpg

There are similar concepts in the Web 3 / Web 5 world such as Verified Credentials by tdb. However, Nostr is the Web 3 now and so wen Attestation NIP?

https://i.nostr.build/Cb047NWyHdJ7h5Ka.jpg

That said, I have seen @utxo has been exploring ‘smart contracts’ on nostr and Attestations may just be a relatively ‘dumb’ subset of the wider concept Nostr-native scripting combined with web-of-trust.

Proof of Place

Attestations handle the signalling of your truth, but what about the initial verification itself?

We already covered how this ultimately has to be derived from your social graph, but what if there was a way to help bootstrap this web-of-trust through the use of oracles? For those unfamiliar with oracles in the digital realm, they are simply trusted purveyors of truth.

Introducing Proof of Place, an out–of-band process where an oracle (such as BTC Map) would mail - yes physically mail- a shared secret to the address of the location being claimed in cyberspace. This shared secret would be locked to the public key (npub) making the claim, which, if unlocked, would prove that the associated private key (nsec) has physical access to the location in meatspace.

One way of doing this would be to mint a 1 sat cashu ecash token locked to the npub of the claimant and mail it to them. If they are able to redeem the token then they have cryptographically proven that they have physical access to the location.

Proof of Place is really nothing more than a weighted Attestation. In a web-of-trust Nostrverse, an oracle is simply a npub (say BTC Map) that you weigh heavily for its opinion on a given topic (say Places).

In the Bitcoin world, Proof of Work anchors digital scarcity in cyberspace to physical scarcity (energy and time) in meatspace and as @Gigi says in PoW is Essential:

"A failure to understand Proof of Work, is a failure to understand Bitcoin."

In the Nostrverse, Proof of Place helps bridge the digital and physical worlds.

@Gigi also observes in Memes vs The World that:

"In Bitcoin, the map is the territory. We can infer everything we care about by looking at the map alone."

https://i.nostr.build/dOnpxfI4u7EL2v4e.png

This isn’t true for Nostr.

In the Nostrverse, the map IS NOT the territory. However, Proof of Place enables us to send cryptographic drones down into the physical territory to help us interpret our digital maps. 🤯

Check-ins

Although not a draft NIP yet, @Arkinox has also been exploring the familiar concept of Foursquare-style Check-ins on Nostr (with kind 13811 notes).

For the uninitiated, Check-ins are simply notes that signal the publisher is at a given location. These locations could be Places (in the Nostr sense) or any other given digital representation of a location for that matter (such as OSM elements) if NIP-73 - External Content IDs are used.

Of course, not everyone will be a Check-in enjoyooor as the concept will not sit well with some people’s threat models and OpSec practices.

Bringing Check-ins to Nostr is possible (as @sebastix capably shows here), but they suffer the same authenticity issues as Places. Just because I say I'm at a given location doesn't mean that I am.

Back in the Web 2.0 days, Foursquare mitigated this by relying on the GPS position of the phone running their app, but this is of course spoofable.

How should we approach Check-in verifiability in the Nostrverse? Well, just like with Places, we can use Attestations and WoT. In the context of Check-ins, an Attestation from the identity (npub) of the Place being checked-in to would be a particularly strong signal. An NFC device could be placed in a coffee shop and attest to check-ins without requiring the owner to manually intervene - I’m sure @blackcoffee and @Ben Arc could hack something together over a weekend!

Check-ins could also be used as a signal for bonafide Place ownership over time.

Summary: Trust Your Bros

So, to recap, we have:

Places: Digital representations of physical locations on Nostr.

Check-ins: Users signalling their presence at a location.

Attestations: Verifiable social proofs used to confirm ownership or the truth of a claim.

You can visualise how these three concepts combine in the diagram below:

https://i.nostr.build/Uv2Jhx5BBfA51y0K.jpg

And, as always, top right trumps bottom left! We have:

Level 0 - Trust Me Bro: Anyone can check-in anywhere. The Place might not exist or might be impersonating the real place in meatspace. The person behind the npub may not have even been there at all.

Level 1 - Definitely Maybe Somewhere: This category covers the middle-ground of ‘Maybe at a Place’ and ‘Definitely Somewhere’. In these examples, you are either self-certifying that you have checked-in at an Attested Place or you are having others attest that you have checked-in at a Place that might not even exist IRL.

Level 2 - Trust Your Bros: An Attested Check-in at an Attested Place. Your individual level of trust would be a function of the number of Attestations and how you weigh them within your own social graph.

https://i.nostr.build/HtLAiJH1uQSTmdxf.jpg

Perhaps the gold standard (or should that be the Bitcoin standard?) would be a Check-in attested by the owner of the Place, which in itself was attested by BTC Map?

Or perhaps not. Ultimately, it’s the users responsibility to determine what they trust by forming their own perspective within the Nostrverse powered by web-of-trust algorithms they control. ‘Trust Me Bro’ or ‘Trust Your Bros’ - you decide.

As we navigate the frontier of cryptographic ownership and decentralised data, it’s up to us to find the balance between preserving the Open Data commons and embracing self-sovereign digital identities.

Thanks

With thanks to Arkinox, Avi, Ben Gunn, Kieran, Blackcoffee, Sebastix, Tomek, Calle, Short Fiat, Ben Weeks and Bitcoms for helping shape my thoughts and refine content, whether you know it or not!

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

Let's talk about baking bread

I've mentioned a few times, how large-scale central planning leads inevitably to artificial scarcity and rising prices. Allow me to illustrate -- using a completely invented allegory about bread -- that has absolutely no parallels to any economy you may already be familiar with.

We start with 20

Let us say, there is a group of 20 people in a village doing something that requires some niche skill and interest, but not inordinate amounts of talent or uncommon knowledge, such as baking loaves of bread containing emmer wheat. This is not an easy thing to do, and you'd have to read up on it and practice, to begin with, but it's not an insurmountably-high barrier for anyone who already knows how to bake.

Now, they're not baking all that much of this bread, as the market for people who want to eat it, is still rather small. But, they're happy to bake the bread, and sell it below cost (at $10), as they can see that the market is steadily growing and they know that there is a possibility of recuperating their investments, and maybe even turning some profit. They hope to eventually profit either directly (through the selling of the bread), or indirectly (as A Person Who Helped Invent Emmer Bread), or ideally some combination of the two.

They are baking away, and honing their baking skills, and scrounging up the money for bigger and better ovens or cleverly-arranging discounted contracts for slightly-larger deliveries of wheat, and more and more bakers see this activity and wander over to their village, to see how this bread is made. Well, the current bakers are starting to sink under all of the bread orders they are receiving, and customers are complaining of late deliveries, so they start to ask the 10 visiting bakers, if they would like to also set up a bakery and take some of the production off of their hands.

We now have 25 bakers

The visiting bakers consider it and 5 agree and the rest wander off again, as they already are quite busy baking the bread they've always baked, and they aren't as certain of the possibility of growth, for this new type of bread.

The 5 additional bakers take a while to setup shop and assemble staff and place wheat orders and etc., but after a few weeks or months, they are also adding to the bread supply. There are now 25 bakers, all completely booked-out, producing bread. The price of bread has fallen, to $8/loaf.

And the bread they produced! All of the bakers competing for orders and expanding their product lines and customer base quickly lead to the white emmer bread being followed by whole-grain emmer bread, emmer dinner rolls, emmer-raisin bread, and even one rebel daring to bake spelt-emmer pretzels because... Well, why not? The customer, (who, at this point, is the person eating the bread), gets to decide which bread will be baked, and the pretzels sell like hotcakes.

The emmer hotcakes also sell like hotcakes.

No baker is making much (or any) money off of the baking, but they all can see where this will end up, so they are still highly motivated and continue to invest and innovate at breathtaking speed. We now have emmer baking mixes, "We luv emmer" t-shirts, emmer baking crowd-sourcing, all-about-emmer recipe books and blogs, etc. The bakers see this all as an investment, and cross-finance their fledgling businesses through selling other bread types, their spouse's day job, burning through their savings, or working Saturday night, stocking shelves at the grocery.

Everyone can be a winner! Everyone can find their niche-in-niche! Everyone can specialize! Private enterprise for every baker, who rises and falls on his own efforts alone! And although everyone was competing with everyone else, there was no bitterness, as everyone could clearly see that effort and reward were in some sort of balance.

We are now short 3

But, alas, that was not meant to be. The joy and harmony is short-lived.

A gigantic, wealthy foundation, who is dedicated to "ensuring much emmer bread will be baked, by financially supporting emmer bakers" enters the chat.

"We have seen that there is much baking going on, here, but just think how much better and more baking could be done, if we financed your baking! Isn't that clever? Then you could really concentrate on baking, instead of having to worry about financing your business or marketing your products. All you have to do, is apply to receive our baker's grant, by signing this form, acknowledging that you will only bake products containing nothing but emmer and you will otherwise support our mission. We promise to pay you $100/loaf."

The 2 people making spelt-emmer pretzels, and the 1 person making spelt-emmer cookies, refuse to sign on, and slink off, as they are very convinced of the rightness of including spelt. One emmer-purist baker refuses on some economic principle that nobody comprehends, and immediately turns around and goes back to work in their bakery, with their shoulders hunched. But the remaining 21 bakers happily apply for a baker's grant. The mixed-grain bakers are upset about the breakup of the emmer market, and spend some time sulking, before wandering off to the new, much-smaller, spelt bread market, that is setting up, down the street. Where they sell their bread for $6 and slowly go bankrupt.

And then there were 10

2 weeks go by. 4 weeks go by. Baking has slowed. The grant hopefuls hold a meeting, where they discuss the joys of baking. Baking slows further.

Everyone is too excited, to find out if their new Universal Customer will be paying for the bread they bake. $100 a loaf! Just think of it! All of the bakers quickly do the math and realize that they not only will turn a profit, they can buy themselves a nice house and a new car and...

Nobody listens to the complaints from The Old Customers, who are the useless individual people only paying $8, despite them slaving away, all day, in front of a hot oven. They should be happy that they are getting bread, at all! Instead they complain that the bread is dry, that the delivery is late, that the bottoms are burnt. Ingrates.

And, then, the big day arrives, and the foundation happily announces that they will be giving 10 lucky bakers a grant.

The bakers are stunned. It had seemed that all of the bakers would be getting the grants, not only part of them. But, of course, the Universal Customer looked through the applications and tried to spend its money wisely. Why give grants to 5 bakers, who all produce the same type of olive-emmer bread? Give it to one, and then tell him to produce 5 times as much bread. He is then the olive-emmer bread expert and they will simply keep loose tabs on him, to nudge him to bake the bread in a sensible manner. And, of course, he shall always focus on baking olive bread, as that is what the grant is for.

The bakers stroll off, to their bakeries. Those who baked olive bread and received no grant, close up shop, as they can see which way the wind is blowing. The other grantless bakers reformulate their bakery plans, to see if they can somehow market themselves as "grant-free bakers" and wonder at how long they can stand the humiliation of selling to demanding, fickle customers at $8/loaf, when others are selling at $100/loaf, to an indifferent customer who doesn't even eat it.

The happiest 10 bakers leave for another conference, and while they are gone, their bakeries burn down. Their grants continue to flow, regardless, and the actual bread eaters are now standing in line at the last few bakeries, paying $20/loaf.

The End.

@ 32ee46c5:dde81be9

As I travel around the United States, one of the things that always jumps out to me is just how beautiful this country is. The seashores and the rivers, the mountains and canyons, the farmlands and forests, the deserts and plains are spectacular, for sure, but so are the cities. A week or so ago, as I... This is a preview of my post. Join my community and get access to this and more of my work.

https://highlighter.com/npub1xthyd3ttv467g65ff6rpvz6qdvm9zpmf3j35svrc8wuumh0gr05sgx8evy

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Table Of Content

• Educational Initiatives Promoting Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Awareness

• Supportive Government Policies and Regulatory Frameworks

• Growing Cryptocurrency Mining Industry

• Increased Adoption by Businesses and Consumers

• Establishment of Cryptocurrency Exchanges and Digital Asset Marketplaces

• Collaboration with Neighboring Countries

• Conclusion

• FAQ

In recent years, Thailand has emerged as a hub for blockchain technology and cryptocurrency adoption. The country has shown an eagerness to embrace the Bitcoin revolution, with significant developments in areas such as education, mining, and regulatory frameworks. This article explores the key factors that have contributed to Thailand's growing prominence in the global Bitcoin landscape

Educational Initiatives Promoting Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Awareness

Thailand has recognized the importance of education in fostering a strong foundation for the growth of blockchain technology and cryptocurrency adoption. As a result, numerous universities and educational institutions now offer courses and degree programs in the field. This has created a talented pool of blockchain experts and enthusiasts who are driving the growth of the industry in the country.

Supportive Government Policies and Regulatory Frameworks

The Thai government has adopted a proactive approach towards the regulation and growth of the cryptocurrency market. In recent years, the country has established clear legal frameworks and guidelines for digital asset businesses, which has encouraged both local and international players to invest in Thailand's burgeoning cryptocurrency sector.

Growing Cryptocurrency Mining Industry

Thailand has become an attractive destination for cryptocurrency mining, thanks to its affordable electricity rates and well-developed infrastructure. The country has seen an influx of mining companies, which have set up large-scale mining operations to capitalize on the favorable conditions. This has not only created jobs but also contributed to the growth of the local economy.

Increased Adoption by Businesses and Consumers

In Thailand, both businesses and consumers are embracing the Bitcoin revolution. A growing number of merchants accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as a form of payment, while consumers are increasingly adopting digital wallets for everyday transactions. This widespread adoption has facilitated the growth of a vibrant cryptocurrency ecosystem in the country.

Establishment of Cryptocurrency Exchanges and Digital Asset Marketplaces

Thailand's supportive regulatory environment has paved the way for the establishment of numerous cryptocurrency exchanges and digital asset marketplaces. These platforms have facilitated easy access to cryptocurrencies for Thai citizens, further boosting the adoption and use of digital assets in the country.

Collaboration with Neighboring Countries

Thailand has actively engaged with neighboring countries in the Southeast Asian region to develop cross-border initiatives and partnerships in the blockchain and cryptocurrency space. These collaborative efforts have helped to create a strong regional network that supports the growth of the industry in Thailand and beyond.

Conclusion

Thailand's rapid embrace of the Bitcoin revolution is a testament to the country's forward-thinking approach towards technology and innovation. By fostering education, supportive regulation, and collaboration, Thailand has positioned itself as a leading player in the global blockchain and cryptocurrency landscape. This has not only benefited the Thai economy but also contributed to the worldwide adoption of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology.

FAQ

How has Thailand embraced the Bitcoin revolution in education? Thailand has incorporated blockchain and cryptocurrency courses into university curriculums, creating a talented pool of experts and enthusiasts who contribute to the growth of the industry.

What role does the Thai government play in supporting the Bitcoin revolution? The government has established clear legal frameworks and guidelines for digital asset businesses, encouraging both local and international players to invest in the cryptocurrency sector.

Why is Thailand becoming a popular destination for cryptocurrency mining? The country offers affordable electricity rates and well-developed infrastructure, attracting mining companies to set up large-scale operations and contributing to the local economy.

How have Thai businesses and consumers adopted cryptocurrencies? A growing number of merchants accept cryptocurrencies as payment, and consumers increasingly use digital wallets for everyday transactions, fostering a vibrant cryptocurrency ecosystem in the country.

That's all for today

If you want more, be sure to follow us on:

NOSTR: croxroad@getalby.com

X: @croxroadnews

Instagram: @croxroadnews.co

Youtube: @croxroadnews

Store: https://croxroad.store

Subscribe to CROX ROAD Bitcoin Only Daily Newsletter

https://www.croxroad.co/subscribe

DISCLAIMER: None of this is financial advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. Please be careful and do your own research.

@ 912212cc:672aac36

O Tsathoggua negro se moldou de uma gárgula semelhante a um sapo para uma linha sinuosa com centenas de pés rudimentares. Como um deus, Tsathoggua pode alterar sua forma para se adaptar melhor a qualquer ambiente em que você esteja. O que você acha dos vídeos sobre os mitos de Cthulhu?

https://video.nostr.build/394067118f64907e9034190f715da078c7c73c07c65b526fe91f683115fff5c5.mp4

@ 76c71aae:3e29cafa

On social media and in the Nostr space in particular, there’s been a lot of debate about the idea of supporting deletion and editing of notes.

Some people think they’re vital features to have, others believe that more honest and healthy social media will come from getting rid of these features. The discussion about these features quickly turns to the feasibility of completely deleting something on a decentralized protocol. We quickly get to the “We can’t really delete anything from the internet, or a decentralized network.” argument. This crowds out how Delete and Edit can mimic elements of offline interactions, how they can be used as social signals.

When it comes to issues of deletion and editing content, what matters more is if the creator can communicate their intentions around their content. Sure, on the internet, with decentralized protocols, there’s no way to be sure something’s deleted. It’s not like taking a piece of paper and burning it. Computers make copies of things all the time, computers don’t like deleting things. In particular, distributed systems tend to use a Kafka architecture with immutable logs, it’s just easier to keep everything around, as deleting and reindexing is hard. Even if the software could be made to delete something, there’s always screenshots, or even pictures of screens. We can’t provably make something disappear.

What we need to do in our software is clearly express intention. A delete is actually a kind of retraction. “I no longer want to associate myself with this content, please stop showing it to people as part of what I’ve published, stop highlighting it, stop sharing it.” Even if a relay or other server keeps a copy, and keeps sharing it, being able to clearly state “hello world, this thing I said, was a mistake, please get rid of it.” Just giving users the chance to say “I deleted this” is a way of showing intention. It’s also a way of signaling that feedback has been heard. Perhaps the post was factually incorrect or perhaps it was mean and the person wants to remove what they said. In an IRL conversation, for either of these scenarios there is some dialogue where the creator of the content is learning something and taking action based on what they’ve learned.

Without delete or edit, there is no option to signal to the rest of the community that you have learned something because of how the content is structured today. On most platforms a reply or response stating one’s learning will be lost often in a deluge of replies on the original post and subsequent posts are often not seen especially when the original goes viral. By providing tools like delete and edit we give people a chance to signal that they have heard the feedback and taken action.

The Nostr Protocol supports delete and expiring notes. It was one of the reasons we switched from secure scuttlebutt to build on Nostr. Our nos.social app offers delete and while we know that not all relays will honor this, we believe it’s important to provide social signaling tools as a means of making the internet more humane.

We believe that the power to learn from each other is more important than the need to police through moral outrage which is how the current platforms and even some Nostr clients work today.

It’s important that we don’t say Nostr doesn’t support delete. Not all apps need to support requesting a delete, some might want to call it a retraction. It is important that users know there is no way to enforce a delete and not all relays may honor their request.

Edit is similar, although not as widely supported as delete. It’s a creator making a clear statement that they’ve created a new version of their content. Maybe it’s a spelling error, or a new version of the content, or maybe they’re changing it altogether. Freedom online means freedom to retract a statement, freedom to update a statement, freedom to edit your own content. By building on these freedoms, we’ll make Nostr a space where people feel empowered and in control of their own media.

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

Bienvenide a Nostr!

Introduccíon

Es tu primera vez aqui en Nostr? Bienvenides! Nostr es un acrónimo raro para "Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays" on un solo objetivo; resistirse a la censura. Una alternativa a las redes sociales tradicionales, comunicaciónes, blogging, streaming, podcasting, y feventualmente el correo electronico (en fase de desarrollo) con características descentralizadas que te capacita, usario. Jamas seras molestado por un anuncio, capturado por una entidad centralizada o algoritmo que te monetiza.

Permítame ser su anfitrión! Soy Onigiri! Yo estoy explorando el mundo de Nostr, un protocolo de comunicacíon decentralizada. Yo escribo sobre las herramientas y los desarolladores increíbles de Nostr que dan vida a esta reino.

Bienvenides a Nostr Wonderland

Estas a punto de entrar a un otro mundo digtal que te hará explotar tu mente de todas las aplicaciones descentralizadas, clientes, sitios que puedes utilizar. Nunca volverás a ver a las comunicaciones ni a las redes sociales de la mesma manera. Todo gracias al carácter criptográfico de nostr, inpirado por la tecnología "blockchain". Cada usario, cuando crean una cuenta en Nostr, recibe un par de llaves: una privada y una publico. Estos son las llaves de tu propio reino. Lo que escribes, cantes, grabes, lo que creas - todo te pertenece.

Unos llaves de Oro y Plata

Mi amigo y yo llamamos a esto "identidad mediante cifrado" porque tu identidad es cifrado. Tu puedes compartir tu llave de plata "npub" a otros usarios para conectar y seguir. Utiliza tu llave de oro "nsec" para accedar a tu cuenta y exponerte a muchas aplicaciones. Mantenga la llave a buen recaudo en todo momento. Ya no hay razor para estar enjaulado por los terminos de plataformas sociales nunca más.

Onigirl npub18jvyjwpmm65g8v9azmlvu8knd5m7xlxau08y8vt75n53jtkpz2ys6mqqu3

Todavia No tienes un cliente? Seleccione la mejor opción.

Encuentra la aplicación adecuada para ti! Utilice su clave de oro "nsec" para acceder a estas herramientas maravillosas. También puedes visit a esta pagina a ver a todas las aplicaciones. Antes de pegar tu llave de oro en muchas aplicaciones, considera un "signer" (firmante) para los sitios web 3. Por favor, mire la siguiente imagen para más detalles. Consulte también la leyenda.

Get a Signer extension via chrome webstore

Un firmante (o "signer" en inglés) es una extensión del navegador web. Nos2x and NostrConnect son extensiónes ampliamente aceptado para aceder a Nostr. Esto simplifica el proceso de aceder a sitios "web 3". En lugar de copiar y pegar la clave oro "nsec" cada vez, la mantienes guardado en la extensión y le des permiso para aceder a Nostr.

👉⚡⚡Obtén una billetera Bitcoin lightning para enviar/recibir Zaps⚡⚡ (Esto es opcional)

Aqui en Nostr, utilizamos la red Lightning de Bitcoin (L2). Nesitaras una cartera lightning para enviar y recibir Satoshis, la denominacion mas chiquita de un Bitcoin. (0.000000001 BTC) Los "zaps" son un tipo de micropago en Nostr. Si te gusta el contenido de un usario, es norma dejarle una propina en la forma de un ¨zap". Por ejemplo, si te gusta este contenido, tu me puedes hacer "zap" con Satoshis para recompensar mi trabajo. Pero apenas llegaste, as que todavia no tienes una cartera. No se preocupe, puedo ayudar en eso!

"Stacker.News" es una plataforma donde los usarios pueden ganar SATS por publicar articulos y interactuar con otros.

Stacker.News es el lugar mas facil para recibir una direccion de cartera Bitcoin Lightning.

1. Acedese con su extensión firmante "signer" - Nos2x or NostrConnect - hace click en tu perfil, un codigo de letras y numeros en la mano superior derecha. Veás algo como esto
2. Haga clic en "edit" y elija un nombre que te guste. Se puede cambiar si deseas en el futuro.
3. Haga clic en "save"
4. Crea una biografía y la comunidad SN son muy acogedora. Te mandarán satoshi para darte la bienvenida.
5. Tu nueva direccion de cartera Bitcoin Lightning aparecerá asi ^^No le mandas "zaps" a esta direccion; es puramente con fines educativos.
6. Con tu Nueva dirección de monedero Bitcoin Lightning puedes ponerla en cualquier cliente o app de tu elección. Para ello, ve a tu página de perfil y bajo la dirección de tu monedero en "Dirección Lightning", introduce tu nueva dirección y pulsa "guardar " y ya está. Enhorabuena.

👉✨Con el tiempo, es posible que desee pasar a las opciones de auto-custodia y tal vez incluso considerar la posibilidad de auto-alojar su propio nodo LN para una mejor privacidad. La buena noticia es que stacker.news tambien está dejando de ser una cartera custodio.

⭐NIP-05-identidad DNS⭐ Al igual que en Twitter, una marca de verificación es para mostrar que eres del mismo jardín "como un humano", y no un atípico como una mala hierba o, "bot". Pero no de la forma nefasta en que lo hacen las grandes tecnológicas. En el país de las maravillas de Nostr, esto te permite asignar tu llave de plata, "npub", a un identificador DNS. Una vez verificado, puedes gritar para anunciar tu nueva residencia Nostr para compartir.

✨Hay un montón de opciones, pero si has seguido los pasos, esto se vuelve extremadamente fácil.

👉✅¡Haz clic en tu "Perfil ", luego en "Configuración ", desplázate hasta la parte inferior y pega tu clave Silver, "npub!" y haz clic en "Guardar " y ¡listo! Utiliza tu monedero relámpago de Stacker.news como tu NIP-05. ¡¡¡Enhorabuena!!! ¡Ya estás verificado! Dale unas horas y cuando uses tu cliente "principal " deberías ver una marca de verificación.

Nostr, el infonformista de los servidores.

En lugar de utilizar una única instancia o un servidor centralizado, Nostr está construido para que varias bases de datos intercambien mensajes mediante "relés". Los relés, que son neutrales y no discriminatorios, almacenan y difunden mensajes públicos en la red Nostr. Transmiten mensajes a todos los demás clientes conectados a ellos, asegurando las comunicaciones en la red descentralizada.

¡Mis amigos en Nostr te dan la bienvenida!

Bienvenida a la fiesta. ¿Le apetece un té?🍵

¡Hay mucho mas!

Esto es la punta del iceberg. Síguenme mientras continúo explorando nuevas tierras y a los desarolladores, los caballeres que potencioan este ecosistema. Encuéntrame aquí para mas contenido como este y comparten con otros usarios de nostr. Conozca a los caballeres que luchan por freedomTech (la tecnología de libertad) en Nostr y a los proyectos a los que contribuyen para hacerla realidad.💋

Onigirl @npub18jvyjwpmm65g8v9azmlvu8knd5m7xlxau08y8vt75n53jtkpz2ys6mqqu3

---

🧡😻Esta guía ha sido cuidadosamente traducida por miggymofongo

Puede seguirla aquí. @npub1ajt9gp0prf4xrp4j07j9rghlcyukahncs0fw5ywr977jccued9nqrcc0cs

sitio web

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

Embracing AI: A Case for AI Accelerationism

In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) development is at the forefront of technological innovation, a counter-narrative championed by a group I refer to as the 'AI Decels'—those advocating for the deceleration of AI advancements— seems to be gaining significant traction. After tuning into a recent episode of the Joe Rogan Podcast, I realized that the prevailing narrative around AI was heading in a dangerous direction. Rogan had Aza Raskin and Tristan Harris, technology safety advocates, who released a talk called 'The AI Dilemma,' on for a discussion. You may know them from the popular documentary 'The Social Dilemma' on the dangers of social media. It became increasingly clear that the cautionary stance dominating this discourse might be tipping the scales too far, veering towards an over-regulated future that stifles innovation rather than fostering it.

Are we moving too fast?

While acknowledging AI's benefits, Aza and Tristan fear it could be dangerous if not guided by ethical standards and safeguards. They believe AI development is moving too quickly and that the right incentives for its growth are not in place. They are concerned about the possibility of "civilizational overwhelm," where advanced AI technology far outpaces 21st-century governance. They fear a scenario where society and its institutions cannot manage or adapt to the rapid changes and challenges introduced by AI.

They argue for regulating and slowing down AI development due to rapid, uncontrolled advancement driven by competition among companies like Google, OpenAI, and Microsoft. They claim this race can lead to unsafe releases of new technologies, with AI systems exhibiting unpredictable, emergent behaviors, posing significant societal risks. For instance, AI can inadvertently learn tasks like sentiment analysis or human emotion understanding, creating potential for misuse in areas like biological weapons or cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

Moreover, AI companies' profit-driven incentives often conflict with the public good, prioritizing market dominance over safety and ethics. This misalignment can lead to technologies that maximize engagement or profits at societal expense, similar to the negative impacts seen with social media. To address these issues, they suggest government regulation to realign AI companies' incentives with safety, ethical considerations, and public welfare. Implementing responsible development frameworks focused on long-term societal impacts is essential for mitigating potential harm.

This isn't new

Though the premise of their concerns seems reasonable, it's dangerous and an all too common occurrence with the emergence of new technologies. For example, in their example in the podcast, they refer to the technological breakthrough of oil. Oil as energy was a technological marvel and changed the course of human civilization. The embrace of oil — now the cornerstone of industry in our age — revolutionized how societies operated, fueled economies, and connected the world in unprecedented ways. Yet recently, as ideas of its environmental and geopolitical ramifications propagated, the narrative around oil has shifted.

Tristan and Aza detail this shift and claim that though the period was great for humanity, we didn't have another technology to go to once the technological consequences became apparent. The problem with that argument is that we did innovate to a better alternative: nuclear. However, at its technological breakthrough, it was met with severe suspicions, from safety concerns to ethical debates over its use. This overregulation due to these concerns caused a decades-long stagnation in nuclear innovation, where even today, we are still stuck with heavy reliance on coal and oil. The scare tactics and fear-mongering had consequences, and, interestingly, they don't see the parallels with their current deceleration stance on AI.

These examples underscore a critical insight: the initial anxiety surrounding new technologies is a natural response to the unknowns they introduce. Yet, history shows that too much anxiety can stifle the innovation needed to address the problems posed by current technologies. The cycle of discovery, fear, adaptation, and eventual acceptance reveals an essential truth—progress requires not just the courage to innovate but also the resilience to navigate the uncertainties these innovations bring.

Moreover, believing we can predict and plan for all AI-related unknowns reflects overconfidence in our understanding and foresight. History shows that technological progress, marked by unexpected outcomes and discoveries, defies such predictions. The evolution from the printing press to the internet underscores progress's unpredictability. Hence, facing AI's future requires caution, curiosity, and humility. Acknowledging our limitations and embracing continuous learning and adaptation will allow us to harness AI's potential responsibly, illustrating that embracing our uncertainties, rather than pretending to foresee them, is vital to innovation.

The journey of technological advancement is fraught with both promise and trepidation. Historically, each significant leap forward, from the dawn of the industrial age to the digital revolution, has been met with a mix of enthusiasm and apprehension. Aza Raskin and Tristan Harris's thesis in the 'AI Dilemma' embodies the latter.

Who defines "safe?"

When slowing down technologies for safety or ethical reasons, the issue arises of who gets to define what "safe" or “ethical” mean? This inquiry is not merely technical but deeply ideological, touching the very core of societal values and power dynamics. For example, the push for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives shows how specific ideological underpinnings can shape definitions of safety and decency.

Take the case of the initial release of Google's AI chatbot, Gemini, which chose the ideology of its creators over truth. Luckily, the answers were so ridiculous that the pushback was sudden and immediate. My worry, however, is if, in correcting this, they become experts in making the ideological capture much more subtle. Large bureaucratic institutions' top-down safety enforcement creates a fertile ground for ideological capture of safety standards.

I claim that the issue is not the technology itself but the lens through which we view and regulate it. Suppose the gatekeepers of 'safety' are aligned with a singular ideology. In that case, AI development would skew to serve specific ends, sidelining diverse perspectives and potentially stifling innovative thought and progress.

In the podcast, Tristan and Aza suggest such manipulation as a solution. They propose using AI for consensus-building and creating "shared realities" to address societal challenges. In practice, this means that when individuals' viewpoints seem to be far apart, we can leverage AI to "bridge the gap." How they bridge the gap and what we would bridge it toward is left to the imagination, but to me, it is clear. Regulators will inevitably influence it from the top down, which, in my opinion, would be the opposite of progress.

In navigating this terrain, we must advocate for a pluralistic approach to defining safety, encompassing various perspectives and values achieved through market forces rather than a governing entity choosing winners. The more players that can play the game, the more wide-ranging perspectives will catalyze innovation to flourish.

Ownership & Identity

Just because we should accelerate AI forward does not mean I do not have my concerns. When I think about what could be the most devastating for society, I don't believe we have to worry about a Matrix-level dystopia; I worry about freedom. As I explored in "Whose data is it anyway?," my concern gravitates toward the issues of data ownership and the implications of relinquishing control over our digital identities. This relinquishment threatens our privacy and the integrity of the content we generate, leaving it susceptible to the inclinations and profit of a few dominant tech entities.

To counteract these concerns, a paradigm shift towards decentralized models of data ownership is imperative. Such standards would empower individuals with control over their digital footprints, ensuring that we develop AI systems with diverse, honest, and truthful perspectives rather than the massaged, narrow viewpoints of their creators. This shift safeguards individual privacy and promotes an ethical framework for AI development that upholds the principles of fairness and impartiality.

As we stand at the crossroads of technological innovation and ethical consideration, it is crucial to advocate for systems that place data ownership firmly in the hands of users. By doing so, we can ensure that the future of AI remains truthful, non-ideological, and aligned with the broader interests of society.

But what about the Matrix?

I know I am in the minority on this, but I feel that the concerns of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) are generally overblown. I am not scared of reaching the point of AGI, and I think the idea that AI will become so intelligent that we will lose control of it is unfounded and silly. Reaching AGI is not reaching consciousness; being worried about it spontaneously gaining consciousness is a misplaced fear. It is a tool created by humans for humans to enhance productivity and achieve specific outcomes.

At a technical level, large language models (LLMs) are trained on extensive datasets and learning patterns from language and data through a technique called "unsupervised learning" (meaning the data is untagged). They predict the next word in sentences, refining their predictions through feedback to improve coherence and relevance. When queried, LLMs generate responses based on learned patterns, simulating an understanding of language to provide contextually appropriate answers. They will only answer based on the datasets that were inputted and scanned.

AI will never be "alive," meaning that AI lacks inherent agency, consciousness, and the characteristics of life, not capable of independent thought or action. AI cannot act independently of human control. Concerns about AI gaining autonomy and posing a threat to humanity are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of AI and the fundamental differences between living beings and machines. AI spontaneously developing a will or consciousness is more similar to thinking a hammer will start walking than us being able to create consciousness through programming. Right now, there is only one way to create consciousness, and I'm skeptical that is ever something we will be able to harness and create as humans. Irrespective of its complexity — and yes, our tools will continue to become evermore complex — machines, specifically AI, cannot transcend their nature as non-living, inanimate objects programmed and controlled by humans.
The advancement of AI should be seen as enhancing human capabilities, not as a path toward creating autonomous entities with their own wills. So, while AI will continue to evolve, improve, and become more powerful, I believe it will remain under human direction and control without the existential threats often sensationalized in discussions about AI's future.

With this framing, we should not view the race toward AGI as something to avoid. This will only make the tools we use more powerful, making us more productive. With all this being said, AGI is still much farther away than many believe.

Today's AI excels in specific, narrow tasks, known as narrow or weak AI. These systems operate within tightly defined parameters, achieving remarkable efficiency and accuracy that can sometimes surpass human performance in those specific tasks. Yet, this is far from the versatile and adaptable functionality that AGI represents.

Moreover, the exponential growth of computational power observed in the past decades does not directly translate to an equivalent acceleration in achieving AGI. AI's impressive feats are often the result of massive data inputs and computing resources tailored to specific tasks. These successes do not inherently bring us closer to understanding or replicating the general problem-solving capabilities of the human mind, which again would only make the tools more potent in our hands.

While AI will undeniably introduce challenges and change the aspects of conflict and power dynamics, these challenges will primarily stem from humans wielding this powerful tool rather than the technology itself. AI is a mirror reflecting our own biases, values, and intentions. The crux of future AI-related issues lies not in the technology's inherent capabilities but in how it is used by those wielding it. This reality is at odds with the idea that we should slow down development as our biggest threat will come from those who are not friendly to us.

AI Beget's AI

While the unknowns of AI development and its pitfalls indeed stir apprehension, it's essential to recognize the power of market forces and human ingenuity in leveraging AI to address these challenges. History is replete with examples of new technologies raising concerns, only for those very technologies to provide solutions to the problems they initially seemed to exacerbate. It looks silly and unfair to think of fighting a war with a country that never embraced oil and was still primarily getting its energy from burning wood. The evolution of AI is no exception to this pattern. As we venture into uncharted territories, the potential issues that arise with AI—be it ethical concerns, use by malicious actors, biases in decision-making, or privacy intrusions—are not merely obstacles but opportunities for innovation. It is within the realm of possibility, and indeed, probability, that AI will play a crucial role in solving the problems it creates. The idea that there would be no incentive to address and solve these problems is to underestimate the fundamental drivers of technological progress.

Market forces, fueled by the demand for better, safer, and more efficient solutions, are powerful catalysts for positive change. When a problem is worth fixing, it invariably attracts the attention of innovators, researchers, and entrepreneurs eager to solve it. This dynamic has driven progress throughout history, and AI is poised to benefit from this problem-solving cycle.

Thus, rather than viewing AI's unknowns as sources of fear, we should see them as sparks of opportunity. By tackling the challenges posed by AI, we will harness its full potential to benefit humanity. By fostering an ecosystem that encourages exploration, innovation, and problem-solving, we can ensure that AI serves as a force for good, solving problems as profound as those it might create. This is the optimism we must hold onto—a belief in our collective ability to shape AI into a tool that addresses its own challenges and elevates our capacity to solve some of society's most pressing issues.

An AI Future

The reality is that it isn't whether AI will lead to unforeseen challenges—it undoubtedly will, as has every major technological leap in history. The real issue is whether we let fear dictate our path and confine us to a standstill or embrace AI's potential to address current and future challenges.

The approach to solving potential AI-related problems with stringent regulations and a slowdown in innovation is akin to cutting off the nose to spite the face. It's a strategy that risks stagnating the U.S. in a global race where other nations will undoubtedly continue their AI advancements. This perspective dangerously ignores that AI, much like the printing press of the past, has the power to democratize information, empower individuals, and dismantle outdated power structures.

The way forward is not less AI but more of it, more innovation, optimism, and curiosity for the remarkable technological breakthroughs that will come. We must recognize that the solution to AI-induced challenges lies not in retreating but in advancing our capabilities to innovate and adapt.

AI represents a frontier of limitless possibilities. If wielded with foresight and responsibility, it's a tool that can help solve some of the most pressing issues we face today. There are certainly challenges ahead, but I trust that with problems come solutions. Let's keep the AI Decels from steering us away from this path with their doomsday predictions. Instead, let's embrace AI with the cautious optimism it deserves, forging a future where technology and humanity advance to heights we can't imagine.

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

If you’re thinking of buying a Bitaxe, here is some information about pools vs solo mining.

Firstly, although the terms are clear “pool mining”, “solo mining” there is nuance in these definitions, so I want to explain these terms fully.

Solo mining pools exist, such as: https://solo.ckpool.org/

It is called a pool, because you are using their credentials to mine, but you keep all the rewards if you win a block. Despite the name, this is not a pool.

You then have a pool such as https://ocean.xyz/ who are a pool, you use their credentials to mine, and you earn a share of their income relative to your contribution in hash power.

There has been some publicity about a solo miner winning a pool recently, there were about 12 blocks won in 2023 by solo miners. However a winning solo miner is likely to be a server farm with hundreds or even thousands of S19’s or S21’s sharing the same payout wallet address. The image of a home miner with a Bitaxe winning a block is extremely unlikely.

A solo miner is defined as a group of miners that share a payout wallet address, so for example you could have 10 Bitaxe’s at home all configured with the same BTC wallet address, this is considered a single solo miner. And so it is with mid tier mining farms, often privately owned, who have a number of machines set to the same payout address. Most of the time, they share earnings for a more reliable income, but the owner may decide to gamble on winning a block and so choose to solo (lottery) mine.

So far, my Bitaxe, which has been running for 4 days now and is part of the Ocean pool. It is earning about 50 Sats a day. If I were to wait for an on-chain payout, it would take around 60 years to receive one. I can, however, setup a BOLT12 lightning payout address and earn this tiny income through Lightning.

So here’s my recommendation.

Currently, there are two pools that control more than 50% of mining, Foundry USA and AntPool. This is a dangerous position and in fact Bitmain, who provide around 90% of all mining hardware actually invest and have stakes in these and several other pools. This is centralising mining and could potentially allow a 51% attack, which could compromise Bitcoin.

Jack Dorsey is currently developing competing mining hardware chipset, through his company Block and Ocean are attempting to decentralise the pools by building a truly independent option for miners to join.

If you buy a Bitaxe, the best way you can help alleviate the dominance of Bitmain is to join a true pool like Ocean to slowly move control away from the dominant pools.

Bear in mind that many of the other smaller pools are still controlled by Bitmain.

If you're still interested in lottery mining, here are your chances of winning a block:

Represented as Hash rates of different miners:

Nerdminer: 20 KH/s = 20,000 H/s

Bitaxe: 750 GH/s = 750,000,000,000 H/s

Bitmain Antminer S9: 13.5 TH/s = 13,500,000,000,000 H/s

Bitmain Antminer S19: 110TH/s = 110,000,000,000,000 H/s

Bitmain Antminer S21: 200TH/s = 200,000,000,000,000 H/s

Current Global Hash rate 628EH/s (Sept 2024) = 628,000,000,000,000,000,000

If you're running a Bitaxe, your percentage chance of winning a block is: 0.000000119426751592357%

Over a year, your chances increase to: 0.00627707006369428%

Your chances of winning the UK national lottery (assuming 20M tickets sold and you buy one):

0.000005%

Over a year, your chances increase to: 0.00026%

Like in all things in Bitcoin, I don’t ask you to trust me. If you want to verify, here are the references I used in making my conclusions:

https://protos.com/chart-when-solo-miners-found-a-bitcoin-block/

https://investors.block.xyz/investor-news/news-details/2024/Blocks-New-Bitcoin-Mining-Chip-to-Be-Part-of-an-Ongoing-Project-With-Core-Scientific-to-Decentralize-Mining-Hardware/default.aspx

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo91DWvZRs8

https://i.nostr.build/9rQ9Plv6XQYtt6xd.jpg

@ c99e3a74:57eb85c1

Livro I

Capítulo I

\ Aristóteles abre sua obra constatando o fato de que toda arte ou investigação, são realizadas em vistas a algum bem. Sendo, portanto, o bem aquilo a que todas as ações tendem. Porém, se bem é aquilo ao qual todas as coisas tendem, surge o seguinte dilema: como pode, então, algumas atividades serem o fim de si mesmas, e outras atividades terem por fim a realização de uma outra coisa? Por exemplo, a realização da construção naval é a produção de um navio, porém a realização da dança se dá no próprio ato de dançar. Assim, há uma diferença entre a natureza dos fins: alguns fins são atividades, enquanto outros são produtos de determinada atividade. Observação: No caso dos fins que são a produção de algo a partir de uma atividade, naturalmente o fim produzido(por exemplo, a saúde para a medicina) é mais perfeito do que a atividade. \ A partir desta constatação, pode-se pensar que, por haver muitas atividades, há também muitos fins. Cita-se o exemplo de que a finalidade da arte médica é a saúde, da construção naval é um navio, da economia é a riqueza e etc. Porém, observa-se que algumas artes subordinam-se a outras, tendo outras por finalidade. Por exemplo, a arte de produzir um bisturi é uma arte sujeita à arte da medicina, que por sua vez tem por finalidade a saúde. Neste sentido, deriva-se que a finalidade da arte mais fundamental, é superior aos da arte subordinadas a ela(no exemplo, a saúde é uma finalidade superior à produção de um bisturi).

Capítulo II

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

I'm having some pain in my heart about the U.S. elections.

Ever since Obama campaigned for office, an increase of young voters have come out of the woodwork. Things have not improved. They've actively told you that "your vote matters." I believe this to be a lie unless any citizen can demand at the gate, at the White House to be allowed to hold and point a gun to the president's head. (Relax, this is a hyperbole)

Why so dramatic? Well, what does the president do? Sign bills, commands the military, nominates new Fed chairman, ambassadors, supreme judges and senior officials all while traveling in luxury planes and living in a white palace for four years.

They promised Every TIME to protect citizen rights when they take the oath and office.

...They've broken this several times, with so-called "emergency-crisis"

The purpose of a president, today, it seems is to basically hire armed thugs to keep the citizens in check and make sure you "voluntarily continue to be a slave," to the system, hence the IRS. The corruption extends from the cop to the judge and even to politicians. The politicians get paid from lobbyists to create bills in congress for the president to sign. There's no right answer when money is involved with politicians. It is the same if you vote Obama, Biden, Trump, or Haley. They will wield the pen to serve themselves to say it will benefit the country.

In the first 100 years of presidency, the government wasn't even a big deal. They didn't even interfere with your life as much as they do today.

^^ You hold the power in your hands, don't let them take it. Don't believe me? Try to get a loan from a bank without a signature. Your signature is as good as gold (if not better) and is an original trademark.

Just Don't Vote. End the Fed. Opt out.

^^ I choose to form my own path, even if it means leaving everything I knew prior. It doesn't have to be a spiritual thing. Some, have called me religious because of this. We're all capable of greatness and having humanity.

✨Don't have a machine heart with a machine mind. Instead, choose to have a heart like the cowardly lion from the "Wizard Of Oz."

There's no such thing as a good president or politicians.

If there was, they would have issued non-interest Federal Reserve Notes. Lincoln and Kennedy tried to do this, they got shot.

There's still a banner of America there, but it's so far gone that I cannot even recognize it. However, I only see a bunch of 🏳‍🌈 pride flags.

✨Patrick Henry got it wrong, when he delivered his speech, "Give me liberty or give me death." Liberty and freedom are two completely different things.

Straightforward from Merriam-Webster Choose Right or left? No control, to be 100% without restrictions- free.

✨I disagree with the example sentence given. Because you cannot advocate for human freedom and own slaves, it's contradicting it. Which was common in the founding days.

I can understand many may disagree with me, and you might be thinking, "This time will be different." I, respectfully, disagree, and the proxy wars are proof. Learn the importance of Bitcoin, every Satoshi is a step away from corruption.

✨What does it look like to pull the curtains from the "Wizard of Oz?"

Have you watched the video below, what 30 Trillion dollars in debt looks like visually? Even I was blown away. https://video.nostr.build/d58c5e1afba6d7a905a39407f5e695a4eb4a88ae692817a36ecfa6ca1b62ea15.mp4

I say this with love. Hear my plea?

Normally, I don't write about anything political. It just feels like a losing game. My energy feels it's in better use to learn new things, write and to create. Even a simple blog post as simple as this. Stack SATs, and stay humble.

<3 Onigirl

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Bitcoin transactions explained

A transaction is a piece of data that takes inputs and produces outputs. Forget about the blockchain thing, Bitcoin is actually just a big tree of transactions. The blockchain is just a way to keep transactions ordered.

Imagine you have 10 satoshis. That means you have them in an unspent transaction output (UTXO). You want to spend them, so you create a transaction. The transaction should reference unspent outputs as its inputs. Every transaction has an immutable id, so you use that id plus the index of the output (because transactions can have multiple outputs). Then you specify a script that unlocks that transaction and related signatures, then you specify outputs along with a script that locks these outputs.

As you can see, there's this lock/unlocking thing and there are inputs and outputs. Inputs must be unlocked by fulfilling the conditions specified by the person who created the transaction they're in. And outputs must be locked so anyone wanting to spend those outputs will need to unlock them.

For most of the cases locking and unlocking means specifying a public key whose controller (the person who has the corresponding private key) will be able to spend. Other fancy things are possible too, but we can ignore them for now.

Back to the 10 satoshis you want to spend. Since you've successfully referenced 10 satoshis and unlocked them, now you can specify the outputs (this is all done in a single step). You can specify one output of 10 satoshis, two of 5, one of 3 and one of 7, three of 3 and so on. The sum of outputs can't be more than 10. And if the sum of outputs is less than 10 the difference goes to fees. In the first days of Bitcoin you didn't need any fees, but now you do, otherwise your transaction won't be included in any block.

If you're still interested in transactions maybe you could take a look at this small chapter of that Andreas Antonopoulos book.

If you hate Andreas Antonopoulos because he is a communist shitcoiner or don't want to read more than half a page, go here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Coin_analogy

@ 01d0bbf9:91130d4c

Chef's notes

Amazingly tangy, firey hot, but still mellow and bright.

I use this on everything– Use it to dress salads, dip (honey mustard) for fried chicken, elevate your taco nights, heck a spoonful first thing in the morning will wake you up better than coffee!

Don't forget to use up those delicious chilis and garlic, they are so good!

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 1-2 weeks
• 🍽️ Servings: (12x) 8oz jars

Ingredients

• 16oz fresh chili peppers
• 8oz red onion
• 8oz garlic
• 96oz honey
• Fresh thyme

Directions

1. Thinly slice peppers, garlic, shallots and fresh thyme
2. Add chopped ingredients to the honey
3. Leave to ferment (loosely covered) for 1-2 weeks
4. Drizzle that amazing pungent firey gold liquid over EVERYTHING. (Don't forget to use up those amazing chilis and garlic too.)

@ 3ad01248:962d8a07

https://image.nostr.build/c7e3732889827ab0a8e2064de5fa6992e37e035347b0c91d249cb8f312b47087.jpg I love Bitcoin. Let me get that out there first of all. I sincerely believe that Bitcoin has the power to change the way the world functions if we can grow adoption to a global scale. This obviously will take time as the gears of economic change grinds slowly. As of right now, people in the western countries don't really see the need for a sovereign politically neutral money that can't be inflated away. They simply don't have to deal with inflation on a regular basis like the rest of the world.

Citizens in western countries got a small taste of what real inflation looks like and guess what? They didn't like it one bit. Overall the last three and a half years you saw countless news stories about how bad inflation and how its making life for the average American or European more difficult.

Yes inflation does suck but look at countries like Argentina, Turkey, Zimbabwe or Venezuela. The people in these countries are suffering from excessive inflation on a regular basis! According to recent economic data Turkey experienced a decline in inflation from 61 percent to 51 percent in August. This is seen as a win in their book! Can you imagine this level of inflation in America? There would be riots in the streets!

Argentina's inflation rate is an astounding 236 percent over the last 12 months! As Bitcoiners we understand that the problem is the money itself. As long as governments have the ability to manipulate the money supply, they will. This is human nature at its finest. When you give a select few that kind of power it becomes irresistible and becomes a tool to control the masses. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone to be honest.

What I find shocking is with all of this inflation globally no one is really looking around asking questions to why this is happening and looking for a way to escape this system. Are people really this lazy? Not to be mean but cmon. It seems to me that most people are perfectly fine bitching online about how hard it is to make ends meet or supporting their favored political party and wanting them to fix the problem they created. Newsflash to all the normies out there, its the GD political parties that caused inflation in the first place.

We literally have a solution that is staring them in the face, ready to go to replace the current debt based system that we are currently suffering through and no one wants to take the time to research it? Am I black pilled? No, am I realist, very much so. If 236 percent inflation in Argentina can't get them on a Bitcoin Standard immediately, we as a community have a long road ahead of us. Hyperbitcoinization isn't coming in 5 years. It isn't coming in 10 years. Hell it might not even happen in our lifetimes and we have to be ok with that.

So what is the best way to get more Bitcoin into the hands of the people, so they can see the true value of the digital monetary revolution that is Bitcoin. We need a trojan horse and that trojan horse is nostr.

Enter The Nostr Trojan Horse

https://image.nostr.build/5ffee418133ac80ba14b30abf0d5390b878f676cbf6332d67639f9384764da4c.jpg

It should be plain to see by now that the inflation or the number go up narrative alone isn't going to drive Bitcoin adoption. The reason for that is because people don't see the utility of Bitcoin. They see it as some esoteric digital funny money that drug dealers and terrorist use to do bad things.

The average Joe doesn't see how Bitcoin is helping dissidents on foreign countries fund their activism, escape oppressive regimes or simply earn a living. These stories are never told in the mainstream media because they don't want to highlight the fact that a non-state money can circumvent the status quo.

The best way to highlight these stories is to share it on social media, which again is controlled by mainstream gatekeeper such as Meta, Google and X. It is in their best interest to censor these stories or memory hole them out of existence which I suspect happens quite a bit without us even knowing. But the thing about censorship is that it slowly impacts everyone one by one until no one is allowed to say anything without the fear of being put in jail.

Think this can't happen in western democracies? It's happening already my friend! Take a look at the UK or Australia. Citizens their are being arrested over post made to social media. I sincerely believe that these two countries should be a proving ground for showing the value of nostr and Bitcoin.

Introducing the concept of a censorship resistant messaging protocol to them will go over well and once it is understood will grow like a wildfire because people innately understand that censorship is bad and will see the utility value of having the ability to speak freely again.

It is only a matter of time until they realize that they can monetize their speech and build a life using zaps aka Bitcoin.

Until people see the utility in the tools that lie before them, they will never pick them up and use them. It is really that simple. At the end of the day we are still kind of like cavemen. We only use tools when it makes life easier. Man made the wheel. We use it everyday because it has utility.

Bitcoin in the end will be the same way. Utility first, then mass adoption. Nostr is what will help people see the utility Bitcoin and from there sky is the limit. The best thing we can do as Bitcoiners is to encourage people to learn about nostr and show them how easy it is to use and to switch clients that suit their needs instead of being shoved into a one-size fits all solution on centralized platforms.

People like choices, and nostr is all about choice. The interoperability and thelack of need to give personal information to create an account are HUGE selling points that can be touched on. Go out and spread the good word about nostr!

Bitcoin #Nostr

@ 3ad01248:962d8a07

test poasting

@ dc652bee:6154e7d0

NEW UPDATE TELEGRAM AIRDROP BOT

📢Exciting news! 🚀 Our new update bot is here to make your Telegram experience even better. Get ready for the ultimate airdrop! Don't miss out!

https://t.me/Dogiators_bot/game?startapp=F80aAU4OlGJX61YK

https://t.me/tonton_intract_bot/start?startapp=eyJyZWZlcnJhbENvZGUiOiJGOER6dDAiLCJyZWZlcnJhbFNvdXJjZSI6IlRFTEVHUkFNX01JTklfQVBQIiwicmVmZXJyYWxMaW5rIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaW50cmFjdC5pby90bWEvcmV3YXJkcyJ9

https://t.me/gamee/start?startapp=ref_730909086

https://t.me/Bcoin2048bot/app?startapp=ref_pCGwqQ15aSZUFYa9ZEys8qRH

https://t.me/realgoats_bot/run?startapp=c127fadc-579e-485a-a68f-f901cd4e64e6

https://t.me/OwlMini_bot/app?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/bluefarming_bot/play?startapp=c8a58023

https://t.me/BitsTonboxBot/BitsAirdrops?startapp=M9Ek3ygSFAJTZ5Y4PS2aoq

https://t.me/digibuy_bot/digiverse/start?startapp=0cb38b86ee4543c74bd76ab16c1c8fd3

http://t.me/foxs_HouseBot?start=730909086

https://t.me/Agent301Bot/app?startapp=onetime730909086

t.me/RealCowsHouse_bot/cowshouse?startapp=kentId730909086

http://t.me/token1win_bot/start?startapp=refId730909086

https://t.me/MemesLabBot?start=PNT7D8

https://t.me/major/start?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/uptonfi_bot/UpTonGames?startapp=ByKBX2QurGdYa

https://t.me/catizenbot/gameapp?startapp=r_1938_7836673

https://t.me/memefi_coin_bot/main?startapp=r_27d6952978

https://t.me/whitebunnywtf_bot?start=ref666953186736f7f2eff6261f

https://t.me/pixelversexyzbot?start=730909086

https://t.me/tapswap_mirror_2_bot?start=r_730909086

https://t.me/hamster_kombaT_bot/start?startapp=kentId730909086

https://t.me/IcebergAppBot?start=referral_730909086

https://t.me/gemsee_bot?start=ref_100a006b

https://t.me/GoodRides_bot?start=NzMwOTA5MDg2

https://t.me/lost_dogs_bot/lodoapp?startapp=ref-u_730909086

https://t.me/gemzcoin_bOt/tap?startapp=nSoqE-UNEtgNUcRp5luy0w

https://t.me/QappiMinerBot?start=730909086

https://t.me/Snakelite_official_bot/Snakelite?startapp=nOuSbPc0

https://t.me/squid_squad_bot/squid?startapp=link_730909086

https://t.me/lovetap_bot?start=ref_120218

https://t.me/BIRDTonBot/app?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/LovelyLegends_bot/start?startapp=kentId730909086

https://t.me/claytoncoinbot/game?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/pehekingdom_bot/open?startapp=iAzmZVumOr

https://t.me/loody_farming_bot/LOODY/?startapp=inviter_id_40937

https://t.me/Tomarket_ai_bot/app?startapp=0000bDIo

https://t.me/CoinCryptoGameBot?start=r_JSGDH54A

https://t.me/Xyzmercoin_bot/play?startapp=BZI2CZ

https://t.me/dragonz_land_bot/app?startapp=ref-668302fc033aa4721ab5d1ea

https://t.me/BullishFarmBot/start?startapp=r_730909086

https://dashboard.wormfare.com/referral/0DC0D761

https://t.me/betfury_social_bot/app?startapp=tgReLe1ec7c70

https://t.me/PipeFlareBot/pipeflare_app?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/TimeFarmCryptoBot?start=x3jKZG0eoJa58ayY

https://t.me/MatchQuestBot/start?startapp=0cb38b86ee4543c74bd76ab16c1c8fd3

https://t.me/DiamoreCryptoBot/app?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/money_dogs_bot/money_dogs?startapp=3eAlu89K

https://t.me/ZARGatesBot/?start=2307731133

https://t.me/taptapcore_bot/Earn?startapp=b1720f3afcf04e5cb76418c267c4559e

https://t.me/Mimiland_appbot/app?startapp=ref_eyJwIjoiIiwiZiI6InJlZiIsInIiOiI3MzA5MDkwODYiLCJtIjoiNjZkNWZmMWJkNTE3MGU1M2ZiYmMwZmNiIn0=

https://t.me/CyberFinanceBot/game?startapp=cj1CRjNxRE5WbmhNQlomdT1yZWY=

https://t.me/BBQcoin_bot/BBQcoin?startapp=rp_9004676_730909086

https://t.me/PonchKick_bot/ponchiqs?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/potusclick_bot/app?startapp=r730909086

https://t.me/chickcoopofficial_bot/chickcoop?startapp=ref_730909086

https://t.me/ArtiTapBot/start?startapp=referrerId730909086

https://t.me/Frogs_HouseBot?start=730909086

https://t.me/tomo_cat_bot?start=r-cofuLtoo

https://t.me/Boom/LoudCoins?startapp=F5iKvP2LEVi9g4hFkGdpya

https://t.me/The_Rocket_bot?start=r_730909086

https://t.me/monkeycost_bot/app?startapp=r_730909086

https://t.me/tapcoinsbot/app?startapp=ref_TxCe4a

https://t.me/cexio_tap_bot?start=1722546804203779

https://t.me/cexio_tap_bot?start=1722546804203779

https://t.me/flarexgamebot?start=66743fede9b04d43fd21fe9e

https://t.me/grandcombat_bot/start?startapp=TFqI0dXjLc

https://t.me/fishing_bowl_bot/fish?startapp=EQANA57LP2PPLgBIwbnWMpHD4708uGKu7YipzvELhOt6fdnA

https://t.me/GametyPlatform_bot?start=NzMwOTA5MDg2XzA

https://t.me/HUNDTAPbot?start=r_730909086

https://t.me/BabyDogePAWS_Bot?start=r_730909086

https://t.me/BillyBobRobot/GAME?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/wcoin_tapbot?start=NzMwOTA5MDg2

https://t.me/cherrygame_io_bot/game?startapp=r_730909086

https://t.me/pirate_frenzy_bot/piratefrenzy?startapp=i7z37hc2G6

https://t.me/MMproBump_bot?start=ref_730909086

https://t.me/theHoldCoinBot/app?startapp=ref_NRPViKZ4

https://t.me/not_panda_bot/not_panda_app?startapp=9j3938HJeb

https://t.me/gmdotaibot/Airdrop?startapp=ovyova

https://t.me/GoldVerseBot/app?startapp=ref_zzT4iN

https://t.me/herewalletbot/grafun?startapp=TewJ6VV5SA2CrVidvyILAXC8diL

https://gra.fun/?ref=TewJ6VV5SA2CrVidvyILAXC8diL

https://t.me/owlsonton_bot?start=730909086

https://t.me/y_nation_bot/start?startapp=NKS74T

https://t.me/cedex_tap_bot?start=1725744305355276

https://t.me/TondropEarnBot/app?startapp=66dfd225c839152d9203f5a9

https://t.me/BYIN_official_bot/BYIN_Launchpad_Beta?startapp=q3lj8O41

https://t.me/ARIXcoin_bot?start=ref_730909086

https://t.me/sunkongmyth_bot/sunkong_miniapp?startapp=E987837FE

https://t.me/boolfamily_bot/join?startapp=8T1X0

https://t.me/tonstationgames_bot/app?startapp=ref_aysq8p4swodmv4ex6c7e4y

https://t.me/y_nation_bot/start?startapp=NKS74T

https://t.me/GalaCoin_bot/app?startapp=ref_KFfSylID

https://t.me/Yaytsogram_bot?start=invite4546481

https://t.me/battle_games_com_bot/start?startapp=frndId730909086

https://t.me/PinEye_Bot/pineye?startapp=r_730909086

https://t.me/pocketfi_bot/Mining?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/SatoshiMiner_Hq_Bot?start=730909086

https://t.me/sidekick_fans_bot?start=730909086

https://t.me/bums/app?startapp=ref_rgws9zFi

https://t.me/TondropEarnBot/app?startapp=66dfd225c839152d9203f5a9

https://t.me/head_coin_bot/start?startapp=bonusId730909086

https://t.me/onus_tap_tap_tap_bot/join?startapp=1722155904792

https://t.me/Atleta_tap_bot/tap?startapp=a89197f4-6ef7-4925-a38d-cbe0cc71aa34

https://t.me/SecretPadBot/app?startapp=r730909086

https://t.me/Binance_Moonbix_bot/start?startApp=ref_730909086&startapp=ref_730909086&utm_medium=web_share_copy

https://t.me/catsdogs_game_bot/join?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/claytoncoinbot/game?startapp=730909086

https://t.me/playpenchobot/play?startapp=ZF6EG6NCVC

https://t.me/nodgoin_bot/?start=ref_309eb495-9c18-4c3b-8177-297b89ac8911

https://t.me/Loodygame_bot/loodydev/?startapp=inviter_id_40937

https://t.me/CrashinoCasinoBot/?start=EjtAhLG5X

https://t.me/BybitCoinsweeper_Bot?start=referredBy=730909086

http://t.me/CamelsHouseBot/House?startapp=66f428b404d8bde3bbb68790

https://t.me/forge_game_bot/start?startapp=NzMwOTA5MDg2

https://t.me/boinker_bot/boinkapp?startapp=boink730909086

---

🆘Several projects are coming to the listing soon, some have already been released, start today it's completely free.⛏️

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

It's been a journey from the Publishing Forest of Nostr to the open sea of web3. I've come across a beautiful chain of islands and thought. Why not take a break and explore this place? If I'm searching for devs and FOSS, I should search every nook and cranny inside the realm of Nostr. It is quite vast for little old me. I'm just a little hamster and I don't speak in code or binary numbers zeros and ones.

After being in sea for awhile, my heart raced for excitement for what I could find. It seems I wasn't alone, there were others here like me! Let's help spread the message to others about this uncharted realm. See, look at the other sailboats, aren't they pretty? Thanks to some generous donation of SATs, I was able to afford the docking fee.

Ever feel like everyone was going to a party, and you were supposed to dress up, but you missed the memo? Or a comic-con? well, I felt completely underdressed and that's an understatement. Well, turns out there is a some knights around here. Take a peek!

A black cat with a knight passed by very quickly. He was moving too fast for me to track. Where was he going? Then I spotted a group of knights heading in the same direction, so I tagged along. The vibes from these guys was impossible to resist. They were just happy-go-lucky. 🥰They were heading to a tavern on a cliff off the island.

Ehh? a Tavern? Slightly confused, whatever could these knights be doing here? I guess when they're done with their rounds they would here to blow off steam. Things are looking curiouser and curiouser. But the black cat from earlier was here with its rider, whom was dismounting. So you can only guess, where I'm going.

The atmosphere in this pub, was lively and energetic. So many knights spoke among themselves. A group here, another there, but there was one that caught my eye. I went up to a group at a table, whose height towed well above me even when seated. Taking a deep breath, I asked, "Who manages this place?" They unanimous pointed to one waiting for ale at the bar. What was he doing? Watching others talk? How peculiar.

So I went up to him! And introduced myself.

"Hello I'm Onigirl"

"Hello Onigirl, Welcome to Gossip"

"Gossip, what is Gossip?" scratching my head and whiskers.

What is Gossip? Gossip is FOSS and a great client for privacy-centric minded nostriches. It avoids browser tech which by-passes several scripting languages such as JavaScript☕, HTML parsing, rendering, and CSS(Except HTTP GET and Websockets). Using OpenGL-style rendering. For Nostriches that wish to remain anonymous can use Gossip over TOR. Mike recommends using QubesOS, Whonix and or Tails. [FYI-Gossip does not natively support tor SOCKS5 proxy] Most helpful to spill the beans if you're a journalist.

On top of using your nsec or your encryption key, Gossip adds another layer of security over your account with a password login. There's nothing wrong with using the browser extensions (such as nos2x or Flamingo) which makes it super easy to log in to Nostr enable websites, apps, but it does expose you to browser vulnerabilities.

Mike Points out

"people have already had their private key stolen from other nostr clients,"

so it a concern if you value your account. I most certainly care for mine.

Gossip UI has a simple, and clean interface revolving around NIP-65 also called the “Outbox model." As posted from GitHub,

"This NIP allows Clients to connect directly with the most up-to-date relay set from each individual user, eliminating the need of broadcasting events to popular relays."

This eliminates clients that track only a specific set of relays which can congest those relays when you publish your note. Also this can be censored, by using Gossip you can publish notes to alternative relays that have not censored you to reach the same followers.

👉The easiest way to translate that is reducing redundancy to publish to popular relays or centralized relays for content reach to your followers.

Cool! What an awesome client, I mean Tavern! What else does this knight do? He reaches for something in his pocket. what is it? A Pocket is a database for storing and retrieving nostr events but mike's written it in Rust with a few extra kinks inspired by Will's nostrdb. Still in development, but it'll be another tool for you dear user! 💖💕💚

Onigirl is proud to present this knights to the community and honor them with kisu. 💋💋💋 Show some 💖💘💓🧡💙💚

👉💋💋Will - jb55 Lord of apples 💋 @npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s

👉💋💋 Mike Knight - Lord of Security 💋 @npub1acg6thl5psv62405rljzkj8spesceyfz2c32udakc2ak0dmvfeyse9p35c

Knights spend a lot of time behind the screen coding for the better of humanity. It is a tough job! Let's appreciate these knights, relay operators, that support this amazing realm of Nostr! FOSS for all!

This article was prompted for the need for privacy and security of your data. They're different, not to be confused.

Recently, Edward Snowden warns Bitcoin devs about the need for privacy, Quote:

“I've been warning Bitcoin developers for ten years that privacy needs to be provided for at the protocol level. This is the final warning. The clock is ticking.”

Snowden’s comments come after heavy actions of enforcement from Samarai Wallet, Roger Ver, Binance’s CZ, and now the closure of Wasabi Wallet. Additionally, according to CryptoBriefing, Trezor is ending it’s CoinJoin integration as well. Many are concerned over the new definition of a money transmitter, which includes even those who don’t touch the funds.

Help your favorite the hamster

^^Me drowning in notes on your feed. I can only eat so many notes to find you.

👉If there are any XMPP fans on here. I'm open to the idea of opening a public channel, so you could follow me on that as a forum-like style. My server of choice would likely be a German server.😀You would be receiving my articles as njump.me style or website-like. GrapeneOS users, you can download Cheogram app from the F-Driod store for free to access. Apple and Andriod users are subjected to pay to download this app, an alternative is ntalk or conversations. If it interests the community, just FYI. Please comment or DM.

👉If you enjoyed this content, please consider reposting/sharing as my content is easily drowned by notes on your feed. You could also join my community under Children_Zone where I post my content.

An alternative is by following #onigirl Just FYI this feature is currently a little buggy.

Follow as I search for tools and awesome devs to help you dear user live a decentralized life as I explore the realm of Nostr.

Thank you Fren

@ d6affa19:9110b177

it's a sunny afternoon at a shopping center. i open the car door for Her. we head into the bookstore. the aroma is rich, thick. i buy us coffee.

we then browse around. but beneath my calm surface, a quiet longing stirs—a deep yearning for Her.

Her touch. Her love.

i still feel the echoes of Her words—a sweet torment that rests in my mind. i've felt it all day. it's nearly maddening.

and yet i maintain my composure as i follow along to the next store.

She turns. i spot a brief smirk.

my breath catches. She knows... i can't hide from Her.

a simple brush of Her hand. it sends jolts. a reminder of the pleasure She wields.

"Are you okay?" Her voice sweet, yet probing.

"Yes, my Queen." i answer in an even tone, managing the storm underneath.

"Good," She nods.

"Let's go, sweet boy." Her command lingers gracefully in the air.

"Help me try on some shoes."

the thought of helping Her... it sends a thrill through me.

i nod, taking another sip of coffee.

it burns, still hot. my hands feel clammy against the cup, heart racing.

the anticipation is electric...

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

NOTE: this is just a quick technical guide. sorry for the lack of details

Install NodeJS

Download it from the official website https://nodejs.org/en/download

Or use nvm https://github.com/nvm-sh/nvm?tab=readme-ov-file#install--update-script

bash wget -qO- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nvm-sh/nvm/v0.39.7/install.sh | bash nvm install 20

Clone example config.yml

bash wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hzrd149/blossom-server/master/config.example.yml -O config.yml

Modify config.yml

```bash nano config.yml

or if your that type of person

vim config.yml ```

Run blossom-server

```bash npx blossom-server-ts

or install it locally and run using npm

npm install blossom-server-ts ./node_modules/.bin/blossom-server-ts ```

Now you can open http://localhost:3000 and see your blossom server

And if you set the dashboard.enabled option in the config.yml you can open http://localhost:3000/admin to see the admin dashboard

@ dc652bee:6154e7d0

Embracing the power of positivity and prosperity! 💵✨ Let's make every dollar count and spread good vibes all around. #GoodDollar 🌐https://n9.cl/gooddolars

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

While I was in Mediera with all the other awesome people at the first SEC cohort there where a lot of discussions around data storage on nostr and if it could be made censorship-resistent

I remember lots of discussions about torrents, hypercore, nostr relays, and of course IPFS

There were a few things I learned from all these conversations:

1. All the existing solutions have one thing in common. A universal ID of some kind for files
2. HTTP is still good. we don't have to throw the baby out with the bath water
3. nostr could fix this... somehow

Some of the existing solutions work well for large files, and all of them are decentralization in some way. However none of them seem capable of serving up cat pictures for social media clients. they all have something missing...

An Identity system

An identity system would allow files to be "owned" by users. and once files have owners servers could start grouping files into a single thing instead of a 1000+ loose files

This can also greatly simplify the question of "what is spam" for a server hosting (or seeding) these files. since it could simply have a whitelist of owners (and maybe their friends)

What is blossom?

Blossom is a set of HTTP endpoints that allow nostr users to store and retrieve binary data on public servers using the sha256 hash as a universal id

What are Blobs?

blobs are chunks of binary data. they are similar to files but with one key difference, they don't have names

Instead blobs have a sha256 hash (like b1674191a88ec5cdd733e4240a81803105dc412d6c6708d53ab94fc248f4f553) as an ID

These IDs are universal since they can be computed from the file itself using the sha256 hashing algorithm ( you can get a files sha256 hash on linux using: sha256sum bitcoin.pdf )

How do the servers work?

Blossom servers expose four endpoints to let clients and users upload and manage blobs

• GET /<sha256> (optional file .ext)
• PUT /upload
• Authentication: Signed nostr event
• Returns a blob descriptor
• GET /list/<pubkey>
• Returns an array of blob descriptors
• Authentication (optional): Signed nostr event
• DELETE /<sha256>
• Authentication: Signed nostr event

What is Blossom Drive?

Blossom Drive is a nostr app built on top of blossom servers and allows users to create and manage folders of blobs

What are Drives

Drives are just nostr events (kind 30563) that store a map of blobs and what filename they should have along with some extra metadata

An example drive event would be json { "pubkey": "266815e0c9210dfa324c6cba3573b14bee49da4209a9456f9484e5106cd408a5", "created_at": 1710773987, "content": "", "kind": 30563, "tags": [ [ "name", "Emojis" ], [ "description", "nostr emojis" ], [ "d", "emojis" ], [ "r", "https://cdn.hzrd149.com/" ], [ "x", "303f018e613f29e3e43264529903b7c8c84debbd475f89368cb293ec23938981", "/noStrudel.png", "15161", "image/png" ], [ "x", "a0e2b39975c8da1702374b3eed6f4c6c7333e6ae0008dadafe93bd34bfb2ca78", "/satellite.png", "6853", "image/png" ], [ "x", "e8f3fae0f4a43a88eae235a8b79794d72e8f14b0e103a0fed1e073d8fb53d51f", "/amethyst.png", "20487", "image/png" ], [ "x", "70bd5836807b916d79e9c4e67e8b07e3e3b53f4acbb95c7521b11039a3c975c6", "/nos.png", "36521", "image/png" ], [ "x", "0fc304630279e0c5ab2da9c2769e3a3178c47b8609b447a30916244e89abbc52", "/primal.png", "29343", "image/png" ], [ "x", "9a03824a73d4af192d893329bbc04cd3798542ee87af15051aaf9376b74b25d4", "/coracle.png", "18300", "image/png" ], [ "x", "accdc0cdc048f4719bb5e1da4ff4c6ffc1a4dbb7cf3afbd19b86940c01111568", "/iris.png", "24070", "image/png" ], [ "x", "2e740f2514d6188e350d95cf4756bbf455d2f95e6a09bc64e94f5031bc4bba8f", "/damus.png", "32758", "image/png" ], [ "x", "2e019f08da0c75fb9c40d81947e511c8f0554763bffb6d23a7b9b8c9e8c84abb", "/old emojis/astral.png", "29365", "image/png" ], [ "x", "d97f842f2511ce0491fe0de208c6135b762f494a48da59926ce15acfdb6ac17e", "/other/rabbit.png", "19803", "image/png" ], [ "x", "72cb99b689b4cfe1a9fb6937f779f3f9c65094bf0e6ac72a8f8261efa96653f5", "/blossom.png", "4393", "image/png" ] ] }

There is a lot going on but the main thing is the list of "x" tags and the path that describes the folder and filename the blob should live at

If your interested, the full event definition is at github.com/hzrd149/blossom-drive

Getting started

Like every good nostr client it takes a small instruction manual in order to use it properly. so here are the steps for getting started

1. Open the app

Open https://blossom.hzrd149.com

2. Login using extension

You can also login using any of the following methods using the input - NIP-46 with your https://nsec.app or https://flare.pub account - a NIP-46 connection string - an ncryptsec password protected private key - a nsec unprotected private key (please don't) - bunker:// URI from nsecbunker

3. Add a blossom server

Right now https://cdn.satellite.earth is the only public server that is compatible with blossom drive. If you want to host your own I've written a basic implementation in TypeScript github.com/hzrd149/blossom-server

4. Start uploading your files

NOTE: All files upload to blossom drive are public by default. DO NOT upload private files

5. Manage files

Encrypted drives

There is also the option to encrypt drives using NIP-49 password encryption. although its not tested at all so don't trust it, verify

Whats next?

I don't know, but Im excited to see what everyone else on nostr builds with this. I'm only one developer at the end of the day and I can't think of everything

also all the images in this article are stored in one of my blossom drives here

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqrhvvpzqfngzhsvjggdlgeycm96x4emzjlwf8dyyzdfg4hefp89zpkdgz99qq8xzun5d93kcefdd9kkzem9wvr46jka

@ 3c984938:2ec11289

Hello (N)osytrs!

Yes! I'm calling you an (N)oystr!

Why is that? Because you shine, and I'm not just saying that to get more SATs. Ordinary Oysters and mussels can produce these beauties! Nothing seriously unique about them, however, with a little time and love each oyster is capable of creating something truly beautiful. I like believing so, at least, given the fact that you're even reading this article; makes you an (N)oystr! This isn't published this on X (formerly known as Twitter), Facebook, Discord, Telegram, or Instagram, which makes you the rare breed! A pearl indeed! I do have access to those platforms, but why create content on a terrible platform knowing I too could be shut down! Unfortunately, many people still use these platforms. This forces individuals to give up their privacy every day. Meta is leading the charge by forcing users to provide a photo ID for verification in order to use their crappy, obsolete site. If that was not bad enough, imagine if you're having a type of disagreement or opinion. Then, Bigtech can easily deplatform you. Umm. So no open debate? Just instantly shut-off users. Whatever, happened to right to a fair trial? Nope, just burning you at the stake as if you're a witch or warlock!

How heinous are the perpetrators and financiers of this? Well, that's opening another can of worms for you.

Imagine your voice being taken away, like the little mermaid. Ariel was lucky to have a prince, but the majority of us? The likelihood that I would be carried away by the current of the sea during a sunset with a prince on a sailboat is zero. And I live on an island, so I'm just missing the prince, sailboat(though I know where I could go to steal one), and red hair. Oh my gosh, now I feel sad.

I do not have the prince, Bob is better! I do not have mermaid fins, or a shell bra. Use coconut shells, it offers more support! But, I still have my voice and a killer sunset to die for!

All of that is possible thanks to the work of developers. These knights fight for Freedom Tech by utilizing FOSS, which help provides us with a vibrant ecosystem. Unfortunately, I recently learned that they are not all funded. Knights must eat, drink, and have a work space. This space is where they spend most of their sweat equity on an app or software that may and may not pan out. That brilliance is susceptible to fading, as these individuals are not seen but rather stay behind closed doors. What's worse, if these developers lose faith in their project and decide to join forces with Meta! 😖 Does WhatsApp ring a bell?

Without them, I probably wouldn't be able to create this long form article. Let's cheer them on like cheerleaders.. 👉Unfortunately, there's no cheerleader emoji so you'll just have to settle for a dancing lady, n guy. 💃🕺

Semisol said it beautifully, npub12262qa4uhw7u8gdwlgmntqtv7aye8vdcmvszkqwgs0zchel6mz7s6cgrkj

If we want freedom tech to succeed, the tools that make it possible need to be funded: relays like https://nostr.land, media hosts like https://nostr.build, clients like https://damus.io, etc.

With that thought, Onigirl is pleased to announce the launch of a new series. With a sole focus on free market devs/projects.

Knights of Nostr!

I'll happily brief you about their exciting project and how it benefits humanity! Let's Support these Magnificent projects, devs, relays, and builders! Our first runner up!

Oppa Fishcake :Lord of Media Hosting

npub137c5pd8gmhhe0njtsgwjgunc5xjr2vmzvglkgqs5sjeh972gqqxqjak37w

Oppa Fishcake with his noble steed!

Think of this as an introduction to learn and further your experience on Nostr! New developments and applications are constantly happening on Nostr. It's enough to make one's head spin. I may also cover FOSS projects(outside of Nostr) as they need some love as well! Plus, you can think of it as another tool to add to your decentralized life. I will not be doing how-to-Nostr guides. I personally feel there are plenty of great guides already available! Which I'm happy to add to curation collection via easily searchable on Yakihonne.

For email updates you can subscribe to my [[https://paragraph.xyz/@onigirl]]

If you like it, send me some 🧡💛💚 hearts💜💗💖 otherwise zap dat⚡⚡🍑🍑peach⚡⚡🍑 ~If not me, then at least to our dearest knight!

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time and support (N)oystr! Shine bright like a diamond! Share if you care! FOSS power!

Follow on your favorite Nostr Client for the best viewing experience!

[!NOTE]

I'm using Obsidian + Nostr Writer Plugin; a new way to publish Markdown directly to Nostr. I was a little nervous using this because I was used doing them in RStudio; R Markdown.
Since this is my first article, I sent it to my account as a draft to test it. It's pretty neat.

@ e97aaffa:2ebd765d

Claro que não, o Bitcoin não é uma solução mas sim uma reação à inação dos governos.

O sistema FIAT está numa situação tão crítica, não existe uma solução boa para o problema da dívida soberana, terá que se optar pela menos má. Como resolver o problema das dívidas futuras, dos fundos de pensões? As dívidas do passado tem que ser pagas, mas como? As dívidas não são apenas números no excel, são pessoas que estão por detrás desses números, não podem ser apagadas, simplesmente.

Uma solução seria uma mudança drástica nas políticas, com uma forte redução de custos do estado e muita austeridade, gerando uma queda do padrão de vida dos cidadãos. Só que isto seria extremamente impopular, nenhum político tem coragem de o fazer, quem tentar vai acabar por perder na próxima eleição.

Assim, a única maneira que resta para os políticos, é fazê-lo pela calada, através da desvalorização da moeda. A inflação permite destruir as dívidas do passado e consequentemente a poupança e a qualidade de vida dos cidadãos. É isto que temos visto nos últimos anos e vai agravar-se no futuro. Só que os atuais níveis de expansão monetária, não foram suficientes para resolver o problema, apenas permite ao governo estar à tona da água, procrastinar o problema.

Um bom exemplo é na UE, onde existe uma regra que permite um défice até 3% do PIB por ano, que muitas vezes nem é cumprida, isto é uma situação insustentável. A regra deveria ser o oposto, obrigar um superávit mínimo de 2% ao ano, só assim será possivel reduzir a dívida.

A expansão monetária e política monetária está a ser utilizada como uma arma contra os cidadãos, é um imposto totalmente cego, muito penalizador para os mais pobres e os governos têm abusado desse poder. A moeda é o sangue de uma economia, os políticos ao diluí-la estão a envenenar a economia. O Bitcoin é a única moeda que não pode ser diluída.

Os políticos reconhecem que existe um problema mas todas as soluções são extremamente impopulares, e como eles são os principais beneficiados do sistema FIAT, dificilmente haverá uma mudança.

Bi-monetário

Como nenhum político terá coragem de mudar, essa mudança tem de partir dos cidadãos, voluntariamente, ou seja, com a adoção do Bitcoin.

Todos os bitcoiners gostariam de assistir a uma mudança rápida do padrão FIAT para o padrão Bitcoin, mas não é possível. É necessário ter noção como o mundo real é, uma mudança rápida entre os padrões seria desastrosa para toda a humanidade, esse processo terá que ser gradual, para não existir uma ruptura entre gerações e entre estratos sociais.

Com a criação do Bitcoin, o paradigma mudou, passou a existir um sistema bi-monetário, com a moeda FIAT e o Bitcoin em circulação simultânea. O FIAT como unidade de conta e o Bitcoin como reserva de valor e as duas como meio de troca.

Hoje, a alocação em Bitcoin ainda é muito baixa. Em média a nível mundial está 99.2% em FIAT e 0.8% em Bitcoin. Mas chegará o dia, atingirá os 50-50%, em alguns países possivelmente será ainda maior.

Será uma adoção completamente voluntária, não será pelos governos, mas sim, pelos cidadãos, de baixo para cima. No início, a adoção será lenta, mas quanto maior for a alocação em Bitcoin, mais acelerada será a adoção.

A dupla circulação de moeda, vai obrigar os governos a fazer uma melhor gestão, vai limitar indiretamente a impressão de dinheiro. Se os governos abusarem desse poder, as pessoas vão se proteger ainda mais no Bitcoin, diminuindo a alocação em FIAT, por sua vez a moeda fica mais fraca e o governo também. Vai obrigar um maior rigor na política monetária.

O Bitcoin será uma proteção contra o abuso dos governos, vai obrigar uma mudança, um maior rigor na sua gestão, possibilitando a redução da dívida a longo prazo.

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Table Of Content

• A Brief Overview of Bitcoin Mining

• The Rails Programming Tool: A Game Changer for Bitcoin Miners

• Customization and Scalability

• Enhancing Security and Compliance

• Conclusion

• FAQ

The world of cryptocurrency is ever-evolving, and as the demand for Bitcoin mining solutions grows, so does the need for innovative and efficient tools. Lincoln Technologies, a leading name in the field of blockchain technology, has introduced a groundbreaking Rails Programming Tool that aims to revolutionize the Bitcoin mining landscape. This article will explore the features and benefits of this powerful new tool and how it can help you unlock the full potential of Bitcoin mining.

A Brief Overview of Bitcoin Mining

Before delving into the details of the Rails Programming Tool, it is essential to understand the concept of Bitcoin mining. Mining is the process of validating and adding new transactions to the blockchain, which ensures the security and integrity of the cryptocurrency network. In return for their efforts, miners are rewarded with newly minted bitcoins and transaction fees. As the mining process becomes increasingly competitive, miners require sophisticated tools to stay ahead of the game.

The Rails Programming Tool: A Game Changer for Bitcoin Miners

Lincoln Technologies' Rails Programming Tool is a cutting-edge solution designed specifically for Bitcoin mining. This powerful software offers a range of features to streamline the mining process, reduce energy consumption, and optimize mining efficiency. Some of the key features include:

User-friendly interface: The Rails Programming Tool boasts a clean and intuitive interface that is easy to navigate even for beginners, reducing the learning curve for new miners.

Advanced mining algorithms: The tool is equipped with the latest mining algorithms to maximize the mining output and increase the chances of earning rewards.

Energy-efficient operations: Energy consumption is a significant concern for Bitcoin miners. The Rails Programming Tool optimizes mining efficiency and reduces energy consumption, lowering the overall costs and environmental impact of mining.

Customization and Scalability

One of the standout features of the Rails Programming Tool is its adaptability. The tool can be customized to suit the specific needs of individual miners, allowing them to create a tailored solution that works best for their mining setup. Additionally, the Rails Programming Tool is designed to grow with the ever-changing world of cryptocurrency, ensuring that users can continue to benefit from its features as the mining landscape evolves.

Enhancing Security and Compliance

Security is of the utmost importance in the world of cryptocurrency, and Lincoln Technologies has taken steps to ensure that the Rails Programming Tool meets the highest security standards. The software employs advanced encryption protocols to protect sensitive data and maintain compliance with industry regulations. By using the Rails Programming Tool, miners can have peace of mind knowing that their operations are secure and compliant.

Conclusion

The Rails Programming Tool from Lincoln Technologies is poised to revolutionize the way Bitcoin miners operate. By harnessing the power of this innovative software, miners can unlock new levels of efficiency, profitability, and sustainability in their mining efforts. As cryptocurrency continues to gain mainstream acceptance, the Rails Programming Tool is a valuable asset for those looking to capitalize on the growing demand for Bitcoin mining solutions.

FAQ

What is the Rails Programming Tool by Lincoln Technologies? The Rails Programming Tool is an innovative software solution designed to streamline and optimize the Bitcoin mining process, reduce energy consumption, and enhance security and compliance.

How does the Rails Programming Tool improve mining efficiency? The Rails Programming Tool uses advanced mining algorithms to maximize mining output, optimizes energy consumption, and offers customization and scalability features that help miners tailor the tool to their specific needs.

Is the Rails Programming Tool suitable for beginners? Yes, the Rails Programming Tool features a user-friendly interface, making it easy to navigate and learn for both beginners and experienced miners alike.

Can the Rails Programming Tool adapt to the changing cryptocurrency landscape? Yes, the Rails Programming Tool is designed for scalability, allowing it to grow and adapt to the ever-evolving world of cryptocurrency and Bitcoin mining.

That's all for today

If you want more, be sure to follow us on:

NOSTR: croxroad@getalby.com

X: @croxroadnews

Instagram: @croxroadnews.co

Youtube: @croxroadnews

Store: https://croxroad.store

Subscribe to CROX ROAD Bitcoin Only Daily Newsletter

https://www.croxroad.co/subscribe

DISCLAIMER: None of this is financial advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. Please be careful and do your own research.

@ a58a2663:87bb2918

Quem sabe – quem sabe! – você se interesse em saber como andam as minhas pesquisas sobre o “projeto humanista” em “A alegoria do mundo: o mago, o filólogo e o colonizador”, módulo atual de Convivium – Seminário Permanente de Humanidades.

Na semana passada fiz uma transmissão de áudio no grupo do Telegram dos participantes. Entre outros temas abordados, pude falar da interpretação que Edgar Wind faz do quadro “Primavera”, de Botticelli, como uma explicitação do tipo de alegoria platonizante que dominaria a mente de humanistas da Renascença.

https://image.nostr.build/6e1ee79986d3d4c929609fdf037a3e1e6ee399559fb7e2b5d8c02ad0b9b188ad.jpg

A alegoria é o modo mental, defende E. H. Gombrich, pelo qual uma tese é proposta antes que as causas e analogias que a embasam sejam estabelecidas, de modo que o processo associativo irá apenas justificar a posteriori o que se quis desde logo comunicar. Imagine George Orwell postado às suas costas enquanto você lê 1984. A todo momento, ele irá cutucar o seu ombro e dizer: “Está vendo? Aqui está o que eu quis dizer com a fala desse personagem nesse trecho”. O texto é apenas pretexto para uma mensagem, e é a mensagem que se ergue com claro perfil discursivo diante do leitor. A ficção começa a ceder espaço para o palanque.

Defendo que a alegoria é a mãe das mitologias abstratas, do romance de tese e da experiência de avatar que caracteriza o mundo digital. E seus princípios de analogia arbitrária, que datam do fim da Idade Média, ganham exemplificação máxima nas obras Da magia e Dos vínculos, de Giordano Bruno, que discutirei numa aula ao vivo hoje (26), às 20h30. Na atuação de Bruno se nota como a magia foi cada vez mais percebida de maneira imaterial, abstrata, psicologizante (e dessa sua concepção nos vêm os primeiros prenúncios do inconsciente), ao mesmo tempo que sua primeira ocupação com o mundo material foi aos poucos transferida para as ciências que tendiam a ignorar o elemento humano que manipula esse mesmo mundo material.

Se por um lado, portanto, começa a triunfar uma cosmovisão que supõe um ser humano quase sobrenatural em seus poderes psíquicos (segundo a nova ideia de magia como manipulação da memória), por outro lado começa a se difundir uma cosmovisão que supõe um mundo subtraído de todo elemento humano, uma espécie de cosmos impessoal, aquele que hoje se encontra nos livros de física. Penso que essa como que esquizofrenia reflete a dinâmica de exaltação e depressão do erudito que comentei durante a leitura do Fausto de Goethe realizada no primeiro módulo de Convivium: o herói do poema ora se sente um deus ora se sente um verme, tal como hoje é muito comum nos sentirmos.

Na aula de hoje irei lidar com aquele primeiro aspecto da analogia como arma de um ego entronado, ao passo que na primeira semana de outubro irei disponibilizar aos alunos o texto “Máquina e segredo”, acompanhado de vídeo com comentários complementares. Nesse escrito tratarei, por exemplo, de como os inventos de Giambattista della Porta (1535-1615), especialmente na área da criptografia, assinalam não só um novo estágio na história da tecnologia, como também um novo estágio da disposição dos estudiosos para com o conhecimento, uma disposição típica do que venho chamando de “nova aposta de Pascal”, conceito que terei a oportunidade de rever.

“Máquina e segredo” será o primeiro excerto que colocarei em discussão do ensaio O destino do humanismo, que talvez acabe recebendo o título de A alegoria do mundo, como o atual e terceiro módulo de Convivium; a ver.

Para comemorar este momento importante das pesquisas que venho fazendo a respeito do “projeto humanista” (iniciadas em 2020, privadamente, e continuadas algo publicamente a partir de 2022), resolvi dar 25% de desconto na inscrição de Convivium para quem optar por pagar em bitcoin. Algumas pessoas já chegaram a Convivium por meio do Nostr, e é minha intenção trazer ainda mais gente. Em vez de pagar R$ 449, pague agora R$ 336,75 para ter acesso a:

1. O destino do humanismo: uma leitura do Fausto de Goethe, com 12 aulas, materiais complementares e aulas bônus (mais de 20 horas de vídeo);
2. Os livros da vida: Abelardo, Dante, Cardano, Santa Teresa, com mais 12 aulas, textos e materiais auxiliares (mais de 20 horas de vídeo idem);
3. A alegoria do mundo: o mago, o filólogo e o colonizador, módulo em andamento e com aulas mensais até abril de 2025. Até o momento tivemos 4 aulas ao vivo, 3 vídeos pré-gravados e 3 transmissões de áudio, além de comentários esparsos pelo grupo do Telegram.

Caso queira se inscrever pagando em bitcoin, mande-me uma mensagem privada ou e-mail para camoensiii57@protonmail.com

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

In an era where data seems to be as valuable as currency, the prevailing trend in AI starkly contrasts with the concept of personal data ownership. The explosion of AI and the ensuing race have made it easy to overlook where the data is coming from. The current model, dominated by big tech players, involves collecting vast amounts of user data and selling it to AI companies for training LLMs. Reddit recently penned a 60 million dollar deal, Google guards and mines Youtube, and more are going this direction. But is that their data to sell? Yes, it's on their platforms, but without the users to generate it, what would they monetize? To me, this practice raises significant ethical questions, as it assumes that user data is a commodity that companies can exploit at will.

The heart of the issue lies in the ownership of data. Why, in today's digital age, do we not retain ownership of our data? Why can't our data follow us, under our control, to wherever we want to go? These questions echo the broader sentiment that while some in the tech industry — such as the blockchain-first crypto bros — recognize the importance of data ownership, their "blockchain for everything solutions," to me, fall significantly short in execution.

Reddit further complicates this with its current move to IPO, which, on the heels of the large data deal, might reinforce the mistaken belief that user-generated data is a corporate asset. Others, no doubt, will follow suit. This underscores the urgent need for a paradigm shift towards recognizing and respecting user data as personal property.

In my perfect world, the digital landscape would undergo a revolutionary transformation centered around the empowerment and sovereignty of individual data ownership. Platforms like Twitter, Reddit, Yelp, YouTube, and Stack Overflow, integral to our digital lives, would operate on a fundamentally different premise: user-owned data.

In this envisioned future, data ownership would not just be a concept but a practice, with public and private keys ensuring the authenticity and privacy of individual identities. This model would eliminate the private data silos that currently dominate, where companies profit from selling user data without consent. Instead, data would traverse a decentralized protocol akin to the internet, prioritizing user control and transparency.

The cornerstone of this world would be a meritocratic digital ecosystem. Success for companies would hinge on their ability to leverage user-owned data to deliver unparalleled value rather than their capacity to gatekeep and monetize information. If a company breaks my trust, I can move to a competitor, and my data, connections, and followers will come with me. This shift would herald an era where consent, privacy, and utility define the digital experience, ensuring that the benefits of technology are equitably distributed and aligned with the users' interests and rights.

The conversation needs to shift fundamentally. We must challenge this trajectory and advocate for a future where data ownership and privacy are not just ideals but realities. If we continue on our current path without prioritizing individual data rights, the future of digital privacy and autonomy is bleak. Big tech's dominance allows them to treat user data as a commodity, potentially selling and exploiting it without consent. This imbalance has already led to users being cut off from their digital identities and connections when platforms terminate accounts, underscoring the need for a digital ecosystem that empowers user control over data. Without changing direction, we risk a future where our content — and our freedoms by consequence — are controlled by a few powerful entities, threatening our rights and the democratic essence of the digital realm. We must advocate for a shift towards data ownership by individuals to preserve our digital freedoms and democracy.

@ 8ce092d8:950c24ad

Overview

1. Introduction
2. Model Types
3. Training (Data Collection and Config Settings)
4. Probability Viewing: AI Inspector
5. Match
6. Cheat Sheet

I. Introduction

AI Arena is the first game that combines human and artificial intelligence collaboration.

AI learns your skills through "imitation learning."

Official Resources

1. Official Documentation (Must Read): Everything You Need to Know About AI Arena

Watch the 2-minute video in the documentation to quickly understand the basic flow of the game. 2. Official Play-2-Airdrop competition FAQ Site https://aiarena.notion.site/aiarena/Gateway-to-the-Arena-52145e990925499d95f2fadb18a24ab0 3. Official Discord (Must Join): https://discord.gg/aiarenaplaytest for the latest announcements or seeking help. The team will also have a exclusive channel there. 4. Official YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aiarena because the game has built-in tutorials, you can choose to watch videos.

What is this game about?

1. Although categorized as a platform fighting game, the core is a probability-based strategy game.
2. Warriors take actions based on probabilities on the AI Inspector dashboard, competing against opponents.
3. The game does not allow direct manual input of probabilities for each area but inputs information through data collection and establishes models by adjusting parameters.
4. Data collection emulates fighting games, but training can be completed using a Dummy As long as you can complete the in-game tutorial, you can master the game controls.

II. Model Types

Before training, there are three model types to choose from: Simple Model Type, Original Model Type, and Advanced Model Type.

It is recommended to try the Advanced Model Type after completing at least one complete training with the Simple Model Type and gaining some understanding of the game.

Simple Model Type

The Simple Model is akin to completing a form, and the training session is comparable to filling various sections of that form.

This model has 30 buckets. Each bucket can be seen as telling the warrior what action to take in a specific situation. There are 30 buckets, meaning 30 different scenarios. Within the same bucket, the probabilities for direction or action are the same.

For example: What should I do when I'm off-stage — refer to the "Recovery (you off-stage)" bucket.

For all buckets, refer to this official documentation:

https://docs.aiarena.io/arenadex/game-mechanics/tabular-model-v2

Video (no sound): The entire training process for all buckets

https://youtu.be/1rfRa3WjWEA

Game version 2024.1.10. The method of saving is outdated. Please refer to the game updates.

Advanced Model Type

The "Original Model Type" and "Advanced Model Type" are based on Machine Learning, which is commonly referred to as combining with AI.

The Original Model Type consists of only one bucket, representing the entire map. If you want the AI to learn different scenarios, you need to choose a "Focus Area" to let the warrior know where to focus. A single bucket means that a slight modification can have a widespread impact on the entire model. This is where the "Advanced Model Type" comes in.

The "Advanced Model Type" can be seen as a combination of the "Original Model Type" and the "Simple Model Type". The Advanced Model Type divides the map into 8 buckets. Each bucket can use many "Focus Area." For a detailed explanation of the 8 buckets and different Focus Areas, please refer to the tutorial page (accessible in the Advanced Model Type, after completing a training session, at the top left of the Advanced Config, click on "Tutorial").

III. Training (Data Collection and Config Settings)

Training Process:

1. Collect Data
2. Set Parameters, Train, and Save
3. Repeat Step 1 until the Model is Complete

Training the Simple Model Type is the easiest to start with; refer to the video above for a detailed process.

Training the Advanced Model Type offers more possibilities through the combination of "Focus Area" parameters, providing a higher upper limit. While the Original Model Type has great potential, it's harder to control. Therefore, this section focuses on the "Advanced Model Type."

1. What Kind of Data to Collect

1. High-Quality Data: Collect purposeful data. Garbage in, garbage out. Only collect the necessary data; don't collect randomly. It's recommended to use Dummy to collect data. However, don't pursue perfection; through parameter adjustments, AI has a certain level of fault tolerance.
2. Balanced Data: Balance your dataset. In simple terms, if you complete actions on the left side a certain number of times, also complete a similar number on the right side. While data imbalance can be addressed through parameter adjustments (see below), it's advised not to have this issue during data collection.
3. Moderate Amount: A single training will include many individual actions. Collect data for each action 1-10 times. Personally, it's recommended to collect data 2-3 times for a single action. If the effect of a single training is not clear, conduct a second (or even third) training with the same content, but with different parameter settings.

2. What to Collect (and Focus Area Selection)

Game actions mimic fighting games, consisting of 4 directions + 6 states (Idle, Jump, Attack, Grab, Special, Shield). Directions can be combined into ↗, ↘, etc. These directions and states can then be combined into different actions.

To make "Focus Area" effective, you need to collect data in training that matches these parameters. For example, for "Distance to Opponent", you need to collect data when close to the opponent and also when far away. * Note: While you can split into multiple training sessions, it's most effective to cover different situations within a single training.

Refer to the Simple Config, categorize the actions you want to collect, and based on the game scenario, classify them into two categories: "Movement" and "Combat."

Movement-Based Actions

Action Collection

When the warrior is offstage, regardless of where the opponent is, we require the warrior to return to the stage to prevent self-destruction.

This involves 3 aerial buckets: 5 (Near Blast Zone), 7 (Under Stage), and 8 (Side Of Stage).

* Note: The background comes from the Tutorial mentioned earlier. The arrows in the image indicate the direction of the action and are for reference only. * Note: Action collection should be clean; do not collect actions that involve leaving the stage.

Config Settings

In the Simple Config, you can directly choose "Movement" in it. However, for better customization, it's recommended to use the Advanced Config directly. - Intensity: The method for setting Intensity will be introduced separately later. - Buckets: As shown in the image, choose the bucket you are training. - Focus Area: Position-based parameters: - Your position (must) - Raycast Platform Distance, Raycast Platform Type (optional, generally choose these in Bucket 7)

Combat-Based Actions

The goal is to direct attacks quickly and effectively towards the opponent, which is the core of game strategy.

This involves 5 buckets: - 2 regular situations - In the air: 6 (Safe Zone) - On the ground: 4 (Opponent Active) - 3 special situations on the ground: - 1 Projectile Active - 2 Opponent Knockback - 3 Opponent Stunned

2 Regular Situations

In the in-game tutorial, we learned how to perform horizontal attacks. However, in the actual game, directions expand to 8 dimensions. Imagine having 8 relative positions available for launching hits against the opponent. Our task is to design what action to use for attack or defense at each relative position.

Focus Area - Basic (generally select all) - Angle to opponent
- Distance to opponent - Discrete Distance: Choosing this option helps better differentiate between closer and farther distances from the opponent. As shown in the image, red indicates a relatively close distance, and green indicates a relatively distant distance.

• Advanced: Other commonly used parameters
• Direction: different facings to opponent
• Your Elemental Gauge and Discrete Elementals: Considering the special's charge
• Opponent action: The warrior will react based on the opponent's different actions.
• Your action: Your previous action. Choose this if teaching combos.

3 Special Situations on the Ground

Projectile Active, Opponent Stunned, Opponent Knockback These three buckets can be referenced in the Simple Model Type video. The parameter settings approach is the same as Opponent Active/Safe Zone.

For Projectile Active, in addition to the parameters based on combat, to track the projectile, you also need to select "Raycast Projectile Distance" and "Raycast Projectile On Target."

3. Setting "Intensity"

Resources

• The "Tutorial" mentioned earlier explains these parameters.
• Official Config Document (2022.12.24): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1adXwvDHEnrVZ5bUClWQoBQ8ETrSSKgG5q48YrogaFJs/edit

---

TL;DR:

Epochs: - Adjust to fewer epochs if learning is insufficient, increase for more learning.

Batch Size: - Set to the minimum (16) if data is precise but unbalanced, or just want it to learn fast - Increase (e.g., 64) if data is slightly imprecise but balanced. - If both imprecise and unbalanced, consider retraining.

Learning Rate: - Maximize (0.01) for more learning but a risk of forgetting past knowledge. - Minimize for more accurate learning with less impact on previous knowledge.

Lambda: - Reduce for prioritizing learning new things.

Data Cleaning: - Enable "Remove Sparsity" unless you want AI to learn idleness. - For special cases, like teaching the warrior to use special moves when idle, refer to this tutorial video: https://discord.com/channels/1140682688651612291/1140683283626201098/1195467295913431111

Personal Experience: - Initial training with settings: 125 epochs, batch size 16, learning rate 0.01, lambda 0, data cleaning enabled. - Prioritize Multistream, sometimes use Oversampling. - Fine-tune subsequent training based on the mentioned theories.

IV. Probability Viewing: AI Inspector

The dashboard consists of "Direction + Action." Above the dashboard, you can see the "Next Action" – the action the warrior will take in its current state. The higher the probability, the more likely the warrior is to perform that action, indicating a quicker reaction. It's essential to note that when checking the Direction, the one with the highest visual representation may not have the highest numerical value. To determine the actual value, hover the mouse over the graphical representation, as shown below, where the highest direction is "Idle."

In the map, you can drag the warrior to view the probabilities of the warrior in different positions. Right-click on the warrior with the mouse to change the warrior's facing. The status bar below can change the warrior's state on the map.

When training the "Opponent Stunned, Opponent Knockback" bucket, you need to select the status below the opponent's status bar. If you are focusing on "Opponent action" in the Focus Zone, choose the action in the opponent's status bar. If you are focusing on "Your action" in the Focus Zone, choose the action in your own status bar. When training the "Projectile Active" Bucket, drag the projectile on the right side of the dashboard to check the status.

Next

The higher the probability, the faster the reaction. However, be cautious when the action probability reaches 100%. This may cause the warrior to be in a special case of "State Transition," resulting in unnecessary "Idle" states.

Explanation: In each state a fighter is in, there are different "possible transitions". For example, from falling state you cannot do low sweep because low sweep requires you to be on the ground. For the shield state, we do not allow you to directly transition to headbutt. So to do headbutt you have to first exit to another state and then do it from there (assuming that state allows you to do headbutt). This is the reason the fighter runs because "run" action is a valid state transition from shield. Source

V. Learn from Matches

After completing all the training, your model is preliminarily finished—congratulations! The warrior will step onto the arena alone and embark on its debut!

Next, we will learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the warrior from battles to continue refining the warrior's model.

In matches, besides appreciating the performance, pay attention to the following:

1. Movement, i.e., Off the Stage: Observe how the warrior gets eliminated. Is it due to issues in the action settings at a certain position, or is it a normal death caused by a high percentage? The former is what we need to avoid and optimize.

2. Combat: Analyze both sides' actions carefully. Observe which actions you and the opponent used in different states. Check which of your hits are less effective, and how does the opponent handle different actions, etc.

The approach to battle analysis is similar to the thought process in the "Training", helping to have a more comprehensive understanding of the warrior's performance and making targeted improvements.

VI. Cheat Sheet

Training 1. Click "Collect" to collect actions. 2. "Map - Data Limit" is more user-friendly. Most players perform initial training on the "Arena" map. 3. Switch between the warrior and the dummy: Tab key (keyboard) / Home key (controller). 4. Use "Collect" to make the opponent loop a set of actions. 5. Instantly move the warrior to a specific location: Click "Settings" - SPAWN - Choose the desired location on the map - On. Press the Enter key (keyboard) / Start key (controller) during training.

Inspector 1. Right-click on the fighter to change their direction. Drag the fighter and observe the changes in different positions and directions. 2. When satisfied with the training, click "Save." 3. In "Sparring" and "Simulation," use "Current Working Model." 4. If satisfied with a model, then click "compete." The model used in the rankings is the one marked as "competing."

Sparring / Ranked 1. Use the Throneroom map only for the top 2 or top 10 rankings. 2. There is a 30-second cooldown between matches. The replays are played for any match. Once the battle begins, you can see the winner on the leaderboard or by right-clicking the page - Inspect - Console. Also, if you encounter any errors or bugs, please send screenshots of the console to the Discord server.

Good luck! See you on the arena!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Pequenos problemas que o Estado cria para a sociedade e que não são sempre lembrados

- **vale-transporte**: transferir o custo com o transporte do funcionário para um terceiro o estimula a morar longe de onde trabalha, já que morar perto é normalmente mais caro e a economia com transporte é inexistente.
- **atestado médico**: o direito a faltar o trabalho com atestado médico cria a exigência desse atestado para todas as situações, substituindo o livre acordo entre patrão e empregado e sobrecarregando os médicos e postos de saúde com visitas desnecessárias de assalariados resfriados.
- **prisões**: com dinheiro mal-administrado, burocracia e péssima alocação de recursos -- problemas que empresas privadas em competição (ou mesmo sem qualquer competição) saberiam resolver muito melhor -- o Estado fica sem presídios, com os poucos existentes entupidos, muito acima de sua alocação máxima, e com isto, segundo a bizarra corrente de responsabilidades que culpa o juiz que condenou o criminoso por sua morte na cadeia, juízes deixam de condenar à prisão os bandidos, soltando-os na rua.
- **justiça**: entrar com processos é grátis e isto faz proliferar a atividade dos advogados que se dedicam a criar problemas judiciais onde não seria necessário e a entupir os tribunais, impedindo-os de fazer o que mais deveriam fazer.
- **justiça**: como a justiça só obedece às leis e ignora acordos pessoais, escritos ou não, as pessoas não fazem acordos, recorrem sempre à justiça estatal, e entopem-na de assuntos que seriam muito melhor resolvidos entre vizinhos.
- **leis civis**: as leis criadas pelos parlamentares ignoram os costumes da sociedade e são um incentivo a que as pessoas não respeitem nem criem normas sociais -- que seriam maneiras mais rápidas, baratas e satisfatórias de resolver problemas.
- **leis de trãnsito**: quanto mais leis de trânsito, mais serviço de fiscalização são delegados aos policiais, que deixam de combater crimes por isto (afinal de contas, eles não querem de fato arriscar suas vidas combatendo o crime, a fiscalização é uma excelente desculpa para se esquivarem a esta responsabilidade).
- **financiamento educacional**: é uma espécie de subsídio às faculdades privadas que faz com que se criem cursos e mais cursos que são cada vez menos recheados de algum conhecimento ou técnica útil e cada vez mais inúteis.
- **leis de tombamento**: são um incentivo a que o dono de qualquer área ou construção "histórica" destrua todo e qualquer vestígio de história que houver nele antes que as autoridades descubram, o que poderia não acontecer se ele pudesse, por exemplo, usar, mostrar e se beneficiar da história daquele local sem correr o risco de perder, de fato, a sua propriedade.
- **zoneamento urbano**: torna as cidades mais espalhadas, criando uma necessidade gigantesca de carros, ônibus e outros meios de transporte para as pessoas se locomoverem das zonas de moradia para as zonas de trabalho.
- **zoneamento urbano**: faz com que as pessoas percam horas no trânsito todos os dias, o que é, além de um desperdício, um atentado contra a sua saúde, que estaria muito melhor servida numa caminhada diária entre a casa e o trabalho.
- **zoneamento urbano**: torna ruas e as casas menos seguras criando zonas enormes, tanto de residências quanto de indústrias, onde não há movimento de gente alguma.
- **escola obrigatória + currículo escolar nacional**: emburrece todas as crianças.
- **leis contra trabalho infantil**: tira das crianças a oportunidade de aprender ofícios úteis e levar um dinheiro para ajudar a família.
- **licitações**: como não existem os critérios do mercado para decidir qual é o melhor prestador de serviço, criam-se comissões de pessoas que vão decidir coisas. isto incentiva os prestadores de serviço que estão concorrendo na licitação a tentar comprar os membros dessas comissões. isto, fora a corrupção, gera problemas reais: __(i)__ a escolha dos serviços acaba sendo a pior possível, já que a empresa prestadora que vence está claramente mais dedicada a comprar comissões do que a fazer um bom trabalho (este problema afeta tantas áreas, desde a construção de estradas até a qualidade da merenda escolar, que é impossível listar aqui); __(ii)__ o processo corruptor acaba, no longo prazo, eliminando as empresas que prestavam e deixando para competir apenas as corruptas, e a qualidade tende a piorar progressivamente.
- **cartéis**: o Estado em geral cria e depois fica refém de vários grupos de interesse. o caso dos taxistas contra o Uber é o que está na moda hoje (e o que mostra como os Estados se comportam da mesma forma no mundo todo).
- **multas**: quando algum indivíduo ou empresa comete uma fraude financeira, ou causa algum dano material involuntário, as vítimas do caso são as pessoas que sofreram o dano ou perderam dinheiro, mas o Estado tem sempre leis que prevêem multas para os responsáveis. A justiça estatal é sempre muito rígida e rápida na aplicação dessas multas, mas relapsa e vaga no que diz respeito à indenização das vítimas. O que em geral acontece é que o Estado aplica uma enorme multa ao responsável pelo mal, retirando deste os recursos que dispunha para indenizar as vítimas, e se retira do caso, deixando estas desamparadas.
- **desapropriação**: o Estado pode pegar qualquer propriedade de qualquer pessoa mediante uma indenização que é necessariamente inferior ao valor da propriedade para o seu presente dono (caso contrário ele a teria vendido voluntariamente).
- **seguro-desemprego**: se há, por exemplo, um prazo mínimo de 1 ano para o sujeito ter direito a receber seguro-desemprego, isto o incentiva a planejar ficar apenas 1 ano em cada emprego (ano este que será sucedido por um período de desemprego remunerado), matando todas as possibilidades de aprendizado ou aquisição de experiência naquela empresa específica ou ascensão hierárquica.
- **previdência**: a previdência social tem todos os defeitos de cálculo do mundo, e não importa muito ela ser uma forma horrível de poupar dinheiro, porque ela tem garantias bizarras de longevidade fornecidas pelo Estado, além de ser compulsória. Isso serve para criar no imaginário geral a idéia da __aposentadoria__, uma época mágica em que todos os dias serão finais de semana. A idéia da aposentadoria influencia o sujeito a não se preocupar em ter um emprego que faça sentido, mas sim em ter um trabalho qualquer, que o permita se aposentar.
- **regulamentação impossível**: milhares de coisas são proibidas, há regulamentações sobre os aspectos mais mínimos de cada empreendimento ou construção ou espaço. se todas essas regulamentações fossem exigidas não haveria condições de produção e todos morreriam. portanto, elas não são exigidas. porém, o Estado, ou um agente individual imbuído do poder estatal pode, se desejar, exigi-las todas de um cidadão inimigo seu. qualquer pessoa pode viver a vida inteira sem cumprir nem 10% das regulamentações estatais, mas viverá também todo esse tempo com medo de se tornar um alvo de sua exigência, num estado de terror psicológico.
- **perversão de critérios**: para muitas coisas sobre as quais a sociedade normalmente chegaria a um valor ou comportamento "razoável" espontaneamente, o Estado dita regras. estas regras muitas vezes não são obrigatórias, são mais "sugestões" ou limites, como o salário mínimo, ou as 44 horas semanais de trabalho. a sociedade, porém, passa a usar esses valores como se fossem o normal. são raras, por exemplo, as ofertas de emprego que fogem à regra das 44h semanais.
- **inflação**: subir os preços é difícil e constrangedor para as empresas, pedir aumento de salário é difícil e constrangedor para o funcionário. a inflação força as pessoas a fazer isso, mas o aumento não é automático, como alguns economistas podem pensar (enquanto alguns outros ficam muito satisfeitos de que esse processo seja demorado e difícil).
- **inflação**: a inflação destrói a capacidade das pessoas de julgar preços entre concorrentes usando a própria memória.
- **inflação**: a inflação destrói os cálculos de lucro/prejuízo das empresas e prejudica enormemente as decisões empresariais que seriam baseadas neles.
- **inflação**: a inflação redistribui a riqueza dos mais pobres e mais afastados do sistema financeiro para os mais ricos, os bancos e as megaempresas.
- **inflação**: a inflação estimula o endividamento e o consumismo.
- **lixo:** ao prover coleta e armazenamento de lixo "grátis para todos" o Estado incentiva a criação de lixo. se tivessem que pagar para que recolhessem o seu lixo, as pessoas (e conseqüentemente as empresas) se empenhariam mais em produzir coisas usando menos plástico, menos embalagens, menos sacolas.
- **leis contra crimes financeiros:** ao criar legislação para dificultar acesso ao sistema financeiro por parte de criminosos a dificuldade e os custos para acesso a esse mesmo sistema pelas pessoas de bem cresce absurdamente, levando a um percentual enorme de gente incapaz de usá-lo, para detrimento de todos -- e no final das contas os grandes criminosos ainda conseguem burlar tudo.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: Community

I was an avid IPFS user until yesterday. Many many times I asked simple questions for which I couldn't find an answer on the internet in the #ipfs IRC channel on Freenode. Most of the times I didn't get an answer, and even when I got it was rarely by someone who knew IPFS deeply. I've had issues go unanswered on js-ipfs repositories for year – one of these was raising awareness of a problem that then got fixed some months later by a complete rewrite, I closed my own issue after realizing that by myself some couple of months later, I don't think the people responsible for the rewrite were ever acknowledge that he had fixed my issue.

Some days ago I asked some questions about how the IPFS protocol worked internally, sincerely trying to understand the inefficiencies in finding and fetching content over IPFS. I pointed it would be a good idea to have a drawing showing that so people would understand the difficulties (which I didn't) and wouldn't be pissed off by the slowness. I was told to read the whitepaper. I had already the whitepaper, but read again the relevant parts. The whitepaper doesn't explain anything about the DHT and how IPFS finds content. I said that in the room, was told to read again.

Before anyone misread this section, I want to say I understand it's a pain to keep answering people on IRC if you're busy developing stuff of interplanetary importance, and that I'm not paying anyone nor I have the right to be answered. On the other hand, if you're developing a super-important protocol, financed by many millions of dollars and a lot of people are hitting their heads against your software and there's no one to help them; you're always busy but never delivers anything that brings joy to your users, something is very wrong. I sincerely don't know what IPFS developers are working on, I wouldn't doubt they're working on important things if they said that, but what I see – and what many other users see (take a look at the IPFS Discourse forum) is bugs, bugs all over the place, confusing UX, and almost no help.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Castas hindus em nova chave

Shudras buscam o máximo bem para os seus próprios corpos; vaishyas o máximo bem para a sua própria vida terrena e a da sua família; kshatriyas o máximo bem para a sociedade e este mundo terreno; brâmanes buscam o máximo bem.

@ 8f69ac99:4f92f5fd

As revoluções muitas vezes começam com os membros mais jovens da sociedade—adolescentes, idealistas e cheios de energia, ansiosos por causar mudanças. No entanto, no mundo de hoje, a noção de revolução foi sequestrada por forças que procuram controlar e manipular, em vez de empoderar os indivíduos. A chamada "revolução woke" é um exemplo claro, impulsionada por uma agenda que polariza a sociedade ao longo das linhas da política identitária. Esta distracção desvia a atenção dos verdadeiros problemas: a desigualdade económica e o autoritarismo. Mas há uma alternativa melhor, uma que prioriza a liberdade e a soberania em vez da divisão e do controlo—Bitcoin.

A "Revolução Woke" Globalista e a Agenda da Polarização

Uma das tácticas mais insidiosas da "revolução woke" é a polarização deliberada da sociedade. Ao criar narrativas que colocam as pessoas umas contra as outras com base em raça, género, religião e política, aqueles no poder mantêm o controlo e desviam a atenção dos problemas mais profundos que realmente importam. Esta estratégia é orwelliana: ao criar uma mentalidade de "nós contra eles", fabricam uma cultura de conflito perpétuo.

Em vez de promover uma mudança significativa, a "revolução woke" prende as pessoas num ciclo de indignação e divisão, distraindo-as de enfrentar as verdadeiras estruturas de poder—como a desigualdade económica e o excesso de controlo estatal. Esta fragmentação enfraquece os laços entre as pessoas, tornando a sociedade mais vulnerável à manipulação pelas autoridades centralizadas.

Esta polarização serve os interesses daqueles que estão no poder. Quando as pessoas estão demasiado ocupadas a lutar entre si, são menos propensas a questionar os sistemas que realmente as controlam. A "revolução woke" torna-se menos uma questão de progresso genuíno e mais uma forma de manter o status quo através da divisão e da distracção.

Por Que a Polarização é Incentivada

A polarização não é acidental—é uma estratégia calculada com o objectivo de controlar. Dividindo as pessoas em campos opostos, a sociedade fragmenta-se, tornando mais difícil para os indivíduos unirem-se contra adversários comuns ou combaterem políticas que beneficiam as elites.

Esta divisão serve também como uma distracção poderosa. Enquanto as pessoas estão consumidas por batalhas ideológicas, os sistemas financeiros centralizados e o controlo governamental expandem-se silenciosamente. Os meios de comunicação, muitas vezes controlados pelos mesmos poderes, alimentam estas divisões, mantendo as pessoas focadas em conflitos internos enquanto ocultam as verdadeiras ameaças à liberdade.

A polarização também corrói as liberdades individuais. Quando as pessoas estão envolvidas em batalhas ideológicas intermináveis, são menos propensas a notar a erosão gradual dos seus direitos. Isto é precisamente o que os poderes estabelecidos desejam—uma população distraída e dividida, demasiado ocupada para desafiar o desmantelamento lento das suas liberdades pessoais.

O Resultado da Polarização

O resultado desta polarização deliberada é uma sociedade mais preocupada com a pureza ideológica do que com a garantia das suas verdadeiras liberdades. As pessoas ficam presas na política identitária, priorizando a lealdade ao grupo em detrimento da autonomia individual. Isto promove uma mentalidade de "pensamento de grupo", onde questionar a narrativa dominante é desencorajado.

Entretanto, a desigualdade económica aprofunda-se à medida que os poderes centralizados continuam a consolidar o controlo. Os sistemas que deveriam promover equidade tornam-se cada vez mais manipulados, beneficiando os poucos em detrimento dos muitos. A verdadeira liberdade—especialmente a liberdade financeira—torna-se mais difícil de alcançar, com os indivíduos presos em sistemas concebidos para beneficiar uma minoria poderosa.

No final, a "revolução woke" apenas reforça as mesmas estruturas que afirma combater. Ao dividir as pessoas e distraí-las dos verdadeiros problemas, os poderes estabelecidos mantêm o seu controlo, enquanto as liberdades pessoais e financeiras da maioria continuam a ser corroídas.

Bitcoin: A Verdadeira Revolução

Em contraste com a "revolução woke", que divide, Bitcoin oferece uma verdadeira revolução—uma que empodera os indivíduos em vez de os separar. Bitcoin proporciona soberania financeira, retirando poder dos governos autoritários e das instituições centralizadas.

Bitcoin permite que os indivíduos controlem a sua própria riqueza, eliminando a necessidade de intermediários como bancos ou governos. As pessoas já não estão sujeitas a entidades que restringem a sua liberdade financeira. Com Bitcoin, podem criar, armazenar e transferir valor de forma segura, transparente e acessível.

Isto não se trata apenas de economia—é sobre recuperar a liberdade. A natureza descentralizada do Bitcoin permite que as pessoas tomem decisões financeiras sem interferência do estado ou de entidades corporativas.

Porque é Que o Bitcoin é Revolucionário

A verdadeira natureza revolucionária do Bitcoin reside no seu design e princípios, que rompem com os sistemas de controlo enraizados. Eis algumas razões pelas quais o Bitcoin é transformador:

• Aberto e Sem Fronteiras: O Bitcoin transcende fronteiras, permitindo que pessoas de todo o mundo participem igualmente no sistema financeiro. Quebra barreiras baseadas em nacionalidade ou geografia, permitindo uma participação económica global.

• Resistente à Censura: Nenhum governo ou empresa pode parar uma transacção em Bitcoin, dando às pessoas a liberdade de transferir valor sem medo de interferências ou retaliações. Esta é a forma definitiva de autonomia financeira.

• Sem Permissão: O Bitcoin não requer aprovação de nenhuma autoridade. Ao contrário dos sistemas financeiros tradicionais, não há porteiros a controlar quem pode participar, tornando o Bitcoin uma ferramenta para a verdadeira auto-soberania financeira.

• Neutro: O Bitcoin é imparcial. Não se importa com raça, género, religião ou política. Num mundo onde a política identitária é usada para dividir, o Bitcoin trata todos de forma igual, oferecendo um sistema financeiro inclusivo que transcende essas divisões.

Bitcoin como o Antídoto para a Polarização

O Bitcoin oferece uma solução para a divisão criada pela polarização. Transcende a política identitária ao tratar todos de forma igual, independentemente da sua origem ou crenças. A neutralidade do Bitcoin garante que nenhum grupo ou facção pode manipulá-lo para impor as suas visões sobre os outros.

Bitcoin permite que os indivíduos se libertem das narrativas divisivas e tomem controlo dos seus destinos financeiros. Promove a cooperação em vez do conflito, capacitando as pessoas a focarem-se em objectivos comuns, em vez de batalhas ideológicas.

O Bitcoin não é apenas uma moeda—é uma força unificadora, oferecendo esperança àqueles que estão cansados da divisão e das lutas pelo poder. Representa uma mudança para práticas financeiras inclusivas que priorizam a autonomia individual em detrimento do controlo centralizado.

Um Apelo à Acção

Para os jovens que sonham em criar uma mudança real: se querem liderar uma revolução que verdadeiramente empodere os indivíduos e quebre as cadeias do controlo centralizado, então é hora de abraçar o Bitcoin.

Esta revolução não é sobre seguir uma agenda predefinida ou alinhar-se com ideologias divisivas. Trata-se de criar um futuro de sistemas financeiros abertos, onde todos têm a liberdade de participar igualmente.

A cor desta revolução é laranja, simbolizando o logótipo do Bitcoin e o movimento em direcção à liberdade financeira. Representa a esperança para aqueles que querem escapar das restrições dos sistemas tradicionais e criar um mundo descentralizado e empoderado.

Conclusão

Estamos à beira de uma revolução financeira. A juventude tem uma escolha: seguir as narrativas pré-definidas dos sistemas ultrapassados ou tomar controlo dos seus próprios destinos através de redes financeiras descentralizadas e abertas.

O Bitcoin é a verdadeira revolução. É um movimento impulsionado pelo desejo de liberdade, autonomia e inclusão. Juntem-se à revolução, sejam parte de algo maior, e ajudem a construir um mundo onde o poder é descentralizado, as oportunidades são iguais e o futuro é brilhante e laranja—a cor da liberdade financeira.

Photo by Tarik Haiga on Unsplash

@ a9434ee1:d5c885be

1. Relay = Community?

If spinning up a relay is getting easier and cheaper by the day, why can't the relays literally be the group/community?

Then: * Any relay is by default a public community. The more restricted read- or write-access is, the more it becomes a private group. * Any publication targeted at (h-tag) and stored, and thus accepted, by a relay can be seen as a publication in that community. * All-in-1 hosting solutions (integrated blossom servers, lightning nodes, ...) are made easier.

2. Why invent new kinds?

Why can't Kind 1 posts that are targeted and accepted by a relay (i.e. community) just be the forum-posts of that community? Why create new kinds for this? And even weirder, why create a new kind with that exclusively serves as a reply to that new kind? Why not just use generic replies (kind 1111) and take the #otherstuff (event kinds and apps) as an opportunity to introduce those?

For chat messages, however, I get it. You need a kind + reply-kind for those.

3. Community VS Private group

It seems like the only distinction you really need, both for the user and the apps implementing all this, is:
1. Public Community: anyone can read and follow this community but for writing the admins can set limits (pricing, white listings, ...) 2. Private group: only the profiles that even know this relay (i.e. group) exists can interact with it. Read-access has to be granted (invite, pricing, ...) and admins can set limits for writing too. Beyond this distinction it's a bit naive to try to categorize them. Open vs Closed doesn't really mean much for example, since technically all groups/communities set limits and are thus closed. It's more interesting to look the ways in which they can be closed and build on the simplest distinctions you can make there.

The difference between Public communities and private groups is the most important one because they both have very different UX and specification requirements:

Memberlist

Communities: None existent
Anyone can read and follow. It just has limits on who can publish what, when. So the most interesting thing to surface is probable something like a list of most active members or a highlighted set of profiles that have special characteristics within this community (top supporter, god-mode, resident artist, ...).
Private Groups: Necessary for it's existence
The whitelisted npubs for read-access are the members.

Moderation actions

Both types of groups need a way for the admin(s) to:
* Block/remove users * Remove events * Edit metadata (name, description, guidelines...) * Specify who can write publish what, under what condition

Only private groups need a way for the admin(s) to:
* Add/approve new members → specify who has read-access, under what condition

Generalizing too many actions like add member, join request, etc... that are only applicable to one of these categories just creates bad UX for the other one. You don't "add a member" to a public community. People can follow it without asking anyone's permission (ok yes, some will AUTH for reading but that's besides the point). Some of its followers will then just choose to publish something there and the admin either allows them or not.

Having a common protocol for specifying the conditions for this write-access interoperably (as mentioned above) is what I would like to see instead: * Both Communities and Private groups need it anyway * You have to assume admins need granularity in the conditions they set for publishing in their group/community: Who, what, under what condition, ... * You don't want to link out to custom websites (or similar) explaining their allowance schemes

Sidenote: we need a similar kind of spec for the services that allow you to spin up your hosting solution (relay, server, node, ...) so that, when you click "Create new community" in an app, those services can be surfaced. With their business models (including options to self-host parts of it) just there, in the app, without linking out. Same for the lines of communication and payments that are needed to make those business models work from within any app.

Publication and Discovery

Only Communities allow for the exciting possibility of publishing something in multiple overlapping communities at once. Someone writing about how Bees are Capitalists can target their article at the communities that most overlap with its content (and with the author's means and write-access of course). Members of a community around beekeeping can organically discover content and communities on Austrian economics relevant to them.

With Private groups publication happens only in the group and discovery is blocked on purpose.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Thoughts on Nostr key management

On Why I don't like NIP-26 as a solution for key management I talked about multiple techniques that could be used to tackle the problem of key management on Nostr.

Here are some ideas that work in tandem:

• NIP-41 (stateless key invalidation)
• NIP-46 (Nostr Connect)
• NIP-07 (signer browser extension)
• Connected hardware signing devices
• other things like musig or frostr keys used in conjunction with a semi-trusted server; or other kinds of trusted software, like a dedicated signer on a mobile device that can sign on behalf of other apps; or even a separate protocol that some people decide to use as the source of truth for their keys, and some clients might decide to use that automatically
• there are probably many other ideas

Some premises I have in my mind (that may be flawed) that base my thoughts on these matters (and cause me to not worry too much) are that

• For the vast majority of people, Nostr keys aren't a target as valuable as Bitcoin keys, so they will probably be ok even without any solution;
• Even when you lose everything, identity can be recovered -- slowly and painfully, but still --, unlike money;
• Nostr is not trying to replace all other forms of online communication (even though when I think about this I can't imagine one thing that wouldn't be nice to replace with Nostr) or of offline communication, so there will always be ways.
• For the vast majority of people, losing keys and starting fresh isn't a big deal. It is a big deal when you have followers and an online persona and your life depends on that, but how many people are like that? In the real world I see people deleting social media accounts all the time and creating new ones, people losing their phone numbers or other accounts associated with their phone numbers, and not caring very much -- they just find a way to notify friends and family and move on.

We can probably come up with some specs to ease the "manual" recovery process, like social attestation and explicit signaling -- i.e., Alice, Bob and Carol are friends; Alice loses her key; Bob sends a new Nostr event kind to the network saying what is Alice's new key; depending on how much Carol trusts Bob, she can automatically start following that and remove the old key -- or something like that.

---

One nice thing about some of these proposals, like NIP-41, or the social-recovery method, or the external-source-of-truth-method, is that they don't have to be implemented in any client, they can live in standalone single-purpose microapps that users open or visit only every now and then, and these can then automatically update their follow lists with the latest news from keys that have changed according to multiple methods.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The boiling frog is a simple tale that illustrates the danger of gradual change: if you put a frog in boiling water, it will quickly jump out to escape the heat. But if you place a frog in warm water and gradually increase the temperature, it won't notice the change and will eventually cook itself. Might the decline in cash usage be construed as an example of this tale?

As long as individuals can freely transact with each other and conduct purchases and sales without intermediaries[^1] such as with cash, our freedoms and rights remain secure from potential threats posed by the payment system. However, as we have seen in several countries such as Sweden over the past 15 years, the use of cash and the amount of banknotes and coins in circulation have decreased. All to the benefit of various intermediated[^1] electronic alternatives.

The reasons for this trend include: - The costs associated with cash usage has been increasing. - Increased regulatory burdens due to stricter anti-money laundering regulations. - Closed bank branches and fewer ATMs. - The Riksbank's aggressive note switches resulted in a situation where they were no longer recognized.

Market forces or "market forces"?

Some may argue that the "de-cashing" of society is a consequence of market forces. But does this hold true? Leading economists at times recommend interventions with the express purpose to mislead the public, such as proposing measures who are "opaque to most voters."

In a working paper on de-cashing by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) from 2017, such thought processes, even recommendations, can be found. IMF economist Alexei Kireyev, formerly a professor at an institute associated with the Soviet Union's KGB (MGIMO) and economic adviser to Michail Gorbachov 1989-91, wrote that:

• "Social conventions may also be disrupted as de-cashing may be viewed as a violation of fundamental rights, including freedom of contract and freedom of ownership."
• Letting the private sector lead "the de-cashing" is preferable, as it will seem "almost entirely benign". The "tempting attempts to impose de-cashing by a decree should be avoided"
• "A targeted outreach program is needed to alleviate suspicions related to de-cashing"

In the text, he also offered suggestions on the most effective approach to diminish the use of cash:

• The de-cashing process could build on the initial and largely uncontested steps, such as the phasing out of large denomination bills, the placement of ceilings on cash transactions, and the reporting of cash moves across the borders.
• Include creating economic incentives to reduce the use of cash in transactions
• Simplify "the opening and use of transferrable deposits, and further computerizing the financial system."

As is customary in such a context, it is noted that the article only describes research and does not necessarily reflect IMF's views. However, isn't it remarkable that all of these proposals have come to fruition and the process continues? Central banks have phased out banknotes with higher denominations. Banks' regulatory complexity seemingly increase by the day (try to get a bank to handle any larger amounts of cash). The transfer of cash from one nation to another has become increasingly burdensome. The European Union has recently introduced restrictions on cash transactions. Even the law governing the Swedish central bank is written so as to guarantee a further undermining of cash. All while the market share is growing for alternatives such as transferable deposits[^1].

The old European disease

The Czech Republic's former president Václav Havel, who played a key role in advocating for human rights during the communist repression, was once asked what the new member states in the EU could do to pay back for all the economic support they had received from older member states. He replied that the European Union still suffers from the old European disease, namely the tendency to compromise with evil. And that the new members, who have a recent experience of totalitarianism, are obliged to take a more principled stance - sometimes necessary - and to monitor the European Union in this regard, and educate it.

The American computer scientist and cryptographer David Chaum said in 1996 that "[t]he difference between a bad electronic cash system and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we will have a dictatorship or a real democracy". If Václav Havel were alive today, he would likely share Chaum's sentiment. Indeed, on the current path of "de-cashing", we risk abolishing or limiting our liberties and rights, "including freedom of contract and freedom of ownership" - and this according to an economist at the IMF(!).

As the frog was unwittingly boiled alive, our freedoms are quietly being undermined. The temperature is rising. Will people take notice before our liberties are irreparably damaged?

[^1]: Transferable deposits are intermediated. Intermediated means payments involving one or several intermediares, like a bank, a card issuer or a payment processor. In contrast, a disintermediated payment would entail a direct transactions between parties without go-betweens, such as with cash.

@ 104f6f7d:220bf499

“He is free to make the wrong choice, but not free to succeed with it. He is free to evade reality, he is free to unfocus his mind and stumble blindly down any road he pleases, but not free to avoid the abyss he refuses to see.” - Ayn Rand

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: Shitcoinery

IPFS was advertised to the Ethereum community since the beggining as a way to "store" data for their "dApps". I don't think this is harmful in any way, but for some reason it may have led IPFS developers to focus too much on Ethereum stuff. Once I watched a talk showing libp2p developers – despite being ignored by the Ethereum team (that ended up creating their own agnostic p2p library) – dedicating an enourmous amount of work on getting a libp2p app running in the browser talking to a normal Ethereum node.

The always somewhat-abandoned "Awesome IPFS" site is a big repository of "dApps", some of which don't even have their landing page up anymore, useless Ethereum smart contracts that for some reason use IPFS to store whatever the useless data their users produce.

Again, per se it isn't a problem that Ethereum people are using IPFS, but it is at least confusing, maybe misleading, that when you search for IPFS most of the use-cases are actually Ethereum useless-cases.

See also

• Bitcoin, the only non-shitcoin

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Economics

Just a bunch of somewhat-related notes.

• notes on "Economic Action Beyond the Extent of the Market", Per Bylund
• Mises' interest rate theory
• Profits, not wages, as the originary factor
• Reisman on opportunity cost
• Money Supply Measurement
• Per Bylund's insight
• Maybe a new approach to the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, some disorganized thoughts
• An argument according to which fractional-reserve banking is merely theft and nothing else
• Conjecture and criticism
• Qual é o economista? (piadas)
• UBI calculations
• Donations on the internet

@ a6e6a54b:8aca70c6

Outline

1. Introduction.
2. Setting the Ground with Definitions: UFO, UAP and The Phenomenon.
3. About the Author: Luis Elizondo.
4. Skeptical Approach.
5. Non-Skeptical Approach.
6. Spiritual-Metaphysical Component of UAP.
7. Worldview Frameworks.
8. Making Sense of UAP.
9. The Stickiness of The Phenomenon.
10. Possibilities for UAP.
11. Spiritual-Metaphysical Beings.
12. Human Nature.
13. UAP Intentions.
14. Psyop Hypothesis.
15. Conclusions.
16. References.

From Lights in the Sky to the Fallen

Expanding the Conversation from Imminent by Luis Elizondo

### 1. Introduction

Man’s mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimensions. -Oliver Wendell Holmes.

During the past few years, there has been a resurgence of interest in the UFO-UAP topic. If you have been paying attention, you know by now that the phenomenon is real: there has been an acknowledgment of what people have been saying for years. However, if you are not aware of the current state of affairs, you might need to catch up. Imminent by Luis Elizondo [1] summarizes the latest events and his role in them. I think this book is not for UAP beginners, and I still consider myself as one. For this reason, it was not the book I was expecting, but it was the book I needed to challenge my approach to this topic. I had to make a mental shift in order to think about this issue more broadly. I will elaborate more on the challenges I faced later.

Luis “Lue” Elizondo explains his role as the Head of AATIP (Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program) run by the Pentagon and why he resigned due to the secrecy. As you can imagine, it is very difficult to make sense of someone else’s experiences, especially when they also involve the phenomenon. From my perspective, the book brings to the forefront yet another layer of this mystery —the spiritual and metaphysical component of UAP—, which is hard to process (it certainly was for me). I initially planned to write a review of the book, but I have decided instead that I will continue the conversation that Lue started, specifically about this aspect of UAP.

Keep in mind that whether you believe they live among us or think it is all nonsense, you may already have a strong bias that confirms your beliefs and dismisses any new information. This is part of what makes this topic so strange—most people seem to fall into one of two categories: either fully invested or completely indifferent. In my experience, the most common nuanced opinion among those who have not delved deeply into the subject but still want to appear open-minded is: “Of course, there are aliens somewhere in the universe, but it is ridiculous to think they have already visited us.” However, if you look closely at the discussions over the past few years, people are not necessarily talking about aliens visiting Earth—that is just one possibility being considered. I think claiming that aliens exist somewhere but have not shown up yet, and probably never will, is a comfort zone stance.

Furthermore, I am not inclined to convince anyone that this topic is relevant. But, if you already think that transparency is worth your time, then let’s think about the puzzle together!

Notes: 1. I think you should read the book, but if you prefer a summary and review of the key points made by Lue, I recommend watching Richard Dolan’s video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uazfN6CqUeQ. 2. I have been careful with the quotes I am sharing here. Having listened to several hours of Lue’s interviews and podcasts, I have only included quotes he has publicly discussed. 3.

---

2. Setting the Ground with Definitions: UFO, UAP and The Phenomenon

I want clarify the meanings of UFO, UAP and the phenomenon, as I understand them:

• UFO: Unidentified Flying Object. This is a well-known acronym, often associated with flying saucers. It carries a lot of stigma, taboo, and conspiracy theories. Because of the recent surge of interest in the topic, the term "UFO" is not as commonly used anymore; instead, most people now refer to UAP. Additionally, the term UFO does not encompass the full range of the phenomenon.

• UAP: Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena[^1]. It was previously defined as Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, but the phenomenon is not only aerial; it is transmedium (moving through air, space, and water—USO refers to Unidentified Submerged Object), and possibly transdimensional. Therefore, “anomalous” is a more accurate word, as it better captures the broader nature of the phenomenon.

• The Phenomenon: This is the core of the issue and what we are trying to understand. The way that I see it, the phenomenon involves the interaction[^2] between humans and a non-human intelligence, which may be more advanced than us. The elements of interaction include:

Objects: These are observed in the sky, in the ocean, or coming from outer space. Objects can also be inserted into the human body. Examples include crafts, lights, and drone-like objects. These objects may appear tangible or not.

Entities or Beings: These are sometimes seen near or inside the objects, or on their own. They may communicate messages through unusual means. Their origin is uncertain—whether material or metaphysical in nature.

To summarize:

From a human perspective, the interaction with the phenomenon can be both material—occurring through devices, human senses, and visible changes in the body with biological effects—and psychological. Even more puzzling is that the phenomenon may enclose what some refer to as paranormal activity[^3].

Whatever the phenomenon is, it seems to have both material and non-material components. So, when we talk about evidence (photos, videos, vehicles, etc.) we might only be seeing one side of the coin, not the whole picture. I am being very deliberate in using the terms material and non-material because I am referring to the materialistic interpretation of the universe. I will expand more about this later.

[^1]: As for the word "phenomena," I do not think it is necessary to use "UAPs" to refer to the plural form. However, it is very common to see “UAPs” used everywhere. I will just stick with "UAP" in this discussion. [^2]: If they are seen or detected, that counts as interaction. When I mentioned earlier that some people say that “life exists somewhere else in the universe”, they are missing the point. The life forms that might exist elsewhere, which we do not yet know about, are not interacting with humans. [^3]: Some suggest that a subset of what we call paranormal activity can be caused or related to the phenomenon. Therefore, in the end, certain instances of paranormal activity could have a material explanation.

---

3. About the Author: Luis Elizondo

Luis Elizondo was recruited as a senior intelligence officer to help establish counterintelligence and security for the Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications Program (AAWSAP), which later became the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). This program was focused on “unconventional technologies” (p. 6), “unusual phenomena” and investigated unidentified aircraft, specifically ones that seem to display beyond-next-generation technology and capabilities—what we now call unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAP, or what were long referred to as UFOs (p. 8).

Some interesting details discussed at the podcast Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal [2] include: * Lue still keeps his security clearance. * Lue’s book went through a year-long review process by the Pentagon, resulting in certain parts being redacted.

Due to these factors, some speculate that he could be a disinformation agent. However, I do not agree with this notion, as other whistleblowers[^4] have come forward and support some of Lue’s claims. Additionally, Lue’s coming out appears to have caused an internal struggle within the Pentagon. It is very confusing to say the least.

[^4]: Lue does not view himself as a whistleblower but rather as a “patriot”. The fact that he retains his security clearance and continues to work as a government consultant makes people wonder who is really behind this disclosure movement. He has stated that: I would never in a million years violate my security oath. The damage inflicted by people such as Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning and, later, Edward Snowden arguably did more harm than good. Yes, the truth got out, but people lost their lives, and intelligence was compromised in the process (p. 193).

In my opinion, the most important claim made by Lue is the following: Unidentified craft with beyond-next-generation technology—including the ability to move in ways that defy our knowledge of physics and to do so within air, water, and space—have been operating with complete impunity all over the world since at least World War II. These crafts are not made by humans. Humanity is in fact not the only intelligent life in the universe, and not the alpha species… While there are valid reasons for secrecy around some aspects of UAP, I do not think humanity should be kept in the dark about the fundamental fact that we are not the only intelligent life in the universe. The United States government and other major governments have decided its citizens do not have a right to know, but I could not disagree more. You might be thinking this all sounds crazy. I’m not saying it doesn’t sound crazy, I’m saying that it’s real (pp. 1-2).

---

4. Skeptical Approach

In seeking truth you have to get both sides of a story. -Walter Cronkite.

Before sharing my opinions, assuming that the claims made by Lue and others are true, I need to outline some of the reasons for skepticism about the information being presented (in his book and in general during this disclosure process):

1. Lack of evidence: Lue has not provided concrete evidence, only his personal testimony. The Pentagon denies his claims.

2. Quality of evidence: The evidence that is presented is often of poor quality: blurry pictures and out of context videos that could be anything.

3. Lue Elizondo’s Credentials: Right after the release of the book, there was considerable debate on #UFOTwitter regarding his position at AATIP.
4. Government secrecy: Many think that it is impossible for a government to keep a big secret like this one from the public for so many years. They argue that the cover-up and secrecy are just conspiracy theories.
5. Persistent Claims of Imminent Disclosure: Ufologists keep claiming, for decades, that disclosure is just about to happen any day now.
6. Questionable Sources: A lot of the reported encounters come from people who might be unstable, seeking attention, or trying to scam others. Even those who seem genuine might be misinterpreting what they experienced.

---

5. Non-Skeptical Approach

The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend. -Henri Bergson.

The goal here is not to focus on the skeptic view. I am well aware that one can just say “Show me the evidence”, and move on if no one points to anything convincing and irrefutable. Also, given the fact that there are many other relevant issues affecting our daily life—like inflation, climate change, geopolitical instability, wars, and surveillance— dedicating mental energy to the UAP issue seems like a waste of time. It is totally reasonable to set this discussion aside due to other priorities.

However, I think it is unfair to dismiss the UAP issue as unscientific, nonsense and full of fraudsters (and there are definitely some of those) without spending a decent amount of time trying to understand what it is really about before criticizing it. Ridiculing a subject you do not know much about and do not understand is not scientific. In my opinion, one of the best critics in this area is Dr. Michael Shermer^5. He is a well-known skeptic with a deep knowledge of various UFO cases, has read a vast amount of information and talked to experiencers and witnesses. I recommend following his work.

In the previous section, I mentioned that some people think it is impossible for a government to keep a big secret[^6] like this for so long. I agree with that perspective and it seems that whistleblowers are starting to come forward. Not just one, but several whistleblowers with military backgrounds have been sharing their stories. It is up for you to decide how trustworthy you think they are. They have appeared in interviews, podcasts and some have even testified before the US Congress. While it is possible that they could all be lying or working together, I am going to assume for now that this is not the case so I can focus on the information they are providing.

[^6]: Some people believe that if there was anything significant to the UAP issue, we would have seen it revealed in Wikileaks by now. Interestingly, the “Podesta emails” include exchanges between Tom DeLonge and John Podesta, both of whom are mentioned in the book because of their interest in the topic.

Sometimes it is important to state the obvious: if something is engaging humanity, we do not need any government to tell us whether it is real or not. As Dr. Avi Loeb^7, Head of the Galileo Project^8, puts it: The sky and oceans are not classified and we can survey them ourselves [3]. People all around the world have been sharing their experiences on this topic for years. Sure, some of these people might be fraudsters, attention seekers, or simply confused, but others might be recounting genuine experiences of events that truly happened to them (even if we do not agree on their nature). That is why the testimonies of whistleblowers who have encountered unusual phenomena during their military service are very significant. Their credibility and training to identify anomalies while staying objective make their accounts worth considering.

There are also people who have had more intriguing encounters with the phenomenon, often referred to as experiencers[^9]. If you’re a good listener, you might have heard some unusual stories from people you know, and you might even know someone who falls into this category. For those who might be unaware, experiencers do exist, and many of them choose to stay quiet. As Dr. Garry Nolan^10, Executive Director of the Sol Foundation^11, points out: I think that what [ridiculing] does is a disservice to people who come forward with stories because they have a double trauma, they have the trauma of seeing something they do not understand and doesn’t fit with their worldview, and then they have the trauma of everyone making fun of them [4]. [^9]: I think this term was originally reserved for abductees, but recently, I have heard it used more broadly to refer to anyone who has had an experience related to the phenomenon. So, I’ll use “experiencers” in this broader context.

---

6. Spiritual-Metaphysical Component of UAP

It is not the answer that enlightens but the question. -Eugène Ionesco.

Worldview Frameworks

To ensure we are all on the same page, let’s take a moment to discuss Materialism, which is the predominant worldview among scientists and philosophers for explaining the nature of reality.

Materialism holds that the universe is entirely physical and governed by the laws of physics.

Reductive Materialism refers to the notion that all mental states—such as emotions, beliefs, perceptions, desires—can be reduced to physical phenomena, hence, mental states correspond to physical states. Most Materialists identify with Reductive Materialism.

Eliminative Materialism takes a step further by suggesting that mental phenomena do not exist at all.

Mental phenomena is an interesting case of study because it seems to be something different. However, most scientists argue that mental states can be explained through materialistic means, suggesting, there is no need to postulate another substance[^12] or property. Nevertheless, consciousness does not seem to be reconciled in a materialistic way due to its subjective nature and we still lack a clear definition of it. This is one of science's greatest mysteries, sparking extensive debate among philosophers, psychologists, and neurologists. In recent decades, computer scientists have also joined the conversation, due to the advances in Artificial Intelligence. I mention this because, as we explore the unknown characteristics of the phenomenon later, some have proposed that moving beyond a materialistic interpretation might be necessary, especially since the phenomenon seems to interact directly with human consciousness.

[^12]: Cartesian dualism divides the world in two parts: the physical and the mental, leading us to the mind-body problem—how does the interaction occur? We have shifted toward a form of monism, assuming that the world is only made of physical stuff (materialism), thus dismissing the mind-body problem, by claiming that the mind is material (reductionism). However, phenomenal consciousness—the realm of subjective experiences or qualia—seems to escape materialism, drawing us back to reconsider dualism and other flavors of it. This scientific challenge has been famously formulated as the Hard Problem of Consciousness by the philosopher Dr. David Chalmers.

Professor Dr. Mark Harris, physicist and theologian, in his essay Faith and physics states that: Physics is widely said to have a unique ability to shine light on physical reality at its most fundamental level. But in order to do so, physicists must make many assumptions. Indeed, the widespread assumption that physics is the most fundamental of the natural sciences, and that all others relate to it, is a consequence of reductionism, a metaphysical belief which can’t itself be established empirically in any direct way. Moreover, whether theorists or experimentalists, most physicists assume a form of realism –in spite of the fact that quantum physics has led to various anti-realist challenges– and a strong belief in the uniformity of nature, that physical reality is systematic, regular and patterned everywhere, and that these patterns may be understood rationally (the idea that is often expressed as the ‘laws of nature/physics’). This requires reliance on physical models to explain or summarise observations. A model is effectively a scientific metaphor, or an analogy, a way of explaining something we don’t understand in terms of something we do… The next assumption is that the uniform patterns we think we see in nature, which we try to describe using models, are universal. This means that we can eliminate local variables. For instance, in an experiment we discard the vast array of data we observe which are not universally systematic in favour of those (usually much sparser) data that are. Note that this means that we inevitably bring theoretical expectations to the lab: we can’t perform an experiment without having a pre-conceived theoretical framework already in place. This is often summarised by the famous phrase of N. R. Hanson that, ‘All data are theory-laden’. In other words, our observations come with theoretical baggage which already goes some way towards interpreting them [5].

Hence, the scientific lenses through which we understand reality are also grounded in suppositions or metaphysical beliefs because we cannot prove: materialism, realism (reality exists independent of the observer), determinism and reductionism, and that all reality can be understood by rational means. These notions certainly help us effectively interpret, understand and predict the physical world we are familiar with. There is a common belief that if something appears to be outside this worldview, it is either because: 1) We have not yet discovered the scientific explanation for it, or 2) It simply does not exist. I find the first possibility compelling, as we should indeed strive to understand the world around us. However, if we encounter phenomena that truly[^13]defy scientific explanation and challenge our established notions of reality (such as the concept of God), dismissing them as non-existent might reflect a personal bias or attachment to a specific worldview rather than an objective search for truth. I do not think that we should just abandon ourselves to all possible explanations every chance we get, but if after a thorough examination of the issue following the scientific method we remain puzzled, maybe, it is time to consider alternative perspectives.

[^13]: We cannot be sure about this.

Making Sense of UAP

Once you find true knowledge, ignorance is no longer an option. And if the knowledge you find is unusual then strange becomes a way of life. -Thomas Campbell.

The UAP issue challenges our scientific understanding in two significant ways:

1. Behavior of UAP: The behavior of UAP do not align with our current understanding of physics. This discrepancy leads many to speculate that we might be encountering intelligence and technology far more advanced than our own. This idea often implies that these phenomena could originate from a more technologically advanced civilization, potentially from somewhere else in the universe. In this regard, Lue mentions the 6 observables that should be explained (p. 156): * Instantaneous acceleration. * Hypersonic velocity. * Low observability. * Transmedium travel. * Antigravity. * Biological effects. *

2. Interaction with Humans: The way experiencers describe their interactions with UAP could challenge our materialistic worldview. This aspect introduces what I refer to as the spiritual-metaphysical component.

When I used to think about the UAP issue, I never felt the need to consider anything beyond science. I was comfortable sticking to a materialistic interpretation of the world (although I do not subscribe to it as the ultimate explanation of reality), and this was reflected in my approach to the phenomenon—I would just ignore anything metaphysical. I was aware of some of the claims but they seemed too overwhelming to process. I also thought that once we understood ‘the observables’, we would be able to explain the rest. While I have not completely changed my perspective on how to study this topic, I am now open to the idea that we need to explore the spiritual-metaphysical side in parallel.

As I was reading and Lue mentioned Robert Bigelow^14 in the first few pages, I thought to myself “Oh no, please don’t go there…” But sure enough, he did touch on the paranormal aspects later in the book. I was disappointed and felt he might be making a mistake: if he wanted to draw attention to this topic from a broader audience, focusing only on concrete data—such as sensor readings, the capabilities of the crafts, and how they seem to defy our understanding of physics—would be more effective. Introducing the more unusual aspects of the topic might turn off physicists and the scientific community, potentially leading them to dismiss the discussion.

To be fair, Lue does not imply that the phenomenon cannot be explained materialistically and it is spiritual in nature. In fact, he references Arthur C. Clarke’s idea that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”, and he appears frustrated with the attitude of some Christian fundamentalists in government regarding this topic. But I will address this in more detail later.

I believe that Lue is intentional with his choice of words and the information he presents as he retains his security clearance. Early in the book, he mentions: Over time, my colleagues and I gained insight into how these mysterious UAP operate (p. 2). From this, I concluded: * He is signaling to a certain group. The book is not meant for beginners looking for a general overview of the UAP issue. * The spiritual-metaphysical aspect of the phenomenon is so significant that it cannot be ignored. * He may be an experiencer himself (he refers to personal experiences), and by acknowledging them, he is validating others, encouraging them to come forward.

Now that the spiritual-metaphysical part of this issue was brought front and center, I had to confront it as well, even though I had been mentally resisting it.

Remote Viewing and Orbs

Lue dedicates a whole chapter to remote viewing: Recruits were trained to spy upon enemies, but not in the usual way. Stargate trained “supersoldiers” to spy on hard targets using their psychic gifts. No, I am not kidding, this was an official US government program. They called the highly controversial technique “remote viewing.” The program, pioneered at Stanford University in the late 1960s, was led by none other than Hal Puthoff, whom I met at the dinner meeting I described earlier. Hal had been a Stanford University researcher and an employee of the NSA when he and his colleague Russell Targ were approached by the CIA and told that Russia had a remote-viewing program. The US needed to catch up and beat their efforts. That’s how it all started. Extrasensory perception had won over supporters in government who were initially dubious, then shocked that the technique worked. No one understood the mechanism. The CIA didn’t care why it worked; the only thing that mattered was that it did (p. 33). This whole story is really captivating but I was under the impression that it was unnecessary for the reader who is only interested to learn about UAP.

It turns out that Lue connects his involvement in AATIP to some unusual incidents that were occurring to him, his family and colleagues. He explains that they started seeing orbs in their homes: I was shocked to find that a lot of my colleagues and I began experiencing firsthand some of these orbs at our homes...The object behaved as if guided by some intelligence. It parked itself in the air, then drifted off down the hall before disappearing entirely (p. 68).

For those of you who do not know about orbs this is how he describes them: One of the most common types of UAP that are often reported is what we call orbs, which are small, luminous balls of light or, in some cases, smooth and metallic spheres. This is nothing new. In World War II, orbs were reported regularly in and around Allied and Axis aircraft, so much so that they were nicknamed “foo fighters” (p. 67). The orbs have been reported: by commercial pilots or military pilots or by eyewitnesses on the ground, particularly around military test ranges and sensitive US military facilities. This is not just a military phenomenon. Now, with the pervasiveness of home security systems and advancements in cell phone cameras, private civilians are capturing these orbs, just like the military is (p. 67). At this point, I was quite surprised because I remembered being part of a conversation with some colleagues in an academic setting where they expressed how much they would like to study orbs. I had no idea what orbs were, and I had never heard about them before, let alone their potential connection to UAP. Reading that chapter made a lot of things from that old conversation click into place. I wish I could go back and ask more questions about orbs, but they sounded too esoteric for my taste back then, and I was not in the right mindset to show genuine curiosity.

There is another interesting point he makes about orbs: The classification of these orbs really varies quite a bit. There are different colors and sizes; some of the colors reported were white, yellow, blue, red, and green. Reports I have seen suggested the blue orbs in particular had a very negative biological consequence, meaning if you got close to one of these, you could expect to be injured (p. 67). This example highlights that the phenomenon is not entirely harmless.

The way I see it, the connection between remote viewing and orbs in the book (not that these two are necessarily related) is that they might both be some kind of surveillance mechanism and ways to collect intel (this much information we have with remote viewing in a military context). This raises interesting questions about the nature of both remote viewing and orbs, as we venture into the blurry area between physics and metaphysics. I was under the impression that remote viewing was debunked, but Lue says that it works and is still used by the CIA, which does not care why it works but just that it does. What is going on here?

Stickiness of The Phenomenon

At the beginning of Lue’s involvement in UAP related work, he was warned that: “You should be prepared for the possibility that some of that strangeness will impact your personal life. These portfolios are sticky” (p. 12). Later, he linked this initial warning to his experience with orbs. I had heard about the Hitchhiker^15 effect but it took me a while to make the connection.

In a particularly eye-opening section of the conversation about Imminent in the podcast hosted by Post Disclosure World, the guests Christopher Sharp and James Iandoli, clearly highlight the concept of stickiness: If you engage with the phenomenon the phenomenon engages back. They raise an intriguing argument against widespread disclosure or confirmation of UAPs: There is this idea that we should not disclose because if we disclose that’s going to open a door for the phenomena to start engaging us in a much more proactive and unambiguous way. Do we want to all wake up at 3 am and see green orbs in our bedroom like Lue Elizondo and his family experience?[6]. Isn’t this a fascinating question?

There does seem to be a reactive aspect to the phenomenon. Personally, I lean towards the idea of transparency. After all, many of us have wondered whether we are alone in the universe and if human intelligence is the highest form. While the stickiness of the phenomenon might be a consequence of this new knowledge, we would eventually learn how to manage it. However, it is easier said than done. No one wants to live in fear, and this reactive part of the phenomenon appears to exacerbate that emotion. Additionally, in times of collective anxiety, there is always the risk of powers emerging “for our protection”—as Winston Churchill famously said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

On the other hand, how deeply do you need to engage with the topic for it to become sticky? I am not sure. I have not had any experience myself.

I have noticed a common pattern among those who have opened up to me about their experiences: they often express confusion, shame, and fear. Many of them wish to forget what happened to them entirely. None of the experiences shared so far have been described as positive or exciting. But I recognize I cannot draw broad conclusions.

Possibilities for UAP

We sometimes get all the information but we refuse to get the message. -Cullen Hightower.

This classification is where things start to get even stranger. Physicist Dr. Harold Puthoff (mentioned several times by Lue), in his paper titled “Ultraterrestrial Models”, published in the Journal of Cosmology, states: It is currently unknown whether the phenomenon is exclusively extraterrestrial, extradimensional, crypto-terrestrial, demonic/djinn, proto/ancient human, time-travelers, etc., or some combination or mutation of any or all of these. However, it appears highly likely that the phenomenon per se is not constituted exclusively of members of the current human population [7]. At this point, I do not even want to speculate on what we are dealing with. The current information available to the public makes it almost impossible to even guess.

Professor Dr. Kevin Knuth[^16], physicist and member of the Advisory Board of the Sol Foundation, in his podcast appearance with the Scientific Coalition for UAP studies shares his thoughts to the very interesting question: How do you empirically study something where the very definition of just kind of a question mark, we don’t know what it is, it’s a phenomenon, it’s a thing, it's an object in the traditional sense at all? [Answer]: The first thing we need to do is to develop some kind of taxonomy. We need to come up with a way to classify things whether it's based on appearance, behavior and situation… We are faced with the difficulty in that there is a stigma attached to one of the hypotheses of what some of these things might be: the extraterrestrial hypothesis, which to me I don’t actually see very unlikely anymore, I think that’s actually very probable. But once you develop some kind of taxonomy then you can start to tease apart what you’re looking at and what you’re trying to study. These things aren’t clearly not all alien spacecraft: some of them are weather balloons, atmospheric phenomena that we don’t know anything about, pictures of birds…. It’s a very interesting and complicated problem, there is a lot to be discovered here. They are not just one thing… I’ll sometimes joke, I’m only interested in the ones that are craft, you cannot always tell which ones are craft and which ones aren’t, it’s not that simple…. We’re in a position where we really don’t know much at all and it really is smart to keep all the hypotheses on the table: the natural phenomena, the craft phenomena, the extraterrestrial hypothesis, the ultraterrestrial hypothesis, time travelers (from the past and future). There’s a lot of possibilities and there could be several of these hypotheses being true, which can be confounding and it'll be difficult to sort things out [8].

[^16]: https://www.albany.edu/physics/faculty/kevin-knuth https://thesolfoundation.org/people/

I know I mentioned things were getting weird, but now they are about to get even weirder. Lue recounts a conversation that left him stunned: “Lue, you know we already know what these things are, right?” …“It’s demonic,” he said to me. “There is no reason we should be looking into this. We already know what they are and where they come from. They are deceivers. Demons.” I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. This was a senior intelligence official putting his religious beliefs ahead of national security. (p. 84, 85). I guess you are not disappointed by how bizarre things have become with this twist.

I was not entirely surprised by this interpretation. I agree with Lue that a senior officer’s religious beliefs should not be more important than national security. The real question is whether this officer arrived at this conclusion purely based on his religious beliefs, or if there is additional information that is being withheld from the public and from special agents like Lue, who were investigating this topic from within the government.

Spiritual-Metaphysical Beings

Believe those who are seeking truth. Doubt those who find it. -André Gide.

Tucker Carlson shared his views, and it is worth noting his perspective because of his significant influence on public discourse. In this conversation he appears with another important public figure, Joe Rogan. Also, what Carlson says is how I expect many people to react and interpret the nature of the entities associated with the phenomenon.

Carlson says: They are spiritual beings, it’s a binary, they are either team good or team bad… The template that you’re using to understand this is, science fiction or an advanced race of beings from somewhere else but the template that every other society before us has used is the spiritual one. There is a whole world that we can’t see that acts on people, the supernatural world, it’s acting on us all the time for good and bad. Every society has thought this before ours, in fact, every society in all recorded history has thought that until, I'll be specific, August 1945 when we dropped the atom bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and all of the sudden the West is just officially secular, we’re God, there is no God but and that’s the world we have grown up. But, that’s an anomaly, no one else has ever thought that… Once you discard your very recent assumptions about how the world works, well, that kind of seems like the obvious explanation [9]. I applaud Carlson for openly talking about this, especially bringing up the spiritual beings interpretation. However, amidst the confusion, we should apply caution when listening to people who emphatically tell us with certainty what they are.

On the other hand, Dr. Avi Loeb expresses his stance on this discussion: Shawn asked whether I believe that UAPs have a spiritual component. I explained that spirituality or consciousness are likely an emergent phenomenon of complex systems, like the human brain and advanced AI systems. Their behavior is difficult to predict because they have a large number of degrees of freedom and are influenced by input from uncontrolled environments. Whether there are intelligent UAPs remains to be documented by the Galileo Project. If such UAPs exist, I would add psychologists to our research team, because they are trained to deal with intelligent systems [3].

We can analyze the nature of these beings from different angles: 1. Non-Materialistic Point of View: I have not gone into a deep level of study of the UAP beings —commonly known as aliens—but I have heard people talk about these entities. They seem to be embodied although their appearances vary. When they interact with humans, some people report both physical and psychological effects, such as body marks, paralysis, telepathic communication, missing time, memory loss, and fear. This does not suggest they are intrinsically spiritual beings, such as angels and demons (the fallen ones) from the Bible. These entities seem to have a dual nature. But one could argue that angels and demons are spiritual in essence and they also have the ability to materialize, and this observation would lead us into theological territory. This shows how easy things get messy when trying to relate something unknown with something else that we think we know. 2. Materialistic Point of View: Let’s forget all the spiritual stuff and demons, nothing of that exists, and even if it does, these entities could just be material. In this case I would say pretty much what Lue keeps repeating “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”. Maybe these creatures have learned how to access our consciousness in a way that we do not even think it is possible.

In my opinion, we are dealing with a mix of different types of entities although I cannot say anything about their ontology. I would not rule out the spiritual beings, demons, or dual nature entities interpretation. For those who have experienced encounters with these beings, sharing their experiences is crucial so we can gather enough data to better understand and categorize them[^17]. But unfortunately, there is always the fear of ridicule. We need to understand what is and isn’t part of the phenomenon. I would also like to hear what other religions and traditions think.

[^17]: Esoteric groups have already developed some taxonomy, but the information they have gathered falls into the category of revelation (by the beings themselves) rather than an accumulation of data.

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. -Albert Einstein.

For example, Dr. John E. Mack^18, a renowned psychiatrist from Harvard who tragically passed away in a car accident in 2004, made significant contributions to the field. I first encountered his work through a documentary about the Ariel School UFO landing. Dr. Mack was deeply interested in speaking with the children who witnessed this traumatic event and sought to understand it. His book, Abduction, explores UFO abductions and encounters with these beings. It is important to point out that he was also a well-regarded expert on nightmares.

In an interview, journalist Ralph Blumenthal^19, who wrote a biography about Dr. Mack titled The Believer, noted that Dr. Mack's research highlighted fundamental differences between experiences of the "old hag syndrome" and UFO abductions. The former often involves reports of an evil presence that sits on the bed and causes suffocation, while abductees typically describe being given information telepathically and undergoing medical procedures.

Although these accounts are disturbing, they provide valuable insights by helping us distinguish between similar but distinct experiences. However, the question of the ontology of these beings and their origins still remains unresolved. Blumenthal adds: What are we to draw from this? Well, first of all, there is a whole kind of anomalous experiences that seem to operate in a world that we do not recognize, another reality, that penetrates our world, as John Mack said, somehow, in ways we can’t explain, we have a clear idea of reality, we think we do; reality is what you can see, smell, taste, and touch, knock on the table, feel it... So maybe there are other dimensions, aspects to the universe that we don’t understand” [10]. In addition, Professor Dr. Garry Nolan, whom I mentioned earlier, says the following: It’s interesting, religions have been dealing with extra dimensions and non-human intelligences for centuries: angels and demons, the spirits of the forest, the jinn of the Quran, etc. Where is heaven and hell? It’s another dimension. Are heaven and hell even in the same dimension? Are they different places altogether? Religion struggled with these ideas and the human mind can already encompass the possibility that they exist and had done so since the most primitive of men. That’s amazing to me [4].

This naturally leads us to ask: Are these realities and dimensions “real”? And more importantly, What do we understand by “real”?

About experiencers, Lue expresses that: In the end, abductees report feeling that these beings did not care one way or another if they lived or died. Many experiencers reported feeling completely vulnerable, helpless, and afraid. As a former special agent, if a witness reported being whisked away against their will, I would consider that an act of kidnapping, a federal crime. And if the witness said they were touched against their will, I would consider that assault, yet another crime in human terms (p. 173). I totally agree with Lue on his opinion right here.

I now think it is a mistake to rely solely on physicists, astronomers, and engineers for answers, yet that is where most people tend to focus. The phenomenon we are dealing with is not just about lights in the sky, mysterious crafts, or extraterrestrial beings. The problem is far more complex, and narrowing the scope to only the physical aspects limits our understanding. To fully grasp what is happening, we need insights from a much broader range of perspectives—psychologists, psychiatrists, philosophers, theologians, heads of different religions, anthropologists, and historians. Each of these fields offers a piece of the puzzle, whether it is understanding human consciousness, exploring ancient interpretations of similar phenomena, or delving into the spiritual implications. It is only by bringing together all of these viewpoints that we can begin to form a more complete picture of the UAP phenomenon.

Human Nature

When the student is ready, the teacher will appear. Ancient Buddhist proverb.

I also believe that we need to start looking inwards and understand our true nature—what makes us humans.

1. *Materialistic Point of View: We have the poetic words of the physicist Sean Carroll, PhD: I want to argue that, though we are part of a universe that runs according to impersonal underlying laws, we nevertheless matter. This isn’t a scientific question — there isn’t data we can collect by doing experiments that could possibly measure the extent to which a life matters. It is at heart a philosophical problem, one that demands that we discard the way that we’ve been thinking about our lives and their meaning for thousands of years. By the old way of thinking, human life couldn’t possibly be meaningful if we are “just” collections of atoms moving around in accordance with the laws of physics. That’s exactly what we are, but it is not the only way of thinking about what we are. We are collections of atoms, operating independently of any immaterial spirits or influences, and we are thinking and feeling people who bring meaning into existence by the way we live our lives* [11].
2. Non-Materialistic Point of View: Professor Mattias Desmet, PhD, expert on the Theory of Mass Formation expresses that: Young science, too, starts from a belief that the object being studied can be fully understood by means of logical reasoning. Facts are logical—how could they not be? However, the further the logical analysis of the phenomenon under investigation is carried, the more clearly one sees the emergence of a core that is intrinsically illogical and inaccessible to the human mind. And just like with a child, that moment gives rise to an awareness of the relativity of all logic as well as a heightened sensitivity to forms of language that don’t aim to be logically understood but lead to a more direct affinity, to resonance with the object (poetry, mysticism, etc.). In the same way, man also has to come to know himself as a psychological being, as a confluence of subjective experiences, thoughts, feelings, especially as they arise in relations with others. The ability to sense one’s own experience and to put it into words and to express it in relation to another is what constitutes the core of our existence as human beings… we exist as human beings when we can give something of our individuality to another through full speech—a kind of speaking in which something of the human being we are vibrates and resonates. It is through the art of full speech—which is the art learned, for example, in psychoanalytic therapy—that we are able to realize a real connection with others and the world around us (without thereby losing ourselves) [12].

If we truly understand who we are and how it feels to relate to each other in our human form, I think that we would be able to recognize what is not us and perhaps discern what kind of entity or intelligence is trying to engage with us. However, if we do not fully grasp our own humanity and the ways in which we are interconnected, how can we even begin to comprehend a non-human intelligence that might be more advanced than we are?

One of the most intriguing insights we have so far about the phenomenon is the possibility that this intelligence is reactive. This is one of the reasons why we need to start talking about our experiences with it. We may be part of a transformational process without even realizing it, and I also believe that this intelligence is being affected by our interaction—it is a two-way street. This is, of course, speculation.

For example, in the Christian worldview, Jesus was a non-human intelligence that transfigured His divinity when He adopted human form, altering His essence through His humanity and interactions with people. He is now both God and human. So, how are we planning to influence this other intelligence?

This process of understanding who we are and our purpose in the universe is entirely subjective, and/or revealed. This is a different kind of knowledge, —more like wisdom—, and, in my opinion, it cannot come from science. How could it? This is why I am now more inclined to consider the phenomenon from perspectives beyond the scientific. The wisdom and knowledge humanity has acquired over thousands of years will be crucial when addressing this subject.

---

7. UAP Intentions

Lue begins his book by discussing the Colares UAP case in Brazil during the 1970s. If you research about what happened you will see that the phenomenon engaged with humans in a very harmful way. This contradicts the belief held by some in the UFO community that these entities are here to help humanity. This belief is often linked to numerous reports of sightings near nuclear weapon sites and facilities, with the suggestion that they are trying to warn us about the dangers of nuclear technology. Moreover, Lue also talks about a case in 1982 in Ukraine: UAP flew over Byelo Air Base in the former Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Seconds later, the launch sequence for the base’s missiles switched on without any human ever entering the launch codes. Operators frantically rushed to shut the system down but could not. When the launch sequence reached its very last rung, it shut down of its own accord (p. 54). Moreover, he says that: “Adults taking matches out of the hands of children,” some say. That’s a nice hopeful thought, but reality has proven us incorrect. At no time have UAP stopped our nuclear ambitions. As examples: They did not stop us from dropping atomic bombs on Japan. UAP did not stop us from making the leap from atomic to nuclear weapons. UAP did not stop the disasters at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, or Fukushima. UAP did not stop the proliferation of nuclear technology from getting into the hands of more nations. Most recently, UAP have not interfered with North Korean, Indian, or Pakistani nuclear testing. And switching on nuclear missiles? That is not so benevolent (pp. 54-55).

Also, Lue on multiple occasions throughout the book expresses his concerns about national security: Humanity acts as if no one else is watching us, like we are alone. But a more advanced intelligent life is likely observing us. Humanity needs to become more aware of our place in the universe and the potential consequences of our actions. Regardless of their motivation, if this tech is cracked by another nation-state with bad intentions it will be an existential threat to our nation and the planet as a whole. Those are the urgent national security concerns and urgent concerns for humanity at large (pp. 168-169).

Regarding national security, I do not believe we have enough information to assign benevolent or malevolent intentions to UAP yet. Additionally, if this is a non-human intelligence, we cannot necessarily think about it in terms of human-like intentions or motivations aimed at accomplishing a specific purpose.

That being said, I appreciate the fact that someone who was in charge of studying UAP from a national security perspective, shares his concerns and makes evaluations based on his background and experience. UAP should be closely monitored. I believe that the US Congress has already briefed on this matter specifically, and they are requesting yearly reports.

---

8. Psyop Hypothesis

To test a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. F. Scott Fitzgerald.

We are facing a trust crisis.

A frequent argument among UAP skeptics is that the recent surge of interest in this topic could be part of a psyop (psychological operation), with the ultimate goal of instilling fear in the population to justify increased surveillance and control. This is a valid point, I have been thinking about this a lot. While I personally believe that the phenomenon is real and engaging with humans, I could also see a scenario where the phenomenon could be exploited—weaponized, even—with half-truths to serve nefarious purposes.

The pressing question then becomes: How can we discern what is real from manipulation?

After reflecting on the book, now I believe that bringing up the spiritual-metaphysical component of the phenomenon was a clever move. At the beginning I thought it was a total mistake, but I have changed my mind. If the phenomenon is used by a government or an elite group for control and manipulation, they would need a common narrative that influences people’s behavior and convinces them that they know and possess ‘the truth’. This approach might work for the material component of the phenomenon but clearly not for the spiritual-metaphysical side. What could be more diverse than people’s spiritual and metaphysical beliefs (and non-beliefs)?

If we start talking to one another about the strange experiences related to UAP, asking for opinions about their meaning and nature, and even disagreeing on interpretations, then two things could happen: 1) Through the process of open discourse, we are more likely to approach the truth, and 2) It becomes much harder for a powerful group to control the narrative. Even if such a group possesses hard evidence and attempts to use certain elements of truth to steer the public toward a specific outcome, open discussion could counteract that influence.

Regarding evidence, there is always an element of trust involved. Imagine that we are finally shown, by “official channels”, a vehicle displaying non-human capabilities: What would convince you that it is “real” and not fabricated to provoke a reaction? Who would need to validate the evidence for you to believe it? The government? Which government (don’t they all have secret programs)? Independent scientists? Scientists affiliated with institutions or organizations? And what kind of institutions or organizations are truly trustworthy?

I believe that a government or elite group can never have control of what is most intimate to a human: their subjective experiences and the meaning they attach to them which is an individual process. This is why we should not allow a particular faith, tradition, or worldview to dominate or lead the discourse related to the spiritual-metaphysical aspects of the phenomenon. Even if you believe there is no such component, you should still have a voice. This is what we, the people, can control—because we are not the ones trying to reverse-engineer retrieved craft in our backyard, but we may have an intuition about the kind of intelligence we might be dealing with. Therefore, we need to start having these conversations, open to all hypotheses, so when disclosure happens (if it does), whether real or fake, it will not catch us off guard.

---

9. Conclusions

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. -Niels Bohr.

Lue was a human who found himself in a very strange position. His decision to come forward has been complicated to digest because he is not the usual whistleblower we are used to seeing. Unlike many, he still retains his security clearance and speaks carefully, only about what is not classified. This unique position makes Lue different from typical whistleblowers. Even for those who are not interested in the UAP topic, Lue argues that it is still worth considering how taxpayer money is being used and whether resources are being properly allocated to investigate these sightings and encounters. Whether or not you are personally invested in this subject, the implications for national security and public accountability are real concerns that deserve attention. By coming forward, Lue has opened up a wide range of discussions, not only about the nature of the UAP phenomenon itself but also about the role of transparency in government and the public’s right to know.

Personally I find this topic fascinating. There are many angles to explore and here I chose to focus on the dual nature of the phenomenon, with special attention to the spiritual-metaphysical component. I understand this can also be frightening given all the possibilities we are faced with when considering the phenomenon’s nature. I have faith in humanity, and whatever we find on the other side, I am sure we can handle it. Moreover, during this time of many questions and very few answers, we should learn to embrace the discomfort of not knowing.

Despite the fear of the unknown, there is also the potential for great discoveries. If we are to fully engage with the phenomenon, we have to address not just the external mystery, but also the internal one: it seems like the phenomenon interacts with us on a deeply personal and psychological level, challenging our established ideas about the nature of reality. Understanding ourselves might be a crucial step toward understanding whatever this phenomenon represents because we are the ones extracting meaning. Maybe it is not just about figuring out what the phenomenon is, but why it engages us in the way it does—and that starts with a deeper exploration of our own human experience.

If this topic resonates with you, there are many ways to keep the conversation going: ask others for their thoughts, share your own experiences, and explore the multiple perspectives surrounding the issue. The more we talk openly about UAPs, the harder it will be for any narrative—governmental or otherwise—to control our reactions. This is not just about the phenomenon; it is about our collective right to transparency, understanding, and the courage to face the unknown together as a species.

There are many topics I would have liked to cover, and I know I am only scratching the surface of what has been discussed for years—but at last, I have arrived.

---

10. References

[1] Elizondo, Luis. Imminent: Inside the Pentagon's Hunt for UFOs: the Former Head of the Program Responsible for Investigating UAPs Reveals Profound Secrets (p. 19). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

[2] Pentagon’s UFO investigator breaks two year silence:

[3] For the Love of the Unfamiliar by Avi Loeb: https://avi-loeb.medium.com/for-the-love-of-the-unfamiliar-9d9a7612bd8e

[4] Garry Nolan on UFOs, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Eric Weinstein:

[5] Pritchard, Duncan; Harris, Mark. Philosophy, Science and Religion for Everyone (pp. 17-18). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

[6] Elizondo’s Imminent Round Table:

[7] Ultraterrestrial Models by H. E. Puthoff, Ph.D.: https://thejournalofcosmology.com/Puthoff.pdf

[8] Kevin Knuth on Studying Scientific Anomalies, Simulating Star Systems, & Possible UAP Origins:

[9] When Tucker Carlson Changed His Mind on Aliens:

[10]: The Harvard Psychiatrist Obsessed with Alien Abduction:

[11]Existential Therapy from the Universe: Physicist Sean Carroll on How Poetic Naturalism Illuminates Our Human Search for Meaning: https://www.themarginalian.org/2016/05/31/sean-carroll-the-big-picture/

[12] Desmet, Mattias. The Psychology of Totalitarianism (p. 223, pp. 225-226). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

@ df478568:2a951e67

One way to mitigate the risk of a Password breach is to stop using passwords and start using randomly generated passphrases. A passphrase is a combination of words. A good example can be found on the EFF dice words website. For most applications, they suggest using 6 words randomly chosen by rolling 5 dice. Each word has a corresponding combination of 5 numbers from. 1-6. In other words, they are generated by dice(That's D6 dice for all the nerds out there)Here is an example of a strong passphrase that is easy to memorize.

pacifist-area-unfiled-demeaning-rundown-oblivion

It would take a computer about 200 ocrodecillion years to brute force this passphrase so it is highly unlikely to get cracked before the sun goes all supernova.

Here's how it works: - Step 1: roll 5 dice

• Step 2: Find the coresponding word: In this example, our dice rolls are 2-6-1-3-1
• Step 3: Find the coresponding word in the eff dice roll list:
• Repeat this 6 times.
• Step 4: Write this down on paper. I like waterproof paper made by Rite in the Rain. This is not an affiliate link. I don't make any money off of them. I just like them because they are waterproof and easy to hide. You can also etch the password on military grade steel.
• Step 5: Use this password password for your passphrase manager like Vaultwarden.

Each character is really a binary number so your passphrase is just a big random number to the computer. This number is hashed with SHA256 or something. If you're really smart, you can calculate this with a pencil and paper, but I use computers and calculators. Xorbin is one of the easier tools, but this can be done in bash using the hash library too. Be aware, typing an actual passphrase you use into any website might be a phishing scam. Don't try to use this for anything you are worried about losing.

Here is the hash we get from the 6 words above:

a41c5312e2957462f9f81597088c1c943c11e864b462cddf49dc55145707b69a

Sweet, Sweet Salt

![salt](https://i.nostr.build/cItICfrhGB7xO5mH.png

This hash is stored on a server, and most passwords add salt these days, at least I hope they do. If we add the word salt at the end. We get this hash:

4a66e2aa58a54d10dd8121bc3e044f57535ed29155115ad75267cca05fb749a2

This is because changing one character in a hash drastically alters the output. If you sha256sum my full name, you'll get this hash:

` '0024f0a28bf81851ed8490c4e87173f8790bd9d8ea9423442114d25ad7137f51'

Check out those two hashcash like leading zeros!

If we append my name with 1, the hash becomes:

e418ca6ef08c88613da1a131d1991de10982249df94081dabce2b4d2ab72cbb2

It's totally different! I wish math in high school was this fun.

The actual passphrase or password is not actually stored on the server. That would be a honeypot. There are lists of hashs of pwned passwords. So if your password is Password123

Any hacker worth his salt would know if they had access to the hash of that passwo4rd:

008c70392e3abfbd0fa47bbc2ed96aa99bd49e159727fcba0f2e6abeb3a9d601

See those sexy leading hex zeros again?

The server added some salt to this password, a black hat hacker wouldn't easily recognize the horrible password, "Password123". It offers a little protection, but this is still very easy to brute force so you still don't want to use it.

I'm Too Lazy To Roll Dice And Can't Remember 10,000 Passphrases?

I don't roll dice for every passphrase. Ain't nobody got time for that. I also don't remember the passphrase to every website I sign up for. That's why I recomend usin a use a password manager like vaultwarden VaultWarden). If you don't want to hassle with running your own server, bitwarden does the same thing. Last I checked, they only charged $10.00 a year for the premium plan, but it might have changed. They both allow you to: - Create passwords and passphrases. - Add special characters, numbers and capital letters. - Check if your password was pwned.

For example, "password1" was breached 3,339,722 times. If this is your password, you might want to change it.

"Blink-182" was breached 1,810 times. This password would meet most policies. It has a capital letter, special character and a 3 numbers. Where did we go wrong? Blink 182 is a popular punk band. Of course 1,810 people and one hacker thought of this. Think your safe if you change a number? Think again. "Blink-183" was pwned 16 times. Changing the numbers are also not a good idea due to possible dictionary attacks.

I run my VaultWarden using Start9 and it is also available on Umbrel and Yunohost

Let's try our six word passphrase we created earlier.

"pacifist-area-unfiled-demeaning-rundown-oblivion"

This password was not found in any breaches. It should be safe to use. Well...except I put it on the clear net, but you get the idea.

Other Risks

Okay, we have a strong password, but that's not the only threat. A bad guy could trick us with a spear phishing attack or someone installs a keylogger onto our computer. Now what do we do? Be prepared like a boyscout. This is where it's a good idea to use 2fa or two-factor authentication. I like Aegis There are others like Google Authenticator or physical devices like YubiKeys, but I like Aegis becauseyou can create backups. YubiKeys were cool, but this happened and I'm not sure if that's been resolved yet.

Securing your login with 2fa means one password us an insufficient amount of information to gain access to your account. The attacker would need to pwn the password and your phone to gain access. While not impossible, this is much more difficult.

Here's a Dad joke created by the Duck Duck Go's free AI chatbot.

`Why did the password go to therapy?

Because it was feeling a little "insecure".`

✌️ https://marcleon.work/pgp

862,887

@ 502ab02a:a2860397

เมื่อกรดซิตริก (citric acid) ที่จริงแล้วไม่ได้ทำมาจากผลไม้

เราเรียนรู้กันมาเราค้นกูเกิลกันมา ว่ากรดซิตริกนั้นเป็นกรดธรรมชาติ มีอยู่ในผลไม้รสเปรี้ยวต่างๆ แล้วมันก็ถูกนำมาใช้เป็นสารป้องกันการบูดเน่าจากธรรมชาติ โดยกรดซีตริกเกิดขึ้นครั้งแรกนั้นคือเมื่อปีค.ศ. 1784 โดยแยกออกมาจากน้ำมะนาว แต่ในปัจจุบัน กรดซิตริกไม่ใช่สูตรนี้ครับ

ที่ผมมีข้อมูลอยู่นั้น สามารถให้คำตอบได้ว่า

นั่นเพราะว่าราวๆปี 1917 บริษัท Pfizer ได้จ้างนักเคมีอาหารชื่อ เจมส์ เคอรี่ James Currie ที่มีแนวคิดฉีกทุกกรอบว่า จะทำการผลิตกรดซิตริก โดยไม่ใช้มะนาวแม้แต่ลูกเดียว คุณเคอรี่ ค้นพบว่าเชื้อราสีดำที่ชื่อว่า Aspergillus niger สามารถเปลี่ยนน้ำตาล ให้เป็นกรดซิตริกได้ ทำให้ Pfizer ออกจำหน่ายสินค้าตัวนี้ในปี 1919 เป็นต้นมา

ในปัจจุบัน กว่า 99% ของกรดซิตริกที่มีขายนั้นเราเรียกว่า manufactured citric acid (MCA) นั่นคือ มันไม่ใช่ของธรรมชาตินั่นเองครับ คุ้นๆไหม ที่ผมเคยบอกเรื่องสารให้ความหวาน ไม่ว่าจะ อิริททริทอล แอลลูโลส สารพัดโอสๆ และอื่นๆอีกมากมาย เราจะได้รับการขายของว่า มีอยู่ในธรรมชาติ บลา บลา บลา โดยที่จริงแล้วที่เราได้มาเป็นกระสอบนั้นไม่ได้มาจากธรรมชาติ แต่มาจากการเร่งให้เกิดปริมาณมากๆเพื่อเอามาขาย ซึ่งไม่เป็นธรรมชาติโดยสิ้นเชิง

MCA นี่ก็เช่นกันครับ เชื้อรา Aspergillus niger ซึ่งส่วนใหญ่ผลิตจากเชื้อราสายพันธุ์ที่ผ่านการดัดแปลงพันธุกรรม (GMO) เอาไปหมักน้ำตาล โดยทั่วไปจะเลี้ยงมันด้วย high fructose corn syrup ที่มีอยู่มากมายและราคาถูกๆ

ก็แน่นอนครับว่าเวลาเราเห็นคำว่ากรดซิตริก เราก็จะนึกถึงรสเปรี้ยวๆ รูปมะนาวสวยๆ cute cute แต่จริงๆแล้วในโรงงานผลิตมันตรงกันข้ามเลยครับ ในการผลิตเราจะได้เห็น ของเหลวหนืดๆเหนียวๆ มีตะกอนสีเข้มๆ ที่เกิดจากการหมักในถังสเตนเลส ข้างในนั้นเป็นส่วนผสมของ เชื้อรา น้ำตาลอุตสาหกรรมโคตรๆ( hyper-refined sugars) บางครั้งก็มีการยิงรังสีแม่เหล็กไฟฟ้าเพื่อให้ความร้อนด้วย

ได้รับการรับรองว่าเป็นออแกนิก ???

และเชื่อหรือไม่ว่า มันได้รับการรับรองว่าเป็นออแกนิก แม้กรดซิตริกจะไม่ได้มาจากแหล่งธรรมชาติแท้จริงเพราะผลิตผ่านกระบวนการหมักที่ใช้เชื้อราดำ GMO (Aspergillus niger GMO) ซึ่งมักใช้ข้าวโพดที่ผ่านการดัดแปลงพันธุกรรม (GMO) เป็นวัตถุดิบในการผลิต ด้วยเหตุผล 2 ข้อคือ

1. มาตรฐานการรับรองที่แตกต่างกัน: องค์กรรับรองออร์แกนิกทั่วโลกมีหลายพันองค์กร แต่ละองค์กรมีเกณฑ์ที่แตกต่างกันในเรื่องคุณภาพและความเข้มงวดในการตรวจสอบแหล่งที่มาของวัตถุดิบ โดยบางแห่งอาจใช้แบบสอบถาม ถามผู้ผลิตว่าใช้กรดซิตริกที่มีส่วนผสมของ GMO หรือไม่
2. การจัดประเภทว่าเป็น Non-GMO: ผู้ผลิตกรดซิตริกจากเชื้อราดำมักจะระบุว่ากรดซิตริกที่ผลิตได้นั้นเป็น Non-GMO เนื่องจากผลผลิตสุดท้ายไม่มีสารพันธุกรรมจาก GMO ที่สามารถตรวจพบได้ ถึงแม้ว่ากระบวนการผลิตจะเริ่มจากวัตถุดิบที่มาจากข้าวโพด GMO หรือเชื้อราที่ถูกดัดแปลงพันธุกรรมโดยการใช้รังสีความร้อน (thermo-radiation) หรือการดัดแปลง DNA ของเชื้อรานั้นก็ตาม

ถึงกระบวนการผลิตกรดซิตริกนี้จะไม่เป็นธรรมชาติและใช้วัตถุดิบที่เกี่ยวข้องกับ GMO แต่มันสามารถได้รับการรับรองออร์แกนิกได้ เนื่องจากไม่มีการตรวจพบสารพันธุกรรมจาก GMO ในผลิตภัณฑ์สุดท้ายที่จะจำหน่าย ทำให้กรดซิตริกนี้สามารถเข้าสู่ตลาดอาหารออร์แกนิกได้โดยไม่ผิดกฎ และหน่วยงานที่ให้การรับรองใบเซอร์ ออแกนิก เจ้าไหนที่ต้องการให้ใช้ MCA ได้นี่ก็เพียงระบุคำว่า "ไม่สามารถตรวจจับ DNA ที่มีแหล่งกำเนิดจาก GMO ได้" ไว้ในเอกสารก็จะทำให้แบรนด์สินค้าได้รับการรับรอง ออแกนิกได้สบายๆ

ได้รับสถานะ GRAS??

เนื่องจากกรดซิตริกมีการผลิตขึ้นมาใช้ก่อนที่สำนักงานคณะกรรมการอาหารและยา (FDA) จะจัดตั้งขึ้น กรดซิตริกจึงได้รับสถานะ GRAS (หมวด “โดยทั่วไปถือว่าปลอดภัย”) แม้ว่าจะยังไม่มีการทดสอบทางวิทยาศาสตร์ใดๆ เกี่ยวกับการบริโภคในมนุษย์ในระยะยาวก็ตาม เจ๋งเนอะ

ผลข้างเคียงจากรา Aspergillus niger

ในปี ค.ศ. 2016 มีการผลิต MCA จำนวน 2.3 ล้านตัน โดยส่วนใหญ่ผลิตในประเทศจีน และประมาณ 70% ใช้เป็นสารเติมแต่งอาหารหรือเครื่องดื่ม ยังไม่มีการศึกษาวิจัยทางวิทยาศาสตร์ใดๆ ที่ดำเนินการเพื่อประเมินความปลอดภัยของ MCA เมื่อรับประทานเข้าไปในปริมาณมากและเป็นเวลานาน (อีกแล้ว เหมือนเดิมเป๊ะ)

เชื้อรา Aspergillus nigerเกี่ยวข้องกับปัญหาการอักเสบของระบบต่างๆ รวมถึงระบบทางเดินหายใจ ระบบทางเดินอาหาร ระบบประสาท และกล้ามเนื้อและโครงกระดูก ดังนั้นหาก เชื้อรา Aspergillus niger เกิดมีเศษเล็กเศษน้อย ดันแทรกซึมเข้าไปในผลิตภัณฑ์กรดซิตริกสำเร็จรูป ผู้บริโภคผลิตภัณฑ์ที่มีกรดซิตริกนี้อาจกินสารพิษที่ก่อให้เกิดการอักเสบนี้เข้าไป แม้จะผ่านกระบวนการฆ่าเชื้อด้วยความร้อนสูงแล้วก็ตาม

นี่เป็นอีกเหตุผลที่แยม Passion of Orange ที่ผมทำนั้นไม่ใส่ citric acid ครับ

แหม่ยังมีอีกหลายเรื่องนะที่จะเล่าให้ฟังเกี่ยวกับอุตสาหกรรมอาหาร อย่างที่บอกนะครับ อะไรที่มั่นใจในวันนี้ อย่าเพิ่งมั่นใจ อาจจะจริงเราเห็นอยู่ เผื่อใจไว้ที่ยังไม่เห็น

PirateKeto #กูต้องรู้มั๊ย #ฉลาก3รู้ #siamstr

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

tempreites

My first library to get stars on GitHub, was a very stupid templating library that used just HTML and HTML attributes ("DSL-free"). I was inspired by http://microjs.com/ at the time and ended up not using the library. Probably no one ever did.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/tempreites

@ a03b38f8:2c7ce1f0

FINANCIAL PRIVACY: Card Transactions, Cash, Monero, Sending Bitcoin Privately

Privacy is foundational for protecting freedom. Abuses to human rights and efforts to control people often depend on governments knowing details of a person’s life, this is why financial privacy is so important. Financial activity reveals details about a person’s relationships, profession, religion, political beliefs, geo location, and lots more.

Much has been said about data privacy concerns around social media, but financial data is also detrimental when abused or in the hands of the wrong persons.

A Person can speak about their humble life in a small town but their Financial data from the banks would reveal that they are actually a Billionaire.

Financial data reveals many areas of a person’s life, so it’s more likely to reveal who someone truly is, even if an individual does not want those details revealed to others.

From where you travel to, what you donate to, financial activity can paint a detailed picture of a person’s life, ensuring financial privacy means being able to have control over who gets to see that picture and purposes. You may not have something to hide but remember privacy is really about having control over your life.

Governments around the World Use Financial data to control people and activities within its jurisdiction. This is where financial privacy can act as a limit on governmental power. Where a lack of privacy is likely to lead to an abuse of that power.

Government policy on financial privacy is complex and often demands access to personal data for law enforcement and National Security purposes. Although often we see governments use that same financial data to hunt and halt activities that do not align with the policies of its agenda.

We believe any access at all should be reasonable and in accordance with privacy and human rights.

Almost all financial institution privacy standards prohibit the disclosure of client information to third parties without consent or an accepted criminal complaint, it is a conditional agreement because it has some limitations; this limitation or restriction in most cases is not clearly explained to clients but it is an ambiguous statement that further explains the limits of the financial institution, meaning the Central Bank which controls a country’s entire financial activities of all Financial institutions in a country does have the power to access all financial data as it demands, thereby limiting privacy.

CARD TRANSACIONS

Data Security and privacy are crucial in payment transactions in the digital era, protecting personal and financial information not only stops unlawful access but also increases customer trust and confidence.

Card transactions comes with a lot of risk and dangers such as Identity theft, cyber criminals use stolen data from digital payment platforms to impersonate individuals and access their financial accounts, make unauthorized purchases, or setup new accounts in order to illegally transfer funds or perform fraudulent financial transactions without owners consent.

Identity theft can have lasting effects on a victim’s financial health and credit status. Additionally phishing attacks are prevalent. Hackers use this technique to deceive users into providing their personal and payment information (Data) under the guise of legitimate request.

It is advisable for cards that you choose to carry around on your person be held in a RFID blocking wallet. Beyond physical security any cards that you use online or in stores should have spending limits and have no access to large amounts of funds you may have to prevent or limit the impact of fraud. For privacy protections consider virtual privacy cards or reloadable debit cards.

Lastly, do not use PayPal. They are a privacy nightmare and there is an entire cottage industry on the dark web selling stolen accounts.

CASH TRANSACTIONS

Cash is king. For a long time cash has been used as the primary form of payment and cash transactions have excellent privacy properties and it is widely accepted in most countries.

Cash transactions provides a high degree of privacy in payments, it also slows the growing information asymmetry between consumers and companies as well as between citizens and public authorities.

Bank notes and coins reduce your digital footprints compared to an electronic payment. Cash remains one of the most effective tools for financial privacy in a world increasingly dominated by digital payments. It offers true anonymity, leaving no digital trail or record of the transaction, making it impossible for third parties—such as governments, corporations, or hackers—to track your spending habits. Unlike card payments or online transfers, cash transactions don't reveal your identity, location, or spending patterns, providing a level of confidentiality that digital methods simply cannot match.

Physical cash works without registers of cash holders and transaction, when paying with bank notes and coins, it is only the buyer and seller who are aware of this: What is bought, how much, when, when by whom and at what.

While cash has its limitations in today’s digital society, it remains a valuable option for those who prioritize privacy. By using cash whenever possible, especially for sensitive or personal purchases, The use of cash gives room for maintenance and control over your financial data, it also help protect from unwanted surveillance, and safeguard your financial autonomy. Ultimately, cash is still king when it comes to preserving your financial privacy.

MONERO (XMR)

Monero is a decentralized cryptocurrency designed with a strong emphasis on privacy, security, stealth address and unlinkability, it is abbreviated XMR.

Monero’s transactions are completely anonymous and confidential by default making it one of the most privacy centric digital currencies available today.

Key features of Monero

·Untraceable Transactions: Monero uses advanced cryptographic techniques, such as Ring Signatures, which combine your transaction with others, making it impossible to identify the actual sender. This feature ensures that transactions cannot be traced back to any single individual.

·StealthAddresses: When you send Monero, the recipient’s address is never publicly recorded on the blockchain. Instead, a one-time address is generated for each transaction, ensuring the recipient's identity remains private.

·ConfidentialTransactions: Monero employs Ring Confidential Transactions (Ring CT) to hide the amount of XMR being transferred. This means the transaction amounts are kept entirely private, further enhancing confidentiality.

·Fungibility: Because Monero transactions are private, every XMR coin is indistinguishable from another. This makes Monero a truly fungible currency, meaning no coin carries a traceable history or stigma, unlike Bitcoin, where some coins can be "tainted" based on their transaction history.

Despite Monero’s popularity as a primary focused cryptocurrency, Monero faces criticism and challenges. The Monero community development team frequently updates the protocol to improve privacy and resist surveillance attempts, this is beneficial for security, meaning users and miners must regularly update software, this can be inconvenient and lead to potential forks if consensus is not reached within the community.

Many governments and financial institutions view Monero as a threat because of its untraceable nature, as a result this has posed some challenges making exchanges to delisted Monero in order to comply with anti-money laundering and know your customer (KYC) regulations.

SENDING BITCOIN PRIVATELY:

Bitcoin is often perceived as an anonymous payment network but in reality Bitcoin is the most transparent payment network in the world. At the same time, Bitcoin can provide acceptable levels of privacy when used correctly. All bitcoin transactions are public, traceable and permanently stored on the Bitcoin network, Bitcoin addresses are the only information used to define its allocations and history.

In ensuring privacy while Bitcoin transactions are performed it is advisable to generate a new address each time a payment is received. The incomplete privacy on transactions will lead to the Fungibility of the scripts, which could affect the stability of Bitcoin as a long-lived currency system, Bitcoin system addresses privacy by hiding the address of transactions via hash functions but the hash value is obviously unique, If the addresses and traders are bounded unconsciously through activities by attackers, the anonymity of the entire system will disappear.

Suppose that the Bitcoin system is connected to the payment of an e-commerce platform, the strong computing power can search the complete data of your incomes and outcomes, which makes everything about money exposed to the public.

Let’s say; You are paid salary via bitcoins and you spend those coins in the supermarket, the plaintext of the account of your income and outcome will inevitably be utilized by businesses to access the benefits like charge you higher prices or target you with advertisement.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

nix

Pra instalar o neuron fui forçado a baixar e instalar o nix. Não consegui me lembrar por que não estava usando até hoje aquele maravilhoso sistema de instalar pacotes desde a primeira vez que tentei, anos atrás.

Que sofrimento pra fazer funcionar com o fish, mas até que bem menos sofrimento que da outra vez. Tive que instalar um tal de fish-foreign-environment (usando o próprio nix!, já que a outra opção era o oh-my-fish ou qualquer outra porcaria dessas) e aí usá-lo para aplicar as definições de shell para bash direto no fish.

E aí lembrei também que o /nix/store fica cheio demais, o negócio instala tudo que existe neste mundo a partir do zero. É só para computadores muito ricos, mas vamos ver como vai ser. Estou gostando do neuron (veja, estou usando como diário), então vou ter que deixar o nix aí.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

O Bitcoin como um sistema social humano

Afinal de contas, o que é o Bitcoin? Não vou responder a essa pergunta explicando o que é uma "blockchain" ou coisa que o valha, como todos fazem muito pessimamente. A melhor explicação em português que eu já vi está aqui, mas mesmo assim qualquer explicação jamais será definitiva.

A explicação apenas do protocolo, do que faz um programa bitcoind sendo executado em um computador e como ele se comunica com outros em outros computadores, e os incentivos que estão em jogo para garantir com razoável probabilidade que se chegará a um consenso sobre quem é dono de qual parte de qual transação, apesar de não ser complicada demais, exigirá do iniciante que seja compreendida muitas vezes antes que ele se possa se sentir confortável para dizer que entende um pouco.

E essa parte técnica, apesar de ter sido o insight fundamental que gerou o evento miraculoso chamado Bitcoin, não é a parte mais importante, hoje. Se fosse, várias dessas outras moedas seriam concorrentes do Bitcoin, mas não são, e jamais poderão ser, porque elas não estão nem próximas de ter os outros elementos que compõem o Bitcoin. São eles:

1. A estrutura

O Bitcoin é um sistema composto de partes independentes.

Existem programadores que trabalham no protocolo e aplicações, e dia após dia novos programadores chegam e outros saem, e eles trabalham às vezes em conjunto, às vezes sem que um se dê conta do outro, às vezes por conta própria, às vezes pagos por empresas interessadas.

Existem os usuários que realizam validação completa, isto é, estão rodando algum programa do Bitcoin e contribuindo para a difusão dos blocos, das transações, rejeitando usuários malignos e evitando ataques de mineradores mal-intencionados.

Existem os poupadores, acumuladores ou os proprietários de bitcoins, que conhecem as possibilidades que o mundo reserva para o Bitcoin, esperam o dia em que o padrão-Bitcoin será uma realidade mundial e por isso mesmo atributem aos seus bitcoins valores muito mais altos do que os preços atuais de mercado, agarrando-se a eles.

Especuladores de "criptomoedas" não fazem parte desse sistema, nem tampouco empresas que aceitam pagamento em bitcoins para imediatamente venderem tudo em troca de dinheiro estatal, e menos ainda gente que usa bitcoins e a própria marca Bitcoin para aplicar seus golpes e coisas parecidas.

1. A cultura

Mencionei que há empresas que pagam programadores para trabalharem no código aberto do BitcoinCore ou de outros programas relacionados à rede Bitcoin -- ou mesmo em aplicações não necessariamente ligadas à camada fundamental do protocolo. Nenhuma dessas empresas interessadas, porém, controla o Bitcoin, e isso é o elemento principal da cultura do Bitcoin.

O propósito do Bitcoin sempre foi ser uma rede aberta, sem chefes, sem política envolvida, sem necessidade de pedir autorização para participar. O fato do próprio Satoshi Nakamoto ter voluntariamente desaparecido das discussões foi fundamental para que o Bitcoin não fosse visto como um sistema dependente dele ou que ele fosse entendido como o chefe. Em outras "criptomoedas" nada disso aconteceu. O chefe supremo do Ethereum continua por aí mandando e desmandando e inventando novos elementos para o protocolo que são automaticamente aceitos por toda a comunidade, o mesmo vale para o Zcash, EOS, Ripple, Litecoin e até mesmo para o Bitcoin Cash. Pior ainda: Satoshi Nakamoto saiu sem nenhum dinheiro, nunca mexeu nos milhares de bitcoins que ele gerou nos primeiros blocos -- enquanto os líderes dessas porcarias supramencionadas cobraram uma fortuna pelo direito de uso dos seus primeiros usuários ou estão aí a até hoje receber dividendos.

Tudo isso e mais outras coisas -- a mentalidade anti-estatal e entusiasta de sistemas p2p abertos dos membros mais proeminentes da comunidade, por exemplo -- faz com que um ar de liberdade e suspeito de tentativas de centralização da moeda sejam percebidos e execrados.

1. A história

A noção de que o Bitcoin não pode ser controlado por ninguém passou em 2017 por dois testes e saiu deles muito reforçada: o primeiro foi a divisão entre Bitcoin (BTC) e Bitcoin Cash (BCH), uma obra de engenharia social que teve um sucesso mediano em roubar parte da marca e dos usuários do verdadeiro Bitcoin e depois a tentativa de tomada por completo do Bitcoin promovida por mais ou menos as mesmas partes interessadas chamada SegWit2x, que fracassou por completo, mas não sem antes atrapalhar e difundir mentiras para todos os lados. Esses dois fracassos provaram que o Bitcoin, mesmo sendo uma comunidade desorganizada, sem líderes claros, está imune à captura por grupos interessados, o que é mais um milagre -- ou, como dizem, um ponto de Schelling.

Esse período crucial na história do Bitcoin fez com ficasse claro que hard-forks são essencialmente incompatíveis com a natureza do protocolo, de modo que no futuro não haverá a possibilidade de uma sugestão como a de imprimir mais bitcoins do que o que estava programado sejam levadas a sério (mas, claro, sempre há a possibilidade da cultura toda se perder, as pessoas esquecerem a história e o Bitcoin ser cooptado, eis a importância da auto-educação e da difusão desses princípios).

@ ae1008d2:a166d760

I wanted to share this PDF on Nostr. Original post: Block ~862,844 September 25th, 2024 Original link Original PDF 👇Click the link below to view as original PDF on YakiHonne or Satellite.Earth👇

Bitcoin's Protection Under the First Amendment

@ eac63075:b4988b48

🤖 Baseado na explicação de Gerard Aithen para o Morning Crypto

Nos últimos anos, o Bitcoin se consolidou como a criptomoeda de referência, trazendo inovação e mudança para o cenário econômico global. Apesar de sua notoriedade, a tecnologia por trás do Bitcoin, especialmente em termos de escalabilidade e eficiência, ainda é um campo em constante evolução. Recentemente, um novo avanço tem gerado bastante discussão entre os entusiastas do mundo cripto: a BitVM2. Desenvolvida por Robin Linus, essa inovação promete transformar a maneira como as transações são processadas e verificadas no ecossistema do Bitcoin.

A BitVM2 está sendo apontada como uma revolução na forma como programas inteiros podem ser verificados dentro da blockchain, facilitando e tornando mais acessível a participação nas transações. Mas o que exatamente é essa nova tecnologia? Como ela funciona? E, acima de tudo, por que ela é tão importante para o futuro do Bitcoin?

Neste artigo, vamos explorar a BitVM2 em profundidade, analisando seu funcionamento, os benefícios que ela traz e suas implicações para o futuro da rede Bitcoin.

O Que é a BitVM2?

Imagine que a primeira versão da BitVM era como um quebra-cabeça gigante, onde cada peça precisava ser ajustada meticulosamente para que a transação fosse validada. Essa estrutura exigia muitas etapas e transações para garantir que tudo funcionasse corretamente, o que, claro, consumia tempo e recursos. A BitVM2 vem para mudar completamente esse cenário.

Com a BitVM2, todo esse processo se torna muito mais rápido e acessível. Agora, é como se um GPS eficiente tivesse sido instalado no lugar do velho mapa. O caminho está traçado, e tudo o que você precisa fazer é seguir as direções. A nova estrutura da BitVM2 utiliza criptografia avançada para transformar programas complexos em fragmentos menores, que podem ser verificados diretamente nas transações do Bitcoin. Em outras palavras, ela permite que contratos inteligentes e programas complexos rodem dentro da blockchain do Bitcoin, sem comprometer a segurança ou eficiência.

O principal benefício? Antes, um processo que exigia mais de 70 transações agora pode ser verificado com apenas três. Isso não apenas economiza tempo e recursos, mas também abre as portas para que mais pessoas possam participar e monitorar essas transações.

A Importância da Descentralização na BitVM2

Um dos pontos mais revolucionários da BitVM2 é que ela é completamente permissionless, ou seja, não precisa de permissão. Isso significa que qualquer pessoa pode verificar ou contestar uma transação. Antes, essa era uma tarefa restrita a operadores específicos dentro da rede. Agora, a verificação e contestação de transações suspeitas podem ser feitas por qualquer um, tornando o sistema mais democrático e transparente.

Essa descentralização aumenta a segurança da rede. Em vez de depender de um grupo centralizado de validadores, o sistema se torna autossustentável. A comunidade como um todo pode vigiar e garantir a integridade das transações, o que dificulta tentativas de fraudes ou manipulações.

Além disso, o novo design da BitVM2 foi pensado para ser compatível com a estrutura atual do Bitcoin, ou seja, não foi necessário fazer alterações no código base da criptomoeda. Isso garante que o Bitcoin continue funcionando como sempre, enquanto permite a introdução de novas funcionalidades. É como construir um novo andar em um prédio sem precisar mexer na estrutura do alicerce.

Rollups e a Eficiência das Transações no Bitcoin

Um dos temas mais discutidos na comunidade de criptomoedas nos últimos anos é a questão da escalabilidade. Conforme o Bitcoin ganha mais adoção, a rede fica mais sobrecarregada, o que pode aumentar o tempo e o custo das transações. A BitVM2 pode ajudar a resolver esse problema, especialmente quando falamos de rollups.

Rollups são soluções que permitem processar transações fora da blockchain principal, para depois consolidá-las em um único registro na blockchain do Bitcoin. Isso torna as transações mais rápidas e baratas, sem comprometer a segurança. A BitVM2 pode ser vista como uma espécie de ponte entre o Bitcoin e essa nova era de rollups, permitindo uma maior eficiência e abrindo espaço para que o Bitcoin continue evoluindo.

De forma simples, a BitVM2 garante que transações complexas possam ser processadas sem sobrecarregar a blockchain principal. Com isso, ela ajuda a diminuir as taxas e a aumentar a velocidade das transações, um avanço crucial para o futuro da criptomoeda.

O Papel dos Covenants no Bitcoin

Outro conceito-chave no desenvolvimento da BitVM2 é o uso dos Covenants. Para quem não está familiarizado, os Covenants são como pequenas promessas que os Bitcoins "fazem" durante as transações. Eles colocam condições específicas sobre como e onde os Bitcoins podem ser gastos. Isso adiciona uma camada extra de segurança e funcionalidade às transações, permitindo que os Bitcoins sejam gastos apenas sob determinadas circunstâncias.

Por exemplo, um Covenant pode especificar que os Bitcoins só podem ser transferidos para certos endereços ou que só podem ser liberados após determinado período de tempo. Esses contratos inteligentes tornam o Bitcoin ainda mais flexível e permitem a criação de soluções inovadoras dentro da rede.

Na BitVM2, os Covenants desempenham um papel importante na verificação das transações, garantindo que todas as regras sejam seguidas e que não haja brechas para fraudes ou manipulações. Isso amplia as possibilidades de uso do Bitcoin, permitindo que ele seja utilizado de formas que antes eram impensáveis.

BitVM2 e a Manipulação de Opinião Pública

Outro ponto que não podemos ignorar ao discutir as inovações tecnológicas no mundo das criptomoedas é a questão da manipulação de opinião pública. Bilionários e grandes empresas têm se posicionado como grandes influenciadores no cenário das criptomoedas. O caso de Elon Musk é um exemplo clássico, onde tweets e posicionamentos podem mudar drasticamente o valor de uma criptomoeda em questão de horas.

Com a BitVM2, no entanto, o poder de manipulação pode ser mitigado, uma vez que o sistema se torna mais descentralizado e aberto à participação de todos. A liberdade de contestar transações e a democratização do processo ajudam a garantir que o Bitcoin continue sendo uma moeda de todos, sem a influência de poucos.

Conclusão: Um Futuro Promissor para o Bitcoin

O lançamento da BitVM2 representa um salto importante para o futuro do Bitcoin. A capacidade de verificar transações complexas de forma rápida e acessível, aliada à descentralização e à possibilidade de uso dos rollups, promete tornar o Bitcoin mais eficiente e acessível para todos.

Mais do que uma simples atualização tecnológica, a BitVM2 traz à tona a discussão sobre liberdade digital, transparência e o papel das criptomoedas no futuro. É um avanço que, sem dúvida, será observado de perto pelos entusiastas e críticos da criptoeconomia.

O Bitcoin sempre foi visto como uma alternativa descentralizada ao sistema financeiro tradicional, e a BitVM2 parece reforçar essa visão. À medida que mais pessoas se envolvem e a tecnologia avança, o futuro das transações digitais parece mais promissor do que nunca. Vamos ficar de olho no que essa nova fase nos reserva e nas novas possibilidades que ela pode abrir.

***

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

O caso da Grêmio TV

enquanto vinha se conduzindo pela plataforma superior daquela arena que se pensava totalmente preenchida por adeptos da famosa equipe do Grêmio de Porto Alegre, viu-se, como por obra de algum nigromante - dos muitos que existem e estão a todo momento a fazer más obras e a colocar-se no caminhos dos que procuram, se não fazer o bem acima de todas as coisas, a pelo menos não fazer o mal no curso da realização dos seus interesses -, o discretíssimo jornalista a ser xingado e moído em palavras por uma horda de malandrinos a cinco ou seis passos dele surgida que cantavam e moviam seus braços em movimentos que não se pode classificar senão como bárbaros, e assim cantavam:

Grêmio TV pior que o SBT !

@ 44dc1c2d:31c74f0b

Chef's notes

Last time I made this I subbed the tomato puréed with some blistered cherry tomatoes. Don't think I'll be using the purée going forward.

I prefer thighs so that's what I use for this but use whatever you want.

Adjust spices based on the size of your onions. If all you have is two massive onions maybe use one and a half onion or just up the amount of spices a little.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: ~10 min
• 🍳 Cook time: ~40 ish min
• 🍽️ Servings: 4

Ingredients

• 2 Onions
• 2 tbsp tomato purée
• 1/3 cup cashews
• 1.5 tsp Garam Masala
• 2 ish cloves of crushed garlic
• 1 tsp chili powder
• 1 tbsp lemon juice
• 1/4 tsb ground turmeric
• 1 tsb salt
• 1 tbsp plain yogurt
• 2 tbsp of your cooking oil or fat
• 1 tbsp Coriander (Cilantro) plus extra for garnish
• 1 tbsp sultanas (golden raisins)
• 1 lb of chicken cubed
• 6 oz of white button mushrooms

Directions

1. Quarter the onions and put them in a food possessor for about a minute
2. Add the tomatoes, nuts, garlic, Garam masala, chili powder, lemon juice, turmeric, salt, yogurt and blend for another minute tell its well mixed in.
3. In a wok or a large pan heat your cooking oil and add the onion and spice mix in. Fry gently for around 2-ish minutes, stir frequently.
4. Add the chicken, coriander, and raisins to the pan. Stir-fry for another minute or so.
5. Add mushrooms and water. Bring to simmer and cover the pan cook for 10 min or until the chicken is 100% cooked through.
6. Serve with plain rice and enjoy!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

My stupid introduction to Haskell

While I was writing my first small program on Haskell (really simple, but functional webapp) in December 2017 I only knew vaguely what was the style of things, some basic notions about functions, pure functions and so on (I've read about a third of LYAH).

An enourmous amount of questions began to appear in my head while I read tutorials and documentation. Here I present some of the questions and the insights I got that solved them. Technically, they may be wrong, but they helped me advance in the matter, so I'm writing them down while I still can -- If I keep working with Haskell I'll probably get to know more and so my new insights will replace the previous ones, and the new ones won't be useful for total begginers anymore.

---

Here we go:

• Why do modules have odd names?
• modules are the things you import, like Data.Time.Clock or Web.Scotty.
• packages are the things you install, like 'time' or 'scotty'
• packages can contain any number of modules they like
• a module is just a collection of functions
• a package is just a collection of modules
• a package is just name you choose to associate your collection of modules with when you're publishing it to Hackage or whatever
• the module names you choose when you're writing a package can be anything, and these are the names people will have to import when they want to use you functions
  • if you're from Javascript, Python or anything similar, you'll expect to be importing/writing the name of the package directly in your code, but in Haskell you'll actually be writing the name of the module, which may have nothing to do with the name of the package
  • people choose things that make sense, like for aeson instead of import Aeson you'll be doing import Data.Aeson, import Data.Aeson.Types etc. why the Data? because they thought it would be nice. dealing with JSON is a form of dealing with data, so be it.
  • you just have to check the package documentation to see which modules it exposes.
• What is data User = User { name :: Text }?
• a data type definition. means you'll have a function User that will take a Text parameter and output a User record or something like that.
• you can also have Animal = Giraffe { color :: Text } | Human { name :: Text }, so you'll have two functions, Giraffe and Human, each can take a different set of parameters, but they will both yield an Animal.
  • then, in the functions that take an Animal parameter you must typematch to see if the animal is a giraffe or a human.
• What is a monad?
• a monad is a context, an environment.
  • when you're in the context of a monad you can write imperative code.
  • you do that when you use the keyword do.
  • in the context of a monad, all values are prefixed by the monad type,
  • thus, in the IO monad all Text is IO Text and so on.
  • some monads have a relationship with others, so values from that monad can be turned into values from another monad and passed between context easily.
  • for exampĺe, scotty's ActionM and IO. ActionM is just a subtype of IO or something like that.
  • when you write imperative code inside a monad you can do assignments like varname <- func x y
  • in these situations some transformation is done by the <-, I believe it is that the pure value returned by func is being transformed into a monad value. so if func returns Text, now varname is of type IO Text (if we're in the IO monad).
    • so it will not work (and it can be confusing) if you try to concatenate functions like varname <- transform $ func x y, but you can somehow do
    • varname <- func x y
    • othervarname <- transform varname
    • or you can do other fancy things you'll get familiar with later, like varname <- fmap transform $ func x y
    • why? I don't know.
• How do I deal with Maybe, Either or other crazy stuff? "ok, I understand what is a Maybe: it is a value that could be something or nothing. but how do I use that in my program?"
• you don't! you turn it into other thing. for example, you use fromMaybe, a function that takes a default value and that's it. if your Maybe is Just x you get x, if it is Nothing you get the default value.
  • using only that function you can already do whatever there is to be done with Maybes.
  • you can also manipulate the values inside the Maybe, for example:
  • if you have a Maybe Person and Person has a name which is Text, you can apply a function that turns Maybe Person into Maybe Text AND ONLY THEN you apply the default value (which would be something like the "unnamed") and take the name from inside the Maybe.
• basically these things (Maybe, Either, IO also!) are just tags. they tag the value, and you can do things with the values inside them, or you can remove the values.
  • besides the example above with Maybes and the fromMaybe function, you can also remove the values by using case -- for example:
  • case x of
    • Left error -> error
    • Right success -> success
  • case y of
    • Nothing -> "nothing!"
    • Just value -> value
  • (in some cases I believe you can't remove the values, but in these cases you'll also don't need to)
  • for example, for values tagged with the IO, you can't remove the IO and turn these values into pure values, but you don't need that, you can just take the value from the outside world, so it's a IO Text, apply functions that modify that value inside IO, then output the result to the user -- this is enough to make a complete program, any complete program.
• JSON and interfaces (or instances?)
• using Aeson is easy, you just have to implement the ToJSON and FromJSON interfaces.
• "interface" is not the correct name, but I don't care.
• ToJSON, for example, requires a function named toJSON, so you do
  • instance ToJSON YourType where
  • toJSON (YourType your type values) = object [] ... etc.
• I believe lots of things require interface implementation like this and it can be confusing, but once you know the mystery of implementing functions for interfaces everything is solved.
• FromJSON is a little less intuitive at the beggining, and I don't know if I did it correctly, but it is working here. Anyway, if you're trying to do that, I can only tell you to follow the types, copy examples from other places on the internet and don't care about the meaning of symbols.

See also

• Haskell Monoids

@ 9262b5a5:2a89f8de

testing

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Classless Templates

There are way too many hours being wasted in making themes for blogs. And then comes a new blog framework, it requires new themes. Old themes can't be used because they relied on different ways of rendering the website. Everything is a mess.

Classless was an attempt at solving it. It probably didn't work because I wasn't the best person to make themes and showcase the thing.

Basically everybody would agree on a simple HTML template that could fit blogs and simple websites very easily. Then other people would make pure-CSS themes expecting that template to be in place.

No classes were needed, only a fixed structure of header. main, article etc.

With flexbox and grid CSS was enough to make this happen.

The templates that were available were all ported by me from other templates I saw on the web, and there was a simple one I created for my old website.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/classless
• https://classless.alhur.es/
• https://classless.alhur.es/themes/

@ 9262b5a5:2a89f8de

https://image.nostr.build/c7e3732889827ab0a8e2064de5fa6992e37e035347b0c91d249cb8f312b47087.jpg I love Bitcoin. Let me get that out there first of all. I sincerely believe that Bitcoin has the power to change the way the world functions if we can grow adoption to a global scale. This obviously will take time as the gears of economic change grinds slowly. As of right now, people in the western countries don't really see the need for a sovereign politically neutral money that can't be inflated away. They simply don't have to deal with inflation on a regular basis like the rest of the world.

Citizens in western countries got a small taste of what real inflation looks like and guess what? They didn't like it one bit. Overall the last three and a half years you saw countless news stories about how bad inflation and how its making life for the average American or European more difficult.

Yes inflation does suck but look at countries like Argentina, Turkey, Zimbabwe or Venezuela. The people in these countries are suffering from excessive inflation on a regular basis! According to recent economic data Turkey experienced a decline in inflation from 61 percent to 51 percent in August. This is seen as a win in their book! Can you imagine this level of inflation in America? There would be riots in the streets!

Argentina's inflation rate is an astounding 236 percent over the last 12 months! As Bitcoiners we understand that the problem is the money itself. As long as governments have the ability to manipulate the money supply, they will. This is human nature at its finest. When you give a select few that kind of power it becomes irresistible and becomes a tool to control the masses. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone to be honest.

What I find shocking is with all of this inflation globally no one is really looking around asking questions to why this is happening and looking for a way to escape this system. Are people really this lazy? Not to be mean but cmon. It seems to me that most people are perfectly fine bitching online about how hard it is to make ends meet or supporting their favored political party and wanting them to fix the problem they created. Newsflash to all the normies out there, its the GD political parties that caused inflation in the first place.

We literally have a solution that is staring them in the face, ready to go to replace the current debt based system that we are currently suffering through and no one wants to take the time to research it? Am I black pilled? No, am I realist, very much so. If 236 percent inflation in Argentina can't get them on a Bitcoin Standard immediately, we as a community have a long road ahead of us. Hyperbitcoinization isn't coming in 5 years. It isn't coming in 10 years. Hell it might not even happen in our lifetimes and we have to be ok with that.

So what is the best way to get more Bitcoin into the hands of the people, so they can see the true value of the digital monetary revolution that is Bitcoin. We need a trojan horse and that trojan horse is nostr.

Enter The Nostr Trojan Horse

https://image.nostr.build/5ffee418133ac80ba14b30abf0d5390b878f676cbf6332d67639f9384764da4c.jpg

It should be plain to see by now that the inflation or the number go up narrative alone isn't going to drive Bitcoin adoption. The reason for that is because people don't see the utility of Bitcoin. They see it as some esoteric digital funny money that drug dealers and terrorist use to do bad things.

The average Joe doesn't see how Bitcoin is helping dissidents on foreign countries fund their activism, escape oppressive regimes or simply earn a living. These stories are never told in the mainstream media because they don't want to highlight the fact that a non-state money can circumvent the status quo.

The best way to highlight these stories is to share it on social media, which again is controlled by mainstream gatekeeper such as Meta, Google and X. It is in their best interest to censor these stories or memory hole them out of existence which I suspect happens quite a bit without us even knowing. But the thing about censorship is that it slowly impacts everyone one by one until no one is allowed to say anything without the fear of being put in jail.

Think this can't happen in western democracies? It's happening already my friend! Take a look at the UK or Australia. Citizens their are being arrested over post made to social media. I sincerely believe that these two countries should be a proving ground for showing the value of nostr and Bitcoin.

Introducing the concept of a censorship resistant messaging protocol to them will go over well and once it is understood will grow like a wildfire because people innately understand that censorship is bad and will see the utility value of having the ability to speak freely again.

It is only a matter of time until they realize that they can monetize their speech and build a life using zaps aka Bitcoin.

Until people see the utility in the tools that lie before them, they will never pick them up and use them. It is really that simple. At the end of the day we are still kind of like cavemen. We only use tools when it makes life easier. Man made the wheel. We use it everyday because it has utility.

Bitcoin in the end will be the same way. Utility first, then mass adoption. Nostr is what will help people see the utility Bitcoin and from there sky is the limit. The best thing we can do as Bitcoiners is to encourage people to learn about nostr and show them how easy it is to use and to switch clients that suit their needs instead of being shoved into a one-size fits all solution on centralized platforms.

People like choices, and nostr is all about choice. The interoperability and thelack of need to give personal information to create an account are HUGE selling points that can be touched on. Go out and spread the good word about nostr!

Bitcoin #Nostr

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

The "Drivechain will replace altcoins" argument

The argument that Drivechain will replace shitcoins is not that people will sell their shitcoins or that the existing shitcoins will instantly vanish. The argument is about a change at the margin that eventually ends up killing the shitcoins or reducing them to their original insignificance.

What does "at the margin" mean? For example, when the price of the coconut drops a little in relation to bananas, does that mean that everybody will stop buying bananas and will buy only coconuts now? No. Does it mean there will be zero increase in the amount of coconuts sold? Also no. What happens is that there is a small number of people who would have preferred to buy coconuts if only they were a little less expensive but end up buying bananas instead. When the price of coconut drops these people buy coconuts and don't buy bananas.

The argument is that the same thing will happen when Drivechain is activated: there are some people today (yes, believe me) that would have preferred to work within the Bitcoin ecosystem but end up working on shitcoins. In a world with Drivechain these people would be working on the Bitcoin ecosystem, for the benefit of Bitcoin and the Bitcoiners.

Why would they prefer Bitcoin? Because Bitcoin has a bigger network-effect. When these people come, they increase Bitocin's network-effect even more, and if they don't go to the shitcoins they reduce the shitcoins' network-effect. Those changes in network-effect contribute to bringing others who were a little further from the margin and the thing compounds until the shitcoins are worthless.

Who are these people at the margin? I don't know, but they certainly exist. I would guess the Stark people are one famous example, but there are many others. In the past, examples included Roger Ver, Zooko Wilcox, Riccardo Spagni and Vitalik Buterin. And before you start screaming that these people are shitcoiners (which they are) imagine how much bigger Bitcoin could have been today if they and their entire communities (yes, I know, of awful people) were using and working for Bitcoin today. Remember that phrase about Bitcoin being for enemies?

But everything that has been invented in the altcoin world is awful, we don't need any of that!

You and me should not be the ones judging what is good and what is not for others, but both you and me and others will benefit if these things can be done in a way that increases Bitcoin network-effect and pays fees to Bitcoin miners.

Also, there is a much stronger point you may have not considered: if you believe all altcoiners are scammers that means we have only seen the things that were invented by scammers, since all honest people that had good ideas decided to not implement them as the only way to do it would be to create a scammy shitcoin. One example is Bitcoin Hivemind.

If it is possible to do these ideas without creating shitcoins we may start to see new things that are actually good.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

A list of things artificial intelligence is not doing

If AI is so good why can't it:

• write good glue code that wraps a documented HTTP API?
• make good translations using available books and respective published translations?
• extract meaningful and relevant numbers from news articles?
• write mathematical models that fit perfectly to available data better than any human?
• play videogames without cheating (i.e. simulating human vision, attention and click speed)?
• turn pure HTML pages into pretty designs by generating CSS
• predict the weather
• calculate building foundations
• determine stock values of companies from publicly available numbers
• smartly and automatically test software to uncover bugs before releases
• predict sports matches from the ball and the players' movement on the screen
• continuously improve niche/local search indexes based on user input and and reaction to results
• control traffic lights
• predict sports matches from news articles, and teams and players' history

This was posted first on Twitter.

@ 6bae33c8:607272e8

I went 2-3 again last week to push the season record to 5-10, nearly drawing dead in the Circa Millions (though you can still win relatively big prizes for winning four-week stretches.)

I didn’t look at the lines yet, only my feel about the teams through three weeks.

Cowboys at Giants — seems like a get well game for Dallas. Probably win by 7-10, won’t be favored by nearly that much. Only chance for the Giants is to get those rushers after Prescott, but more likely the Dallas rush will crush a skittish Danny Dimes.

Saints at Falcons — I like the Falcons at -2.5 or better. Last week’s game was annoying though.

Bengals at Panthers — Get well game for Cincy. Good sell high on Panthers, but Dalton is not bad, and the Bengals defense is. Probably staying away.

Rams at Bears — Two shit teams. Probably Bears -2.5. Stay away. If anything leaning Rams.

Vikings at Packers — If Jordan Love is playing, Packers -2.5. Have to treat the Vikings as a serious contender now.

Jaguars at Texans — Jaguars are broken probably getting seven. Texans looked bad last week too. Both teams desperate in their own ways. Stay away.

Steelers at Colts — Anthony Richardson looks off, and this is not the get-well opponent. Steelers -3, stay away. If anything taking the ugly Colts.

Broncos at Jets — Jets by 7.5, think last week’s Broncos win was a fluke.

Eagles at Buccaneers — I’ll say pick ‘em. Leaning Bucs as buy-low.

Team at Cardinals — Jayden Daniels looked great, but I’m taking Cardinals up to 5.5

Patriots at 49ers — Probably 49ers -13 for me, real line maybe 10? Can’t play hide the QB forever, and this would be a tough assignment if Drake Maye plays.

Chiefs at Chargers — Depends on Herbert’s status. Can’t say. Chiefs are unwatchable with the dink, dunk and penalties in their favor.

Browns at Raiders — Two teams desperate to bounce back. I instinctively like the Raiders here, but feels like the Browns are the sharper side for some nagging reason.

Bills at Ravens — Imagine this line will be 2.5 or so. I’ll probably go with the Ravens who need it much more.

Titans at Dolphins — Two bad teams, no idea who will play QB for the Dolphins. Pass.

Seahawks at Lions — Imagine this line will be about 3.5. Probably lay the wood if I had to, but would be my fifth out of five if I use it.

@ a03b38f8:2c7ce1f0

PROTECT YOUR HOME (NETWORK)

This is actually a rather large topic depending on your needs and how far you are willing to go. I will most likely have to put out several posts on this topic. For today we will start at the very beginning and build from there.

This is going to be more of a beginners guide but that doesn't make it any less important. First you must get your home in order before you can do anything else. If bad actors get access to your network then they can use it for illegal things that will be tied to your IP address, use it to launch a bot for a DDoS attack, gain access to any of your home devices, or just hangout and watch you log into bank accounts or whatever.

I will be blunt, your home network sucks. It's slow and unsecure but we will be fixing that.

I. EVERYONE

1. WHAT DO YOU HAVE?

Somewhere in your house you have either a phone cord or a cable coming out of the wall running to a box. Go find it. This is your modem, it "translates" the internet signal from your ISP to your house so you can use the internet.

Found it? Good. Now is there a cable coming from the modem to another box or do you just have one? This other box is your router, it is pretty common now that you will have a all in one modem, router, WIFI, etc. That's fine. Write down the model number of the router or all in one. Also there should be a sticker on the side with the administrator password (sometimes listed as access code) and maybe the WIFI password. Also look if the IP address is listed as well. You will need these for the next step.

1. LOG IN

Go to your computer and fire up a web browser. Enter your routers IP address if it was listed, otherwise we are going to have to find your router's IP address.

In widows and Mac you can look under Network & Internet, scroll down to your internet connection and look for details or properties. Inside properties you are looking for something listed as default or gateway or IPv4 DNS Server. It will be a 192.168.X.X number.

Or you can open a command prompt and type: ipconfig /all

Or you can just do a internet search for your router model number IP.

You will know when you get the right one because a control screen for your router will pop up in the browser.

1. UPDATE

First thing first check if there is any available updates. This could be it's own tab or listed under device or in diagnostics. If it asks you for a password use the one that was written on the side of the router. Install any available updates. Honestly they rarely update these things so if there is one then it must have been pretty needed.

1. CHANGE THE LOCKS

You have to realize that this device is the front door between every internet device in your home and the outside wild internet. You are probably blasting WIFI signal all the way to the street. All someone has to do is connect to your WIFI and then they will have access to your router as well. The default administrator password for these mass produced ISP devices are not exactly secret. You can even find lists of them by brand. It is like locking your front door but leaving the key under the mat, not very secure.

Look in the settings and change the administrator password. Use your password manager to generate a 10 word passphrase. Change it to that and SAVE it in your password manager.

1. RENAME AND CHANGE WIFI PASSWORD

In the settings change the default name of your network to something memorable. Do NOT use anything personal like your name, address, or router brand (Netgear or whatever). If you want to be cute you can use: Not Available, or Network Error or something like that.

Now change the WIFI password. Again use your password manager to generate a passphrase. You can cut it down to 6 words since you will probably be entering this one much more often. Be sure to SAVE it in your password manager.

1. ADD A GUEST NETWORK

You don't just give your WIFI password to all the kids in the neighborhood that swing by to play with your kids or to your friends visiting do you? If so, STOP it. Setup a guest network. A guest network allows people to have WIFI access at your house without giving them access to the router. Yes I know we put a strong password on the router but it doesn't matter.

Setup a guest network with a easy password. If you have given this out to several people already that are coming back often you can name the guest network the old default name and use that default WIFI password. When friends and family come over their devices will have that name already saved and will connect automatically. This way you don't have to do the whole song and dance everytime someone comes over.

1. CHANGE YOUR DNS SERVER

DNS is the Domain Name System. Remember the IP address we found earlier for the router? Every device connect to the internet has a unique IP address. Every server hosting a website, etc but luckily you don't have to remember 142.250.188.14, you can just go to Google.com

This works because behind the scenes your computer is checking with a DNS server to provide a human readable address instead of a bunch of numbers. The equivalent would be a phone book that gives you John Smith and not just a address somewhere.

There is a little bit more to it than that but you don't need to know all that in order to grasp the concept.

The default DNS in your router is probably the one provided by your ISP. Your ISP can see everything that pings against that DNS server and probably uses it to feed you ads. The DNS server provider impacts how a lot of your data is handled. It's speed, it's security, how it's logged, shared, and sold.

So change your DNS server. The default one your ISP gave you is shit. It will improve your speed and security but just remember that privacy and security are not the same thing. The Google Public DNS (8.8.8.8) is very secure and a good choice but as you can imagine the privacy is not really great. But not to worry, all the data they are collecting is anonymized ; )

Your best bet is to use your own DNS server with something like Pi Hole or Adguard home. Setting that up is a little bit beyond the scope of this article so I will cover it in greater detail in a future one. Until then Cloudflare (1.1.1.1) is probably your best choice until you run your own.

Now you have probably better privacy and security than most people with only these simple changes. Next steps would be to upgrade your hardware for faster internet, better firewall, more control, etc. Will detail in future drops.

Always Forward, GHOST

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

Also posted on substack

1 Thessalonians 5:17 tells us “pray without ceasing;”

You may be thinking, “I have responsibilities. How can I pray without ceasing? I can’t be on my knees praying without stopping. This can’t be what the Bible expects from us.”

Don’t worry, prayer doesn’t have to be a burden. It doesn’t have to be locking yourself in a room alone for hours on you knees on a cold, hard stone floor like the monks of the middle ages. Prayer is just what you need to help you on your next step to growing closer to Jesus.

Analogy of old married couple and believer with God

As believers, our prayer relationship with God should be like the way an old, loving couple talks. They don’t talk without stopping to do other things, but they are always talking and keeping the other person included in what they do and what they care about.

They also have lots of different kinds of conversation. Some are deep conversations that take an extended period of time. Some are brief comments about what is going on in their life. Some are pointing out something interesting or asking for help. Sometimes the words are just an acknowledgement of the other’s presence. Sometimes communications may be no more than a glance or a grunt, but it conveys so much because of how close they are.

Scheduled time

Just like the old married couple schedules a date night or other time together, there are times that we want to schedule time with God. It might be a group prayer meeting. It might be a time alone to discuss particular worries with God. This is usually an extended time to pray about something in particular. It may be scheduled regularly. It may be scheduled specifically based on circumstances.

To many people, this is what they think of when they think about being a prayer warrior, but the truth is, at least for most of us, this is the smallest portion of our prayer life.

Regular time

Just like an old married couple has times that they are regularly together and talking, such as first thing in the morning when they awake and say “Good morning!” or just talk about their plans for the day. Most couples regularly talk during meals together. These discussions might be about how the day is going or about plans for the future or about various common interests. Most couples also talk at least briefly at bed time. They know that almost every day they will talk during these periods.

In the same way, believers should have regular times that they talk to God. I think upon waking, at meals, and at bedtime are good times to pray regularly. That doesn’t mean that you always have to pray for extended periods . Most of these will probably be fairly short and the time allowed may vary from day to day.

Praying at these 5 times is handy because you wake up and go to bed every day and most people eat breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day. These events are reminders to pray. You may have other times like when you pick kids up at school, when you get in your car to drive, or nightly devotions before putting kids to bed. You might have other times that work for you because everyone’s life is a little different. Some of these may be solitary prayers, while others might include someone else, especially family members. Whatever the case, these are times that you usually pray every day. They are guaranteed times with God. They are times God can count on you and you can count on God.

With others

An old married couple usually doesn’t hang out only with each other. They also hang out and talk with friends and family. They will get together with some friends/family on regular occasions. They will get together with others on special occasions. This is a nice time of jointly conversing and helping each other.

Believers also are called to pray together.

They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. (Acts 2:42) {emphasis mine}

We may pray with a person or group. We may pray at church, a Bible study, or a prayer meeting. We may regularly meet with one or more people just to pray for our church, our country, and each other.

For 2-3 years I had a friend I would pray with once a week for about an hour. We were both very busy. We both homeschooled kids and had other responsibilities. We didn’t live near each other, so we prayed together on the phone. We made prayer together work, even when it wasn’t convenient, because it was important to us.

Depending on our life circumstances, we may pray with others more or less. (Singles usually have less opportunities to pray with others, while families always have each other to pray with.) Whether or not it happens every day, we are called to pray to God with other believers and for other believers.

Random discussion (Thanks, interests, & Concerns)

Random discussion normally should be the largest component of communications between a couple and between believers and God. These prayers are not planned or organized. They are a sign that we are including another in our daily lives because they are important to us.

Sometimes these prayers are a quick comment on what is happening in our lives. Sometimes these prayers are about a worry or concern. They can be a mention of something we find interesting or something we find beautiful. It may be a comment on something we learned or about us finally understanding something. Frequently they are prayers to say a quick “help” or “thank you.”

These little brief prayers shot up to God, usually while doing the normal activities of life, are just a sign that we find God important and want Him in our life. You may say, “Wow! That is a great view! You made beautiful mountains.” You may say, “I’m really struggling with this. Please help me do better.” You may say, “What is happening in the world is scary. Please help me to know what to do and help me to trust you in all things.” You might ask, “What am I supposed to say to this unbeliever to draw them to you?” or “How do I speak wisely to this person who is hurting?” We are including God in our lives and listening to Him because we want His opinion and guidance.

We may speak out loud or we may think our prayers silently where only God hears. We usually aren’t kneeling. We usually don’t have our hands folded, nor do we have our eyes closed.

If we are truly depending on God to guide our lives, these prayers should be a huge part of our lives. They should be sprinkled consistently through our day.

Cries for help

Part of the joy of a long and loving marriage is having someone to depend on when we are in need, whether sick, or tired, or sad, or frustrated, or physically unable to do something ourselves. We always have that other person to depend on and lean on.

And if one can overpower him who is alone, two can resist him. A cord of three strands is not quickly torn apart. (Ecclesiastes 4:12)

In the same way believers should lean on God to support them throughout their lives. I’ll admit that I used to only “bother God” with my really big concerns. I wasn’t comfortable asking Him for help with my little, day-to-day concerns, but that was pushing God away.

Unlike with a person who has a limited amount of time and energy, God can see and hear all prayers throughout all of history at the same time and not even break a sweat. We aren’t bothering God with our requests. We are honoring Him with our requests. He wants to be not only a part of our lives, but the leading part of our lives. When we ask for His help, His wisdom, His guidance, and His power, we are doing exactly what we should and we are growing our relationship with Him.

It is good to continually ask God for help, but that doesn’t mean we should ask for every petty desire. Our prayers shouldn’t be filled with requests for wealth, fame, and power. All prayers should include the same qualifier (even if not stated explicitly) Jesus used right before going to the cross, saying, “… yet not My will, but Yours be done.” (Luke 22:42b) We should be praying our problems and leaving the solution to Him. He frequently will answer in ways we never imagined (and frequently would never choose for ourselves), but these answers are always for our good.1

Conclusion

As you can see, praying continually is just a lifestyle. It is a way of including God in our lives. It is a way of showing we trust God fully. It is a way of serving God and being used by God.

In reality, praying continually isn’t as hard as it sounds. Like all habits, it just takes a little time to build the habit. Once prayer becomes a part of your life, it doesn’t feel like work, it just happens. It is as natural as talking to your best friend or spouse or parents or kids. You can’t imagine not talking to God continually.

I’ll end with these lyrics:

What a friend we have in Jesus\ All our sins and grieves to bear\ What a privilege it is to carry\ Everything to God in prayer

Have we trials and temptations\ Is there trouble anywhere\ Our precious Savior\ He is still our refuge\ Take it to the Lord in prayer

When we're weak and heavy laden\ Cumbered with a load of care\ We should never be discouraged\ When we take it to the Lord in prayer

Oh what peace we often forfeit\ Oh what needless pain we bear\ We should never be discouraged when we\ Take it to the Lord in prayer

Trust Jesus.\ \ your sister in Christ,

Christy

Bible verses are NASB (New American Standard Bible) 1995 edition unless otherwise stated

FYI, If you are wondering what to say, this acrostic (ACTS) is a handy for outline for prayer:

• A = Adoration -Praise God for who He is

• C = Confession - Admit our sins and His righteous lordship

• T = Thanks - Thank God for all He has done for us including our salvation

• S = Supplication - Make requests from God for help and to supply our needs.

For more articles and to see all of my posts check out my Trust Jesus Substack and consider subscribing to avoid missing any posts.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Um algoritmo imbecil da evolução

Suponha que você queira escrever a palavra BANANA partindo de OOOOOO e usando só alterações aleatórias das letras. As alterações se dão por meio da multiplicação da palavra original em várias outras, cada uma com uma mudança diferente.

No primeiro período, surgem BOOOOO e OOOOZO. E então o ambiente decide que todas as palavras que não começam com um B estão eliminadas. Sobra apenas BOOOOO e o algoritmo continua.

É fácil explicar conceber a evolução das espécies acontecendo dessa maneira, se você controlar sempre a parte em que o ambiente decide quem vai sobrar.

Porém, há apenas duas opções:

1. Se o ambiente decidir as coisas de maneira aleatória, a chance de você chegar na palavra correta usando esse método é tão pequena que pode ser considerada nula.
2. Se o ambiente decidir as coisas de maneira pensada, caímos no //design inteligente//.

Acredito que isso seja uma enunciação decente do argumento "no free lunch" aplicado à crítica do darwinismo por William Dembski.

A resposta darwinista consiste em dizer que não existe essa BANANA como objetivo final. Que as palavras podem ir se alterando aleatoriamente, e o que sobrar sobrou, não podemos dizer que um objetivo foi atingido ou deixou de sê-lo. E aí os defensores do design inteligente dirão que o resultado ao qual chegamos não pode ter sido fruto de um processo aleatório. BANANA é qualitativamente diferente de AYZOSO, e aí há várias maneiras de "provar" que sim usando modelos matemáticos e tal.

Fico com a impressão, porém, de que essa coisa só pode ser resolvida como sim ou não mediante uma discussão das premissas, e chega um ponto em que não há mais provas matemáticas possíveis, apenas subjetividade.

Daí eu me lembro da minha humilde solução ao problema do cão que aperta as teclas aleatoriamente de um teclado e escreve as obras completas de Shakespeare: mesmo que ele o faça, nada daquilo terá sentido sem uma inteligência de tipo humano ali para lê-las e perceber que não se trata de uma bagunça, mas sim de um texto com sentido para ele. O milagre se dá não no momento em que o cão tropeça no teclado, mas no momento em que o homem olha para a tela.

Se o algoritmo da evolução chegou à palavra BANANA ou UXJHTR não faz diferença pra ela, mas faz diferença para nós, que temos uma inteligência humana, e estamos observando aquilo. O homem também pensaria que há //algo// por trás daquele evento do cão que digita as obras de Shakespeare, e como seria possível alguém em sã consciência pensar que não?

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Per Bylund's insight

The firm doesn't exist because, like Coase said, it is inefficient to operate in a fully open-market and production processes need some bubbles of central planning.

Instead, what happens is that a firm is created because an entrepreneur is doing a new thing (and here I imagine that doing an old thing in a new context also counts as doing a new thing, but I didn't read his book), and for that new thing there is no market, there are no specialized workers offering the services needed, nor other businesses offering the higher-order goods that entrepreneur wants, so he must do all by himself.

So the entrepreneur goes and hires workers and buys materials more generic than he wanted and commands these to build what he wants exactly. It is less efficient than if he could buy the precise services and goods he wanted and combine those to yield the product he envisaged, but it accomplishes the goal.

Later, when that specific market evolves, it's natural that specialized workers and producers of the specific factors begin to appear, and the market gets decentralized.

@ dc652bee:6154e7d0

🆘📢Exciting news for our community! We are thrilled to announce the Bybit bot airdrop, designed to enhance your trading experience. Don't miss out on this opportunity to elevate your game! 🚀💰 #BybitAirdrop 🌐 http://surgishop.lnkiy.in/Bybit_bot👈

@ 13e63e99:25525c6a

The Federal Reserve has announced a 50-basis-point reduction in the benchmark interest rate, officially initiating the first easing cycle in U.S. monetary policy since March 2020. This move aims to address potential weaknesses in the U.S. economy and labor market while further reducing inflation. Fed Chair Jerome Powell emphasized that current economic conditions are strong, and the rate cut is designed to sustain this momentum and enable a flexible response to changing conditions.

Fed officials expect additional rate reductions for the remainder of the year, gradually lowering rates over the next few years. This easing cycle is anticipated to have significant implications for the future of the U.S. economy, influencing the rates at which banks extend loans to both individuals and businesses. As a result, borrowing costs for consumers—such as home mortgages and credit card debt—are likely to decrease.

The news supported bitcoin prices, with bitcoin recently near $63,000. Bitcoin prices tend to rise on signs of monetary easing, as they are broadly seen as risk-on assets even as some investors tout their use as safe havens.

In the long run, increased borrowing and spending can lead to stronger economic growth, which may further enhance liquidity in the system. However, while liquidity may initially increase, prolonged low rates can also lead to potential risks, such as asset bubbles and excessive debt levels. Monitoring these factors is essential to maintain financial stability.

Reference: Trading Economics, Reuters

The Nostr ecosystem is known for its decentralization and focus on sovereign identity, offering a unique advantage for users. With more than 100 applications across social media, entertainment, marketplace and more, Nostr's key strengths include:

1. Decentralization and Sovereignty: Protects users' privacy from censorship.

2. Integration with payment system: Enhances features like zapping and streaming.

While these aspects attract Bitcoin enthusiasts, broader user adoption will require more sustainable and diverse features. Over the next few years, various opportunities and challenges may arise.

Social Media

Nostr represents a significant opportunity in decentralized social media, giving users control over their data and promoting free speech. Users can zap each other’s content through the Bitcoin Lightning Network. Nostr’s interoperability allows users to share posts across platforms, enabling a more integrated experience. Unlike traditional social media, where data is siloed, Nostr fosters collaboration among apps, allowing users to switch easily based on their needs. Over the next few years, we can expect a thriving ecosystem.

Identification and Login

Nostr's decentralized identity system relies on public and private keys, making it a fundamental feature. While no standalone disruptive applications are expected, this identification functionality can enhance social media and wallet apps by integrating features that improve competitiveness.

Decentralized Marketplace

Nostr's secure communication framework can facilitate decentralized marketplaces, enabling direct buyer-seller interactions while enhancing privacy. These marketplaces could extend beyond traditional goods to include music, writing, and services.

Regulation in the Nostr Ecosystem

As a censorship-resistant platform, Nostr might faces unique regulatory challenges. The protocol itself is neutral, but how developers manage relays will determine oversight levels. Proper regulation might prevent illegal activities and enhance the credibility of apps, helping Nostr grow without stifling its decentralized spirit. Developers focusing on decentralization may find opportunities in regulatory advising, ensuring that Nostr apps adhere to principles of decentralization while fostering healthy growth.

## MicroStrategy Raises $1.01 Billion in Convertible Notes to Fuel Bitcoin Acquisitions

MicroStrategy has completed a $1.01 billion offering of 0.625% convertible senior notes due in 2028, with plans to acquire Bitcoin using part of the proceeds. The private offering, finalized on Sept. 19, targeted institutional investors and allows conversion into cash or MicroStrategy stock. The company will also redeem $500 million in senior secured notes, releasing collateral that includes 69,080 Bitcoin. Between Sept. 13 and 19, MicroStrategy purchased approximately 7,420 Bitcoin for about $458.2 million, averaging $61,750 per Bitcoin.

> Reference: Microstrategy, Cointelegraph

Bhutan Revealed as Major Bitcoin Holder with 13,093 BTC

Bhutan, the Buddhist kingdom in the eastern Himalayas, has emerged as a significant Bitcoin holder, owning 13,093 BTC valued at approximately $830.789 million, according to Arkham Intelligence. This is the first public disclosure of Bhutan's Bitcoin addresses.

Mining is conducted by the country's investment arm, Druk Holdings, which has established facilities at various sites, including the defunct Education City project. In May 2023, Bitdeer partnered with Druk Holding & Investments to develop a 100% carbon-free Bitcoin mining operation in Bhutan. Earlier reports indicated plans to expand mining capacity from 100 to 600 megawatts, leveraging the country's abundant hydropower resources for eco-friendly operations.

Reference: Arkham, Bitcoin Magazine

Donald Trump Makes History with Bitcoin Payment

Republican Party presidential nominee Donald Trump made history as the first former U.S. president to complete a Bitcoin payment at PubKey, a Bitcoin-themed bar in Greenwich Village, NYC, during National Cheeseburger Day.

He described the payment as “easy” and said it went through “quickly and beautifully.”

After the transaction, Trump, accompanied by bar owner Thomas Pacchia, greeted attendees. “This was one of the most important Bitcoin transactions of all time,” said Pacchia. “President Trump came to connect with and support the Bitcoin community. We are very excited he was here.”

> Reference: Yahoo Finance, Cointelegraph

## We are Hiring: Entrepreneur In Residence

As an Entrepreneur In Residence with HCM, you will lead and drive innovative projects related to building Bitcoin ecosystem. Leveraging your extensive background in business, technology, product development, marketing, and/or operations management, you will drive projects from the seed stage through capital market financing and growth, along with our resource supports. We seek leaders with a good understanding of the Bitcoin who can achieve breakthroughs in the international market.

Please send your resume to: account_admin@hcm.capital/yake@hcm.capital\ For more information, please check out bitcoinerjobs.com

## Lifpay is sponsoring Max & Stacy Invitational at EL Encanto Golf Tournament in January 2025, El Salvador

> Reference: X.com

Unchained and University Impact Launch Bitcoin-Native Donor-Advised Funds to Streamline Charitable Donations and Maximize Tax Efficiency

> Reference: X.com

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY and the "covenants" drama

There are many ideas for "covenants" (I don't think this concept helps in the specific case of examining proposals, but fine). Some people think "we" (it's not obvious who is included in this group) should somehow examine them and come up with the perfect synthesis.

It is not clear what form this magic gathering of ideas will take and who (or which ideas) will be allowed to speak, but suppose it happens and there is intense research and conversations and people (ideas) really enjoy themselves in the process.

What are we left with at the end? Someone has to actually commit the time and put the effort and come up with a concrete proposal to be implemented on Bitcoin, and whatever the result is it will have trade-offs. Some great features will not make into this proposal, others will make in a worsened form, and some will be contemplated very nicely, there will be some extra costs related to maintenance or code complexity that will have to be taken. Someone, a concreate person, will decide upon these things using their own personal preferences and biases, and many people will not be pleased with their choices.

That has already happened. Jeremy Rubin has already conjured all the covenant ideas in a magic gathering that lasted more than 3 years and came up with a synthesis that has the best trade-offs he could find. CTV is the result of that operation.

---

The fate of CTV in the popular opinion illustrated by the thoughtless responses it has evoked such as "can we do better?" and "we need more review and research and more consideration of other ideas for covenants" is a preview of what would probably happen if these suggestions were followed again and someone spent the next 3 years again considering ideas, talking to other researchers and came up with a new synthesis. Again, that person would be faced with "can we do better?" responses from people that were not happy enough with the choices.

And unless some famous Bitcoin Core or retired Bitcoin Core developers were personally attracted by this synthesis then they would take some time to review and give their blessing to this new synthesis.

To summarize the argument of this article, the actual question in the current CTV drama is that there exists hidden criteria for proposals to be accepted by the general community into Bitcoin, and no one has these criteria clear in their minds. It is not as simple not as straightforward as "do research" nor it is as humanly impossible as "get consensus", it has a much bigger social element into it, but I also do not know what is the exact form of these hidden criteria.

This is said not to blame anyone -- except the ignorant people who are not aware of the existence of these things and just keep repeating completely false and unhelpful advice for Jeremy Rubin and are not self-conscious enough to ever realize what they're doing.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

IPFS problems: Conceit

IPFS is trying to do many things. The IPFS leaders are revolutionaries who think they're smarter than the rest of the entire industry.

The fact that they've first proposed a protocol for peer-to-peer distribution of immutable, content-addressed objects, then later tried to fix that same problem using their own half-baked solution (IPNS) is one example.

Other examples are their odd appeal to decentralization in a very non-specific way, their excessive flirtation with Ethereum and their never-to-be-finished can-never-work-as-advertised Filecoin project.

They could have focused on just making the infrastructure for distribution of objects through hashes (not saying this would actually be a good idea, but it had some potential) over a peer-to-peer network, but in trying to reinvent the entire internet they screwed everything up.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Replacing the web with something saner

This is a simplification, but let's say that basically there are just 3 kinds of websites:

1. Websites with content: text, images, videos;
2. Websites that run full apps that do a ton of interactive stuff;
3. Websites with some interactive content that uses JavaScript, or "mini-apps";

In a saner world we would have 3 different ways of serving and using these. 1 would be "the web" (and it was for a while, although I'm not claiming here that the past is always better and wanting to get back to the glorious old days).

1 would stay as "the web", just static sites, styled with CSS, no JavaScript whatsoever, but designers can still thrive and make they look pretty. Or it could also be something like Gemini. Maybe the two protocols could coexist.

2 would be downloadable native apps, much easier to write and maintain for developers (considering that multi-platform and cross-compilation is easy today and getting easier), faster, more polished experience for users, more powerful, integrates better with the computer.

(Remember that since no one would be striving to make the same app run both on browsers and natively no one would have any need for Electron or other inefficient bloated solutions, just pure native UI, like the Telegram app, have you seen that? It's fast.)

But 2 is mostly for apps that people use every day, something like Google Docs, email (although email is also broken technology), Netflix, Twitter, Trello and so on, and all those hundreds of niche SaaS that people pay monthly fees to use, each tailored to a different industry (although most of functions they all implement are the same everywhere). What do we do with dynamic open websites like StackOverflow, for example, where one needs to not only read, but also search and interact in multiple ways? What about that website that asks you a bunch of questions and then discovers the name of the person you're thinking about? What about that mini-app that calculates the hash of your provided content or shrinks your video, or that one that hosts your image without asking any questions?

All these and tons of others would fall into category 3, that of instantly loaded apps that you don't have to install, and yet they run in a sandbox.

The key for making category 3 worth investing time into is coming up with some solid grounds, simple enough that anyone can implement in multiple different ways, but not giving the app too much choices.

Telegram or Discord bots are super powerful platforms that can accomodate most kinds of app in them. They can't beat a native app specifically made with one purpose, but they allow anyone to provide instantly usable apps with very low overhead, and since the experience is so simple, intuitive and fast, users tend to like it and sometimes even pay for their services. There could exist a protocol that brings apps like that to the open world of (I won't say "web") domains and the websockets protocol -- with multiple different clients, each making their own decisions on how to display the content sent by the servers that are powering these apps.

Another idea is that of Alan Kay: to design a nice little OS/virtual machine that can load these apps and run them. Kinda like browsers are today, but providing a more well-thought, native-like experience and framework, but still sandboxed. And I add: abstracting away details about design, content disposition and so on.

---

These 3 kinds of programs could coexist peacefully. 2 are just standalone programs, they can do anything and each will be its own thing. 1 and 3, however, are still similar to browsers of today in the sense that you need clients to interact with servers and show to the user what they are asking. But by simplifying everything and separating the scopes properly these clients would be easy to write, efficient, small, the environment would be open and the internet would be saved.

See also

• On the state of programs and browsers

@ c278022e:b37d01a2

Abstract

This paper proposes a comprehensive system design for a decentralized prediction market and a game-theoretic stablecoin built entirely on Bitcoin's Lightning Network. Leveraging Discreet Log Contracts (DLCs) and off-chain transactions, the system enables leveraged trading, liquidity provision, and stablecoin creation without relying on alternative cryptocurrencies or tokens. We address potential flaws and criticisms, demonstrating that Bitcoin alone provides a secure, scalable, and efficient platform for advanced financial applications.

truthserum@iris.to

Introduction

Motivation

Bitcoin, as the original and most secure cryptocurrency, offers a stable and decentralized platform for financial innovation. While alternative platforms like Ethereum have introduced smart contracts and decentralized finance (DeFi) applications, they often suffer from network congestion, high fees, and centralization risks. This paper aims to demonstrate that Bitcoin's Lightning Network can support complex financial instruments, including a decentralized prediction market and a game-theoretic stablecoin, without the need for alternative cryptocurrencies.

Overview

We propose a system that:

• Utilizes Bitcoin's Lightning Network for scalability and low fees.
• Employs Discreet Log Contracts (DLCs) for secure, private smart contracts.
• Creates a decentralized prediction market with leveraged trading.
• Introduces a synthetic stablecoin based on the net positions of long and short traders.
• Addresses potential flaws and criticisms, ensuring robustness and security.

Background

Bitcoin and the Lightning Network

Bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency that operates on a peer-to-peer network, using proof-of-work consensus for security. The Lightning Network is a layer-two protocol that enables fast, off-chain transactions between participants, enhancing Bitcoin's scalability.

Discreet Log Contracts (DLCs)

DLCs are a type of smart contract that allows two parties to make a conditional payment based on the outcome of a future event, with privacy and security ensured by cryptographic techniques.

Prediction Markets and Stablecoins

Prediction markets allow participants to speculate on the outcome of future events, while stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to maintain a stable value relative to a target asset or basket of assets.

System Design

Key Components

1. Liquidity Providers (LPs): Users who provide Bitcoin as collateral to the liquidity pool.
2. Traders: Users who take leveraged long or short positions on asset prices.
3. Oracles: Entities that provide reliable price feeds for asset settlement.
4. Stablecoin: A synthetic stablecoin derived from the net positions of traders, backed by Bitcoin collateral.

Core Features

• Decentralized Prediction Market: Facilitates leveraged trading on asset prices.
• Game-Theoretic Stablecoin: Maintains stability through the balance of longs and shorts.
• Yield Generation: LPs earn yields from trading fees, funding rates, and liquidation penalties.
• Bitcoin-Only: Built entirely on Bitcoin's network without alternative tokens.

Technical Implementation

Leveraged Trading via Discreet Log Contracts

Contract Setup

Two parties, a trader and an LP, agree on contract terms:

• Asset: Bitcoin/USD price.
• Leverage: Multiplier on the trader's collateral.
• Collateral: Bitcoin amount provided by the trader.
• Duration: Contract length.
• Oracle: Selected to provide the settlement price.

Funding the Contract

• Trader: Locks collateral C_T in a multi-signature address.
• LP: Locks collateral C_LP to cover potential payouts.

Execution and Settlement

1. At maturity, the oracle provides a signature of the final price P_f.
2. The DLC allows funds to be distributed based on P_f and the contract terms.

Synthetic Stablecoin Creation

Mechanism

• Stablecoins are minted when traders open positions.
• Backed by Bitcoin collateral from LPs and traders.
• Stability maintained through balanced market positions and funding rates.

Funding Rates and Market Balance

Purpose

To incentivize traders to balance long and short positions, maintaining system stability.

Implementation

• Funding Rate: Funding Rate = k * (Net Position / Total Open Interest)
• Payments: Traders on the dominant side pay funding fees to the opposite side.

Risk Management and Liquidations

• Margin Requirements: Minimum collateral ratios for traders.
• Liquidation Thresholds: Positions are liquidated if collateral falls below maintenance margin.
• Automatic Liquidations: Enforced by smart contracts without human intervention.

Mathematical Foundations

Payout Calculation

Position Size

Position Size = C_T * L

Profit/Loss (P/L)

P/L = Position Size * ((P_f - P_0) / P_0)

Return on Investment (ROI)

ROI = (P/L / C_T) * 100%

Liquidation Price Calculation

For a long position:

P_liquidation = P_0 - ((C_T / Position Size) * P_0)

Game Theory and Incentive Alignment

Traders

• Incentive: Profit from accurate market predictions.
• Behavior: Manage risk to avoid liquidation.

Liquidity Providers

• Incentive: Earn yields from fees and funding rates.
• Risk: Exposure to traders' net P/L.

Oracles

• Incentive: Earn fees for accurate data provision.
• Behavior: Maintain reliability to secure future earnings.

Potential Flaws and Criticisms Addressed

Oracle Trustworthiness

Criticism

Relying on oracles introduces a single point of failure and potential for data manipulation.

Solution

• Decentralized Oracles: Use multiple oracles and aggregate data.
• Threshold Signatures: Require consensus among oracles.
• Incentive Alignment: Oracles are incentivized to provide accurate data through fees and reputation.

Liquidity Risks

Criticism

Insufficient liquidity may prevent covering traders' profits, especially during high volatility.

Solution

• Dynamic Leverage Limits: Adjust leverage based on liquidity.
• Risk Management Protocols: Implement strict margin requirements.
• Incentivizing LPs: Offer competitive yields to attract liquidity.

Price Volatility and Market Manipulation

Criticism

Extreme market movements could lead to rapid liquidations and instability.

Solution

• Anti-Manipulation Measures: Use time-weighted average prices (TWAP).
• Circuit Breakers: Temporarily halt trading during extreme volatility.
• Robust Liquidation Mechanisms: Ensure smooth liquidations without market disruption.

Technical Complexity

Criticism

Implementing DLCs and managing Lightning Network channels require advanced expertise.

Solution

• User-Friendly Interfaces: Develop intuitive platforms.
• Educational Resources: Provide guides and support.
• Community Development: Encourage collaboration and open-source contributions.

Regulatory Compliance

Criticism

Operating a leveraged trading platform may raise regulatory concerns.

Solution

• Decentralization: Structure the platform to minimize central control.
• Legal Consultation: Engage experts to navigate regulations.
• KYC/AML Policies: Implement where necessary without compromising privacy.

Network Limitations

Criticism

The Lightning Network may face limitations in liquidity and channel capacity.

Solution

• Channel Management Strategies: Utilize multi-path payments and channel factories.
• Liquidity Hubs: Establish well-funded nodes.
• Ongoing Development: Contribute to scalability improvements.

Conclusion

By leveraging Bitcoin's Lightning Network and Discreet Log Contracts, we can build a decentralized prediction market and a game-theoretic stablecoin without relying on alternative cryptocurrencies. This system addresses potential flaws and demonstrates that Bitcoin alone provides a secure, scalable, and efficient platform for advanced financial applications.

Future Work

• Prototype Development: Create a working model of the proposed system.
• Security Audits: Conduct thorough assessments to ensure robustness.
• Community Engagement: Involve developers and users in refining the system.
• Regulatory Navigation: Work with legal experts to ensure compliance.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Bitcoin and Lightning Network communities for their ongoing contributions to decentralized finance and open-source development.

References

1. Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, 2008.
2. Joseph Poon and Thaddeus Dryja, The Bitcoin Lightning Network: Scalable Off-Chain Instant Payments, 2016.
3. Tadge Dryja, Discreet Log Contracts, 2017.
4. GMX, Decentralized Perpetual Exchange, https://gmx.io/, Accessed 2023.
5. BIP 0341, Taproot: SegWit Version 1 Spending Rules, 2020.
6. Rusty Russell, Generic Smart Contracts Over Lightning, 2019.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

"House" dos economistas e o Estado

Falta um gênio pra produzir um seriado tipo House só que com economistas. O House do seriado seria um austríaco é o "everybody lies" seria uma premissa segundo a qual o Estado é sempre a causa de todos os problemas.

Situações bem cabeludas poderiam ser apresentadas de maneira que parecesse muito que a causa era ganância ou o mau-caratismo dos agentes, mas na investigação quase sempre se descobriria que a causa era o Estado.

Parece ridículo, mas se eu descrevesse House assim aqui também pareceria. A execução é que importa.

@ 472f440f:5669301e

Last night I had the pleasure of sitting down with Caitlin Long, Founder and CEO of Custodia - a fully reserved bank providing banking services to bitcoin companies, to discuss an affidavit written by Elaine Hetrick of Silvergate Bank. Elaine is the Chief Administrative Officer of Silvergate and wrote an affidavit, a sworn testimony subject to perjury, in which she detailed the events that led to Silvergate voluntarily winding down their business and returning deposits to their customers.

This affidavit is a bombshell because it confirms speculation that Silvergate was solvent in early 2023 and wasn't shut down because of bad risk management on behalf of the bank's management team, but instead was forced to shutter its doors because the Biden Administration, with strong influence from Senator Elizabeth Warren, forced Silvergate's hand because they didn't like that they were banking digital asset companies.

For those who are a bit fuzzy on the details of the narratives that were flying around Silvergate at the time, I'll jog your memory. FTX was a customer of Silvergate's at the time their Ponzi scheme unraveled. As FTX was blowing up, everyone and their mother was scrambling to get their money out of Silvergate because they assumed that since one of the bank's largest counterparties was going bust, the bank must be in trouble too. A sane decision. Especially considering the history of systemically non-important financial institutions this century.

Unless you were paying close attention during this time, you were likely under the impression that Silvergate was a typical fractionally reserved bank that was experiencing a run that led to its inevitable demise. The media made it seem this way. The regulators made it seem this way. And one pompous short seller made it seem this way. However, nothing could be further from the truth. Here are the most important parts of the affidavit:

Silvergate had stabilized, was able to make regulatory capital requirements, and had the capability to continue to serve its customers that had kept their deposits with Silvergate Bank.

Despite this, regulators decided to turn the pressure up and essentially gave Silvergate Bank, and Signature Bank as well, an ultimatum; drastically change your business models immediately by dropping your digital asset customer base or we'll shut you down. There were no hard numbers described in Elaine's testimony, but rumors are that the regulators wanted Silvergate to quickly shrink their exposure to digital asset-related clients to less than 15% of their capital base. At the time, Silvergate's customer base was made up almost entirely of digital asset companies (99.5% to be exact).

The regulators were asking Silvergate to do something that was quite literally impossible given the circumstances. Faced with an impossible task, on March 8th of 2023 Silvergate decided to voluntarily wind down their operations and return deposits back to their customers.

Let's be very clear here, Silvergate did not lose a single penny of customer deposits due to the run on their bank. Management, understanding the volatile nature of the digital asset markets, designed their risk management and capital allocation strategies in a way that would enable them to return dollars to any customer who requested them. And that's exactly what they did when customers came to request their money. They returned EVERY SINGLE PENNY.

This begs the question, "Why did they essentially force Silvergate to shut down?" They seemed to be running a very responsible operation after all. You'd think the regulators would applaud Silvergate's vigilance in risk management on behalf of their customer base. How many banks would have been able to do the same thing if put in the same situation? Probably not many.

The answer to this question is already well known throughout the industry, but Elaine Hetrick's testimony adds some hard evidence that makes it undeniable; Elizabeth Warren, the SEC, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve have been acting in concert to unconstitutionally and extrajudicially target the bitcoin and broader digital asset industry because they do not believe that it should exist. It is a threat to their power structure. The financial system, as it is designed today, gives those who would like to centrally plan the economy and micromanage the lives of American citizens a ton of power. Bitcoin is a threat to that power and they have to do everything in their power to prevent its proliferation.

The targeting of the industry was also confirmed by the aftermath of the NYDFS and FDIC uncharacteristically taking Signature Bank behind the woodshed in the evening of Sunday, March 20th, 2023, despite the fact that Barney Frank and others at the bank were convinced they could handle withdraws come market open the next day.

Signature Bank was ultimately sold to Flagstar Bank. However, they were forced to spin out their digital asset-related accounts before doing so.

This public signaling and sudden regulatory shift made clear that, at least as of the first quarter of 2023, the Federal Bank Regulatory Agencies would not tolerate banks with significant concentrations of digital asset customers, ultimately preventing Silvergate Bank from continuing its digital asset focused business model.

Pretty damning if you ask me. Also, very frustrating and most definitely illegal.

Elizabeth Warren and her gaggle of hall monitors across alphabet soup agencies and the Federal Reserve have been on one massive, unconstitutional, power trip for the last four years. They've besmirched bitcoin and those of us working hard to ensure that the United States of America leads the way forward as bitcoin adoption continues at every turn. Good people striving to make the world a better place.

No one is a better example of this than Alan Lane, the former CEO of Silvergate Bank. I consider Alan a friend and feel supremely confident when I say that he is one of the nicest and thoughtful people I have met in this industry. A man who followed his passion to bring legitimacy and much needed banking services to an industry that the incumbents refused to touch. And he did bring legitimacy. As I explained earlier, Alan and his team understood the volatile nature of the industry and built their firm in a way that took this volatility into account. Silvergate did not fail, they were forced to shut down by Elizabeth Warren and her acolytes at the regulatory agencies.

What's worse, Warren's vendetta against bitcoin and the digital asset industry incited the largest banking crisis this country had seen since 2008. Silvergate and Signature being taken behind the woodshed put everyone on their toes and bank runs started across the country. This led to the failure of First Republic, Silicon Valley Bank and a couple of smaller banks, forced the Fed to step in with their emergency BTFP program, and burdened taxpayers with $40B in FDIC costs that needed to be absorbed as a result. If it weren't for the bailouts things would have gotten completely out of control. All because Elizabeth Warren wants to live in a world in which we are forced to use CBDCs and unable to opt-in to bitcoin.

The euthanasia of Silvergate and Signature are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Chokepoint 2.0.

Caitlin Long and Custodia have been in a years long battle with the Federal Reserve to receive a Fed master account so that they can properly serve their customers. For those who are unaware, Custodia is a full-reserve bank that exist to serve bitcoin and digital asset businesses as well as other adjacent businesses like fintechs, banks and funds. Custodia is a chartered bank and special purpose depository institution that has built custody services so that customers can hold bitcoin within their bank accounts alongside their dollar accounts.

Like Silvergate and Signature, Custodia has been singled out and unlawfully denied a master account with the Fed because the Federal Reserve doesn't want a bank like Custodia to exist. Either because they worry about the ramifications of the introduction of a full-reserve bank into a system dominated by fractional-reserve banks or they simply do not want to see bitcoin succeed. If we're being honest, it's probably a combination of the two.

Despite what we, or anyone else, thinks about the potential effect a bank like Custodia could have on the market if it's granted a master account, the Fed's actions are unconstitutional in this case as well. This was made pretty clear (but yet to be determined by a court) in an amicus brief written by Paul Clement on behalf of Custodia earlier this Summer. The Fed is actively undermining the dual-banking system that was set up in this country to enable competition between state chartered banks and the Federal Reserve system.

In the case of Custodia, the Federal Reserve is exhibiting expansive discretionary power that it has never shown before. Custodia is a state chartered special purpose depository institution in the state of Wyoming. Historically, it would be trivial for this type of state chartered bank to get a master account with the Fed. But for whatever reason (we know the reason) the Fed has been denying Custodia their right to this account for a number of years. To the point where Custodia was forced to sue the Federal Reserve and take their case to the courts.

What's interesting about the saga of Custodia and the Fed is that it has forced Custodia's legal team to dig in and highlight where the Fed is overextending its reach and acting arbitrarily. In the amicus brief that was published in July of this year, Paul Clement argues that the way Federal Reserve Bank presidents are chosen is unconstitutional when you take into consideration the fact the these Fed branch presidents are unilaterally undermining state banking laws by denying master accounts.

If they are going to unilaterally undermine state banking laws they need to be appointed by the President or an official acting on behalf of the Executive Branch. Federal Reserve Bank presidents aren't appointed by the President of the United States or any official acting with the authority of the Executive Branch. Instead, they are appointed by their boards, which are controlled by the privately held commercial banks who own them. The Federal Reserve system is clearly acting unconstitutionally when they deny Custodia from being assigned a master account.

The people in power within the federal government and the Federal Reserve system are actively targeting the bitcoin and digital asset industry, acting extrajudicially and making a mockery of the rule of law in the United States. They are completely out of control and it is important that everyone who cares about the future of bitcoin in the United States and the future of the United States more broadly (even if you don't like bitcoin) speaks out and fights against these totalitarians as vehemently as possible. What they are doing is wrong. It's unconstitutional. And it is putting the future of our country at risk.

If the federal government, the regulators and the Federal Reserve do not get out of the way and let law abiding citizens build the businesses they want and associate with businesses they want, those businesses will go elsewhere and the United States will be set back generations as a result.

It's time to put these people in their place and let it be known that freedom will reign supreme in the Land of the Free. Fight!

Final thought... I promised Parker Lewis that I would do cross fit on Friday morning and I'm using today's final thought as an accountability tool.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

notes on "Economic Action Beyond the Extent of the Market", Per Bylund

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7St6pCipCB0

Markets work by dividing labour, but that's not as easy as it seems in the Adam Smith's example of a pin factory, because

1. a pin factory is not a market, so there is some guidance and orientation, some sort of central planning, inside there that a market doesn't have;
2. it is not clear how exactly the production process will be divided, it is not obvious as in "you cut the thread, I plug the head".

Dividing the labour may produce efficiency, but it also makes each independent worker in the process more fragile, as they become dependent on the others.

This is partially solved by having a lot of different workers, so you do not depend on only one.

If you have many, however, they must agree on where one part of the production process starts and where it ends, otherwise one's outputs will not necessarily coincide with other's inputs, and everything is more-or-less broken.

That means some level of standardization is needed. And indeed the market has constant incentives to standardization.

The statist economist discourse about standardization is that only when the government comes with a law that creates some sort of standardization then economic development can flourish, but in fact the market creates standardization all the time. Some examples of standardization include:

• programming languages, operating systems, internet protocols, CPU architectures;
• plates, forks, knifes, glasses, tables, chairs, beds, mattresses, bathrooms;
• building with concrete, brick and mortar;
• money;
• musical instruments;
• light bulbs;
• CD, DVD, VHS formats and others alike;
• services that go into every production process, like lunch services, restaurants, bakeries, cleaning services, security services, secretaries, attendants, porters;
• multipurpose steel bars;
• practically any tool that normal people use and require a little experience to get going, like a drilling machine or a sanding machine; etc.

Of course it is not that you find standardization in all places. Specially when the market is smaller or new, standardization may have not arrived.

There remains the truth, however, that division of labour has the potential of doing good.

More than that: every time there are more than one worker doing the same job in the same place of a division of labour chain, there's incentive to create a new subdivision of labour.

From the fact that there are at least more than one person doing the same job as another in our society we must conclude that someone must come up with an insight about an efficient way to divide the labour between these workers (and probably actually implement it), that hasn't happened for all kinds of jobs.

But to come up with division of labour outside of a factory, some market actors must come up with a way of dividing the labour, actually, determining where will one labour stop and other start (and that almost always needs some adjustments and in fact extra labour to hit the tips), and also these actors must bear the uncertainty and fragility that division of labour brings when there are not a lot of different workers and standardization and all that.

In fact, when an entrepreneur comes with a radical new service to the market, a service that does not fit in the current standard of division of labour, he must explain to his potential buyers what is the service and how the buyer can benefit from it and what he will have to do to adapt its current production process to bear with that new service. That's has happened not long ago with

• services that take food orders from the internet and relay these to the restaurants;
• hostels for cheap accommodation for young travellers;
• Uber, Airbnb, services that take orders and bring homemade food from homes to consumers and similars;
• all kinds of software-as-a-service;
• electronic monitoring service for power generators;
• mining planning and mining planning software; and many other industry-specific services.

See also

• Profits, not wages, as the originary factor
• Per Bylund's insight

@ fd78c37f:a0ec0833

A mirror post on the Dora Research Blog can be found at: https://research.dorahacks.io/2024/09/25/network-states-critique-part-1/ Author: DORA Interns

Section 1:

As capitalism became the new economic system, replacing the old feudal guilds and their small and inefficient means of production, cultural conditions began to take hold that would give rise to nations and a sense of national consciousness. This thesis, argued in great detail by Benedict Anderson in his book Imagined Communities, is characteristically similar to Marxist theory, which generally holds that any difference made in a society's economic and technological base results in changes throughout its whole structure. As humans alter their environment, gain control of its variables, and reduce the severity of their conditions, higher, more rational faculties may begin to develop. Karl Marx writes, “By thus acting on the external world and changing it, (human beings) at the same time change (their) own nature.” As technology progresses; as the tools used by human beings advance and become more efficient and productive, human consciousness grows with it. Starting with primitive forms of productive forces like stone tools, human beings organize themselves in ways made possible by this primal mode of technology, which possesses a meager capacity to tame and alter nature, and, consequently, casts human understanding and knowledge into the shadows, greatly obstructing their freedom, as well as their capacity to become self-aware. Thus as the means of production progress, more complicated forms of social organization become possible. Human beings slowly become conscious of their autonomy - the ability to live a life dictated by reason, by rational choice and principle, and not by the caprice of external causal factors. Throughout this historical process, the old institutions and societal structures deteriorate and grow obsolete; revolutions occur to update the social infrastructure and catch up to the progressing economic base.

When technology grew to the point of being able to sustain capitalism, and more well-organized systems of labor were needed to underpin what the economy demanded, people flocked to the cities, leaving behind the rural life that was characteristic of the feudal system, and began thinking of themselves as part of larger collectives, as nations. Marx writes, “Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, with separate interests, laws, governments, and systems of taxation, became lumped together into one nation, with one government, one code of laws, one national class-interest, one frontier, and one-customs tariff.” Industrialization, then, and its new tools, which drastically shifted the means of production, changed human consciousness and laid the conditions necessary for societies to become nation-states.

In Imagined Communities, Anderson claims this development toward industrialization and nation-states was largely set in motion by the advent of the Gutenberg printing press in 1440. He argues that this technology, which began to distribute newspapers, novels, and bibles to readers in a language that would become a people’s common vernacular, had laid the cultural conditions for a sense of national consciousness, the feeling that one belonged to a larger community that expanded past their immediate surroundings, to arise. People who previously did not think of themselves as ‘French’, or ‘English’, or ‘American’, who spoke in largely discontinuous dialects, slowly began to think of themselves as participating in a nation of people bound together by a shared experience. These new national identities replaced the old religious, preordained orders that once provided meaning to human beings, and nationality became one of the more dominant modes through which people identified who and what they were.

Now, another important technology that facilitated the historical development of nations was the ledger and its use for double-entry bookkeeping. As information regarding debits and credits was able to be recorded, more large-scale trades, transfers of assets, and general forms of record-keeping were made possible, bringing about the need for more uniform, clear, and discrete boundaries between the various territories. Nation-states became a means to meet the demands made by society’s progress. Feudalism and its notion of the Divine Right of Kings, its old religious dogmas, and its obsolete forms of social institutions, were unable to adapt to these economic shifts. The emergence of the Enlightenment period (1685-1789) ushered in new ways of understanding the state and its position of authority and legitimacy to hold power. Rather than being conceived as a beacon of Divine order, it increasingly became seen as a rational compromise between people who invested the state with authority in exchange for preserving their natural rights. It was now a third-party institution that resided over settling disputes, enforcing the law, and punishing those who violated it. The state was now only legitimate insofar as it protected the rights of the individuals who consented to be governed.

However, over time, a great deal of trust had been handed to these new institutions, and many believe they have now led to an excess of centralized power. Banks became the holders of financial ledgers; distribution of information, of news and events, became the job of a few selected companies, and the government, over time, stepped over its initial claim to legitimacy by taking on roles far surpassing the task of merely protecting individual rights and liberties. Because there was no technology for it, people still had to be trusted as disinterested and objective third-party mediators, which human nature often fails to achieve, allowing self-interest, greed, envy, and human vice more generally to have an influential role in state and governmental processes. This creates corrosive trust issues between citizens and their institutions. In their book The Truth Machine, Michael J. Casey and Paul Vigna write, “Trust - especially in our institutions - is a vital social resource, the true lubricant of all human interaction. When it works, we take it for granted - we wait our place in line, follow road rules, and assume everyone will do the same… But when trust is lacking, things really, really break down.”

Today, with the invention of blockchain and cryptocurrencies, many believe these institutions themselves become obsolete and that new forms of social organization are needed. In his book The Network State, Balaji Srinivasan labors to demonstrate this claim, arguing that the network and its capacity to allow individuals to organize digital, landless communities, can replace the old nation-states that obstruct social development. In particular, he believes blockchain and its capacity to underpin trustless systems to be capable of supplanting the older institutions by automating what they were entrusted with doing; cryptocurrencies can automate the roles done by central banks and the Federal Reserve; information of news and events can be loaded onto blockchains and remain immutable, preventing self-serving parties from tampering and manipulating it for their interests; private information can be cryptographically secured and held by individuals rather than by centralized, private tech companies like Google; and nation-states more generally can be superseded by the network, which eliminates the perennial issue of land that has caused innumerable wars and conflicts between sovereign states. But, despite the optimism induced by these new technologies, there are problems. The rest of this article will be concerned with addressing what it means for a network state to be ‘ethical’, to use a term of Srinivasan’s. Some nation-states are viewed as unethical, as providing conditions that are degrading to human beings; North Korea immediately comes to mind. The next section will propose a way to discern why such a judgment is true, and will be used to assess what a network state must achieve to be considered ‘ethical’. I will argue that this can only be done by holding people’s autonomy as the principal end of the state.

Section 2:

To see this, we can think of creating a state as a complex activity, and, as with most activities, it is directed toward certain ends. Similarly to how playing a sport, gardening, or driving a car is an activity, so is creating a state - albeit a far more complicated one. But whereas the ends of certain activities may be for the sake of pleasure or leisure, the state’s ends are always within a moral and ethical scope. It is moral in that, whenever one is engaged in the activity of state-making, the ends by which the activity is oriented are always directed toward drafting principles that will establish cooperative social practices and institutions that guide and govern the actions of the members within the state, which lay the conditions by which human beings will pursue their individual and collective well-being. In other words, the ends that the act of founding a state is aimed toward is to create practices that consist of individuals who form collectives, and who cooperate and live according to a given set of moral ends that orient, inform, and shape the lives of those within the state. Therefore, all acts occurring within this activity are never neutral from the moral point of view but are inextricably linked to questions about morality and the ethical life. Such an activity, then, should not be viewed as anything less than a pursuit of moral and ethical ends, and to confuse this activity with the pursuit of other ends - like financial gain, technological innovation, the expansion of markets, or the satisfaction of personal interests - commits a modal confusion, which immediately involves one in a separate activity than that of founding a state. By modal confusion, I mean the error of engaging in a particular mode of activity with the wrong set of ends in mind. For example, someone who makes paintings would be deeply confused to declare themself to be an artist when their chief end is financial gain. Such an end is better captured by calling the activity manufacturing rather than artistry. Perhaps a more characteristic end of an artist would be the production of beauty, for instance, or self-expression, but not profit. Profit would be employed only as a means to further, more artistic ends that are deemed necessary by the social conditions the artist finds themself in.

Or imagine a person who becomes friends with someone to derive certain benefits from them, like using them to get to know someone they are interested in, but who nevertheless believes that the two are sincere friends. The person who befriends the other confuses what kind of activity they are engaged in. The relation of being friends with someone involves adopting certain ends that are demanded by the relationship. In the case of friendship, an obvious end that characterizes the activity is holding the other person as an end-in-themselves, as someone who is not valuable for any other reason other than the fact that they’re a friend. One would be deeply confused by believing to be engaged in friendship when one does not hold the relevant end in relation to the activity.

Now, when founding a network state, reducing the degree of modal confusion is central to the project of creating an ‘ethical’ state. If a founder holds an irrelevant set of ends in mind, they risk the potential for causing significant harm to persons, and I will argue that it does so by reducing autonomy. By autonomy, I mean a human being’s capacity to exercise willful, deliberative choice, and not be wholly dictated by external influence. The philosopher Harry Frankfurt defines it as follows: “Autonomy is essentially a matter of whether we are active rather than passive in our motives and choices - whether… they are the motives and choices that we really want and are therefore in no way alien to us.” Now, one’s autonomy exists within one’s subjectivity, which can be understood as a person’s conscious experience. It’s the center at which one’s thoughts, desires, perceptions, worries, fears, anxieties, all occur, as they manifest in experience. Subjectivity can then be divided into at least two parts, one of which is a quantitative dimension, the other being qualitative. The first consists of the stream of experience, of the constant succession of mental states and behaviors. At one moment I’m hungry and so act to satisfy the desire; at another, I’m struck with fear and run away from the object that is the target of my response, and so on. As the examples imply, this dimension of subjectivity involves a high degree of passivity; events and experiences are simply happening to me. The qualitative dimension, on the other hand, is far more active and is the space by which autonomy exists. This involves the capacity to evaluate one’s mental states and to reflect and decide whether they are worth acting on, whether they’re rational or not, whether they represent the world accurately; and to act autonomously is to act based on one’s qualitative nature, and not be carried away unreflectively by the more passive, quantitative dimension.

The central claim of this article is that the principal end of the state is to promote the development and growth of the qualitative nature of its members’ subjectivity. To hold this capacity of human beings as secondary, or accidental and not a primary need, is to be modally confused. That’s not to say the state is the primary institution responsible for promoting or even determining its citizens’ autonomy - the existence and crimes of the USSR are sufficient to refute that - but only that it shares the responsibility. Whatever its exact role is, or in what forms it is concretely realized, the state’s principal end is directed toward facilitating the development of its citizens’ subjectivity. A society can be imagined as a large, extended plain divided into proportions sized according to the degree of each part’s contribution toward reaching this goal. One part consists of the economy, another is occupied by the private and public affairs of communities and individuals, and another is delegated to the state. Whatever the exact configuration of this plain, each part cooperates and contributes toward fulfilling the full breadth of human needs. And I believe this can be done in numerous ways; there is not necessarily one form a state must have, which specifies and delineates each of its fixed parts to align with some ultimate reality, to reach this end. Nevertheless, I believe the state does have a hierarchy of ends.

It could be argued, however, that this is wrong and that founding a state is not a moral activity but merely a prudential one, whose end is to protect individual self-interests and preferences. That is, the state is not concerned with morality but with establishing conditions that enable individuals to pursue their own self-interests and preferences uninterrupted by other human beings. Because individuals are concerned with their own well-being, with their own survival, and the satisfaction of their desires, living in a state of nature, where there is no authority to settle disputes or conflicts regarding life, liberty, or property, is contrary to individual interests. It would be rational, then, to form a state invested with the authority granted by the consent of the governed which has the power to punish those who violate the law, adjudicate and settle disputes, and protect everyone’s basic liberties that prevent others from interfering with one another’s lives.

Understanding the state this way means that the ends of the state are prudential and not primarily moral. Individuals are free to opt into whatever network state they wish, insofar as they do so by their own, uncoerced choice.

Now Srinivasan, as I see it, is somewhere in the middle between the moral and prudential conceptions of state founding. He speaks of state legitimacy as being grounded entirely in the consent of the governed. If a network state receives enough members; if it expands to the point of reaching diplomatic recognition, then that is a testament to the legitimacy of that state. People have consented to their smart contract(s), they have invested a certain amount of authority to the founder(s) by agreeing to its terms, and such a state, Srinivasan concludes, is therefore ‘ethical’. But the notion of being ethical here is ambiguous. Does he mean that it is so because what constitutes something as ethical is an agreement, or does he mean that freedom to choose is the principal end of the state? The former is prudential because it reasons that it is up to individuals to decide for themselves what is ethical or moral, given that there is no objective fact of the matter; individuals calculate according to their self-interests, preferences, and desires, and whether a contract is fair, just, or equal is up to each person. The latter, on the other hand, is moral because it holds freedom of choice as what constitutes the moral ends of the state. What matters is whether individuals freely choose to join the state, and not whether the contract is fair or just independent of that. This is because individuals' most valuable capacity is to choose. Because it is up to each person to decide for themselves whether a contract is fair or just, a state is morally legitimate if people voluntarily consent to its contract.

Whichever one Srinivasan is committed to, both are problematic and I will present arguments against the two interpretations, which will be motivated by the following claims. That one, holding the state to be merely concerned with prudential ends is to confuse means with ends, which underestimates the role it plays in the individual’s life, and two, holding freedom of choice as the principal end confuses mere choice with free choice. These confusions permit the degradation of human dignity by disregarding the human need to foster the faculties necessary for autonomy. It is within each individual’s interests to be within a society. To be outside of a community, to be isolated and without access to resources, to be without recourse to institutions who will enforce the protection of one’s rights, is to live within a hostile environment that is against fulfilling one’s needs. However, establishing more hospitable conditions does not thereby define the principal end of the state, and the mere ability to choose does not necessarily respect the capacity for autonomy. It only offers the appearance of choice and not the reality. To freely choose means far more than the pursuit of satisfying an impulse. Before developing these arguments further, Srinivasan's two potential conceptions of the ‘ethical’ state need to be better understood. Let’s begin with the prudential account.

Section 3:

According to this argument, the state is directed toward establishing the conditions necessary for individuals to pursue their own self-interests, desires, and preferences, without the interference of others, and insofar as one’s projects do not infringe on someone else’s. An exemplar of this view is the philosopher Thomas Hobbes. A state of nature, where individuals exist outside of an organized collective bound by laws and institutions, is a state of war, filled with perpetual conflict and strife and the competition of self-interests, and consists of an endless pursuit of individuals attempting to gain power over one another for the sake of the control and security necessary for extinguishing the fear caused by their harsh environment. Setting aside the plausibility of such a state, what’s important is that, by understanding individuals in this way, human nature is presented as calculative, as the rational pursuit of one’s own interests. And since interests conflict, and each individual has an inborn right to preserve itself, to fight for its own survival; and because each one must determine what their survival requires, life in a state of nature is nasty, brutish, and short.

It would be far more rational, then, both for oneself and others, to form a state that would eliminate this perpetual state of war and conflict by implementing laws and institutions that enforce agreements and contracts made between persons, and that uphold conditions of peace, which allows individuals to pursue their ends without the fear of being interfered with. The philosopher Immanuel Kant phrases this as follows: “Each may seek his happiness in whatever way he sees fit, so long as he does not infringe upon the freedom of others to pursue a similar end which can be reconciled with the freedom of everyone else within a general workable law.”

Notice, then, that forming a state is not a matter of morals but of rational calculation, of looking out for one’s own interests. It’s not that a state should be formed because it allows persons to treat one another with dignity, or because each is worthy of some inviolable respect, but because it is in everyone’s best interests. Founding a state, then, “means finding out how the mechanism of nature can be applied to men in such a manner that the antagonism of their hostile attitudes will make them compel one another to submit to coercive law, thereby producing a condition of peace within which the laws can be enforced.” This is a prudential account of state-founding.

There’s a fundamental problem with this kind of account, however. The first thing to note is the conception of human subjectivity contained within it. A Hobbesian notion of human nature, simply put, suggests subjectivity consists of computational processes whose ends are the satisfaction of the subject's desires and preferences. The state’s aim, then, is to discipline the subject in a way that will lead to them having the capacity to coexist in peaceful conditions with others. It is not to prescribe certain definite moral ends, to orient them around a conception of the good, or to circumscribe what their desires should or should not be; it is to sustain the conditions necessary for individuals to pursue their interests without interfering with the right of others to pursue their own.

Now, the issue here is that human subjectivity is conceived one-dimensionally. Human beings are born with certain natural desires and preferences like survival and the fulfillment of basic needs, and the state is not to interfere with this but to protect each individual's impulse to preserve them, and to shape their lives as they see fit. Each can do as they please insofar as it does not harm another. But this is too simplistic. This amounts to believing that human desires and preferences occupy a single, quantitative plain, and each individual goes about maximizing these while simultaneously avoiding infringing on others’ ability to do so. But if we step back and ask whether a desire itself is desirable we are no longer asking a question along this quantitative plane, but have begun to ask about the qualitative nature of the desire. Is that desire of more worth than that one? This is a question regarding second-order desires.

First-order desires often happen to us, they occur, and pull us in the direction of the desired object. My desire to eat does not arise by my own volition. After a time of not eating, the desire simply renews itself. Second-order desires concern the will, of what one wants to want, of whether a desire is something one desires to motivate his or her will. Harry Frankfurt writes, “Creatures like ourselves are not limited to desires that move them to act. In addition, they have the reflexive capacity to form desires regarding their own desires - that is, regarding both what they want to want, and what they want not to want.” Focusing solely on the quantitative dimension of subjectivity does not account for this distinction. If someone goes about attempting to maximize their well-being by satisfying their immediate desires, some of the desires they do not act on, the ones that don’t motivate them to act but are present, are competing first-order desires, which do not consist of an evaluation regarding whether the one desire is of more worth than the other; one simply out-competes the other.

Now, with this distinction in mind, the point can be stated as follows: this qualitative, evaluative dimension, is first informed and shaped by the social context one finds oneself in, or, as the philosopher Martin Heidegger would phrase it, is thrown into. By being in the world with other people, through communication, language, and interaction, human beings begin to form and make sense of what occurs in their inner and outer life. William A. Luijpen and Henry J. Koren write in their book Existential Phenomenology that, “In my dealing with others, there occurs a quasi-process of sedimentation, and the quasi-effect of it is called ‘social facticity’ or my ‘social body’. The way I greet others, speak, or think is, at least in the first instance, largely the quasi-effect of the fact that I grew up in the West and not in China.” Social facticity, then, is the set of social conditions by which a human being becomes acquainted with the world, making things intelligible and meaningful, ordered and sensible. The philosopher Charles Taylor writes, “I can only learn what anger, love, anxiety, the aspiration to wholeness, etc., are through my and others’ experience of these being objects for us, in some common space.”

When developing within a social environment, the qualitative dimension of subjectivity is largely first shaped by the situation one is in, which provides the framework by which to discern who and what one is, what is valuable, what the good is, how one should conduct oneself in specific contexts, and so forth. Underpinning all of this is an assumed picture of qualitative evaluations. For this not to be present means the individual will not be able to live. Therefore, when a state is formed that will govern a society, it is not merely concerned with prudential ends but with moral ones as well. Self-interests, preferences, desires, fears, impediments to action, in short, the whole internal and external life of an individual, are first made sense of in the social environment. To think that one can merely pursue their own ends without reference to this further dimension is wrong.

As the psychologist Erich Fromm points out in his book To Have or To Be, living in social conditions that only emphasize the quantitative nature of human beings is dehumanizing. A society and state that promotes the satisfaction of desires and preferences, of one’s self-interests, which will supposedly somehow lead to realizing human beings’ higher capacities, is highly implausible. How can character traits like egoism, greed, and selfishness produce social cooperation, connection, and harmony, which are integral to well-being? Most of the great thinkers throughout history spent their time on this issue. Socrates, Plato, the Stoics, the Epicureans, all formulated distinctions between our qualitative and quantitative capacities. Fromm writes, “The essential element in their thinking is the distinction between those needs (desires)... whose satisfaction leads to momentary pleasure, and those needs that are rooted in human nature and whose realization is conducive to human growth and produces eudaimonia, i.e., ‘well-being’.” If the qualitative dimension of subjectivity possesses needs essential to well-being, such as the ability to actively and critically engage with oneself and the world, then measures must be taken that target these features of human beings, otherwise, they will be left empty and unfulfilled.

Now, as I mentioned earlier, this doesn’t mean the state must therefore be delegated the primary bearer of this responsibility. But it does mean that it plays a role toward this end. Whatever that precisely is, the principal end of the state is to discern and actualize its part in this process.

Section 4:

So much for Srinivasan’s notion of the ‘ethical’ state as one that establishes the prudential ends of rational, self-interest-seeking agents. What about the second way to understand this idea, that the state is ethical because freedom of choice is all that matters and is the fundamental end to be preserved and exercised in and by the state? The argument I will present against this way of understanding the state has to do with how we should understand the term ‘freedom’ in this context.

If freedom of choice is the primary end of the state; if non-interference in one’s decisions to pursue one’s ends is what the term ‘ethical’ amounts to, then it must be clear what constitutes a free choice. According to the prudential account of state-founding, a state was ethical because it established conditions for individuals to pursue their desires and private conceptions of happiness. It is not a question of morals but of calculative reason, of locating rational means, and the state is a way for individuals to coexist and pursue their interests.

As has been shown, however, the state does much more than this. By having an integral role in organizing society, the state substantially contributes toward the frameworks by which individuals understand themselves, which shape the concepts necessary for moral deliberation, for positing ends worthy of pursuit, and the resources used to differentiate good from bad, right from wrong.

The proposal now is that the term ethical suggests that the state is a moral activity and not merely a prudential one, but also that the sole end of the state is to allow individuals to freely choose for themselves what they consider to be the good, or what holds value, and by making an uncoerced choice, whatever the agreement is, by consenting to it, it is ethical. The freedom to choose is the principal end of all human conduct and affairs.

This creates a twofold problem that depends on the degree of value placed on choice. The first is that, if choice is held as being forfeitable, as something someone may decide to surrender when consenting to join a state, then a state can be ethical merely because people chose to opt in, even if it allows for the existence of conditions that are degrading to human beings. The second is that, if choice is held to be the principal end of the state and is not forfeitable, it may still not realize the freedom necessary for free choice, namely, autonomy. The first problem is more easily discerned, while the second is more subtle. Let’s begin with the first.

There are many reasons why someone may choose to join a state and forfeit their freedom, but for the sake of argument it’s best to focus on one and this will be when an individual feels alienated from, and alone within, a society. A historical way to frame this problem, as Erich Fromm does in his book Escape From Freedom, is to look at the fading presence of the Catholic Church after the Reformation. To put it very simply, in the Middle Ages the world was viewed as perfectly ordered and possessed an eternal structure created by God, including how human beings, both individually and collectively, were to live. The individual was not confronted with questions of how to live, what to do with one’s life, or what ends to pursue; the Church answered these questions and provided a sense of belonging in the world. Fromm writes, “In having a distinct, unchangeable, and unquestionable place in the social world from the moment of birth, man was rooted in a structuralized whole, and thus life had a meaning which left no place, and no need, for doubt… The social order was conceived as a natural order, and being a definite part of it gave a feeling of security and belonging.” When God was “demoted,” as the historian Marci Shore puts it, and when there was no longer available recourse to some greater being to understand how human beings should live and the responsibility became their own, a great space was left empty and needed to be filled again; human beings could not assume they were at the center of things. They themselves became accountable for how society was to be organized, how life should be lived, what meaning life possesses; and the answers to these concerns must be formed by human reason itself and not by an imposed, nonhuman standard. But this emerging form of freedom came with a price. Dostoevsky formulates this cost in his famous phrase, “If there is no God, then everything is permissible.” That is, without some ultimate, nonhuman reality that makes the world appear ordered, harmonious, justified, good, everything becomes unchained. And for things to return to their previous, stable state, which is of course necessary for human beings to live, it was human beings that bore the burden. Simone de Beauvoir, a 20th-century philosopher, writes in her book The Ethics of Ambiguity that Man now “bears the responsibility for a world which is not the work of a strange power, but of himself, where his defeats are inscribed, and his victories as well. A God can pardon, efface, and compensate. But if God does not exist, man’s faults are inexpiable.”

The experience of alienation in modern society can be partially explained by modernity not being able to cope with this burden. To use Fromm’s phrase, great efforts have been made to escape from it. Historians like Hannah Arendt have attributed the rise of totalitarian governments in the 20th century as arising from this condition, where individuals forfeit this new form of freedom by submerging themselves within the group and relinquishing their responsibility to choose how to live and decide what their lives ultimately mean. But doing so eliminates choice altogether and therefore reduces subjectivity to a mere thing that is not aware of itself, and thus not accountable for its actions and projects, as being the one responsible for what takes place in the world. And as the 20th century demonstrates, this is catastrophic. Therefore, no network state that attempts to allow individuals to forfeit their freedom and autonomy is worthy of being called ethical. Such a state is an attempt to avoid moral and ethical choices and does not attempt to cope with them.

The second part of the problem, where freedom is the principal value and is not forfeitable, is that it conceives of choice in purely negative terms. The mistake made is to confuse mere choice with free choice. Similarly to how the prudential account mistook individuals’ ends as being formed ultimately by the individual, this account of the ethical presupposes that choice can be a matter of pursuing first-order desires and does not require whether one has considered if such desires are worth pursuing; one could be moved entirely by instinct and therefore not by the faculties necessary for a real choice. If choice is simply a matter of determining how to maximize one’s satisfaction and is not concerned with the qualitative nature of the desires themselves, then reflection, deliberation, and thinking more generally are simply instruments used to obtain happiness. They are means employed to satisfy desires. But if desires go unchecked; if they’re taken for granted and assumed to be worth the attention we instinctively give them, then a choice was not made. That is, second-order desires are not taken into consideration. Acting purely from first-order desires is to be caused to act by impulse, instinct, or inclination, which determines the action, and not by reflection. It is through reflection and deliberation, through considerations formulated by one’s own will, that one truly chooses. The philosopher Immanuel Kant distinguishes between autonomy and heteronomy. Understanding this will clarify the argument. To act autonomously is to be an originating and self-determining cause of an action. To act heteronomously is to be caused to act, to be moved by influences and forces outside of one’s will. Thus to enact a choice freely one must will the action and not be motivated by what is outside of the will. The philosopher Paul Franco writes in his book Hegel’s Philosophy of Freedom, “Kant rejects the naturalistic understanding of freedom as exemplified by Hobbes that sees it as the unimpeded pursuit of one’s empirically given desires. In giving into natural desire or inclination, the will is determined by something other than itself…” From this, it can be seen how acting from desire does not constitute a free choice. If desires are conditioned by the external environment, then the expression of those desires was not of one’s choosing but is due to the conditioning that took place in the development and upbringing of the individual. Mere choice, then, does not constitute free choice.

But why, it may be asked, is this problematic? Even if the individual’s choice is said not to be fully free, why should the state concern itself with this? It’s up to the individual to discover their own freedom. I don’t necessarily disagree with this. It is not that the state should interfere with and enforce that individuals make free rather than mere choices, but only that it should concern itself with realizing conditions that are conducive to the development necessary for individuals to actualize their faculties for autonomy, which is located in the more qualitative dimension of subjectivity. The aim here is not to precisely articulate how the state should do this, but only that individual autonomy is the end it must strive toward. To hold this as secondary is to treat human activity as being in service to something other than itself; as if human faculties are meant for some other end. This is false. The state’s aim is to play its role in treating human beings as ends-in-themselves and as the reason for its legitimacy to have any authority. To do otherwise is to confuse self-interests with morality.

Conclusion:

The ‘ethical’ network state holds autonomy as its principal end. Its goal is to discover how to best contribute toward formulating conditions conducive to realizing this. What the government must precisely be, what laws are best, what institutions are necessary, must be understood in these terms. To do otherwise is to be confused about what activity one is involved in, which may lead to dehumanizing environments for those who opt-in to states that fail to live up to this standard.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

litepub

A Go library that abstracts all the burdensome ActivityPub things and provides just the right amount of helpers necessary to integrate an existing website into the "fediverse" (what an odious name). Made for the gravity integration.

• https://godoc.org/github.com/fiatjaf/litepub

See also

-

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit

This is about Ryan Fugger's Ripple.

The summary is: unless everybody is good and well-connected at all times a transaction can always be left in a half-committed state, which creates confusion, erodes trust and benefits no one.

If you're unconvinced consider the following protocol flow:

1. A finds a route (A--B--C--D) between her and D somehow;
2. A "prepares" a payment to B, tells B to do the same with C and so on (to prepare means to give B a conditional IOU that will be valid as long as the full payment completes);
3. When the chain of prepared messages reaches D, D somehow "commits" the payment.
4. After the commit, A now really does owe B and so on, and D really knows it has been effectively paid by A (in the form of debt from C) so it can ship goods to A.

The most obvious (but wrong) way of structuring this would be for the entire payment chain to be dependent on the reveal of some secret. For example, the "prepare" messages could contain something like "I will pay you as long as you know p such that sha256(p) == h".

The payment flow then starts with D presenting A with an invoice that contains h, so D knows p, but no one else knows. A can then send the "prepare" message to B and B do the same until it reaches D.

When it reaches D, D can be sure that C will pay him because he knows p such that sha256(p) == h. He then reveals p to C, C now reveals it to B and B to A. When A gets it it has a proof that D has received his payment, therefore it is happy to settle it later with B and can prove to an external arbitrator that he has indeed paid D in case D doesn't deliver his products.

Issues with the naïve flow above

What if D never reveals p to C?

Then no one knows what happened. And then 10 years later he arrives at C's house (remember they are friends or have a trust relationship somehow) and demands his payment, and shows p to her in a piece of paper. Or worse: go directly to the court and shows C's message that says "I will pay you as long as you know p such that sha256(p) == h" (but with an actual number instead of "h") and the corresponding p. Now the judge has to decide in favor of D.

Now C was supposed to do the same with B, but C is not playing with this anymore, has lost all contact with B after they did their final settlement many years ago, no one was expecting this.

This clearly can't work. There must be a timeout for these payments.

What if we have a timeout?

Now what if we say the payment expires in one hour. D cannot hold the payment hostage and reveal p after 10 years. It must either reveal it before the timeout or conditional IOU will be void. Solves everything!

Except no, now it's the time we reach the most dark void of the protocol, the flaw that sucks its life into the abyss: subjectivity and ambiguity.

The big issue is that we don't have an independent judge to assert, for example, that D has indeed "revealed" p to C in time. C must acknowledge that voluntarily. C could do it using messages over the internet, but these messages are not reliable. C is not reliable. Clocks are not synchronized. Also if we now require C to confirm it has received p from D then the "prepare" message means nothing, as for D now just knowing p is not enough to claim before an arbitrator that C owes her -- because, again, D also must prove it has shown p to C before the timeout, therefore it needs a new signed acknowledgement from C, or from some other party.

Let's see a few examples.

Subjectivity and perverse incentives

D could send p to C, and C acknowledge it, but then when C goes to B and send it B will not acknowledge it, and claim it's past the time. Now C loses money.

Maybe C can not acknowledge it received anything from D before checking first with B? But B will have to check with A too! And it subverts the entire flow of the thing. And now A has a "proof of payment" (knowledge of p) without even having to acknowledge anything! In this case knowing p or not becomes meaningless as everybody knows p without acknowleding it to anyone else.

But even if A is honest and sends an "acknowledge" message to B, now B can just sit quiet and enjoy the credit it has just earned from A without ever acknowleding anything to C. It's perverted incentives in every step.

Ambiguity

But isn't this a protocol based on trust?, you ask, isn't C trusting that B will behave honestly already? Therefore if B is dishonest C just has to acknowledge his loss and break his chain of trust with B.

No, because C will not know what happened. B can say "I could have sent you an acknowledgement, but was waiting for A, and A didn't send anything" and C won't ever know if that was true. Or B could say "what? You didn't send me p at all", and that could be true. B could have been offline when A sent it, there could have been a broken connection or many other things, and B continues: "I was waiting for you to present me with p, but you didn't, therefore the payment timed out, you can't come here with p now, because now A won't accept it anymore from me". That could be true or could be false, who knows?

Therefore it is impossible for trust relationships and reputations to be maintained in such a system without "good fences".[^ln-solution][^ln-issue]

[^ln-solution]: The Lightning Network has a solution for the problem of the decentralized commit. [^ln-issue]: Ironically this same ambiguity problem is being faced by the Lightning Network community when trying to create a reputation/payment system to prevent routing abuses. It seems simple when you first think about it: "let each node manage its own trust", but in fact it is somewhat impossible.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Mises' interest rate theory

Inspired by Bob Murphy's thesis against the "pure time preference theory" (see also this series of podcasts) -- or blatantly copying it -- here are some thoughts on Mises' most wrong take:

• Mises asserts that the market rate of interest is not the originary rate of interest, because the market rate involves entrepreneurial decisions, risk, uncertainty etc. No one lends money with 100% guarantee that it will be paid back in the market and so. But if that is true, where can we see that originary interest? We're supposed to account for its existence and be sure that it is logically there in every trade between present and future, because it's a category of action. But then it seems odd to me that it has anything to do with the actual interest.
• Mises criticizes the notion of "profit" from classical economists because it mashed together gains deriving from speculation, risk, other stuff and originary interest -- but that's only because he assumes originary interest as a given (because it's a category of action and so on). If he didn't he could have just not cited originary interest in the list of things that give rise to "profit" and all would be fine.
• Mixing the two points above, it seems very odd to think that we should look for interest as a component of profit. It seems indeed to be very classifical-economist take. It would be still compatible with Mises'sworldview -- indeed more compatible -- that we looked for profit as a component of interest: when someone lends some 100 and is paid 110 that is profit. Plain simple. Why he did that and why the other person paid isn't for the economist to analyse, or to dissect the extra 10 into 9 interest, 1 risk remuneration or anything like that. If the borrower hadn't paid it would be a 100 loss or a 109 loss?
• In other moments, Mises talks about the originary rate of interest being the same for all things: apples and bicycles and anything else. But wasn't each person supposed to have its own valuation of each good -- including goods in the present and in the future? Is Mises going to say that it's impossible for someone to value an orange in the future more than a bycicle in the future in comparison with these same goods in the present? (The very "more" in the previous sentence shows us that Mises was incurring in cardinal value calculations when coming up with this theory -- and I hadn't noticed it until after I finished typing the phrase.) In other words: what if someone prefers orange, bycicle, bycicle in the future, orange in the future? That doesn't seem to fit. What is the rate of interest?
• Also, on the point above, what if someone has different rates of interest for goods in different timeframes? For example, someone may prefer a bycicle now a little more than a bycicle tomorrow, but very very much more than a bycicle in two days. That also breaks the notion of "originary interest" as an universal rate.
• Now maybe I misunderstood everything, maybe Mises was talking about originary interest as a rate defined by the market. And he clearly says that. That if the rate of interest is bigger on some market entrepreneurs will invest capital in that one until it equalizes with rates in other markets. But all that fits better with the plain notion of profit than with this poorly-crafted notion of originary interest. If you're up to defining and (Mises forbid?) measuring the neutral rate of interest you'll have to arbitrarily choose some businesses to be part of the "market" while excluding others.
• By the way, wasn't originary interest a category of action? How can a category of action be defined and ultimately fixed by entrepreneurial action in a market?

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Table Of Content

• What is a Bitcoin Paper Wallet?

• How Does a Bitcoin Paper Wallet Work?

• Creating a Bitcoin Paper Wallet

• Benefits of Using a Bitcoin Paper Wallet

• Conclusion

• FAQ

Bitcoin has become increasingly popular over the years, and with its popularity comes the need for safe storage options. One of the most secure ways to store your Bitcoin is by using a paper wallet. But what exactly is a Bitcoin paper wallet, and how does it work? In this beginner's guide, we'll explore everything you need to know about Bitcoin paper wallets, including how to create one, and the benefits of using them.

What is a Bitcoin Paper Wallet?

A Bitcoin paper wallet is a form of cold storage for your Bitcoin. It's a physical piece of paper that contains the public and private keys necessary to access your Bitcoin. The public key is used to receive Bitcoin, while the private key is used to send Bitcoin. Since the paper wallet is offline, it's considered one of the most secure ways to store your Bitcoin.

How Does a Bitcoin Paper Wallet Work?

A Bitcoin paper wallet works by generating a pair of public and private keys using a random number generator. The public key is used to receive Bitcoin, and the private key is used to send Bitcoin. These keys are then printed onto a piece of paper, along with a QR code that represents the public key. You can then use the QR code to easily send Bitcoin to your paper wallet.

Creating a Bitcoin Paper Wallet

Creating a Bitcoin paper wallet is a simple process that you can do at home. Here are the steps to follow:

1. Go to a paper wallet generator website, such as Bitaddress.org or Walletgenerator.net.

2. Disconnect your computer from the internet and ensure your printer is not connected to a network.

3. Generate a pair of keys by moving your mouse around the screen or using another form of randomness.

4. Print out the paper wallet, ensuring you print multiple copies and store them in a secure location.

5. Send Bitcoin to your paper wallet by scanning the QR code with your Bitcoin wallet.

Benefits of Using a Bitcoin Paper Wallet

There are several benefits to using a Bitcoin paper wallet, including:

1. Security - Since a paper wallet is not connected to the internet, it's one of the most secure ways to store your Bitcoin.

2. Control - You have complete control over your Bitcoin since you're the only one with access to your private keys.

3. Accessibility - You can easily access your Bitcoin by scanning the QR code on your paper wallet.

4. Backup - You can print multiple copies of your paper wallet and store them in different locations as a backup.

Conclusion

A Bitcoin paper wallet is a secure and accessible way to store your Bitcoin offline. By following the steps outlined in this beginner's guide, you can easily create a paper wallet and start safely storing your Bitcoin. Remember to keep your paper wallet in a secure location and make multiple copies as a backup. With a Bitcoin paper wallet, you can have complete control over your Bitcoin and protect it from potential online threats.

FAQ

Are paper wallets safe? Yes, paper wallets are one of the most secure ways to store your Bitcoin since they're offline and not connected to the internet.

Can I use the same paper wallet multiple times? Yes, you can use the same paper wallet multiple times to receive Bitcoin.

Can I store other cryptocurrencies on a paper wallet? Yes, you can store other cryptocurrencies on a paper wallet as long as the wallet generator supports them.

That's all for today

If you want more, be sure to follow us on:

NOSTR: croxroad@getalby.com

X: @croxroadnews

Instagram: @croxroadnews.co

Youtube: @croxroadnews

Store: https://croxroad.store

Subscribe to CROX ROAD Bitcoin Only Daily Newsletter

https://www.croxroad.co/subscribe

DISCLAIMER: None of this is financial advice. This newsletter is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. Please be careful and do your own research.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Thafne venceu o Soletrando 2008.

As palavras que Thafne teve que soletrar: "ocioso", "hermético", "glossário", "argênteo", "morfossintaxe", "infra-hepático", "hagiológio". Enquanto isso Eder recebia: "intramuscular", "destilação", "inabitável", "subcutâneo", "homogeneidade", "predecessor", "displicência", "subconsciência", "psicroestesia" (isto segundo o site da folha, donde certamente faltam algumas palavras de Thafne). Sério, "argênteo"? Não é errado dizer que a Globo tentou promover o menino pobre da escola pública do sertão contra a riquinha de Curitiba.

O mais espetacular disto é que deu errado e o Brasil inteiro torceu pela Thafne, o que se verifica com uma simples busca no Google. Eis aqui alguns exemplos:

• O problema de Thafne traz comentários tentando incriminar o governo do Estado de Minas Gerais com a vitória forçada de Eder.
• este vídeo mostrando os erros do programa e a vitória triunfal, embora parcial, de Thafne, traz a brilhante descrição "globo de puleira quis complicar a vida da menina!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
• este vídeo, com o mesmo conteúdo,, porém chamado "Thafne versus Luciano Huck, o confronto do século", tem, além disto, vários comentários de francos torcedores de Thafne:
• "Nossa isso é burrice porq o doutor falou duas vezes como o luciano não prestou atenção logo thafine deu duas patadas no luciano... Proxima luciano presta atenção na pronuncia"
• "ele nao pronunciou errado porque é burro, isso foi pra manipular o resultado"
• "Gabriel o Bostador ficou pianinho. Babaca do krl"
• "Pena que ela perdeu :("
• "verdade... ela que ganhou, o outro só ficou com o título :S"
• "A menina deu um banho nesse que além de idiota é BURRO."
• e muitos, muitos outros.
• Globo Erra e Luciano Huck dá Vexame, um breve artigo descrevendo alguns dos pontos em que Eder foi favorecido.
• esta comunidade do Orkut, apenas a maior dentre várias que foram criadas.

O movimento de apoio a Thafne é um exemplo entre poucos de união total da nação em prol de uma causa.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Democracy as a failed open-network protocol

In the context of protocols for peer-to-peer open computer networks -- those in which new actors can freely enter and immediately start participating in the protocol --, without any central entity, specially without any central human mind judging things from the top --, it's common for decisions about the protocol to be thought taking in consideration all the possible ways a rogue peer can disrupt the entire network, abuse it, make the experience terrible for others. The protocol design must account for all incentives in play and how they will affect each participant, always having in mind that each participant may be acting in a purely egoistical self-interested manner, not caring at all about the health of the network (even though most participants won't be like that). So a protocol, to be successful, must have incentives aligned such that self-interested actors cannot profit by hurting others and will gain most by cooperating (whatever that means in the envisaged context), or there must be a way for other peers to detect attacks and other kinds of harm or attempted harm and neutralize these.

Since computers are very fast, protocols can be designed to be executed many times per day by peers involved, and since the internet is a very open place to which people of various natures are connected, many open-network protocols with varied goals have been tried in large scale and most of them failed and were shut down (or kept existing, but offering a bad experience and in a much more limited scope than they were expected to be). Often the failure of a protocol leads to knowledge about its shortcomings being more-or-less widespread and agreed upon, and these lead to the development of a better protocol the next time something with similar goals is tried.

Ideally democracies are supposed to be an open-entry network in the same sense as these computer networks, and although that is a noble goal, it's one full of shortcomings. Democracies are supposed to the governing protocol of States that have the power to do basically anything with the lives of millions of citizens.

One simple inference we may take from the history of computer peer-to-peer protocols is that the ones that work better are those that are simple and small in scope (Bitcoin, for example, is very simple; BitTorrent is also very simple and very limited in what it tries to do and the number of participants that get involved in each run of the protocol).

Democracies, as we said above, are the opposite of that. Besides being in a very hard position to achieve success as an open protocol, democracies also suffer from the fact that they take a long time to run, so it's hard to see where it is failing every time.

The fundamental incentives of democracy, i.e. the rules of the protocol, posed by the separation of powers and checks-and-balances are basically the same in every place and in every epoch since the XIII century, and even today most people who dedicate their lives to the subject still don't see how they're completely flawed.

The system of checks and balances was thought from the armchair of a couple of political theorists who had never done anything like that in their lives, didn't have any experience dealing with very adversarial environments like the internet -- and probably couldn't even imagine that the future users of their network were going to be creatures completely different than themselves and their fellow philosophers and aristocrats who all shared the same worldview (and how fast that future would come!).

Also

• The illusion of checks and balances

@ a03b38f8:2c7ce1f0

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----

wcDMA17V9MGW3LFGAQv/clUvo/uJPS2NodjoiSskIjK+IQkSzGxjGCEPO6jzRBVK zY+rCNUEEv6i9EB4PAeihLEQREBm3zZqLsG9OeVnxIy0AWLQcBrH4WHQuIlRfii7 7SifuNky5LkBcguKVBe9NWDAmzgMP+Y8KKUTSeMUF1qNUPKKGCezvrjAjSojDvQK Jh4sewLMMI1ALihduxKOwLaZpinqyubOQz9LOB2oZg1xLpjXkGNbLQbsT3Aa3/dj MAojIp6qG8mERTtDB9C0ti+dNTn0mYtQPblHSZR38Ze25YYhYunRIlSUjPmI2233 VgTYYW3V9mci3v6tMdvO/lzgGVpb2EaqT0wxU0EqoM4knu7JFq0oqfGqtD4Wr4ro QnHuUprjH8qYFa4fpXTnY9f0OKxOacsBQenHvG9AQH+XZ/mSFcpUjZQJQmb0SYzK ZiWo6t3hIjg6lX/eXg+PixkgljLpbdIOZZb9PHK/aLfr47lEf0hCGfEptda1CZtH v377/o/psGdL2nYQdpab0tFNAYwDa7LaaxSYix6XU/8ew7Hfp0upIPE0SDxzKBJ2 +qlcIVxthOKoIjD0wnSy49UjqJGPFm4X9yfZUEtWqXr622cIHMmkmL3gm1xi+FSt /SVs3X5zypDYRxDilOeoimW1Vh1J0aQAWCMDPo1MuGkgZ6SdQ5sWOUnmBcGdhPWw DkXfkz5PL4tWrQxQiuUWbaXGDH0OTAYGc5LjFsZhMVE4hdJ48Gli70joIdrZUiSr MHGBdpQQtZFMN7xdWpag42aHxObnHvGP+NhIBT349Lp+/sfnFvQ7nPGhBSOI//va 6H/AtwVgWDM+J1KIdE/phgIPhGG3x8xGb4Lg8WB3YbBmJtTFO0G+ni8KjnZ73tvY o/U2bZseubIuVccQPt0igy8zSXb/FLuRF7Ns1ZRZnrs66Au+QzpvX0Lcyi/6JTDV 1OAC18PHWmgtKktfKD1D4y9CRMaBrgK9AFYPKONkxc4unnyotYgkPKgXsuENKde1 4LtBb/Atj+REalCgezGoyvp5jck5+SBSug29/csijUZBliv2iaiZ0dhEbMVB1rvo ly4n7CgKEoC4FPVsqiUOyOHkU8YqoUfeBz65MbtiALKBymmDvw8tSQnNA1LpnW3R In052B5akP2xE2/h2WXaxgDyR9gu2z+BkK1TN2tcSkrZ+SIauuyeAicXbjqBAuqW fJ1WOxgg5Rj9DCUS08e03CRSMYFQVVf3F1kFc6lsc4Y8tqvPQZiF9dOd8dGnpo76 5D9l8f7YwyuwkHlJ7oPTnCCpOIWvcUEVDmwDd2j4pEGMVA9K/IF02sjRCDG4Ktap VxosdEBWWJyQLz6USb17w5nRJ8yqlM3nv6zYak1G4e0Y9SPTeMKDFnw9z70/LGMI r1YTeWXrGA3qvaU1G36GOUZov7g0JLgffafJ+yN5Qccqn3EtIwHEaL6MLr6VOjoy M/pL0tadnxo+qkyOWpo/V5sz/MvoXvPO2f+LNy9POOVQaz8KMJB3gieJilJpCNIs 54N9ciu8Qe5A7oeD4PJ1GE661RLoaZDth3lq5VclNW+bcWr3Hd/mWTN1TnrGt1K3 E0PT+2B/m0UPVUrIFb/ZrIng27x8oKuNTa0DyyKtVvuOZl8DjXmtrN/yHI8rPTI9 Xa9Gfbf/yxcKUIEWGSM0Ujmrt2MoqnYR8rplNWXSBSRblwP2UfrC2C/hEVmc4KA+ DxCahylqF3LJNiG/0IHHXTd6g7gl2AuQIfaCVGy7x6OADQnvM4QlcPXkgcGrXqpp prnhE6W599Y+lvO80Ng3u2sQb9PgauWf62NMLochN66Hi6Bl4Ge0S+mey0/vNmvO K8IBwYxix/pQ7xKFyuI2OKOkBqPEMmvSLCMYI+3qa/r91S7R0GNuX7cZHU1mRNcq 21GSpgnjG985Rb5UzWrfk2HgDM9rgNuQ8o0NTiv8gYZlQWegsmczdAu5vZX9/48/ TnSNIVjfImDLEhXHTi5K2++Km8bVjYg1/gTV/dfrQ58sNdbnc2wzzCbdQ5/NxSHr 1m8h+0TzyWhNIKEWoZctk0qJKnXMfMcsxuju4zREPclm0l311yTauO7up9A/ogjB XhInGpHt4KqQ/GiIjweJPWYc/m9XwTCfRvq/JQCwv23TX6dfRDR/AKqJ8mo6VWZr rD9mpr+r85kS3Z0WFcN8CjWB5Za6Reo1XFeTdReNdsefEipmrnHDleU8NBVF1YZU 294hGSGpu5hn6arpWBg/CUK9SqkSrYePL3hCitjLswvP+rVxg2jHSUY2TPt8/6kg GaBxt3dn0ENHlPSbOk0nT8ik4pwpbdg52oOjohJOjXE+nQIXA5apOtVoGy5O5h9r mQn2eQZ5hLrqIhW7kU9mqW4XXtTEns5AcNtwGLoNpd1DMR6rGnkXSozStrPzovp4 lRTpOa4NsuFcUd++HlJHCVw0tXKuYttMcqwT4/Bt70qwtpZKueo7fcqbkLW5068Y RoRy5fUoYUlaHqLwT9TgWspR83xLjKViZqoVtZjxaKE8uRTh39JtFfw8jSM2BFRL rW+AHGm3SZnwYyOQUXbd4rjx89rHs7042QUGCJU61f7CBdYxfgshFA69Uew84O6r DTlYdSPcn5XKwWbZlt9/qkGfRem4L0u9W4YQevVmg8id23GI5z8O8FvMlqJ/2DKM ggYL5CAyUMs05pK2h9wC2oHgoGNy/4r3aoY4pyJR/LIVjW2zYTfK9t+Kbgy2RK4S 9ogGs7tWfOCy+sUyZMKwl8FLjQvttfDu9j2L8hAF0usPS8yLujihc1px6Mu/TyT1 FpBXE6dXRPMV9vNLB6EEEMvsWBjAkw32jI69jJoGBEKeyRFlAvTkYps6bJeW/4U/ T6RfLV4AqSD/p6k64TdOI4QYAXeIkwDFYG0TiwIr09cLzkRKEMlkzOzfpRbJPdpA taNHta1yPDr3sLOBF1CfilFF0HlXkc5+Foj7J9gPEfE3YaXLjuws5ejsHQF7Tjri sba0WBH4vhTK8c9KceV5oSo82oZSUcAylrufyxXEcmMWuY1OZuLeYIGNIDhlXRpR pJLpZZ6eCn6foAvRgmRHjth6A9sJ4X9t3Zh0YYo9jsIssPfSlcEhQ9acOe2jVjYk iDxBZiQA+X7GguRDH2zj9nW6fKEDfWWKpjjfq3yRd4wVfa0XChs8hKFURYRCJnZa eHUSjgqZXsVhk0J8FCBTyMsL2s5ePhrvKgxC5jqMjznv0B5CQRw0qoRwPWM2aEO1 hnT9smHehCiadCT9GVNMGQj1NSwOH/4dzDm8utt7XssbagUF2Fn+pDUphKYFJV7k WJIQNpQTC4IHzqjF+NipjAxxmUrSaCqyWLAy4WYJ0u7uAhU+6LoQ4wvQQTxWapbf w/sc2ua8IOxh/BwCB7vq32gYnskwkWJB6DQg1PqjRYwqJzOCETYlfVklqswbxIjP po6KHjlGzRAi0pfipQiQfAjMDIqfGMucNYO9k81aOMzBpp0KcOqaKB9FO3CUZnfi s7l0Vh0EA0dvrl0Qpp5xi1K8zKtF+TtjDmg/M4l5i9VB3Lpl1lOKlsDgFUee+g3d UdwORMjByrFBLIGe0+Rmo/Gak4rrk5QH/ErIMeJumhWcwlwCfr00s7QGY09LKUzd mQGL1MK+4w4HiLe+kdbHe0frcdjBiDEuZReW+SGKPdMrvWEsy4yr2JfIQ4NmbHD7 EdOZmojCOWkJAnbz/pZ59O/BJbuRRlY0MVdxfw0foXnINteMVmJ0JUYg/YqB2J7+ 2MXhyqTCiiJcziDU6s+9Gm2PWP8ihkgwrlfjG5bOWBRyGyaKT1ryMvP0+4J2Q8Vd dbM0zEwk8JwW2Snro3vinVPxA1vrEnkQ5TJUZuJqCasgEL5XaOXRtdOJCa9FDGIo UEz2IyN8G2MrHAzxB2SQ8kshycUsDp3K1tJYt+GeDmkWi0owYEFkb7cbHtbY33Kk bRZBS8ghwXIp8hy8AXXerIFh6kzENcP8P+jpHRBw4WWZ/k7Tp9fXxjkFnXZjQ24s wkiBz+kUN3FdZJOlSggiQDSntN0D2cApF/+NVTwQp4rZBWTw8e0PuJs2vne9vh3L eNci6g2B1Lxf6jWa9eZgcqQYZCtLl6ClVQM879jZo2o1+I0ta3S2p6u53llf10Pf Ad0vfj5AhBAkMbSvrgCiFyiMpjO9mIKpF/47XtyVEdcF1bx8ul5eewWTMrK7PMsn aTrVqwlmfQa8qPtuQr2OKsdKR//UlM0dSoyjQai2vZPyAosgbjiE9khAaKBKJaeK OC6gFPQemmGc4hVlGB0Cs+Dubg0OCoqpqOPitLh6TBCwqHcNso1Uz/qf7YsdKdJ5 6A3J1w7HV6f/FJSNZ7dPU1nFuWiJfMwn/1hGbQaWM/Ln4EQIDjspJYZTtY/8BOhI L4RJeU6vNTm2trmumgBKGuovSq1vZ/UWxEJkXCK9N+W2cLl7A2u8vkkCLj5oxr3y ybDvfd7kPZ+aZSW6Y7eA5CWehsh5PtJMtOaNGfCl6jynCj8xG1NKxWzewKv9Gs0E TM7+QqXrmuANuGYT0h5xlO7bXJpwynKX5mzvNuuq9kzUoikj2ucoVxKvhMi73Jvz 7I0EjJFXER30EovOdL6V9jAUk9eITx3cGQ/acHGnUVK7Ncq/bWd4/P0StQeINdN5 8TgUjKS0Wc4Y5gstdJXnJcQx3/pXSQAvsujgDQGWQCDxEU1t6YKu7UNuZG0gLmYi ZyRXKbKzlw10Tm28608D+zMJ/ZlJenqohm7g4YQV7T7/glZKFbqx1q2Inw67aLdj zr2m5KU1Adert+KfDKA6PvwBHGOPBkza0z1EdG2ft2xA6HjQfbRyNO+7iCwesJb4 54qGc9apW4+facRCNgQVCtEG9h2yrnqmDG8k3poSQagHaRUM0+kUq4g+ABPEi1/G xr6hkKmoniD9vmZKveyIzjuDXtMcIIezUCttDI5rssct2tIGBBq9uckduWb8dw+1 fWoje3NxxSiogQCeXrZLq8T8viPz3b/SpQHBpa8PfJ4+ljCH6Fzf0Jf5r3aViVb/ G8BxXuU5UdSaCs/MVdgLyrJWMpMoOTawXomEdl6Sty8BSn3kJPJ3WXK9tUIyyeg6 AvX+IJ22UldmfrhYu1+PI4hLz2GHY/NR5KT4VIUaYfSknnzhfj+dRGSSoT8H5ptM P58t0Zb0CwGwu3q3YsNosahnYo4d5eS1h39GbO1Bd4hSQkjbQ04aDYl1qIdXtaII 2ydLgWiWgCS4w7fsHohmvibOxCnGBblhY0bA9PlMUU4FX6VyS2DkrVcsltPX1+ZL cjmZiwOFzyiX6pYWuv8n7uWVW/tylWEsrxoSRYP2Ey/4HDHZ7F8AuCt7ouaJBoLW AksJt76BlYJGI7RS9tsjl97Jxi2gp2P4dAi5J95MQSGBWw5S60e9luMbR9yw8kHb 8TLEYxKfNdj6Uq0Phqa5tEkiU7UwttW2VBXS6fgyEYYcWcbruNs+T142VRhnGaTw CnoenePc7aFK+h+8bBP2PCJCTLNigM3dfJ3Zd4ch8xA3oKj9rxjDy6bh4HvOHsHP eimWuDNMKUvZ6tTQcN0Nl+MpqUgDqItmrkZB1wCNmitKzbEBN3uIGTpFtDHVupLb 4XyvlUwqdGhJrcPdUZy3JjulTkaGbuujg86JY0CCgLdVUyqofGI5YgKOx4x2L4RJ bxHb01iByLslLhG120Np5IkK4qSn9MGovQaqkoWm3ADFBSeFQGiTyemN4OPoKSZN mQAwp1dyNf7K7m6FlG5PHWXH3m2td4R6v2EHWN7IM1V5WqwG29wSCkKNjAKA0TZR K1Hy+bZDL0o1m2OwMhQvGY9oIpQr2rfTSWdknE41WR8Eqdg365ftWnQje+IEpKQU kyUfbKMd7iBFhM38OA2nSajugCbt5e/t5GoTMDvXXkKbpmIfpKk/rpBdxmkjDNFV ZgQ6tc/ySqft2+pmzj3g8vfDDzKMRN6W/q2N8TXc1tkcVqPOfjId97o5TTW+L8ME sQdKtssQGe9ICOJbXd1XM2AllrVZtsMRDe+4qxrky865p/qVNaJ+laotdNV7glJT 26PHqHlHWJN1mONoiLCaiqYRyNygsIc6fANIEKbEJxjdjW7mq579IYu0QAbsITwc NW7IAomk4vz5YVPEJIr/i1twERWn9IYvDjMroO1U1D7P3/Z1sE+xtU/0HVvvXLoD GD79KIr9nUDJTKKZyefy00piEyBJz9gHdJkryqBuAaODIPrWSs5nNS+MJc6fSv6j aQJdFcNQGuoIYtjHF1lz4cMSjd8pJlADIwrLt28NLL+Y/wHT6WUzpsWIOxwgJolL EnNDOaCBDk17CDoKWoqvT8RfYwUvtpK4QrEtLwOygEcObIaSjrMDkPropZRbiT+i dDQIK8T85ggYNrb9XZGwVbKEMiOnTxgsa/mxykAwi7Xp+5FDKS6HJS4QvE45zZY9 4j3azT3sqv9NIyTZKFnjLFIxWez5I+PWupuFY/oFC81kFvTI/OtJcNqKRIRlfv7M h/LNKrdmsJ4JC+Jn+SCZ5BXD/q/aaWPSzXgSMTnXOtTNi0Nsxp7roUuPZjvXt/s6 WyPf4qpN7GtBF1htg0uVfdSO2B9eVi+xU4Ly7uR+G+yI4oUDbHx3oBdoIoExwBRm Mu+arV9ELEkpHmidEjFuM1AB1C2gRH+H2mghF4Axxw== =6MjS -----END PGP MESSAGE-----

@ b39b8e83:0e391257

For widespread privacy, we need a social contract. People must work together to deploy these systems for the common good.

Privacy isn't just personal. It's a collective effort. The more people use privacy tech, the stronger our defenses become.

Adopting privacy tools is a form of solidarity. When you protect your data, you help protect everyone's.

Education is key. Teach others about privacy tools. Help your friends and family set up encrypted messaging.

Support privacy-focused projects, businesses, & developers. Contribute code, donate, or simply use and promote these tools.

Normalize privacy practices. Make using encryption and anonymity tools as common as locking your front door.

Privacy as a social norm benefits everyone. It protects whistleblowers, journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens alike.

The social contract for privacy: I'll respect your right to privacy, and you'll respect mine.

https://image.nostr.build/f235113e856a4adfa13b25dd703f46e17bbeef3f40bbdebacacc5e0fc0063f79.jpg

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Bolo

It seems that from 1987 to around 2000 there was a big community of people who played this game called "Bolo". It was a game in which people controlled a tank and killed others while trying to capture bases in team matches. Always 2 teams, from 2 to 16 total players, games could last from 10 minutes to 12 hours. I'm still trying to understand all this.

The game looks silly from some videos you can find today, but apparently it was very deep in strategy because people developed strategy guides and wrote extensively about it and Netscape even supported bolo: URLs out of the box.

The two most important elements on the map are pillboxes and bases. Pillboxes are originally neutral, meaning that they shoot at every tank that happens to get in its range. They shoot fast and with deadly accuracy. You can shoot the pillbox with your tank, and you can see how damaged it is by looking at it. Once the pillbox is subdued, you may run over it, which will pick it up. You may place the pillbox where you want to put it (where it is clear), if you've enough trees to build it back up. Trees are harvested by sending your man outside your tank to forest the trees. Your man (also called a builder) can also lay mines, build roads, and build walls. Once you have placed a pillbox, it will not shoot at you, but only your enemies. Therefore, pillboxes are often used to protect your bases.

That quote was taken from this "augmented FAQ" written by some user. Apparently there were many FAQs for this game. A FAQ is after all just a simple, clear and direct to the point way of writing about anything, previously known as summa[^summa-k], it doesn't have to be related to any actually frequently asked question.

More unexpected Bolo writings include an etiquette guide, an anthropology study and some wonderings on the reverse pill war tactic.

[^summa-k]: It's not the same thing, but I couldn't help but notice the similarity.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Lagoa Santa: como chegar -- partindo da rodoviária de Belo Horizonte

Ao descer de seu ônibus na rodoviária de Belo Horizonte às 4 e pouco da manhã, darás de frente para um caubói que toma cerveja em seus trajes típicos em um bar no setor mesmo de desembarque. Suba a escada à direita que dá no estacionamento da rodoviária. Vire à esquerda e caminhe por mais ou menos 400 metros, atravessando uma área onde pessoas suspeitas -- mas provavelmente dormindo em pé -- lhe observam, e então uma pracinha ocupada por um clã de mendigos. Ao avistar um enorme obelisco no meio de um cruzamento de duas avenidas, vire à esquerda e caminhe por mais 400 metros. Você verá uma enorme, antiga e bela estação com uma praça em frente, com belas fontes aqüáticas. Corra dali e dirija-se a um pedaço de rua à direita dessa praça. Um velho palco de antigos carnavais estará colocado mais ou menos no meio da simpática ruazinha de parelepípedos: é onde você pegará seu próximo ônibus.

Para entrar na estação é necessário ter um cartão com créditos recarregáveis. Um viajante prudente deixa sempre um pouco de créditos em seu cartão a fim de evitar filas e outros problemas de indisponibilidade quando chega cansado de viagem, com pressa ou em horários incomuns. Esse tipo de pessoa perceberá que foi totalmente ludibriado ao perceber que que os créditos do seu cartão, abastecido quando de sua última vinda a Belo Horizonte, há três meses, pereceram de prazo de validade e foram absorvidos pelos cofre públicos. Terá, portanto, que comprar mais créditos. O guichê onde os cartões são abastecidos abre às 5h, mas não se espante caso ele não tenha sido aberto ainda quando o primeiro ônibus chegar, às 5h10.

Com alguma sorte, um jovem de moletom, autorizado por dois ou três fiscais do sistema de ônibus que conversam alegremente, será o operador da catraca. Ele deixa entrar sem pagar os bêbados, os malandros, os pivetes. Bastante empático e perceptivo do desespero dos outros, esse bom rapaz provavelmente também lhe deixará entrar sem pagar.

Uma vez dentro do ônibus, não se intimide com os gritalhões e valentões que, ofendidíssimos com o motorista por ele ter parado nas estações, depois dos ônibus anteriores terem ignorado esses excelsos passageiros que nelas aguardavam, vão aos berros tirar satisfação.

O ponto final do ônibus, 40 minutos depois, é o terminal Morro Alto. Lá você verá, se procurar bem entre vários ônibus e pessoas que despertam a sua mais honesta suspeita, um veículo escuro, apagado, numerado 5882 e que abrigará em seu interior um motorista e um cobrador que descansam o sono dos justos.

Aguarde na porta por mais uns vinte minutos até que, repentinamente desperto, o motorista ligue o ônibus, abra as portas e já comece, de leve, a arrancar. Entre correndo, mas espere mais um tempo, enquanto as pessoas que têm o cartão carregado passem e peguem os melhores lugares, até que o cobrador acorde e resolva te cobrar a passagem nesse velho meio de pagamento, outrora o mais líqüído, o dinheiro.

Este último ônibus deverá levar-lhe, enfim, a Lagoa Santa.

@ 3c7dc2c5:805642a8

🧠Quote(s) of the week:

“Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder,” according to 20th-century historian Arnold Toynbee.

He claimed every great culture collapses internally due to a divergence in values between the ruling class and the common people…

"Constant inflation is a human rights issue. It basically prevents people from building up liquid capital reliably. It either forces them to monetize illiquid things like real estate or just keeps rug-pulling them year after year and they're never able to build any serious capital and better themselves."
-Lyn Alden.

🧡Bitcoin news🧡

On the 15th of September:

➡️More than a week a week ago rumors circulated that Coinbase is writing Bitcoin IOUs for BlackRock and they are suppressing the price. Now fast forward to today.

➡️Power bills increased by $300 per year for each home in a Norwegian town after the local Bitcoin miner shut down.

The miner paid 20% of the area's grid fees, thus subsidizing other consumers. With the miner gone, people's power bills are skyrocketing.

Aledander Ellefsen: "Politicians fall into the cobra effect trap once again: "The mayor cheered the shutdown of the controversial Bitcoin mining data center, but now residents are facing an unexpected consequence: a hefty bill increase."

Locals will now have to pay an extra $200-$300 per year due to increased costs to grid fees without the big mining customer, and the mayor of this remote municipality comments: "We work continuously to facilitate the industrial activity we want in the municipality. It may not be something we can solve in just one month, but we are dedicated to promoting business development every single day." (This is political jargon, for it will likely never happen.) The "celebration" ended the moment they got their first bill - You can't make this shit up

"Some people do not understand that Bitcoin miners lower the cost of electricity by spreading the grid's fixed costs over a larger rate base." - Pierre Rochard.

A fun fact about the Norway example is that in Norway and will quote Alexander Ellefsen again: "About 97% of our electricity production comes from renewable energy sources, with the majority generated by hydropower. In the northern regions, we have hydropower dams where excess water is released due to low electricity demand outside peak hours. It’s perplexing to see how some politicians continue to overlook Bitcoin mining as a potential solution. By utilizing this surplus renewable energy, we could support the Bitcoin network while ensuring better energy efficiency and reducing waste."

➡️ETHBTC just traded on a 0.03 handle for the first time in 3.5 years (Apr 2021) -53% since the merge in Sep 2022.

Daily reminder that all shitcoins are trending towards zero compared to Bitcoin, including Ethereum. Remember when all the altcoin fanboys were talking about the flippening?

➡️Microstrategy has 244,800 BTC. In 2025 when 1 BTC goes to $1M their holding will be worth $244.8B.

➡️Duo9BTC: "Coinbase CEO just admitted that you got to trust them on their word. They will not provide any proof of reserves for the BTC they claim they have, nor any proof of backing for their new paper BTC called cbBTC. If they print too much paper BTC they will go the FTX route."

Once again...never leave your coins on an exchange. Period!

Rumors are circulating that Coinbase is writing Bitcoin IOUs for BlackRock and they are suppressing price.

Imagine a hacker gains access to Coinbase’s 2 million+ Bitcoin in custody, sends it all to a time-locked address, 100 years into the future, and shares the private keys publicly.

➡️Bitcoin (+43%) and Gold (+25%) are the top-performing major assets in 2024. We've never seen these two in the #1/#2 spots for any calendar year.

On the 16th of September:

➡️President Bukele announces that El Salvador will no longer borrow external debt to finance its budget. Bitcoin country is winning.

➡️MicroStrategy announces plans to raise another $700M and buy more Bitcoin with proceeds.

MicroStrategy increased its capital raising by an extra +$175m. It will now raise $875 million to buy more Bitcoin and potentially raise another $135m within two weeks. Eventually, MicroStrategy sold $1.01 billion worth of convertible notes to buy more Bitcoin.

'Michael Saylor found the infinite money glitch: • Convert cash to Bitcoin • MSTR goes up • Take out more debt • MSTR goes up • Sell personal holdings • MSTR goes up • Issue more stock • MSTR goes up • Join the S&P 500 • MSTR goes up' - TheBTCTherapist

I will quote Dylan Leclair on this one: 'Rather than purchasing physical infrastructure & energy to generate computational hashes, the world's most efficient Bitcoin miner is short-selling dollars & leveraging common stock volatility.'

MicroStrategy now HODLs 252,200 Bitcoin worth +$16 BILLION. Average cost: $39,266 per bitcoin.

On the 17th of September:

➡️Bhutan and El Salvador now combined hold 18,900 BTC worth $1.1 billion. Thanks to its vast hydroelectric energy sources, Bhutan secretly started mining Bitcoin in 2020, now holding up to 13,029 BTC total. Game theory has started playing out and it will force every country to adopt it.

On the 18th September:

➡️BlackRock’s latest report on Bitcoin includes a striking comparison table, highlighting how Bitcoin, the S&P 500, and gold performed after major geopolitical events.

On top of that the world's largest asset manager sees bitcoin as a geopolitical hedge against the US debt crisis and dollar instability.

➡️The State of Louisiana becomes the first in the nation to accept Bitcoin via the Lightning network.

On the 19th of September:

➡️'Everyone who's been daily DCAing Bitcoin is once again in profit. Even those who first started DCAing at an all-time high 190 days ago.' -Wicked

➡️The first nuclear-powered Bitcoin mining facility in Pennsylvania, operated by Terrawulf Inc.

On the 20th of September:

➡️BNY Mellon, America’s biggest custodian bank, has received SEC approval for custody.

Source: https://unchainedcrypto.com/bank-of-new-york-mellon-identified-as-first-bank-to-receive-sec-exemption-from-sab-121/

They are the world’s largest custodian bank with $50T under custody. The game theory this will kick off is something we’re not ready for!

➡️Bitcoin to hit $200,000 no matter who wins 2024 US Election - Standard Chartered, Head of Digital Assets

➡️SEC approves options for BlackRock's spot Bitcoin ETF.

Joe Consorti: "With the introduction of options on bitcoin ETFs, sophisticated investors can now generate yield on BTC. Get ready for a huge influx of liquidity from big players looking to sell covered calls, drawing bigger players into the game, more liquidity, and on and on."

💸Traditional Finance / Macro:

On the 17th of September:

👉🏽"Warren Buffett is hoarding more cash: Last week, Berkshire Hathaway reported that it sold $229 million of Bank of America stock over 3 trading days. Since mid-July, Buffett’s total sales of hit $7.2 billion or 174.7 million shares. As a result, total holdings fell to $33.7 billion or 858 million shares, the lowest level since 2018. Berkshire Hathaway's cash position surged by $88 billion in Q2 2024, reaching a record $277 billion. Warren Buffett continues to build his cash position." -TKL.

🏦Banks:

👉🏽No news

🌎Macro/Geopolitics:

On the 15th of September:

👉🏽The Saudis have joined other Asian countries in ditching their long-term sensitivity to the gold price. Evidence suggests the Saudi central bank has been covertly buying 160 tonnes of gold in Switzerland since early 2022, contributing to the current gold bull market.

On the 1st of September, I already shared the news that global net gold purchases by central banks reached 483 tonnes in the first half of 2024, the most on record. This is 5% higher than the previous record of 460 tonnes set in the first half of 2023. The East (China, India, Russia, Saudi, etc.) no longer trusts owning Western reserve assets. Even in the West, the trust in the bond market is crumbling.

You don't believe my word?

'Blue = Foreign Central Bank holdings of USTs. Red = Total US Federal Debt. Mind the gap (with QE, bank regulations, MMF regulations, pension tax benefits, enticing US retail to buy, etc.)'- Luke Gromen

👉🏽Meloni takes the first steps for Italy to build nuclear power plants.

The Ministry of Environment revealed today that new laws will be introduced later this year and that a decree on the matter will come in 2025 Italy voted no to nuclear power in a referendum in 1987, just a year after Chornobyl. Personally, I think this is a smart move.

👉🏽Jeroen Blokland: 'But, government bonds are a wonderful asset on someone's balance sheet.' Sure, as long as you do not ask who is genuinely willing to hold all that DEBT. The UK government budget is doomed!

👉🏽'The difference between the 2-year Treasury yield and the Fed interest rates dropped to -1.69%, the most in at least 35 years.

This gap is now even larger than in 2008 and 1989, a few months before the recession began. The 2-year Treasury yield is considered a leading indicator for the next Fed’s interest rate moves. In other words, the bond market expects that the Fed will be cutting rates at a rapid pace in the coming months. This has been driven by increasing evidence of the deteriorating labor market and many indicators suggesting this trend will continue.' -TKL.

Regarding the rate cute:

The similarities between 2007 and 2024 are wild!

Fed's First Rate Cut:

Sept 18, 2007

Sept 18, 2024 (high probability)

Unemployment Rate

Sept 2007: 4.7

Sept 2024: 4.2

US Inflation Rate YoY

Sept 2007: 2.5

Sept 2024: 2.5

US Housing Starts:

Sept 2007: 1.238

Sept 2024: 1.235

US Leading Economic Activity

Sept 2007: 100.4

Sept 2024: 100.4

US Existing Home Sales

Sept 2007: 4.5 Million

Sept 2024: 3.95 Million

(This post is not calling for a 2007 crash. I am simply pointing out the intriguing similarities in timing and economic indicators.)

You can find the charts here:

👉🏽Germany's lack of public investment is structural. Germany records one of the lowest net public investment ratios* in the EU over 1995-2023 (i.e. ~zero expansion in net public capital stock). Only Latvia and Slovakia do worse. Net investment: gross investment - minus depreciation

German „green“ policy:

1. 2023 25,6% of German electricity came from coal before the decision to close nuclear 31% came from nuclear
2. Deindustrialization drives production to Asia, where some products cause 30% more CO2 German Greens ruin both the economy and the environment.

German business model was based on: 1. Cheap energy from Russia 2. Cheap subcontractors in Eastern Europe 3. Steadily growing exports to China All three are gone by now. And we are in the good times, imagine what will happen during the next recession. Germany is Europe's engine.

On the 17th September:

👉🏽US debt now stands at $35.3 trillion. If we were to return to 0% interest and make payments of $1 million per hour, it would take approximately 4,023 years, or until the year 6,047, to bring the debt back down to zero.

The US government has added $5 trillion to Federal Debt in the last 2 years. With annual spending of $6.95 trillion and taxes of $4.91 trillion, the US government is currently overspending by $233 million per hour. Yikes.

👉🏽'Total consumer credit jumped by $25.5 billion in July and reached a new all-time high of $5.1 trillion.

This marked the largest jump since November 2022 and the 11th straight monthly increase.

Total consumer debt has DOUBLED in 14 years. Revolving debt, which includes credit cards, jumped by $10.6 billion and also hit a new record of $1.4 trillion. Non-revolving credit rose by $14.8 billion and is just $2 billion below the January peak of $3.73 trillion. Meanwhile, the share of credit card debt delinquencies soared to 9.1%, the highest level in 12 years. The debt mountain is collapsing.' TKL

On the 18th of September:

👉🏽Federal Reserve cuts interest rates by 50 basis points, first cut in over 4 years.

On the 20th of September:

👉🏽Gold new all-time high $2,620 as markets brace for fiat destruction. Gold prices are up a MASSIVE 28% in 2024 to a fresh record high of $2,660/oz. This puts Gold on track for its best annual return since 1979, all while the Fed is calling for a "soft landing."

👉🏽 Two weeks ago I already explained a bit about the Volkswagen & Germany situation. Now we received the news that Volkswagen is planning to lay off as many as 30.000 employees.

On the 21st of September:

👉🏽"Unrealized losses on investment securities for US banks reached $512.9 billion in Q2 2024.

This is 7 TIMES higher than at the peak of the 2008 Financial Crisis. Q2 2024 also marked the 11th consecutive quarter of unrealized losses as interest rates continued to pressure the economy. Bank of America, the second-largest lender in the US, now accounts for $110.8 billion of held-to-maturity securities with unrealized losses or 20% of the total. Meanwhile, the number of banks on the FDIC Problem Bank List increased to 66 in Q1 2024, or 1.5% of the aggregate.

Unrealized losses held by banks remain a major issue." -TKL

🎁If you have made it this far I would like to give you a little gift: Matthew Pines is the Director of Intelligence at SentinelOne and a National Security Fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute.

In this episode, they explore UAPs, simulation theory, remote viewing, and human consciousness. They discuss the potential implications of knowing that aliens are real and what this could mean for humanity - exploring the nature of reality and challenging our understanding of existence, as they discuss the intersection of advanced phenomena and human perception.

https://youtu.be/YN2Le9dp_Ww?si=6eydqVLxCZXLba_V

Credit: I have used multiple sources! My savings account: Bitcoin. The tool I recommend for setting up a Bitcoin savings plan: @Relai 🇨🇭 especially suited for beginners or people who want to invest in Bitcoin with an automated investment plan once a week or monthly. (Please only use it till the 31st of October - after that full KYC) Hence a DCA, Dollar cost Average Strategy. Check out my tutorial post (Instagram) & video (YouTube) for more info.⠀⠀⠀⠀

Get your Bitcoin out of exchanges. Save them on a hardware wallet, run your own node...be your own bank. Not your keys, not your coins. It's that simple.⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀

Do you think this post is helpful to you? If so, please share it and support my work with sats.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Liquidificador

A fragilidade da comunicação humana fica clara quando alguém liga o liquidificador.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

An argument according to which fractional-reserve banking is merely theft and nothing else

Fractional-reserve banking isn't anything else besides transfer of money from the people at large to bankers.

It has been argued that fractional-reserve banking serves a purpose in making new funds available out of no one's pocket for lending and thus directing resources to productive borrowers. This financing method is preferrable to the more conservative way of borrowing funds directly from a saver and then using that to lend to others because it uses new money, money not tied to anyone else before, and thus it's cheaper and involves less friction.

Instead, what happens is that someone must at all times be the owner of each money. So when banks use their power of generating fractional-reserve funds, they are creating new money and they are the owners – at this point, a theft occurs from the public at large to them – and then they proceed to lend their own money. From this description it is clear that the fact that bank customers have previously deposited their own funds in the banks' vaults have no direct relation with the fact that banks created money afterwards, there's only a legal relation and the fact that banks may need cash deposited by its customers to redeem borrowers claims, but even that wouldn't be necessary if banks were allowed to print their own cash.

@ c7eadcf0:7821e562

https://image.nostr.build/c7e3732889827ab0a8e2064de5fa6992e37e035347b0c91d249cb8f312b47087.jpg I love Bitcoin. Let me get that out there first of all. I sincerely believe that Bitcoin has the power to change the way the world functions if we can grow adoption to a global scale. This obviously will take time as the gears of economic change grinds slowly. As of right now, people in the western countries don't really see the need for a sovereign politically neutral money that can't be inflated away. They simply don't have to deal with inflation on a regular basis like the rest of the world.

Citizens in western countries got a small taste of what real inflation looks like and guess what? They didn't like it one bit. Overall the last three and a half years you saw countless news stories about how bad inflation and how its making life for the average American or European more difficult.

Yes inflation does suck but look at countries like Argentina, Turkey, Zimbabwe or Venezuela. The people in these countries are suffering from excessive inflation on a regular basis! According to recent economic data Turkey experienced a decline in inflation from 61 percent to 51 percent in August. This is seen as a win in their book! Can you imagine this level of inflation in America? There would be riots in the streets!

Argentina's inflation rate is an astounding 236 percent over the last 12 months! As Bitcoiners we understand that the problem is the money itself. As long as governments have the ability to manipulate the money supply, they will. This is human nature at its finest. When you give a select few that kind of power it becomes irresistible and becomes a tool to control the masses. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone to be honest.

What I find shocking is with all of this inflation globally no one is really looking around asking questions to why this is happening and looking for a way to escape this system. Are people really this lazy? Not to be mean but cmon. It seems to me that most people are perfectly fine bitching online about how hard it is to make ends meet or supporting their favored political party and wanting them to fix the problem they created. Newsflash to all the normies out there, its the GD political parties that caused inflation in the first place.

We literally have a solution that is staring them in the face, ready to go to replace the current debt based system that we are currently suffering through and no one wants to take the time to research it? Am I black pilled? No, am I realist, very much so. If 236 percent inflation in Argentina can't get them on a Bitcoin Standard immediately, we as a community have a long road ahead of us. Hyperbitcoinization isn't coming in 5 years. It isn't coming in 10 years. Hell it might not even happen in our lifetimes and we have to be ok with that.

So what is the best way to get more Bitcoin into the hands of the people, so they can see the true value of the digital monetary revolution that is Bitcoin. We need a trojan horse and that trojan horse is nostr.

Enter The Nostr Trojan Horse

https://image.nostr.build/5ffee418133ac80ba14b30abf0d5390b878f676cbf6332d67639f9384764da4c.jpg

It should be plain to see by now that the inflation or the number go up narrative alone isn't going to drive Bitcoin adoption. The reason for that is because people don't see the utility of Bitcoin. They see it as some esoteric digital funny money that drug dealers and terrorist use to do bad things.

The average Joe doesn't see how Bitcoin is helping dissidents on foreign countries fund their activism, escape oppressive regimes or simply earn a living. These stories are never told in the mainstream media because they don't want to highlight the fact that a non-state money can circumvent the status quo.

The best way to highlight these stories is to share it on social media, which again is controlled by mainstream gatekeeper such as Meta, Google and X. It is in their best interest to censor these stories or memory hole them out of existence which I suspect happens quite a bit without us even knowing. But the thing about censorship is that it slowly impacts everyone one by one until no one is allowed to say anything without the fear of being put in jail.

Think this can't happen in western democracies? It's happening already my friend! Take a look at the UK or Australia. Citizens their are being arrested over post made to social media. I sincerely believe that these two countries should be a proving ground for showing the value of nostr and Bitcoin.

Introducing the concept of a censorship resistant messaging protocol to them will go over well and once it is understood will grow like a wildfire because people innately understand that censorship is bad and will see the utility value of having the ability to speak freely again.

It is only a matter of time until they realize that they can monetize their speech and build a life using zaps aka Bitcoin.

Until people see the utility in the tools that lie before them, they will never pick them up and use them. It is really that simple. At the end of the day we are still kind of like cavemen. We only use tools when it makes life easier. Man made the wheel. We use it everyday because it has utility.

Bitcoin in the end will be the same way. Utility first, then mass adoption. Nostr is what will help people see the utility Bitcoin and from there sky is the limit. The best thing we can do as Bitcoiners is to encourage people to learn about nostr and show them how easy it is to use and to switch clients that suit their needs instead of being shoved into a one-size fits all solution on centralized platforms.

People like choices, and nostr is all about choice. The interoperability and thelack of need to give personal information to create an account are HUGE selling points that can be touched on. Go out and spread the good word about nostr!

Bitcoin #Nostr

@ 1b5ee74d:bb1aae6e

The days when a mere announcement from Tesla, stating that it would begin accepting Bitcoin for some of its products, would cause a surge in the cryptocurrency's price seem like a distant memory. That was in 2021.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1374617643446063105https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1374617643446063105https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1374617643446063105https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1374617643446063105https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1374617643446063105https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1374617643446063105https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1374617643446063105Today, three years later, the price barely reacts to three pieces of institutional adoption news released within 72 hours.

The first piece of news comes from Switzerland, where SIX, the Swiss Stock Exchange operator, announced that it is seriously considering launching a crypto exchange. Bjørn Sibbern, global head of exchanges at SIX Group, stated, "The company is evaluating the creation of a platform where we can facilitate trading, both in crypto spot and derivatives."

The second news comes from Germany, where two of the country's leading banks, Commerzbank and DZ Bank, have launched Bitcoin trading for their clients. Commerzbank is one of Germany's four largest banks, while DZ Bank is part of the Volksbanken Raiffeisenbanken group, effectively giants of the European banking system. Together, they will open access to Bitcoin trading for approximately 40 million customers.

The third news comes from the United States, where BlackRock published a report describing Bitcoin as a diversification opportunity for traditional investors.

Some might ask: “But wasn’t Bitcoin supposed to be an anti-system technology?”

The Economic Incentive: A Core Part of Game Theory

Bitcoin is far more than just an anti-system asset. It’s a technology that incentivizes not only its most radical supporters but also potential adversaries. It’s now clear how its programmed scarcity creates a mechanism for appreciation, assuming demand stays the same. Each event signaling an increase in adoption represents a step toward an increase in the asset's value. The reason why even financial institutions—seemingly unrelated or even hostile to Bitcoin—are drawn to it lies in this market dynamic.

Banks and major institutions cannot ignore the asset’s appreciation. Bitcoin creates a perfect environment for both speculation and long-term investment. When the price rises, even the most conservative financial actors cannot overlook the economic incentive.

This is where game theory comes into play: Bitcoin is structured in such a way that anyone—even those who deny or criticize its potential—is incentivized to participate to avoid being excluded from future economic benefits. Financial institutions, driven by greed or opportunism, are forced to join in, knowing that staying out could be costly.

The Two Opposing Cycles: Virtuous for Bitcoin, Vicious for the Fiat System This process creates a reinforcing effect for Bitcoin while paradoxically weakening the traditional financial system that embraces it. Every time an institution decides to offer Bitcoin to its clients or include it in its portfolio, it legitimizes the asset in the public's eyes, strengthens its position, and further increases demand. The result is a virtuous cycle for Bitcoin: the more it is adopted, the more it appreciates, and the more financial actors become interested.

Shorting the System

For the fiat system, the process is the opposite. Bitcoin’s increasing demand pushes its value upward, while the traditional debt-based and expansionary monetary system loses strength. In this context, buying Bitcoin with fiat currency becomes an implicit shorting operation. Every transaction that shifts value from fiat to Bitcoin reduces the demand for fiat, increasing its vulnerability to inflation.

The demand dynamic is not complex: every time an investor buys Bitcoin, they commit resources that would otherwise have been destined for purchasing or investing in fiat-denominated assets. This reduces the buying pressure on fiat itself while increasing it on Bitcoin. The more money flows into Bitcoin, the less remains to sustain the value of fiat currencies.

Let’s suppose, for example, that a bank decides to allocate $100 million to Bitcoin. The market responds to this capital shift by increasing Bitcoin’s price due to its scarcity, while the demand for dollars decreases. All else being equal, this decrease in demand reduces the dollar’s purchasing power, thus increasing inflationary pressure.

This dynamic can also be expressed in terms of the relationship between supply and demand. While Bitcoin’s supply is fixed and predetermined, the dollar’s supply can be expanded infinitely through inflationary monetary policies. The dollar, therefore, tends to lose value as trust in it diminishes and its supply increases.

This process is not immediately visible, but its cumulative effect is devastating for the fiat system. Once the cycle begins, it becomes almost impossible to stop, as more institutions realize the dynamic and rush to buy Bitcoin to protect themselves from the erosion of fiat value.

The Trojan Horse

Given all this, we can understand why Alex Gladstein describes Bitcoin as a “Trojan horse for freedom.”

The news from the last three days, though seemingly small and quiet, signals a much larger and deeper phenomenon: the slow but steady transition of the traditional financial system toward Bitcoin. The banks and institutions adopting Bitcoin, often without fully realizing it, are contributing to a systemic shift that could lead to the downfall of the very institutions that fail to adapt to the new reality.

These small adoption moves are now so frequent and widespread that they no longer make a big splash. Yet with every move, with every bank launching a Bitcoin product, or every traditional investor adding it to their portfolio, the grave for the traditional financial system is being slowly dug. The actors who remain outside this process risk finding themselves in an increasingly weaker position, unable to compete with a market that is gradually embracing Bitcoin.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Thomas Kuhn sequer menciona o "método científico"

O que define uma ciência é o recorte de uma realidade a partir de um paradigma que todos os que entram no campo daquela ciência aceitam como verdade. Pronto.

O "método científico" não é nem necessário nem suficiente (apesar de que ele mesmo precisa pressupor uma série de axiomas para funcionar, do contrário a pessoa ficaria tendo que testar cada sílaba dos seus experimentos e cada um desses testes seria impossível de realizar pois eles necessariamente precisariam de outros conhecimentos prévios etc.).

Por isso - a física teórica pode ser uma ciência embora não faça experimentos; - e a economia pode ser uma ciência embora não faça experimentos (tá bom, existem pessoas que insistem em fazer "experimentos" em economia, mas que na verdade são só uma enorme perda de tempo baseada em estatísticas, mas isso não importa, até essas coisas podem ter algum valor desde que não se as entenda como sendo parte de um método científico); - e a história pode ser uma ciência, por mais estranho que isso pareça, bastando apenas que o historiador junte fatos de antigamente tendo como pressuposto um paradigma, por exemplo, de que existe um sentido da história, ou sei lá (não acho que exista essa ciência da história hoje em dia, me parece que cada historiador está fazendo uma coisa diferente, sem muitos paradigmas além do bom senso); - e a biologia pode ser uma ciência mesmo consistindo unicamente num longo esforço de classificação, e de fato é hoje, já que vê cada espécie e suas partes como frutos de um processo evolutivo cujas bases constituem um paradigma, e nega outras visões, como a teleologia.

• Método científico
• A estrutura paradigmática da ciência
• Um algoritmo imbecil da evolução

@ 3cd2ea88:bafdaceb

Il viaggio verso il trading smart continua, e vogliamo celebrarlo con te con una serie di eventi incredibili! 🚀

✨ Sfida di 6 secondi:

Partecipa alla Sfida di 6 secondi di Bitget e vinci una PS5, una gift box speciale e 20.000 USDT! 🕹💰

📜 Lettera di Gracy Chen

La CEO Bitget condivide tre storie ispiratrici che raccontano la crescita straordinaria di Bitget e la nostra attenzione ai risultati. 💪 Scopri di più su come sia diventato uno dei primi quattro exchange di criptovalute nel mondo! 🌍

https://www.bitget.com/it/blog/articles/6th-anniversary-letter-from-bitget-ceo

🔗 Unisciti alla celebrazione e fai trading in modo smart con Bitget! https://bonus.bitget.com/U1JNEK

https://www.bitget.com/events/6year

@ d6affa19:9110b177

i'm in the upstairs office. lost in some project i've been tinkering with. i feel driven with purpose.

the door is cracked open. i always leave the door open.

Her footsteps echo up the stairway. but my focus is intense; a solution just beyond my fingertips.

the door creaks open, a soft whisper of a sound.

i instantly feel Her presence. a sweet vanilla scent wraps around me, thick and intoxicating.

Her fingers brush through my hair, a gentle caress.

She grips my hair, then releases it— over and over again. it feels good.

a soothing warmth envelops me.

Her fingers glide, each stroke igniting my senses. a chill races down my spine.

the monitor becomes a bit distant.

"You're really focused, hmm?" She teases, leaning closer. "I'm just checking in on my sweet boy." Her tone alluring, already drawing me in.

"of course, my Queen." i reply, my eyes glued to the screen, struggling to concentrate. "thank You," my voice hints at annoyance. "i'm so close to finishing this up."

just when i near a breakthrough, She appears, a siren pulling me from my path. how does She know..? the quiet signals that betray my focus— that reveal my yearning.

"Hmmmm," She playfully muses.

ugh, i need to concentrate. but the way this feels...

it pulls me deeper.

Her fingers drift by my ear, lingering around my neck. nails grazing my skin, sending shivers through me.

my heart begins to race. the screen blurs, reality separates.

"Okay, sweet boy." Her voice is a soft command. Her nails dig in, a mixture of pain and pleasure. a sharp contrast to the softness of Her touch. "I'll be downstairs while you finish."

yet She remains. i close my eyes, drowning in the sensation. i should be finishing this project...

but each press feels like a silent command, an urge to abandon my thoughts, to succumb to the pull of Her presence.

the way She easily captures my attention... it makes me feel so vulnerable...

Her grip finally loosens, and slowly leaves my neck. it wants more...

i barely hear Her leave. but the air feels colder. the warmth of Her presence is fading. an aching emptiness fills the space...

the weight of Her absence settles in, another reminder of how easily She commands my thoughts...

desperately, i take in the remnants of Her scent.

i stare at my monitor. focus shattered, thoughts scattered like leaves.

i linger for a moment. fighting the urge to chase after Her.

the pull of Her absence is heavy in the air. i'm unable to resist. i rise from my seat.

the door is slightly open. She always leaves the door open.

i make my way downstairs, lost in the thoughts of serving Her. my true purpose...

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Drivechain comparison with Ethereum

Ethereum and other "smart contract platforms" capable of running turing-complete code and "developer-friendly" mindset and community have been running for years and they were able to produce a very low number of potentially useful "contracts".

What are these contracts, actually? (Considering Ethereum, but others are similar:) they are sidechains that run inside the Ethereum blockchain (and thus their verification and data storage are forced upon all Ethereum nodes). Users can peg-in to a contract by depositing money on it and peg-out by making a contract operation that sends money to a normal Ethereum address.

Now be generous and imagine these platforms are able to produce 3 really cool, useful ideas (out of many thousands of attempts): Bitcoin can copy these, turn them into 3 different sidechains, each running fixed, specific, optimized code. Bitcoin users can now opt to use these platforms by transferring coins to it – all that without damaging the nodes or the consensus protocol that has been running for years, and without forcing anyone to be aware of these chains.

The process of turning a useful idea into a sidechain doesn't come spontaneously, and can't be done by a single company (like often happens in Ethereum-land), it must be acknowledge by a rough consensus in the Bitcoin community that that specific sidechain with that specific design is a desirable thing, and ultimately approved by miners, as they're the ones that are going to be in charge of that.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Lightning and its fake HTLCs

Lightning is terrible but can be very good with two tweaks.

How Lightning would work without HTLCs

In a world in which HTLCs didn't exist, Lightning channels would consist only of balances. Each commitment transaction would have two outputs: one for peer A, the other for peer B, according to the current state of the channel.

When a payment was being attempted to go through the channel, peers would just trust each other to update the state when necessary. For example:

1. Channel AB's balances are A[10:10]B (in sats);
2. A sends a 3sat payment through B to C;
3. A asks B to route the payment. Channel AB doesn't change at all;
4. B sends the payment to C, C accepts it;
5. Channel BC changes from B[20:5]C to B[17:8]C;
6. B notifies A the payment was successful, A acknowledges that;
7. Channel AB changes from A[10:10]B to A[7:13]B.

This in the case of a success, everything is fine, no glitches, no dishonesty.

But notice that A could have refused to acknowledge that the payment went through, either because of a bug, or because it went offline forever, or because it is malicious. Then the channel AB would stay as A[10:10]B and B would have lost 3 satoshis.

How Lightning would work with HTLCs

HTLCs are introduced to remedy that situation. Now instead of commitment transactions having always only two outputs, one to each peer, now they can have HTLC outputs too. These HTLC outputs could go to either side dependending on the circumstance.

Specifically, the peer that is sending the payment can redeem the HTLC after a number of blocks have passed. The peer that is receiving the payment can redeem the HTLC if they are able to provide the preimage to the hash specified in the HTLC.

Now the flow is something like this:

1. Channel AB's balances are A[10:10]B;
2. A sends a 3sat payment through B to C:
3. A asks B to route the payment. Their channel changes to A[7:3:10]B (the middle number is the HTLC).
4. B offers a payment to C. Their channel changes from B[20:5]C to B[17:3:5]C.
5. C tells B the preimage for that HTLC. Their channel changes from B[17:3:5]C to B[17:8]C.
6. B tells A the preimage for that HTLC. Their channel changes from A[7:3:10]B to A[7:13]B.

Now if A wants to trick B and stop responding B doesn't lose money, because B knows the preimage, B just needs to publish the commitment transaction A[7:3:10]B, which gives him 10sat and then redeem the HTLC using the preimage he got from C, which gives him 3 sats more. B is fine now.

In the same way, if B stops responding for any reason, A won't lose the money it put in that HTLC, it can publish the commitment transaction, get 7 back, then redeem the HTLC after the certain number of blocks have passed and get the other 3 sats back.

How Lightning doesn't really work

The example above about how the HTLCs work is very elegant but has a fatal flaw on it: transaction fees. Each new HTLC added increases the size of the commitment transaction and it requires yet another transaction to be redeemed. If we consider fees of 10000 satoshis that means any HTLC below that is as if it didn't existed because we can't ever redeem it anyway. In fact the Lightning protocol explicitly dictates that if HTLC output amounts are below the fee necessary to redeem them they shouldn't be created.

What happens in these cases then? Nothing, the amounts that should be in HTLCs are moved to the commitment transaction miner fee instead.

So considering a transaction fee of 10000sat for these HTLCs if one is sending Lightning payments below 10000sat that means they operate according to the unsafe protocol described in the first section above.

It is actually worse, because consider what happens in the case a channel in the middle of a route has a glitch or one of the peers is unresponsive. The other node, thinking they are operating in the trustless protocol, will proceed to publish the commitment transaction, i.e. close the channel, so they can redeem the HTLC -- only then they find out they are actually in the unsafe protocol realm and there is no HTLC to be redeemed at all and they lose not only the money, but also the channel (which costed a lot of money to open and close, in overall transaction fees).

One of the biggest features of the trustless protocol are the payment proofs. Every payment is identified by a hash and whenever the payee releases the preimage relative to that hash that means the payment was complete. The incentives are in place so all nodes in the path pass the preimage back until it reaches the payer, which can then use it as the proof he has sent the payment and the payee has received it. This feature is also lost in the unsafe protocol: if a glitch happens or someone goes offline on the preimage's way back then there is no way the preimage will reach the payer because no HTLCs are published and redeemed on the chain. The payee may have received the money but the payer will not know -- but the payee will lose the money sent anyway.

The end of HTLCs

So considering the points above you may be sad because in some cases Lightning doesn't use these magic HTLCs that give meaning to it all. But the fact is that no matter what anyone thinks, HTLCs are destined to be used less and less as time passes.

The fact that over time Bitcoin transaction fees tend to rise, and also the fact that multipart payment (MPP) are increasedly being used on Lightning for good, we can expect that soon no HTLC will ever be big enough to be actually worth redeeming and we will be at a point in which not a single HTLC is real and they're all fake.

Another thing to note is that the current unsafe protocol kicks out whenever the HTLC amount is below the Bitcoin transaction fee would be to redeem it, but this is not a reasonable algorithm. It is not reasonable to lose a channel and then pay 10000sat in fees to redeem a 10001sat HTLC. At which point does it become reasonable to do it? Probably in an amount many times above that, so it would be reasonable to even increase the threshold above which real HTLCs are made -- thus making their existence more and more rare.

These are good things, because we don't actually need HTLCs to make a functional Lightning Network.

We must embrace the unsafe protocol and make it better

So the unsafe protocol is not necessarily very bad, but the way it is being done now is, because it suffers from two big problems:

1. Channels are lost all the time for no reason;
2. No guarantees of the proof-of-payment ever reaching the payer exist.

The first problem we fix by just stopping the current practice of closing channels when there are no real HTLCs in them.

That, however, creates a new problem -- or actually it exarcebates the second: now that we're not closing channels, what do we do with the expired payments in them? These payments should have either been canceled or fulfilled before some block x, now we're in block x+1, our peer has returned from its offline period and one of us will have to lose the money from that payment.

That's fine because it's only 3sat and it's better to just lose 3sat than to lose both the 3sat and the channel anyway, so either one would be happy to eat the loss. Maybe we'll even split it 50/50! No, that doesn't work, because it creates an attack vector with peers becoming unresponsive on purpose on one side of the route and actually failing/fulfilling the payment on the other side and making a profit with that.

So we actually need to know who is to blame on these payments, even if we are not going to act on that imediatelly: we need some kind of arbiter that both peers can trust, such that if one peer is trying to send the preimage or the cancellation to the other and the other is unresponsive, when the unresponsive peer comes back, the arbiter can tell them they are to blame, so they can willfully eat the loss and the channel can continue. Both peers are happy this way.

If the unresponsive peer doesn't accept what the arbiter says then the peer that was operating correctly can assume the unresponsive peer is malicious and close the channel, and then blacklist it and never again open a channel with a peer they know is malicious.

Again, the differences between this scheme and the current Lightning Network are that:

a. In the current Lightning we always close channels, in this scheme we only close channels in case someone is malicious or in other worst case scenarios (the arbiter is unresponsive, for example). b. In the current Lightning we close the channels without having any clue on who is to blame for that, then we just proceed to reopen a channel with that same peer even in the case they were actively trying to harm us before.

What is missing? An arbiter.

The Bitcoin blockchain is the ideal arbiter, it works in the best possible way if we follow the trustless protocol, but as we've seen we can't use the Bitcoin blockchain because it is expensive.

Therefore we need a new arbiter. That is the hard part, but not unsolvable. Notice that we don't need an absolutely perfect arbiter, anything is better than nothing, really, even an unreliable arbiter that is offline half of the day is better than what we have today, or an arbiter that lies, an arbiter that charges some satoshis for each resolution, anything.

Here are some suggestions:

• random nodes from the network selected by an algorithm that both peers agree to, so they can't cheat by selecting themselves. The only thing these nodes have to do is to store data from one peer, try to retransmit it to the other peer and record the results for some time.
• a set of nodes preselected by the two peers when the channel is being opened -- same as above, but with more handpicked-trust involved.
• some third-party cloud storage or notification provider with guarantees of having open data in it and some public log-keeping, like Twitter, GitHub or a Nostr relay;
• peers that get paid to do the job, selected by the fact that they own some token (I know this is stepping too close to the shitcoin territory, but could be an idea) issued in a Spacechain;
• a Spacechain itself, serving only as the storage for a bunch of OP_RETURNs that are published and tracked by these Lightning peers whenever there is an issue (this looks wrong, but could work).

Key points

1. Lightning with HTLC-based routing was a cool idea, but it wasn't ever really feasible.
2. HTLCs are going to be abandoned and that's the natural course of things.
3. It is actually good that HTLCs are being abandoned, but
4. We must change the protocol to account for the existence of fake HTLCs and thus make the bulk of the Lightning Network usage viable again.

See also

• Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit
• The Lightning Network solves the problem of the decentralized commit

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

contratos.alhur.es

A website that allowed people to fill a form and get a standard Contrato de Locação.

Better than all the other "templates" that float around the internet, which are badly formatted .doc files.

It was fully programmable so other templates could be added later, but I never did. This website made maybe one dollar in Google Ads (and Google has probably stolen these like so many other dollars they did with their bizarre requirements).

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/contratos
• http://contratos.alhur.es

@ bcbb3e40:a494e501

|| |:-:| |BLANCO, Carlos X. y COSTALES, Jose; España: Historia de una demolición controlada; Letras Inquietas, 2024|

Ya hemos publicado varias reseñas de algunas obras del Profesor Carlos X. Blanco, cuyas temáticas nos resultan totalmente familiares, y con las que coincidimos en un buen número de sus análisis y críticas del mundo actual. Recordaremos, para aquellos que estén interesados en sus obras las reseñas de De Covadonga a la nación española: La hispanidad en clave spengleriana y Un imperio frente al caos, además de algunas otras que podréis encontrar en nuestro blog. La obra del autor asturiano, en este caso en coautoría con José Costales, resulta muy clarificadora a la hora de analizar aspectos generales de la historia de España, cuestiones que tienen que ver con nuestra historia particular, y aquellos hechos que podemos considerar como más generales y fruto de un contexto y unas coyunturas que han marcado el destino de nuestra Patria en los últimos tiempos. Es por ese motivo, que así de entrada podemos distinguir dos bloques claramente diferenciados en esta obra: Un primer bloque que aborda nuestra historia peculiar, las características que definen el «hecho hispánico» y marcan nuestro devenir histórico; un segundo bloque en el que se señalan las amenazas y peligros que se yerguen frente a la España actual, aparentemente agonizante y desahuciada por la falta de soberanía y una serie de problemas graves y trascendentales que amenazan nuestra existencia.

Hay que destacar que el prólogo que precede a la obra en sí y le sirve como presentación corre a cargo del conocido abogado, jurista e historiador Guillermo Rocafort. En un breve pero certero escrito delinea los grandes problemas que atenazan a un Occidente decadente en plena crisis económica, geopolítica y de valores, embarcado en una deriva suicida que hace aguas y se ha vuelto insostenible. La crisis del capitalismo unipolar y globalista enfrenta el reto de la pujanza de los BRICS, con el resurgimiento de Rusia y el desarrollo y ascenso como superpotencia de China, junto a la formación de grandes bloques geopolíticos que definen la multipolaridad que, recientemente, autores como Aleksandr Duguin vienen teorizando desde la escuela euroasiática. Esta situación hace que la el mundo anglosajón y sus oligarquías plutocráticas comiencen a ver resquebrajada su hegemonía, con su sistema de dinero fiat y sus organizaciones pantalla, tales como la Unión Europea, o el desarrollo de su conocida como ideología woke y todas las perversas y destructivas ingenierías sociales asociadas, así como la acción de la Agenda 2030.

|| |:-:| |DUGUIN, Aleksandr G.; La geopolítica de Rusia: De la revolución rusa a Putin; Hipérbola Janus, 2015|

En el caso particular de España los efectos de los más de 300 años de dominio anglosajón han tenido consecuencias especialmente perniciosas con la desindustrialización, la destrucción del sector primario, las ingenierías sociales asociadas a las ideologías de género, donde España ha servido como particular conejillo de indias, o nuestras permanentes renuncias en materia de política exterior, donde nos hemos visto obligados, por imposiciones venidas del otro lado del Atlántico, a renunciar a nuestra soberanía sobre el Sahara Occidental o a las permanentes y humillantes cesiones a Marruecos.

En el escrito de Introducción, los autores trazan una genealogía de los hechos, de las circunstancias que se hallan detrás de las razones del propio título de la obra, «Historia de una demolición controlada», en la que el papel de la angloesfera ha sido fundamental para la situación de debilidad, sometimiento y negación de nuestra propia historia que vivimos en la actualidad. Somos parte de una Europa sojuzgada que actúa a remolque de las políticas estadounidenses y anglosajonas, a través de la acción de la OTAN, donde no somos más que un agregado servil, actuando en defensa de los intereses geopolíticos del Imperio. Dentro de Europa, la UE define otro tipo de jerarquías internas, en las cuales el eje franco-alemán impone sus intereses a los países con economías menos desarrolladas del sur. Al mismo tiempo, también se advierten las importantes transformaciones que el régimen constitucional de 1978 ha experimentado en las últimas décadas, especialmente a partir de Zapatero, con el mayor sojuzgamiento de España a la Agenda globalista.

Todas estas circunstancias adversas, y también trágicas para nuestro destino, hacen necesario un análisis de la propia historia de España, de su gestación y de los atributos que han cimentado la idea de lo español o hispánico. La historia de España ha estado condicionada por su proximidad a África, lo cual ha tenido una importancia decisiva en su configuración final. Con la invasión musulmana del 711 se produjo un episodio de dislocación dentro de nuestra historia, que a partir de ese momento experimentó una situación de dualidad étnico-religiosa y comenzó un episodio transfigurador y de construcción del ideal hispánico que se había iniciado con el reino visigodo de Toledo, y que la Reconquista contribuyó a potenciar. En este sentido, la configuración étnica que resultó de la invasión árabe hizo que las zonas del Norte, donde se refugiaron los restos de la antigua nobleza visigoda derrotada, predominó el elemento germánico que se erigió como motor inicial del proceso de Reconquista, mientras que en otras latitudes del levante y el sur peninsular se produjo un proceso de africanización y semitización sobre las antiguas poblaciones hispanorromanas. Un norte cristiano, germanizado e indoeuropeo, equiparable al Norte de Europa, representado por la monarquía asturiana frente a un sur africanizado, sumido en un caos étnico y de enfrentamientos civiles era el resultado de la entidad andalusí.

El proceso de romanización afectó de manera desigual a los territorios peninsulares, y los pueblos de las regiones noroccidentales como astures, cántabros o vascones apenas se vieron afectados, conservando un importante sustrato indoeuropeo en contraste con las regiones más mediterráneas, ocupadas por los íberos, que ya poseían un modelo de civilización elevado y en conexión con las civilizaciones clásicas mediterráneas. Estos elementos ya aparecen claramente expuestos en la interpretación spengleriana que uno de nuestros autores, Carlos X Blanco, expone en De Covadonga a la nación española: La hispanidad en clave spengleriana. Es el contraste entre una España atlántica, indoeuropea y germanizada frente a otra vertiente representada por la España mediterránea, levantina y romanizada. En la confluencia de ambos modelos tenemos la definición de las sucesivos siglos en los que se forja la Reconquista, en la que, según los autores, pasamos de una etapa inicial de predominio atlántico y noroccidental, con el Reino de Asturias, y posteriormente León, capitalizando el proceso de la Reconquista, mientras que posteriormente, será Castilla, que obedecerá al modelo mediterráneo, quien llevaría la batuta en el avance hacia el Sur y la hispanización de España, porque la invasión del 711 marca un proceso de deshispanización, una idea fundamental, también en nuestra opinión, que el avance de los reinos cristianos del Norte contribuirán a erosionar y finalmente, para nuestra fortuna, destruir por completo.

Como parte de la geopolítica hispánica y su relanzamiento como Patria común, es fundamental que España vuelva a resucitar el eje atlántico y noroccidental, propiamente asturiano, frente aquel castellano, para que recupere su primacía como eje en la reconstrucción de España y revertir así la agonía y rumbo errático que nos lleva hacia la destrucción total y la desaparición como nación histórica.

No obstante, si queremos refundar España a través de un verdadero proyecto nacional debemos ser realistas, y no dejarnos embelesar por los visiones sobreexcitados que representan el modelo Imperial de los Austrias o posteriores reverberaciones del mismo a través de construcciones ideales, sino que contemplando las actuales coyunturas, con el viraje hacia la multipolaridad que está experimentando el mundo actual, quizás estaríamos llamados, o al menos existe ese gran potencial, a liderar una suerte de hispanosfera con los antiguos países que fueron parte de la América española, frente a la anglosfera, que viene perjudicando nuestra soberanía y sometiéndonos, junto al resto de Europa, como una colonia.

Blanco y Costales nos ofrecen algunas directrices para esta reconstrucción, tales como la descentralización de los centros de poder, frente a todo modelo jacobino y liberal diríamos nosotros, como parte de un modelo confederal, que incluso podría apoyarse en la fundación de centros de poder en el continente americano. Asimismo, este modelo confederal, implicaría dotar de mayor poder y protagonismo a las regiones, tal y como habría postulado uno de los grandes teóricos del tradicionalismo español, Don Juan Vázquez de Mella, frente al actual modelo balcanizador de las 17 taifas dirigidas por las oligarquías partitocráticas y corruptas del Régimen de 1978. En cuanto al modelo político requerido, este no es la monarquía, sino la república, por el descrédito de los Borbones y la trayectoria descendente y de decadencia que han venido marcando en su reinado desde hace más de 300 años. En cualquier caso, lo que este modelo debe aportar es cohesión interna y voluntad de integración en el modelo de mundo unipolar, que se viene gestando y estructurando bajo relaciones de poder, redes económicas, comerciales y de otro tipo, que deben garantizar esa capacidad de interconexión. Y, por supuesto, en coherencia con lo sostenido con anterioridad, nuestros autores proponen que el eje atlántico y noroccidental debe representar el motor y artífice de este nuevo ciclo histórico.

Desde el advenimiento de los Borbones a comienzos del siglo XVIII, el polo mediterráneo y africanizado ha venido tomando un protagonismo creciente, que vemos reflejado el el triunfo posterior, a lo largo del siglo XIX, del liberalismo con la destrucción del Imperio y el sometimiento de España y de su historia a los dominios de la leyenda negra, urdida por la anglosfera, y que tiende a presentarnos como el producto de una hibridación de pueblos afrosemitas y mahometanos, sin identidad, y como una especie de anomalía frente a la europeidad prototípica. Un discurso que, claro está, fue aceptado por el liberalismo español con la consecuente desvalorización y rechazo de los orígenes astur-godos de la monarquía hispánica y del proceso de Reconquista por parte de unas élites corruptas, antiespañolas y endófobas, que se sometieron ideológicamente a Francia y al mundo anglosajón. En un principio, esto sirvió para provocar fragmentar la unidad interna del Imperio Español y enajenar el catolicismo de la Hispanidad, y posteriormente, una vez destruida esa unidad, someter a estos países al capitalismo depredador y esclavizarlos por la vía de la deuda. Paralelamente, y a través de la masonería, también se introdujeron ideas profundamente destructivas entre las élites liberales y traidoras, como son el laicismo, el separatismo y otras ideas disolventes que nos vienen desnaturalizando desde hace siglos.

La acción de este capitalismo destructivo y depravado, es la que nos ha convertido en un instrumento en manos de grandes cenáculos y organizaciones que forman parte de un entramado complejo y anónimo, desde donde se interviene permanentemente en nuestros asuntos imponiendo cambios profundos en las costumbres, tradiciones e identidad, empobreciéndonos y reduciéndonos a la más pura insignificancia.

Otro elemento a destacar, podríamos decir una de las grandes piedras angulares que definen la idiosincrasia de lo Hispánico, viene representado por el Catolicismo, que en el caso peninsular también revistió un carácter peculiar, especialmente en lo que respecta, una vez más, a los contrastes internos entre la zona atlántica-noroccidental y la mediterránea, así como con la propia realidad del reino visigodo, donde la Iglesia resultó ser muy autónoma, vertebrada a través de sus concilios. Con la irrupción de la contemporaneidad, este elemento, el católico, de vital importancia durante la Reconquista y a lo largo de toda nuestra historia, se ha visto disminuido, con la propia acción del liberalismo, y especialmente desde la izquierda, y también desde sus propios centros de poder, desde el mismo Vaticano, a raíz de su famoso Concilio Vaticano II, abdicando en sus principios y doctrina frente al liberalismo y el mundo moderno.

En el primer párrafo hemos hablado de un primer bloque, que de algún modo vendría a hablarnos de nuestra historia, de la autorepresentación que tenemos de la misma, y los elementos basales que componen su estructura. Esta sería la primera parte del libro. Una segunda parte vendría comprendida por el análisis de otros elementos más externos que definen unas coyunturas internacionales muy características, las cuales forman parte, desgraciadamente, de nuestro presente actual.

Entre los principales elementos de análisis se encuentra la acción de la anglosfera y el sometimiento que experimenta España junto al resto de naciones del orbe europeo, especialmente occidental, bajo instituciones transnacionales como la OTAN o la UE, que lastran permanentemente nuestra soberanía y nos convierten en meros cipayos al servicio de los intereses de la anglosfera (Estados Unidos y Reino Unido) en contra de nuestros propios intereses. El ejemplo más significativo lo tenemos en Ucrania, donde la OTAN está librando una guerra contra Rusia en la que viene utilizando al pueblo ucraniano como ariete de sus intereses geopolíticos a costa de la destrucción del país, en un auténtico drama humano con la muerte de miles de jóvenes en el frente de batalla. La historia de la anglosfera viene siendo la misma desde siempre, en el que sus teóricos aliados vienen siendo humillados, con multitud de traiciones, y ataques de falsa bandera, la creación de grupos terroristas, promoción de golpes de Estado, compra y soborno de políticos con aquellos países que no se sometían a los intereses del Imperio anglosajón. La base de tal poder, en la que tal imperio basa su poder el capitalismo financiero y especulador, cuyas raíces se encuentran en el siglo XVII, y que sirve a unas élites globales que se sirve de los mecanismos tales como los procesos inflacionarios para empobrecer y someter a los pueblos, a los que desprecia e instrumentaliza al servicio de Agendas globalistas. Al mismo tiempo acaparan gran parte de la riqueza global, que mantienen oculta en paraísos fiscales y de la que se sirven para sufragar el tráfico de drogas o la financiación de grupos terroristas que protagonizan los atentados de falsa bandera a los que nos hemos referido.

|| |:-:| |MUTTI, Claudio; Democracia y talasocracia: Antología de ensayos geopolíticos; Hipérbola Janus, 2017|

El enorme y desproporcionado proceso de financiarización que padece la economía del Occidente sometido a la anglosfera ha tenido consecuencias funestas sobre el complejo productivo real, redundando en la desindustrialización y la decadencia general bajo las teorías del «decrecimiento». Desde la administración Bush, a comienzos de siglo, hemos asistido a una serie de guerras de agresión en las que se han destruido países como Irak, Libia o Afganistán con el objetivo de controlar los hidrocarburos y las rutas de transporte, una tendencia que se ha venido incrementado especialmente con la administración Biden , y anteriormente con la de Obama, con la creación de organizaciones terroristas como el ISIS y la desestabilización permanente en Oriente Próximo, y el creciente y peligroso papel del complejo militar industrial.

Pero el poder y hegemonía estadounidense están menguando a pasos agigantados con la emergencia de dos grandes potencias, como son Rusia y China, frente a las que la anglosfera ve amenazada su hegemonía económica, con la colonización comercial china y el resurgir del potencial ruso, frente al cual, como decíamos, libran una guerra con intermediarios a través de Ucrania. Al mismo tiempo, tenemos a los BRICS, liderados por Rusia y China, con países emergentes como Irán, la India o Brasil con el papel de potencias regionales. La guerra de Ucrania solamente ha conseguido revigorizar a Rusia, alejarla de Europa y reforzar su alianza con China, mientras que los grandes perjudicados son Ucrania, que quedará en manos de grandes fondos de inversión como Blackrock ante una pretendida reconstrucción del país y las multinacionales que participarán en su reconstrucción, quedando en manos del globalismo. Europa es la otra gran perdedora, empobrecida y sumisa ante los designios del Imperio yanqui, al que rinde pleitesía a través de sus gobernantes, que no son más que títeres. Ante la inevitable pérdida de soberanía en el mundo, la anglosfera también pretende llevar la guerra a Asia contra China, viendo la derrota que está sufriendo en todos los frentes.

En el contexto de los intereses hispánicos, la anglosfera siempre ha representado una amenaza y un elemento especialmente dañino, responsable de la disolución del Imperio español con la introducción de las ideas liberales y masónicas entre las élites locales hispanoamericanas, practicando formas aberrantes de neocolonialismo sobre estos territorios una vez independizados, y siendo considerados como el patio trasero de Estados Unidos, quien ha practicado una política especialmente perniciosa y de desestabilización en todos estos territorios en vistas a coartar cualquier forma de desarrollo positivo.

Otro de los grandes problemas que se abordan en el libro es la amenaza que representa el enemigo del sur, Marruecos, para la integridad territorial española, sobre Ceuta, Melilla y las Islas Canarias, con el apoyo incondicional de países como Estados Unidos, Francia o Israel, tras las primeras y humillantes concesiones que ya se produjeron en 1975 con Juan Carlos I con el Sahara Occidental, y las posteriores, bajo mandato de Sánchez. Al mismo tiempo Estados Unidos e Israel especialmente, participan activamente en el rearme y fortalecimiento del reino moro, que ha desarrollado una política expansionista y agresiva contra los países vecinos. Para ello también se sirve de los lobbies marroquíes que actúan en el propio seno de la UE y dentro de España, que se sirven de las políticas cobardes y traidoras de sus políticos adheridos al Régimen del 78. Las consecuencias no se han dejado de notar en la destrucción y progresivo debilitamiento de nuestro sector primario en detrimento de los productos del país norteafricano, que entran sin ningún tipo de control en nuestro territorio, sin cumplir los requisitos mínimos a nivel fitosanitario. La ineptitud, servilismo y cobardía del actual Régimen hacia poderes globalistas y transnacionales, hacia la anglosfera, nos condenan a seguir un guión sin ninguna autonomía ni poder de decisión.

Otro de los ámbitos importantes que contempla el libro, lo encontramos en la ya mencionada Unión Europea, que no deja de ser otro instrumento de dominación y supeditación a los intereses de la anglosfera, y donde se reúnen los representantes de los grandes poderes fácticos a través de plutócratas, banqueros y poderes económicos y financieros transnacionales. Esta institución ha ido sustrayendo progresivamente el poder de las naciones que la integran con una comisión europea con atribuciones y poderes omnímodos para dictar normas y con una presidenta, Ursula Von der Leyen, metida en multitud de casos de corrupción, entre los que destacan aquellos vinculados a la Plandemia de 2020 y las falsas vacunas. Todo ello sin contar los protocolos criminales que se impusieron durante ese periodo, la represión policial y el cercenamiento de derechos y libertades con la presión absolutamente criminal sobre los que decidieron no «vacunarse» con el producto experimental del que nadie se hacía responsable y sobre el cual reinaba toda opacidad informativa. Desde esas fechas hasta el presente los fondos de inversión globalistas, como Blackrock o Vanguard entre otros, se sirvieron de la crisis generada para enriquecerse y acaparar la compra de todo lo comprable como instrumento de las élites plutocráticas mundiales y sus ansias de dominio global.

|| |:-:| |NAD, Boris; Después del virus: El renacimiento de un mundo multipolar; Hipérbola Janus, 2022|

La Unión Europea no ha dejado de ser, como ya hemos dicho, parte de las organizaciones que la anglosfera, y particularmente el gobierno yanqui, ha utilizado para dominarnos y debilitarnos desde 1945, y en nuestros días también a través de la Agenda 2030, a partir de la cual pretenden reducir Europa a la nada, desindustrializando y destruyendo el sector primario, algo especialmente dramático en el caso español. La UE también nos habla de la implantación de la divisa digital con todos los peligros que esta entraña como, por ejemplo, la posibilidad de que se programe su uso y sirva como herramienta de control social para monitorear y controlar nuestras gestiones, la caducidad del dinero o limitar la compra de productos en función de la llamada «huella de carbono». A ello debemos añadir el proceso inflacionario que venimos sufriendo desde el 2020 en una farsa deliberadamente provocada por los bancos centrales (la Reserva Federal y el BCE) con la impresión masiva de dinero.

En el plano social la UE no ha dejado de implementar el modelo del caos multicultural que viene ocasionando estragos en buena parte de la Europa occidental a través del uso de recursos maquiavélicos y diferentes ingenierías sociales que se apoyan en los mass media. Esto ha generado una distopía social con la introducción de ideas aberrantes como las asociadas a las ideologías de género, con la castración y hormonación de niños o el odio radical y enfermizo hacia los hombres blancos heterosexuales, convertidos en potenciales violadores con la ideología feminista institucionalizada. Y todo esto con el contraste que supone la llegada masiva de «inmigrantes» de países de África, por ejemplo, donde predominan sociedades patriarcales, en muchos casos musulmanas, cuyas tradiciones y visión de la vida chocan con las ingenierías sociales de la élite globalista.

Carlos Blanco y José Costales plantean una refundación de la Unión Europea bajo otros parámetros más democráticos y bajo unos organismos reguladores que puedan controlar los lobbies, las multinacionales y a los plutócratas y frente a los abusos de poder del eje franco-alemán. Una Europa de los pueblos, de naciones soberanas al servicio del interés ciudadano frente a las oligarquías y el gobierno mundial.

Otro de los capítulos está dedicado al papel de las oligarquías y las élites, donde reaparecen algunos de los temas ya tratados, y en los que se viene a destacar la acción perniciosa y destructiva de estos poderes anónimos que actúan a través de organizaciones pantalla y agendas planificadas perpetradas desde el llamado Occidente, bajo las premisas de una ideología misántropa y deshumanizada que es asumida por los gobiernos traidores de las naciones de la Europa occidental. Todas estas políticas se presentan bajo aspectos devastadores en el sector alimentario, con la ya referida demolición del sector primario con catastróficas consecuencias en un futuro próximo, o la fabricación de guerras, conflictos sociales y polarización de la población, junto a falsas banderas y grupos terroristas creados y financiados desde el propio Occidente. En este sentido tenemos multitud de ejemplos de desestabilización en torno a la red Gladio durante los años 70 (los famosos años del plomo en Italia) o con el tráfico de drogas, que ha servido para generar conflictividad social en Ecuador en los últimos tiempos tras quedar cortadas las redes del comercio de heroína procedente de Afganistán.

En los últimos capítulos del libro también se aborda el separatismo y la balcanización de España, un fenómeno propiamente moderno y que aparece indefectiblemente ligado al advenimiento de los liberales a lo largo del siglo XIX. A raíz de una serie de conflictos de origen dinástico, se generó una antítesis irreconciliable entre dos sistemas de gobierno, el propiamente moderno representado por el liberalismo y encarnado en la futura reina Isabel II y el tradicionalismo representado por los carlistas y encarnado, inicialmente, por Carlos María Isidro (Carlos V). Se libraron tres guerras devastadoras entre liberales y carlistas a lo largo del siglo XIX, en las que se dirimieron dos modelos, uno centralista (liberal) frente a otro descentralizado (carlista) con el respeto a las instituciones locales y regionales, a los Fueros. cuyas prerrogativas y vigencia se fueron perdiendo a lo largo del siglo. El siglo XIX tuvo unas consecuencias desastrosas para España, con la liquidación del Imperio y su debilitamiento en todos los ámbitos. Es a finales de susodicha centuria cuando nacen los movimientos separatistas, especialmente en Vascongadas y Cataluña, que irá cristalizando y gestándose a través de un discurso identitario cada vez más radical y antiespañol. La decadencia política e institucional que representa el actual Régimen Constitucional del 78, ha convertido a las formaciones políticas separatistas en los árbitros del sistema, ejerciendo de bisagras en la formación de los gobiernos centrales, con episodios vergonzantes y humillantes como los asociados a la Ley de Amnistía del PSOE en los últimos tiempos. Al mismo tiempo, el separatismo ha asumido los mismos mantras ideológicos a través de sus oligarquías regionales, que el resto de los integrantes del régimen partitocrático en relación a las políticas globalistas impulsadas desde la UE o la siniestra Agenda 2030, a la que son plenamente funcionales. En este sentido el mundo anglosajón, interesado en contribuir a la destrucción interna y fragmentación territorial de España, a través de complejas redes de financiación, como las desplegadas por Soros y su Open Society o las desplegadas, a través de organizaciones pantalla, por los servicios secretos ingleses y estadounidenses. Estos poderes ya tienen experiencia en esta materia, como demuestran los resultados de la Guerra de Yugoslavia durante los años 90, de la que resultó la fragmentación de su territorio en pequeñas repúblicas.

----

Artículo original: Hipérbola Janus, Reseña: «España: Historia de una demolición controlada», de José Costales y Carlos X Blanco (TOR), 24/Sep/2024

@ 1d5357bf:1bdf0a52

If Bitcoin Is in Its Infancy, Nostr Is Still in Its Nursing Stage Skepticism is healthy, especially within the Bitcoin community. At the moment, Nostr users are predominantly Bitcoiners, and it's understandable that people are cautious about adopting new technologies. However, based on my limited experience over the last few months, Nostr has shown immense potential and is evolving at a breakneck pace.

The Speed of Development: A Double-Edged Sword The rate at which new functionality is being rolled out on Nostr is staggering. On the one hand, this rapid development brings constant innovation and new tools for users to explore. On the other hand, it often means that many implementations still need refinement, or at the very least, better documentation. It's exciting, but there are still bumps in the road that need to be ironed out. Censorship Resistance and Relay-Based Architecture One of Nostr’s most appealing features is its decentralized architecture, which revolves around relays. This design ensures that the protocol is censorship-resistant. If you’re tech-savvy enough, you can even run your own relay, allowing you to retain full control of your notes. This distributed system empowers users by giving them the tools to protect their content and stay independent of centralized entities.

A Protocol, Not a Platform Nostr is not a platform—it's a protocol. This distinction is crucial because it enables a high degree of interoperability, which can pave the way for a diverse ecosystem of applications. This opens up a world of possibilities and allows for network effects to take hold as more people and applications begin to interact with the protocol.

Privacy and Control Another advantage is the ability to manage your privacy more effectively. With Nostr, you can use multiple nsec/npub keys, giving you more control over your identity and interactions. This flexibility is a game-changer in a world where privacy is often compromised by centralized platforms.

Areas for Improvement Of course, Nostr is not without its challenges. Many of the available applications feel unpolished, and spam is a growing issue (the infamous "reply guy" problem). The ephemeral nature of the content also presents a challenge—once you post something, you can't "put the toothpaste back in the tube," sort to speak.

Enjoying the Ride Despite its growing pains, I’ve found Nostr to be an enjoyable experience so far. There are no algorithms dictating what you see, which results in a signal-rich environment with minimal toxicity—for now, at least. It’s refreshing to engage in conversations that aren’t manipulated by unseen forces, and I look forward to seeing where Nostr goes from here.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Gold is not useless

If there's something all common people believe about gold is that it is useless[^1]. Austrian economists and libertarians in general that argue against central banks or defend a primitive gold standard are often charged with that accusation: that gold is useless, it has no use in the industry, it serves no purpose besides ornamental, so it is a silly commodity, a luxurious one, and that it would be almost immoral to have such a thing in a so central position in an economy such as the position of money.

I've seen libertarians in general argue such things as: "it is used in some dental operations", which means people make dental prosthesis of gold, something that fits in same category of jewelry, I would say.

There's also the argument of electronic connectors. That's something that appears to be true, but wouldn't suffice the anti-gold arguments. The fact remains that, besides its uses as money -- because gold is still considered to be a form money even now that it doesn't have that position formally in any country (otherwise it wouldn't be considered as an "investment" or "value store" everywhere) -- gold is used mainly for ornamental purposes[^2].

All that is a hassle for libertarians in general. Even the Mises Regression Theory wouldn't solve that problem of people skeptical of gold due to its immoral nature. That problem is solved once you read what is written in the chapter 17 from Richard Cantillon's Essay on Economic Theory^3 (page 103):

Gold and silver are capable of serving not only the same purpose as tin and copper, but also most of the purposes of lead and iron. They have this further advantage over other metals in that they are not consumed by fire and are so durable that they may be considered permanent. It is not surprising, therefore, that the men who found the other metals useful, valued gold and silver even before they were used in exchange.

So gold is indeed useful. Everybody should already know that. You can even do forks and spoons with gold. You can do furniture with gold, and many other useful stuff. As soon as you grasp this, gold is useful again. It is an useful commodity.

Answering the next question becomes easy: why isn't anyone making gold forks anywhere? The questioner already knows the answer: because it is too expensive for that.

And now the Regression Theory comes with its full force: why is it expensive? Because it has gained a lot of value in the process of becoming money. The value of gold as money is much greater than as a metal used in fork production.

---

[^1]: see http://www.salon.com/2014/02/02/ignore_sean_hannity_gold_is_useless_partner/ or all answers on https://www.quora.com/Why-is-gold-considered-so-precious-and-why-does-it-have-such-high-prices. [^2]: this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#Modern_applications section on the Wikipedia page for gold is revealing.

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

This idea had been kind of percolating in the back of my mind for a bit, but on my walk today it crystalized: there ought to be a podcast affiliated with this territory.

GrayRuby, you/we/I should launch something to talk about not just what's happening in sports, but what stackers are talking about wrt sports. I'm not aware of a bitcoiner podcast that touches sports at all.

I'm imagining it would start as a short weekly experiment, covering our game reactions, ~Stacker_Sports contests and posts, bitcoin bets, personal sports stories, and our kids' sports adventures.

This seems like something that could really elevate ~Stacker_Sports and I'm sure we have enough content to keep it going and have it be distinct from other podcasts.

Btw, I'm doing this in public both to bring public pressure on you and to gauge demand.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/698947

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Filemap

filemap solves the problem of sending and receiving files to and from non-tech people when you don't have a text communication channel with them.

Imagine you want to send files to your grandfather, or you don't use Facebook and your younger cousin who only uses Facebook and doesn't know what is email wants to send you some pictures, it's pretty hard to get a file-sharing channel between people if they're not in the same network. If even the people have a way to upload the files to some hosting service and then share the link everything would still work, but you're not going to write somehostingservice.com/wHr4y7vFGh0 to your grandfather -- or expect your cousin to do that for you and send you an SMS with dozens of those links.

Solution: * Upload your files to https://filemap.xyz/ (you can either upload directly or share links to things already uploaded -- or even links to pages) and pin them to your grandfather's house address; then tell your grandfather to open https://filemap.xyz/ and look for his address. Done. * Tell your younger cousin to visit filemap.xyz and upload all the files to his address, later you open the site and look for his address. There are your files.

---

Initially this used ipfs-dropzone, but IPFS is broken, os I migrated to WebTorrent, but that required the file sender to be online hosting its own file and the entire idea of this service was to make something easy, so I migrated to Firebase Hosting, which is also terrible and has a broken API, but at least is capable of hosting files. Should have used something like S3.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/filemap.xyz
• https://filemap.xyz/

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

The illusion of checks and balances

The website history.com has a list of some of the most important "checks and balances" put in place by the United States Constitution. Here are some of them and how they are not real checks, they're flawed and easily bypassed by malicious peers that manage to enter the network.

The president (head of the executive branch) serves as commander in chief of the military forces, but Congress (legislative branch) appropriates funds for the military and votes to declare war.

As it has happened multiple times, the United States has engaged in many undeclared wars -- and many other military encounters that don't get enough media coverage and weren't even formally acknowledged by the Congress.

Congress has the power of the purse, as it controls the money used to fund any executive actions.

There's a separate power called Federal Reserve which is more-or-less under the influence of the executive branch that is controlled by a single man and has the power of creating unlimited money. It was softly abused by the executive branch since its creation, but since 2008 it has been increasingly having its scope expanded from just influencing the banking sector to also directly using its money to buy all sorts of things and influence all sorts of markets and other actors.

Veto power. Once Congress has passed a bill, the president has the power to veto that bill. In turn, Congress can override a regular presidential veto by a two-thirds vote of both houses.

If you imagine that both the executive and the legislative are 100% dedicated to go against each other the president could veto all bills, but then the legislative could enact them all anyway. Congress has the absolute power here (which can be justified by fact that the congress itself is split into multiple voters, but still this "veto" rule seems more like a gimmick to obscure the process than any actual check).

The Supreme Court and other federal courts (judicial branch) can declare laws or presidential actions unconstitutional, in a process known as judicial review.

This rule gives absolute power to the Supreme Court over any matter. It can use their own personal judgement to veto any bill, cancel any action by the executive, reinterpret any existing law in any manner. There's no check against bad interpretations or judgements, so any absurd thing must be accepted. This should be obvious, and yet the entire system which most people believe to be "checked" is actually dependent on the good will and sanity of the judicial branch.

In turn, the president checks the judiciary through the power of appointment, which can be used to change the direction of the federal courts

If the president and congress are being attacked by the judicial power, this isn't of much help as its effects are very long term. On the other hand, a president can single-handedly and arbitrarily use this rule to slowly poison the judicial system such that will turn malicious for the rest of the system after some time.

By passing amendments to the Constitution, Congress can effectively check the decisions of the Supreme Court.

What is written in the Constitution can be easily ignored or misread by the members of the Supreme Court without any way for these interpretations to be checked or reverted. Basically the Supreme Court has absolute power over all things if we consider this.

Congress (considered the branch of government closest to the people) can impeach both members of the executive and judicial branches.

Again (like in the presidential veto rule), this gives the congress unlimited power. There are no checks here -- except of course the fact that the congress is composed by multiple different voting heads of which a majority has to agree for the congress to do anything, which is the only thing preventing overabuse of this rule.

---

As shown above, most rules that compose the "checks and balances" system can be abused and if given enough time they will. They aren't real checks.

Ultimately, the stability and decency of a democracy relies on the majority rule (so congress votes are never concentrated in dictatorial measures) and the common sense of the powerful people (president and judges).

There probably hasn't been a single year in any democracy in which one of these powers didn't abused or violated one of the rules, but still in most cases the overall system stays in place because of the general culture, splitted views about most issues, overall common sense and fear of public shame.

The checks and balances system itself is an illusion. All the complex "democracy" construct depends on the goodwill of all the participants and have only worked so far (when it did) by miracle and by the power of human cooperation and love.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

jiq

When someone created jiq claiming it had "jq queries" I went to inspect and realized it didn't, it just had a poor simple JSON query language that implemented 1% of all jq features, so I forked it and plugged jq directly into it, and renamed to jiq.

After some comments on issues in the original repository from people complaining about lack of jq compatibility it got a ton of unexpected users, was even packaged to ArchLinux.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/jiq

@ 306068fe:d542563e

Looking for a good investment insight?..Checkout “Fintech catalyst”..it’s an exchange; which runs trade in autopilot to generate weekly profits (ROI) https://app.fintechcatalysts.com/ref/Nefrod

Join the discussion group with the link beneath https://t.me/+34-QRRBVj98xMDVh

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Boardthreads

This was a very badly done service for turning a Trello list into a helpdesk UI.

Surprisingly, it had more paying users than Websites For Trello, which I was working on simultaneously and dedicating much more time to it.

The Neo4j database I used for this was a very poor choice, it was probably the cause of all the bugs.

-https://github.com/fiatjaf/boardthreads

@ 6bae33c8:607272e8

So it really happened. The Bengals lost outright, meaning for the third straight week, the league’s biggest favorite lost. The Circa Survivor pool is down to 550 entries out of 14,000 in Week 4. Unfathomable insanity. And of course, I went 2-3 on the week in Circa Millions, and at 5-10, am getting very close to drawing-dead territory.

I’m not as annoyed as I might be because Survivor this year is just funny, so that softens the blow of being out Week 1, I would have taken Cincy this week for sure had I pivoted off them and losing with the Bengals in the Millions contest is offset by the payoff of getting to marvel at it.

I am annoyed at the other game. They posted the score during the Cincy game on my screen, so it was spoiled on the 40-minute version, and once I saw what the score was, I had no interest in wasting time on it. (I did briefly flip to it for a couple drives when I realized it was the earlier game, but then realized eventually it would spoil the game I cared more about, so I switched back.) And in any event (and this is a bug on Gamepass), they flashed the final of the Bengals-Team before the game started from the beginning. I squinted, but caught a 38, and it became apparent in the third quarter which team was getting to 38 and which wasn’t given the kinds of scores they would need.

At least Ja’Marr Chase (three leagues) absolutely crushed.

• Chase had a huge game, but only seven targets. Why is it teams like the Rams (with Cooper Kupp) or even the Giants (with Malik Nabers) can motion guys and get them double-digit targets and often catches every game, while the Bengals are content to let teams double Chase and take him out of the game for long stretches? I mean this game flow should have seen Chase get 14 targets, not that I’m complaining about the production, but get your best player the ball!

• Chase Brown and Zack Moss both looked good, but easier to run from behind when the defense is conceding it.

• Joe Burrow was pretty accurate — some perfect deep throws to Chase, a couple balls behind receivers over the middle — and had decent feel in the pocket. But the offensive line wasn’t great, and he’s no longer a threat to scramble.

• Andrei Iosivas had his best game by far. Tee Higgins looked a little rusty.

• The Bengals defense is super soft. It’s the reason they lost to the Patriots in Week 1, they just can’t bring runners down.

• Jayden Daniels played great. He didn’t average much per carry, but he’s tough to tackle, has great instincts as to when to take off and has a nose for the first down. He played like the good version of Jalen Hurts, only with more tackle breaking ability.

• Two guys I crossed off my draft list this year because they were older, washed up running backs were Alvin Kamara and Austin Ekeler. Ekeler looked great on a kick return, his 24-yard TD and two catches before leaving with a concussion.

• I do have a couple shares of Brian Robinson who struggled, but I like him. He picks up the blitz well, gets a ton of goal line work, runs hard and can even catch a few passes. Ekeler looking spry though isn’t great for him.

• Terry McLaurin finally got going, and it took a full half. Daniels looks more comfortable now, so it makes sense.

• I’ve said this before but the Jets played 11-D chess winning that last game in 2020, getting the No. 2 pick in the 2021 draft class instead of the No. 1 for no reason and lettng the Jaguars draft Trevor Lawrence. Now the Jets have Aaron Rodgers, but the Jaguars still have Lawrence! As I said I didn’t watch that game, but how much time does he need finally to get going?

• I wanted to draft Travis Etienne too for the skills and role, but there’s been something wrong with that offense for the last couple years, so he hasn’t been quite able to deliver. He’s like a poor man’s Saquon Barkley — have to get him to a team where he can thrive.

• I watched the Bills first two drives, both TDs, and Josh Allen makes it look so easy. It’s a foregone conclusion he’s converting the third or the fourth down.

• Dalton Kincaid finally did something, but the game flow was such you couldn’t expect much for any Bills pass catcher.