@ eac63075:b4988b48

Imagine sending a private message to a friend, only to learn that authorities could be scanning its contents without your knowledge. This isn't a scene from a dystopian novel but a potential reality under the European Union's proposed "Chat Control" measures. Aimed at combating serious crimes like child exploitation and terrorism, these proposals could significantly impact the privacy of everyday internet users. As encrypted messaging services become the norm for personal and professional communication, understanding Chat Control is essential. This article delves into what Chat Control entails, why it's being considered, and how it could affect your right to private communication.

https://www.fountain.fm/episode/coOFsst7r7mO1EP1kSzV

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0IZ6kMExfxFm4FHg5DAWT8?si=e139033865e045de

Sections:

• Introduction
• What Is Chat Control?
• Why Is the EU Pushing for Chat Control?
• The Privacy Concerns and Risks
• The Technical Debate: Encryption and Backdoors
• Global Reactions and the Debate in Europe
• Possible Consequences for Messaging Services
• What Happens Next? The Future of Chat Control
• Conclusion

---

What Is Chat Control?

"Chat Control" refers to a set of proposed measures by the European Union aimed at monitoring and scanning private communications on messaging platforms. The primary goal is to detect and prevent the spread of illegal content, such as child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and to combat terrorism. While the intention is to enhance security and protect vulnerable populations, these proposals have raised significant privacy concerns.

At its core, Chat Control would require messaging services to implement automated scanning technologies that can analyze the content of messages—even those that are end-to-end encrypted. This means that the private messages you send to friends, family, or colleagues could be subject to inspection by algorithms designed to detect prohibited content.

Origins of the Proposal

The initiative for Chat Control emerged from the EU's desire to strengthen its digital security infrastructure. High-profile cases of online abuse and the use of encrypted platforms by criminal organizations have prompted lawmakers to consider more invasive surveillance tactics. The European Commission has been exploring legislation that would make it mandatory for service providers to monitor communications on their platforms.

How Messaging Services Work

Most modern messaging apps, like Signal, Session, SimpleX, Veilid, Protonmail and Tutanota (among others), use end-to-end encryption (E2EE). This encryption ensures that only the sender and the recipient can read the messages being exchanged. Not even the service providers can access the content. This level of security is crucial for maintaining privacy in digital communications, protecting users from hackers, identity thieves, and other malicious actors.

Key Elements of Chat Control

• Automated Content Scanning: Service providers would use algorithms to scan messages for illegal content.
• Circumvention of Encryption: To scan encrypted messages, providers might need to alter their encryption methods, potentially weakening security.
• Mandatory Reporting: If illegal content is detected, providers would be required to report it to authorities.
• Broad Applicability: The measures could apply to all messaging services operating within the EU, affecting both European companies and international platforms.

Why It Matters

Understanding Chat Control is essential because it represents a significant shift in how digital privacy is handled. While combating illegal activities online is crucial, the methods proposed could set a precedent for mass surveillance and the erosion of privacy rights. Everyday users who rely on encrypted messaging for personal and professional communication might find their conversations are no longer as private as they once thought.

---

Why Is the EU Pushing for Chat Control?

The European Union's push for Chat Control stems from a pressing concern to protect its citizens, particularly children, from online exploitation and criminal activities. With the digital landscape becoming increasingly integral to daily life, the EU aims to strengthen its ability to combat serious crimes facilitated through online platforms.

Protecting Children and Preventing Crime

One of the primary motivations behind Chat Control is the prevention of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) circulating on the internet. Law enforcement agencies have reported a significant increase in the sharing of illegal content through private messaging services. By implementing Chat Control, the EU believes it can more effectively identify and stop perpetrators, rescue victims, and deter future crimes.

Terrorism is another critical concern. Encrypted messaging apps can be used by terrorist groups to plan and coordinate attacks without detection. The EU argues that accessing these communications could be vital in preventing such threats and ensuring public safety.

Legal Context and Legislative Drivers

The push for Chat Control is rooted in several legislative initiatives:

• ePrivacy Directive: This directive regulates the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in electronic communications. The EU is considering amendments that would allow for the scanning of private messages under specific circumstances.

• Temporary Derogation: In 2021, the EU adopted a temporary regulation permitting voluntary detection of CSAM by communication services. The current proposals aim to make such measures mandatory and more comprehensive.

• Regulation Proposals: The European Commission has proposed regulations that would require service providers to detect, report, and remove illegal content proactively. This would include the use of technologies to scan private communications.

Balancing Security and Privacy

EU officials argue that the proposed measures are a necessary response to evolving digital threats. They emphasize the importance of staying ahead of criminals who exploit technology to harm others. By implementing Chat Control, they believe law enforcement can be more effective without entirely dismantling privacy protections.

However, the EU also acknowledges the need to balance security with fundamental rights. The proposals include provisions intended to limit the scope of surveillance, such as:

• Targeted Scanning: Focusing on specific threats rather than broad, indiscriminate monitoring.

• Judicial Oversight: Requiring court orders or oversight for accessing private communications.

• Data Protection Safeguards: Implementing measures to ensure that data collected is handled securely and deleted when no longer needed.

The Urgency Behind the Push

High-profile cases of online abuse and terrorism have heightened the sense of urgency among EU policymakers. Reports of increasing online grooming and the widespread distribution of illegal content have prompted calls for immediate action. The EU posits that without measures like Chat Control, these problems will continue to escalate unchecked.

Criticism and Controversy

Despite the stated intentions, the push for Chat Control has been met with significant criticism. Opponents argue that the measures could be ineffective against savvy criminals who can find alternative ways to communicate. There is also concern that such surveillance could be misused or extended beyond its original purpose.

---

The Privacy Concerns and Risks

While the intentions behind Chat Control focus on enhancing security and protecting vulnerable groups, the proposed measures raise significant privacy concerns. Critics argue that implementing such surveillance could infringe on fundamental rights and set a dangerous precedent for mass monitoring of private communications.

Infringement on Privacy Rights

At the heart of the debate is the right to privacy. By scanning private messages, even with automated tools, the confidentiality of personal communications is compromised. Users may no longer feel secure sharing sensitive information, fearing that their messages could be intercepted or misinterpreted by algorithms.

Erosion of End-to-End Encryption

End-to-end encryption (E2EE) is a cornerstone of digital security, ensuring that only the sender and recipient can read the messages exchanged. Chat Control could necessitate the introduction of "backdoors" or weaken encryption protocols, making it easier for unauthorized parties to access private data. This not only affects individual privacy but also exposes communications to potential cyber threats.

Concerns from Privacy Advocates

Organizations like Signal and Tutanota, which offer encrypted messaging services, have voiced strong opposition to Chat Control. They warn that undermining encryption could have far-reaching consequences:

• Security Risks: Weakening encryption makes systems more vulnerable to hacking, espionage, and cybercrime.
• Global Implications: Changes in EU regulations could influence policies worldwide, leading to a broader erosion of digital privacy.
• Ineffectiveness Against Crime: Determined criminals might resort to other, less detectable means of communication, rendering the measures ineffective while still compromising the privacy of law-abiding citizens.

Potential for Government Overreach

There is a fear that Chat Control could lead to increased surveillance beyond its original scope. Once the infrastructure for scanning private messages is in place, it could be repurposed or expanded to monitor other types of content, stifling free expression and dissent.

Real-World Implications for Users

• False Positives: Automated scanning technologies are not infallible and could mistakenly flag innocent content, leading to unwarranted scrutiny or legal consequences for users.
• Chilling Effect: Knowing that messages could be monitored might discourage people from expressing themselves freely, impacting personal relationships and societal discourse.
• Data Misuse: Collected data could be vulnerable to leaks or misuse, compromising personal and sensitive information.

Legal and Ethical Concerns

Privacy advocates also highlight potential conflicts with existing laws and ethical standards:

• Violation of Fundamental Rights: The European Convention on Human Rights and other international agreements protect the right to privacy and freedom of expression.
• Questionable Effectiveness: The ethical justification for such invasive measures is challenged if they do not significantly improve safety or if they disproportionately impact innocent users.

Opposition from Member States and Organizations

Countries like Germany and organizations such as the European Digital Rights (EDRi) have expressed opposition to Chat Control. They emphasize the need to protect digital privacy and caution against hasty legislation that could have unintended consequences.

---

The Technical Debate: Encryption and Backdoors

The discussion around Chat Control inevitably leads to a complex technical debate centered on encryption and the potential introduction of backdoors into secure communication systems. Understanding these concepts is crucial to grasping the full implications of the proposed measures.

What Is End-to-End Encryption (E2EE)?

End-to-end encryption is a method of secure communication that prevents third parties from accessing data while it's transferred from one end system to another. In simpler terms, only the sender and the recipient can read the messages. Even the service providers operating the messaging platforms cannot decrypt the content.

• Security Assurance: E2EE ensures that sensitive information—be it personal messages, financial details, or confidential business communications—remains private.
• Widespread Use: Popular messaging apps like Signal, Session, SimpleX, Veilid, Protonmail and Tutanota (among others) rely on E2EE to protect user data.

How Chat Control Affects Encryption

Implementing Chat Control as proposed would require messaging services to scan the content of messages for illegal material. To do this on encrypted platforms, providers might have to:

• Introduce Backdoors: Create a means for third parties (including the service provider or authorities) to access encrypted messages.
• Client-Side Scanning: Install software on users' devices that scans messages before they are encrypted and sent, effectively bypassing E2EE.

The Risks of Weakening Encryption

1. Compromised Security for All Users

Introducing backdoors or client-side scanning tools can create vulnerabilities:

• Exploitable Gaps: If a backdoor exists, malicious actors might find and exploit it, leading to data breaches.
• Universal Impact: Weakening encryption doesn't just affect targeted individuals; it potentially exposes all users to increased risk.

2. Undermining Trust in Digital Services

• User Confidence: Knowing that private communications could be accessed might deter people from using digital services or push them toward unregulated platforms.
• Business Implications: Companies relying on secure communications might face increased risks, affecting economic activities.

3. Ineffectiveness Against Skilled Adversaries

• Alternative Methods: Criminals might shift to other encrypted channels or develop new ways to avoid detection.
• False Sense of Security: Weakening encryption could give the impression of increased safety while adversaries adapt and continue their activities undetected.

Signal’s Response and Stance

Signal, a leading encrypted messaging service, has been vocal in its opposition to the EU's proposals:

• Refusal to Weaken Encryption: Signal's CEO Meredith Whittaker has stated that the company would rather cease operations in the EU than compromise its encryption standards.
• Advocacy for Privacy: Signal emphasizes that strong encryption is essential for protecting human rights and freedoms in the digital age.

Understanding Backdoors

A "backdoor" in encryption is an intentional weakness inserted into a system to allow authorized access to encrypted data. While intended for legitimate use by authorities, backdoors pose several problems:

• Security Vulnerabilities: They can be discovered and exploited by unauthorized parties, including hackers and foreign governments.
• Ethical Concerns: The existence of backdoors raises questions about consent and the extent to which governments should be able to access private communications.

The Slippery Slope Argument

Privacy advocates warn that introducing backdoors or mandatory scanning sets a precedent:

• Expanded Surveillance: Once in place, these measures could be extended to monitor other types of content beyond the original scope.
• Erosion of Rights: Gradual acceptance of surveillance can lead to a significant reduction in personal freedoms over time.

Potential Technological Alternatives

Some suggest that it's possible to fight illegal content without undermining encryption:

• Metadata Analysis: Focusing on patterns of communication rather than content.
• Enhanced Reporting Mechanisms: Encouraging users to report illegal content voluntarily.
• Investing in Law Enforcement Capabilities: Strengthening traditional investigative methods without compromising digital security.

The technical community largely agrees that weakening encryption is not the solution:

• Consensus on Security: Strong encryption is essential for the safety and privacy of all internet users.
• Call for Dialogue: Technologists and privacy experts advocate for collaborative approaches that address security concerns without sacrificing fundamental rights.

---

Global Reactions and the Debate in Europe

The proposal for Chat Control has ignited a heated debate across Europe and beyond, with various stakeholders weighing in on the potential implications for privacy, security, and fundamental rights. The reactions are mixed, reflecting differing national perspectives, political priorities, and societal values.

Support for Chat Control

Some EU member states and officials support the initiative, emphasizing the need for robust measures to combat online crime and protect citizens, especially children. They argue that:

• Enhanced Security: Mandatory scanning can help law enforcement agencies detect and prevent serious crimes.
• Responsibility of Service Providers: Companies offering communication services should play an active role in preventing their platforms from being used for illegal activities.
• Public Safety Priorities: The protection of vulnerable populations justifies the implementation of such measures, even if it means compromising some aspects of privacy.

Opposition within the EU

Several countries and organizations have voiced strong opposition to Chat Control, citing concerns over privacy rights and the potential for government overreach.

Germany

• Stance: Germany has been one of the most vocal opponents of the proposed measures.
• Reasons:
• Constitutional Concerns: The German government argues that Chat Control could violate constitutional protections of privacy and confidentiality of communications.
• Security Risks: Weakening encryption is seen as a threat to cybersecurity.
• Legal Challenges: Potential conflicts with national laws protecting personal data and communication secrecy.

Netherlands

• Recent Developments: The Dutch government decided against supporting Chat Control, emphasizing the importance of encryption for security and privacy.
• Arguments:
• Effectiveness Doubts: Skepticism about the actual effectiveness of the measures in combating crime.
• Negative Impact on Privacy: Concerns about mass surveillance and the infringement of citizens' rights.

Table reference: Patrick Breyer - Chat Control in 23 September 2024

Privacy Advocacy Groups

European Digital Rights (EDRi)

• Role: A network of civil and human rights organizations working to defend rights and freedoms in the digital environment.
• Position:
• Strong Opposition: EDRi argues that Chat Control is incompatible with fundamental rights.
• Awareness Campaigns: Engaging in public campaigns to inform citizens about the potential risks.
• Policy Engagement: Lobbying policymakers to consider alternative approaches that respect privacy.

Politicians and Activists

Patrick Breyer

• Background: A Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Germany, representing the Pirate Party.
• Actions:
• Advocacy: Actively campaigning against Chat Control through speeches, articles, and legislative efforts.
• Public Outreach: Using social media and public events to raise awareness.
• Legal Expertise: Highlighting the legal inconsistencies and potential violations of EU law.

Global Reactions

International Organizations

• Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International: These organizations have expressed concerns about the implications for human rights, urging the EU to reconsider.

Technology Companies

• Global Tech Firms: Companies like Apple and Microsoft are monitoring the situation, as EU regulations could affect their operations and user trust.
• Industry Associations: Groups representing tech companies have issued statements highlighting the risks to innovation and competitiveness.

The Broader Debate

The controversy over Chat Control reflects a broader struggle between security interests and privacy rights in the digital age. Key points in the debate include:

• Legal Precedents: How the EU's decision might influence laws and regulations in other countries.
• Digital Sovereignty: The desire of nations to control digital spaces within their borders.
• Civil Liberties: The importance of protecting freedoms in the face of technological advancements.

Public Opinion

• Diverse Views: Surveys and public forums show a range of opinions, with some citizens prioritizing security and others valuing privacy above all.
• Awareness Levels: Many people are still unaware of the potential changes, highlighting the need for public education on the issue.

The EU is at a crossroads, facing the challenge of addressing legitimate security concerns without undermining the fundamental rights that are central to its values. The outcome of this debate will have significant implications for the future of digital privacy and the balance between security and freedom in society.

---

Possible Consequences for Messaging Services

The implementation of Chat Control could have significant implications for messaging services operating within the European Union. Both large platforms and smaller providers might need to adapt their technologies and policies to comply with the new regulations, potentially altering the landscape of digital communication.

Impact on Encrypted Messaging Services

Signal and Similar Platforms

• Compliance Challenges: Encrypted messaging services like Signal rely on end-to-end encryption to secure user communications. Complying with Chat Control could force them to weaken their encryption protocols or implement client-side scanning, conflicting with their core privacy principles.

• Operational Decisions: Some platforms may choose to limit their services in the EU or cease operations altogether rather than compromise on encryption. Signal, for instance, has indicated that it would prefer to withdraw from European markets than undermine its security features.

Potential Blocking or Limiting of Services

• Regulatory Enforcement: Messaging services that do not comply with Chat Control regulations could face fines, legal action, or even be blocked within the EU.

• Access Restrictions: Users in Europe might find certain services unavailable or limited in functionality if providers decide not to meet the regulatory requirements.

Effects on Smaller Providers

• Resource Constraints: Smaller messaging services and startups may lack the resources to implement the required scanning technologies, leading to increased operational costs or forcing them out of the market.

• Innovation Stifling: The added regulatory burden could deter new entrants, reducing competition and innovation in the messaging service sector.

User Experience and Trust

• Privacy Concerns: Users may lose trust in messaging platforms if they know their communications are subject to scanning, leading to a decline in user engagement.

• Migration to Unregulated Platforms: There is a risk that users might shift to less secure or unregulated services, including those operated outside the EU or on the dark web, potentially exposing them to greater risks.

Technical and Security Implications

• Increased Vulnerabilities: Modifying encryption protocols to comply with Chat Control could introduce security flaws, making platforms more susceptible to hacking and data breaches.

• Global Security Risks: Changes made to accommodate EU regulations might affect the global user base of these services, extending security risks beyond European borders.

Impact on Businesses and Professional Communications

• Confidentiality Issues: Businesses that rely on secure messaging for sensitive communications may face challenges in ensuring confidentiality, affecting sectors like finance, healthcare, and legal services.

• Compliance Complexity: Companies operating internationally will need to navigate a complex landscape of differing regulations, increasing administrative burdens.

Economic Consequences

• Market Fragmentation: Divergent regulations could lead to a fragmented market, with different versions of services for different regions.

• Loss of Revenue: Messaging services might experience reduced revenue due to decreased user trust and engagement or the costs associated with compliance.

Responses from Service Providers

• Legal Challenges: Companies might pursue legal action against the regulations, citing conflicts with privacy laws and user rights.

• Policy Advocacy: Service providers may increase lobbying efforts to influence policy decisions and promote alternatives to Chat Control.

Possible Adaptations

• Technological Innovation: Some providers might invest in developing new technologies that can detect illegal content without compromising encryption, though the feasibility remains uncertain.

• Transparency Measures: To maintain user trust, companies might enhance transparency about how data is handled and what measures are in place to protect privacy.

The potential consequences of Chat Control for messaging services are profound, affecting not only the companies that provide these services but also the users who rely on them daily. The balance between complying with legal requirements and maintaining user privacy and security presents a significant challenge that could reshape the digital communication landscape.

---

What Happens Next? The Future of Chat Control

The future of Chat Control remains uncertain as the debate continues among EU member states, policymakers, technology companies, and civil society organizations. Several factors will influence the outcome of this contentious proposal, each carrying significant implications for digital privacy, security, and the regulatory environment within the European Union.

Current Status of Legislation

• Ongoing Negotiations: The proposed Chat Control measures are still under discussion within the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Amendments and revisions are being considered in response to the feedback from various stakeholders.

• Timeline: While there is no fixed date for the final decision, the EU aims to reach a consensus to implement effective measures against online crime without undue delay.

Key Influencing Factors

1. Legal Challenges and Compliance with EU Law

• Fundamental Rights Assessment: The proposals must be evaluated against the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, ensuring that any measures comply with rights to privacy, data protection, and freedom of expression.

• Court Scrutiny: Potential legal challenges could arise, leading to scrutiny by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which may impact the feasibility and legality of Chat Control.

2. Technological Feasibility

• Development of Privacy-Preserving Technologies: Research into methods that can detect illegal content without compromising encryption is ongoing. Advances in this area could provide alternative solutions acceptable to both privacy advocates and security agencies.

• Implementation Challenges: The practical aspects of deploying scanning technologies across various platforms and services remain complex, and technical hurdles could delay or alter the proposed measures.

3. Political Dynamics

• Member State Positions: The differing stances of EU countries, such as Germany's opposition, play a significant role in shaping the final outcome. Consensus among member states is crucial for adopting EU-wide regulations.

• Public Opinion and Advocacy: Growing awareness and activism around digital privacy can influence policymakers. Public campaigns and lobbying efforts may sway decisions in favor of stronger privacy protections.

4. Industry Responses

• Negotiations with Service Providers: Ongoing dialogues between EU authorities and technology companies may lead to compromises or collaborative efforts to address concerns without fully implementing Chat Control as initially proposed.

• Potential for Self-Regulation: Messaging services might propose self-regulatory measures to combat illegal content, aiming to demonstrate effectiveness without the need for mandatory scanning.

Possible Scenarios

Optimistic Outcome:

• Balanced Regulation: A revised proposal emerges that effectively addresses security concerns while upholding strong encryption and privacy rights, possibly through innovative technologies or targeted measures with robust oversight.

Pessimistic Outcome:

• Adoption of Strict Measures: Chat Control is implemented as initially proposed, leading to weakened encryption, reduced privacy, and potential withdrawal of services like Signal from the EU market.

Middle Ground:

• Incremental Implementation: Partial measures are adopted, focusing on voluntary cooperation with service providers and emphasizing transparency and user consent, with ongoing evaluations to assess effectiveness and impact.

How to Stay Informed and Protect Your Privacy

• Follow Reputable Sources: Keep up with news from reliable outlets, official EU communications, and statements from privacy organizations to stay informed about developments.

• Engage in the Dialogue: Participate in public consultations, sign petitions, or contact representatives to express your views on Chat Control and digital privacy.

• Utilize Secure Practices: Regardless of legislative outcomes, adopting good digital hygiene—such as using strong passwords and being cautious with personal information—can enhance your online security.

The Global Perspective

• International Implications: The EU's decision may influence global policies on encryption and surveillance, setting precedents that other countries might follow or react against.

• Collaboration Opportunities: International cooperation on developing solutions that protect both security and privacy could emerge, fostering a more unified approach to addressing online threats.

Looking Ahead

The future of Chat Control is a critical issue that underscores the challenges of governing in the digital age. Balancing the need for security with the protection of fundamental rights is a complex task that requires careful consideration, open dialogue, and collaboration among all stakeholders.

As the situation evolves, staying informed and engaged is essential. The decisions made in the coming months will shape the digital landscape for years to come, affecting how we communicate, conduct business, and exercise our rights in an increasingly connected world.

---

Conclusion

The debate over Chat Control highlights a fundamental challenge in our increasingly digital world: how to protect society from genuine threats without eroding the very rights and freedoms that define it. While the intention to safeguard children and prevent crime is undeniably important, the means of achieving this through intrusive surveillance measures raise critical concerns.

Privacy is not just a personal preference but a cornerstone of democratic societies. End-to-end encryption has become an essential tool for ensuring that our personal conversations, professional communications, and sensitive data remain secure from unwanted intrusion. Weakening these protections could expose individuals and organizations to risks that far outweigh the proposed benefits.

The potential consequences of implementing Chat Control are far-reaching:

• Erosion of Trust: Users may lose confidence in digital platforms, impacting how we communicate and conduct business online.
• Security Vulnerabilities: Introducing backdoors or weakening encryption can make systems more susceptible to cyberattacks.
• Stifling Innovation: Regulatory burdens may hinder technological advancement and competitiveness in the tech industry.
• Global Implications: The EU's decisions could set precedents that influence digital policies worldwide, for better or worse.

As citizens, it's crucial to stay informed about these developments. Engage in conversations, reach out to your representatives, and advocate for solutions that respect both security needs and fundamental rights. Technology and policy can evolve together to address challenges without compromising core values.

The future of Chat Control is not yet decided, and public input can make a significant difference. By promoting open dialogue, supporting privacy-preserving innovations, and emphasizing the importance of human rights in legislation, we can work towards a digital landscape that is both safe and free.

In a world where digital communication is integral to daily life, striking the right balance between security and privacy is more important than ever. The choices made today will shape the digital environment for generations to come, determining not just how we communicate, but how we live and interact in an interconnected world.

---

Thank you for reading this article. We hope it has provided you with a clear understanding of Chat Control and its potential impact on your privacy and digital rights. Stay informed, stay engaged, and let's work together towards a secure and open digital future.

Read more:

• https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/
• https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/new-eu-push-for-chat-control-will-messenger-services-be-blocked-in-europe/
• https://edri.org/our-work/dutch-decision-puts-brakes-on-chat-control/
• https://signal.org/blog/pdfs/ndss-keynote.pdf
• https://tuta.com/blog/germany-stop-chat-control
• https://cointelegraph.com/news/signal-president-slams-revised-eu-encryption-proposal
• https://mullvad.net/en/why-privacy-matters

@ ec42c765:328c0600

カスタム絵文字とは

任意のオリジナル画像を絵文字のように文中に挿入できる機能です。

また、リアクション（Twitterの いいね のような機能）にもカスタム絵文字を使えます。

カスタム絵文字の対応状況（2024/02/05）

カスタム絵文字を使うためにはカスタム絵文字に対応したクライアントを使う必要があります。

※表は一例です。クライアントは他にもたくさんあります。

使っているクライアントが対応していない場合は、クライアントを変更する、対応するまで待つ、開発者に要望を送る（または自分で実装する）などしましょう。

対応クライアント

• Amethyst
• FreeFrom
• nostter
• Rabbit
• Snort
• noStrudel

ここではnostterを使って説明していきます。

準備

カスタム絵文字を使うための準備です。

• Nostrエクステンション（NIP-07）を導入する
• 使いたいカスタム絵文字をリストに登録する

Nostrエクステンション（NIP-07）を導入する

Nostrエクステンションは使いたいカスタム絵文字を登録する時に必要になります。

また、環境（パソコン、iPhone、androidなど）によって導入方法が違います。

Nostrエクステンションを導入する端末は、実際にNostrを閲覧する端末と違っても構いません（リスト登録はPC、Nostr閲覧はiPhoneなど）。

Nostrエクステンション（NIP-07）の導入方法は以下のページを参照してください。

ログイン拡張機能 (NIP-07)を使ってみよう | Welcome to Nostr! ～ Nostrをはじめよう！ ～

少し面倒ですが、これを導入しておくとNostr上の様々な場面で役立つのでより快適になります。

使いたいカスタム絵文字をリストに登録する

以下のサイトで行います。

emojito

右上のGet startedからNostrエクステンションでログインしてください。

例として以下のカスタム絵文字を導入してみます。

実際より絵文字が少なく表示されることがありますが、古い状態のデータを取得してしまっているためです。その場合はブラウザの更新ボタンを押してください。

generalJP | カスタム絵文字

• 右側のOptionsからBookmarkを選択

これでカスタム絵文字を使用するためのリストに登録できます。

カスタム絵文字を使用する

例としてブラウザから使えるクライアント nostter から使用してみます。

nostter

nostterにNostrエクステンションでログイン、もしくは秘密鍵を入れてログインしてください。

文章中に使用

1. 投稿ボタンを押して投稿ウィンドウを表示
2. 顔😀のボタンを押し、絵文字ウィンドウを表示
3. ＊タブを押し、カスタム絵文字一覧を表示
4. カスタム絵文字を選択
5. : 記号に挟まれたアルファベットのショートコードとして挿入される

この状態で投稿するとカスタム絵文字として表示されます。

カスタム絵文字対応クライアントを使っている他ユーザーにもカスタム絵文字として表示されます。

対応していないクライアントの場合、ショートコードのまま表示されます。

ショートコードを直接入力することでカスタム絵文字の候補が表示されるのでそこから選択することもできます。

リアクションに使用

1. 任意の投稿の顔😀のボタンを押し、絵文字ウィンドウを表示
2. ＊タブを押し、カスタム絵文字一覧を表示
3. カスタム絵文字を選択

カスタム絵文字リアクションを送ることができます。

カスタム絵文字を探す

先述したemojitoからカスタム絵文字を探せます。

例えば任意のユーザーのページ emojito ロクヨウ から探したり、 emojito Browse all からnostr全体で最近作成、更新された絵文字を見たりできます。

また、以下のリンクは日本語圏ユーザーが作ったカスタム絵文字を集めたリストです（2024/06/30）

※漏れがあるかもしれません

日本ユーザー作 カスタム絵文字

各絵文字セットにあるOpen in emojitoのリンクからemojitoに飛び、使用リストに追加できます。

---

以上です。

次：Nostrのカスタム絵文字の作り方

Yakihonneリンク Nostrのカスタム絵文字の作り方

Nostrリンク nostr:naddr1qqxnzdesxuunzv358ycrgveeqgswcsk8v4qck0deepdtluag3a9rh0jh2d0wh0w9g53qg8a9x2xqvqqrqsqqqa28r5psx3

---

仕様

NIP-30 Custom Emoji

NIP-30 カスタム絵文字（和訳）

@ 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!

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

由于gmail在中国被防火墙拦截了，无法打开，不想错过邮件通知。

通过自建ntfy接受gmail邮件通知。 怎么自建ntfy，后面再写。

---

2024年08月13日更新：

修改不通过添加邮件标签来标记已经发送的通知，通过Google Sheets来记录已经发送的通知。

为了不让Google Sheets文档的内容很多，导致文件变大，用脚本自动清理一个星期以前的数据。

---

准备工具

• Ntfy服务
• Google Script
• Google Sheets

操作步骤

1. 在Ntfy后台账号，设置访问令牌。
2. 添加订阅主题。
3. 进入Google Sheets创建一个表格.记住id，如下图：
4. 进入Google Script创建项目。填入以下代码（注意填入之前的ntfy地址和令牌）：

```javascript function checkEmail() { var sheetId = "你的Google Sheets id"; // 替换为你的 Google Sheets ID var sheet = SpreadsheetApp.openById(sheetId).getActiveSheet();

// 清理一星期以前的数据 cleanOldData(sheet, 7 * 24 * 60); // 保留7天（即一周）内的数据

var sentEmails = getSentEmails(sheet);

var threads = GmailApp.search('is:unread'); Logger.log("Found threads: " + threads.length);

if (threads.length === 0) return;

threads.forEach(function(thread) { var threadId = thread.getId();

if (!sentEmails.includes(threadId)) {
  thread.getMessages().forEach(sendNtfyNotification);
  recordSentEmail(sheet, threadId);
}

}); }

function sendNtfyNotification(email) { if (!email) { Logger.log("Email object is undefined or null."); return; }

var message = `发件人: ${email.getFrom() || "未知发件人"} 主题: ${email.getSubject() || "无主题"}

内容: ${email.getPlainBody() || "无内容"}`;

var url = "https://你的ntfy地址/Gmail"; var options = { method: "post", payload: message, headers: { Authorization: "Bearer Ntfy的令牌" }, muteHttpExceptions: true };

try { var response = UrlFetchApp.fetch(url, options); Logger.log("Response: " + response.getContentText()); } catch (e) { Logger.log("Error: " + e.message); } }

function getSentEmails(sheet) { var data = sheet.getDataRange().getValues(); return data.map(row => row[0]); // Assuming email IDs are stored in the first column }

function recordSentEmail(sheet, threadId) { sheet.appendRow([threadId, new Date()]); }

function cleanOldData(sheet, minutes) { var now = new Date(); var thresholdDate = new Date(now.getTime() - minutes * 60 * 1000); // 获取X分钟前的时间

var data = sheet.getDataRange().getValues(); var rowsToDelete = [];

data.forEach(function(row, index) { var date = new Date(row[1]); // 假设日期保存在第二列 if (date < thresholdDate) { rowsToDelete.push(index + 1); // 存储要删除的行号 } });

// 逆序删除（从最后一行开始删除，以避免行号改变） rowsToDelete.reverse().forEach(function(row) { sheet.deleteRow(row); }); }

```

4.Goole Script需要添加gmail服务，如图：

5.Google Script是有限制的不能频繁调用，可以设置五分钟调用一次。如图：

结尾

本人不会代码，以上代码都是通过chatgpt生成的。经过多次修改，刚开始会一直发送通知，后面修改后将已发送的通知放到一个“通知”的标签里。后续不会再次发送通知。

如需要发送通知后自动标记已读，可以把代码复制到chatgpt给你写。

效果预览：

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

请看2014年王兴的一场思维碰撞，视频27分钟开始

最后，一个当时无法解决的点：丢失

@ 4523be58:ba1facd0

NIP-116

Event paths

Description

Event kind 30079 denotes an event defined by its event path rather than its event kind.

The event directory path is included in the event path, specified in the event's d tag. For example, an event path might be user/profile/name, where user/profile is the directory path.

Relays should parse the event directory from the event path d tag and index the event by it. Relays should support "directory listing" of kind 30079 events using the #f filter, such as {"#f": ["user/profile"]}.

For backward compatibility, the event directory should also be saved in the event's f tag (for "folder"), which is already indexed by some relay implementations, and can be queried using the #f filter.

Event content should be a JSON-encoded value. An empty object {} signifies that the entry at the event path is itself a directory. For example, when saving user/profile/name: Bob, you should also save user/profile: {} so the subdirectory can be listed under user.

In directory names, slashes should be escaped with a double slash.

Example

Event

json { "tags": [ ["d", "user/profile/name"], ["f", "user/profile"] ], "content": "\"Bob\"", "kind": 30079, ... }

Query

json { "#f": ["user/profile"], "authors": ["[pubkey]"] }

Motivation

To make Nostr an "everything app," we need a sustainable way to support new kinds of applications. Browsing Nostr data by human-readable nested directories and paths rather than obscure event kind numbers makes the data more manageable.

Numeric event kinds are not sustainable for the infinite number of potential applications. With numeric event kinds, developers need to find an unused number for each new application and announce it somewhere, which is cumbersome and not scalable.

Directories can also replace monolithic list events like follow lists or profile details. You can update a single directory entry such as user/profile/name or groups/follows/[pubkey] without causing an overwrite of the whole profile or follow list when your client is out-of-sync with the most recent list version, as often happens on Nostr.

Using d-tagged replaceable events for reactions, such as {tags: [["d", "reactions/[eventId]"]], content: "\"👍\"", kind: 30079, ...} would make un-reacting trivial: just publish a new event with the same d tag and an empty content. Toggling a reaction on and off would not cause a flurry of new reaction & delete events that all need to be persisted.

Implementations

• Relays that support tag-replaceable events and indexing by arbitrary tags (in this case f) already support this feature.
• IrisDB client side library: treelike data structure with subscribable nodes.

https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/1266

@ 13351007:eccd002a

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

@ b60c3e76:c9d0f46e

KRIS menjamin semua golongan masyarakat mendapatkan perlakuan sama dari rumah sakit, baik pelayanan medis maupun nonmedis.

Demi memberikan peningkatan kualitas layanan kesehatan kepada masyarakat, pemerintah baru saja mengeluarkan Peraturan Presiden (Perpres) nomor 59 tahun 2024 tentang Jaminan Kesehatan. Melalui perpres itu, Presiden Joko Widodo (Jokowi) telah menghapus perbedaan kelas layanan 1, 2, dan 3 dalam Badan Penyelenggara Jaminan Sosial atau BPJS Kesehatan.

Layanan berbasis kelas itu diganti dengan KRIS (Kelas Rawat Inap Standar). Berkaitan dengan lahirnya Perpres 59/2024 tentang Perubahan Ketiga atas Perpres 82/2018 tentang Jaminan Kesehatan, Presiden Joko Widodo telah memerintahkan seluruh rumah sakit yang bekerja sama dengan BPJS Kesehatan melaksanakannya.

Kebijakan baru itu mulai berlaku per 8 Mei 2024 dan paling lambat 30 Juni 2025. Dalam jangka waktu tersebut, rumah sakit dapat menyelenggarakan sebagian atau seluruh pelayanan rawat inap berdasarkan KRIS sesuai dengan kemampuan rumah sakit.

Lantas apa yang menjadi pembeda dari sisi layanan dengan layanan rawat inap sesuai Perpres 59/2024? Dahulu sistem layanan rawat BPJS Kesehatan dibagi berdasarkan kelas yang dibagi masing-masing kelas 1, 2, dan 3. Namun, melalui perpres, layanan kepada masyarakat tidak dibedakan lagi.

Pelayanan rawat inap yang diatur dalam perpres itu--dikenal dengan nama KRIS—menjadi sistem baru yang digunakan dalam pelayanan rawat inap BPJS Kesehatan di rumah sakit-rumah sakit. Dengan KRIS, semua golongan masyarakat akan mendapatkan perlakuan yang sama dari rumah sakit, baik dalam hal pelayanan medis maupun nonmedis.

Dengan lahirnya Perpres 59/2024, tarif iuran BPJS Kesehatan pun juga akan berubah. Hanya saja, dalam Perpres itu belum dicantumkan secara rinci ihwal besar iuran yang baru. Besaran iuran baru BPJS Kesehatan itu sesuai rencana baru ditetapkan pada 1 Juli 2025.

“Penetapan manfaat, tarif, dan iuran sebagaimana dimaksud ditetapkan paling lambat tanggal 1 Juli 2025,” tulis aturan tersebut, dikutip Senin (13/5/2024).

Itu artinya, iuran BPJS Kesehatan saat ini masih sama seperti sebelumnya, yakni sesuai dengan kelas yang dipilih. Namun perpres itu tetap berlaku sembari menanti lahirnya peraturan lanjutan dari perpres tersebut.

Kesiapan Rumah Sakit

Berkaitan dengan lahirnya kebijakan layanan kesehatan tanpa dibedakan kelas lagi, Kementerian Kesehatan (Kemenkes) menegaskan mayoritas rumah sakit di Indonesia siap untuk menjalankan layanan KRIS untuk pasien BPJS Kesehatan.

Kesiapan itu diungkapkan oleh Dirjen Pelayanan Kesehatan Kemenkes Azhar Jaya. “Survei kesiapan RS terkait KRIS sudah dilakukan pada 2.988 rumah sakit dan yang sudah siap menjawab isian 12 kriteria ada sebanyak 2.233 rumah sakit,” ujar Azhar.

Sebagai informasi, KRIS adalah pengganti layanan Kelas 1, 2, dan 3 BPJS Kesehatan yang bertujuan untuk memberikan layanan kesehatan secara merata tanpa melihat besaran iurannya.

Melalui KRIS, rumah sakit perlu menyiapkan sarana dan prasarana sesuai dengan 12 kriteria kelas rawat inap standar secara bertahap. Apa saja ke-12 kriteria KRIS itu?

Sesuai bunyi Pasal 46A Perpres 59/2024, disyaratkan kriteria fasilitas perawatan dan pelayanan rawat inap KRIS meliputi komponen bangunan yang digunakan tidak boleh memiliki tingkat porositas yang tinggi serta terdapat ventilasi udara dan kelengkapan tidur.

Demikian pula soal pencahayaan ruangan. Perpres itu juga mengatur pencahayaan ruangan buatan mengikuti kriteria standar 250 lux untuk penerangan dan 50 lux untuk pencahayaan tidur, temperature ruangan 20--26 derajat celcius.

Tidak hanya itu, layanan rawat inap berdasarkan perpres itu mensyaratkan fasilitas layanan yang membagi ruang rawat berdasarkan jenis kelamin pasien, anak atau dewasa, serta penyakit infeksi atau noninfeksi.

Selain itu, kriteria lainnya adalah keharusan bagi penyedia layanan untuk mempertimbangkan kepadatan ruang rawat dan kualitas tempat tidur, penyediaan tirai atau partisi antartempat tidur, kamar mandi dalam ruangan rawat inap yang memenuhi standar aksesibilitas, dan menyediakan outlet oksigen.

Selain itu, kelengkapan tempat tidur berupa adanya dua kotak kontak dan nurse call pada setiap tempat tidur dan adanya nakas per tempat tidur. Kepadatan ruang rawat inap maksimal empat tempat tidur dengan jarak antara tepi tempat tidur minimal 1,5 meter.

Tirai/partisi dengan rel dibenamkan menempel di plafon atau menggantung. Kamar mandi dalam ruang rawat inap serta kamar mandi sesuai dengan standar aksesibilitas dan outlet oksigen.

Azhar menjamin, Kemenkes akan menjalankan hal tersebut sesuai dengan tupoksi yang ada. “Tentu saja kami akan bekerja sama dengan BPJS Kesehatan dalam implementasi dan pengawasannya di lapangan,” ujar Azhar.

Berkaitan dengan perpres jaminan kesehatan itu, Direktur Utama BPJS Kesehatan Ghufron Mukti menilai, perpres tersebut berorientasi pada penyeragaman kelas rawat inap yang mengacu pada 12 kriteria. "Bahwa perawatan ada kelas rawat inap standar dengan 12 kriteria, untuk peserta BPJS, maka sebagaimana sumpah dokter tidak boleh dibedakan pemberian pelayan medis atas dasar suku, agama, status sosial atau beda iurannya," ujarnya.

Jika ada peserta ingin dirawat pada kelas yang lebih tinggi, kata Ghufron, maka diperbolehkan selama hal itu dipengaruhi situasi nonmedis. Hal itu disebutkan dalam Pasal 51 Perpres Jaminan Kesehatan diatur ketentuan naik kelas perawatan.

Menurut pasal tersebut, naik kelas perawatan dilakukan dengan cara mengikuti asuransi kesehatan tambahan atau membayar selisih antara biaya yang dijamin oleh BPJS Kesehatan dengan biaya yang harus dibayar akibat peningkatan pelayanan.

Selisih antara biaya yang dijamin oleh BPJS Kesehatan dengan biaya pelayanan dapat dibayar oleh peserta bersangkutan, pemberi kerja, atau asuransi kesehatan tambahan.

Ghufron Mukti juga mengimbau pengelola rumah sakit tidak mengurangi jumlah tempat tidur perawatan pasien dalam upaya memenuhi kriteria KRIS. "Pesan saya jangan dikurangi akses dengan mengurangi jumlah tempat tidur. Pertahankan jumlah tempat tidur dan penuhi persyaratannya dengan 12 kriteria tersebut," tegas Ghufron.

Penulis: Firman Hidranto Redaktur: Ratna Nuraini/Elvira Inda Sari Sumber: Indonesia.go.id

@ 266815e0:6cd408a5

Lot of people are starting to talk about building a web-of-trust and how nostr can or is already being used as such

We all know about using the kind:3 following lists as a simple WoT that can be used to filter out spam. but as we all know it does not really signal "trust", its mostly just "I find your content interesting"

But what about real "trust"... well its kind of multi-denominational, I could trust that your a good developer or a good journalist but still not trust you enough to invite you over to my house. There are some interesting and clever solutions proposed for quantifying "trust" in a digital sense but I'm not going to get into that here. I want to talk about something that I have not see anyone discuss yet.

How is the web-of-trust maintained? or more precisely how do you expect users to update the digital representation of the "trust" of other users?

Its all well and good to think of how a user would create that "trust" of another user when discovering them for the first time. They would click the "follow" button, or maybe even rate them on a few topics with a 1/5 star system But how will a user remove that trust? how will they update it if things change and they trust them less?

If our goal is to model "trust" in a digital sense then we NEED a way for the data to stay up-to-date and as accurate as possible. otherwise whats the use? If we don't have a friction-less way to update or remove the digital representation of "trust" then we will end up with a WoT that continuously grows and everyone is rated 10/10

In the case of nostr kind:3 following lists. its pretty easy to see how these would get updated. If someone posts something I dislike or I notice I'm getting board of their content. then I just unfollow them. An important part here is that I'm not thinking "I should update my trust score of this user" but instead "I'm no longer interested, I don't want to see this anymore"

But that is probably the easiest "trust" to update. because most of us on social media spend some time curating our feed and we are used to doing it. But what about the more obscure "trust" scores? whats the regular mechanism by which a user would update the "honestly" score of another user?

In the real world its easy, when I stop trusting someone I simply stop associating with them. there isn't any button or switch I need to update. I simply don't talk to them anymore, its friction-less But in the digital realm I would have to remove or update that trust. in other words its an action I need to take instead of an action I'm not doing. and actions take energy.

So how do we reflect something in the digital world that takes no-energy and is almost subconscious in the real world?

TLDR; webs-of-trust are not just about scoring other users once. you must keep the score up-to-date

@ 1eb966a6:e3eddf94

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

@ 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

@ f977c464:32fcbe00

Güneşin kaybolmasının üçüncü günü, saat öğlen on ikiyi yirmi geçiyordu. Trenin kalkmasına yaklaşık iki saat vardı. Hepimiz perondaydık. Valizlerimiz, kolilerimiz, renk renk ve biçimsiz çantalarımızla yan yana dizilmiş, kısa aralıklarla tepemizdeki devasa saati kontrol ediyorduk.

Ama ne kadar dik bakarsak bakalım zaman bir türlü istediğimiz hızla ilerlemiyordu. Herkes birkaç dakika sürmesi gereken alelade bir doğa olayına sıkışıp kalmış, karanlıktan sürünerek çıkmayı deniyordu.

Bekleme salonuna doğru döndüm. Nefesimden çıkan buharın arkasında, kalın taş duvarları ve camlarıyla morg kadar güvenli ve soğuk duruyordu. Cesetleri o yüzden bunun gibi yerlere taşımaya başlamışlardı. Demek insanların bütün iyiliği başkaları onları gördüğü içindi ki gündüzleri gecelerden daha karanlık olduğunda hemen birbirlerinin gırtlağına çökmüş, böğürlerinde delikler açmış, gözlerini oyup kafataslarını parçalamışlardı.

İstasyonun ışığı titrediğinde karanlığın enseme saplandığını hissettim. Eğer şimdi, böyle kalabalık bir yerde elektrik kesilse başımıza ne gelirdi?

İçerideki askerlerden biri bakışlarımı yakalayınca yeniden saate odaklanmış gibi yaptım. Sadece birkaç dakika geçmişti.

“Tarlalarım gitti. Böyle boyum kadar ayçiçeği doluydu. Ah, hepsi ölüp gidiyor. Afitap’ın çiçekleri de gi-”

“Dayı, Allah’ını seversen sus. Hepimizi yakacaksın şimdi.”

Karanlıkta durduğunda, görünmez olmayı istemeye başlıyordun. Kimse seni görmemeli, nefesini bile duymamalıydı. Kimsenin de ayağının altında dolaşmamalıydın; gelip kazayla sana çarpmamalılar, takılıp sendelememeliydiler. Yoksa aslında hedefi sen olmadığın bir öfke gürlemeye başlar, yaşadığın ilk şoku ve acıyı silerek üstünden geçerdi.

İlk konuşan, yaşlıca bir adam, kafasında kasketi, nasırlı ellerine hohluyordu. Gözleri ve burnu kızarmıştı. Güneşin kaybolması onun için kendi başına bir felaket değildi. Hayatına olan pratik yansımalarından korkuyordu olsa olsa. Bir anının kaybolması, bu yüzden çoktan kaybettiği birinin biraz daha eksilmesi. Hayatta kalmasını gerektiren sebepler azalırken, hayatta kalmasını sağlayacak kaynaklarını da kaybediyordu.

Onu susturan delikanlıysa atkısını bütün kafasına sarmış, sakalı ve yüzünün derinliklerine kaçmış gözleri dışında bedeninin bütün parçalarını gizlemeye çalışıyordu. İşte o, güneşin kaybolmasının tam olarak ne anlama geldiğini anlamamış olsa bile, dehşetini olduğu gibi hissedebilenlerdendi.

Güneşin onlardan alındıktan sonra kime verileceğini sormuyorlardı. En başta onlara verildiğinde de hiçbir soru sormamışlardı zaten.

İki saat ne zaman geçer?

Midemin üstünde, sağ tarafıma doğru keskin bir acı hissettim. Karaciğerim. Gözlerimi yumdum. Yanımda biri metal bir nesneyi yere bıraktı. Bir kafesti. İçerisindeki kartalın ıslak kokusu burnuma ulaşmadan önce bile biliyordum bunu.

“Yeniden mi?” diye sordu bana kartal. Kanatları kanlı. Zamanın her bir parçası tüylerinin üstüne çöreklenmişti. Gagası bir şey, tahminen et parçası geveliyor gibi hareket ediyordu. Eski anılar kolay unutulmazmış. Şu anda kafesinin kalın parmaklıklarının ardında olsa da bunun bir aldatmaca olduğunu bir tek ben biliyordum. Her an kanatlarını iki yana uzatıverebilir, hava bu hareketiyle dalgalanarak kafesi esneterek hepimizi içine alacak kadar genişleyebilir, parmaklıklar önce ayaklarımızın altına serilir gibi gözükebilir ama aslında hepimizin üstünde yükselerek tepemize çökebilirdi.

Aşağıya baktım. Tahtalarla zapt edilmiş, hiçbir yere gidemeyen ama her yere uzanan tren rayları. Atlayıp koşsam… Çantam çok ağırdı. Daha birkaç adım atamadan, kartal, suratını bedenime gömerdi.

“Bu sefer farklı,” diye yanıtladım onu. “Yeniden diyemezsin. Tekrarladığım bir şey değil bu. Hatta bir hata yapıyormuşum gibi tonlayamazsın da. Bu sefer, insanların hak etmediğini biliyorum.”

“O zaman daha vahim. Süzme salaksın demektir.”

“İnsanların hak etmemesi, insanlığın hak etmediği anlamına gelmez ki.”

Az önce göz göze geldiğim genççe ama çökük asker hâlâ bana bakıyordu. Bir kartalla konuştuğumu anlamamıştı şüphesiz. Yanımdakilerden biriyle konuştuğumu sanmış olmalıydı. Ama konuştuğum kişiye bakmıyordum ona göre. Çekingence kafamı eğmiştim. Bir kez daha göz göze geldiğimizde içerideki diğer iki askere bir şeyler söyledi, onlar dönüp beni süzerken dışarı çıktı.

Yanımızdaki, az önce konuşan iki adam da şaşkınlıkla bir bana bir kartala bakıyordu.

“Yalnız bu sefer kalbin de kırılacak, Prometheus,” dedi kartal, bana. “Belki son olur. Biliyorsun, bir sürü soruna neden oluyor bu yaptıkların.”

Beni koruyordu sözde. En çok kanıma dokunan buydu. Kasıklarımın üstüne oturmuş, kanlı suratının ardında gözleri parlarken attığı çığlık kulaklarımda titremeye devam ediyordu. Bu tabloda kimsenin kimseyi düşündüğü yoktu. Kartalın, yanımızdaki adamların, artık arkama kadar gelmiş olması gereken askerin, tren raylarının, geçmeyen saatlerin…

Arkamı döndüğümde, asker sahiden oradaydı. Zaten öyle olması gerekiyordu; görmüştüm bunu, biliyordum. Kehanetler… Bir şeyler söylüyordu ama ağzı oynarken sesi çıkmıyordu. Yavaşlamış, kendisini saatin akışına uydurmuştu. Havada donan tükürüğünden anlaşılıyordu, sinirliydi. Korktuğu için olduğunu biliyordum. Her seferinde korkmuşlardı. Beni unutmuş olmaları işlerini kolaylaştırmıyordu. Sadece yeni bir isim vermelerine neden oluyordu. Bu seferkiyle beni lanetleyecekleri kesinleşmişti.

Olması gerekenle olanların farklı olması ne kadar acınasıydı. Olması gerekenlerin doğasının kötücül olmasıysa bir yerde buna dayanıyordu.

“Salaksın,” dedi kartal bana. Zamanı aşan bir çığlık. Hepimizin önüne geçmişti ama kimseyi durduramıyordu.

Sonsuzluğa kaç tane iki saat sıkıştırabilirsiniz?

Ben bir tane bile sıkıştıramadım.

Çantama uzanıyordum. Asker de sırtındaki tüfeğini indiriyordu. Benim acelem yoktu, onunsa eli ayağı birbirine dolaşıyordu. Oysaki her şey tam olması gerektiği anda olacaktı. Kehanet başkasının parmaklarının ucundaydı.

Güneş, bir tüfeğin patlamasıyla yeryüzüne doğdu.

Rayların üzerine serilmiş göğsümün ortasından, bir çantanın içinden.

Not: Bu öykü ilk olarak 2021 yılında Esrarengiz Hikâyeler'de yayımlanmıştır.

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Table Of Content

• Bitcoin Bulls Get a Treat from SEC!

• Gold's Future in Question?

• Conclusion

• FAQ

In the world of finance and investments, there are always exciting developments and trends that capture the attention of investors and enthusiasts alike. Recently, Bitcoin bulls have been delighted by a treat from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), while the future of gold has come into question. In this article, we will explore the implications of these events and their potential impact on the financial landscape.

Bitcoin Bulls Get a Treat from SEC!

The SEC's Recognition of Bitcoin

The first significant development for Bitcoin bulls is the recognition by the SEC of Bitcoin as a legitimate asset class. This recognition brings a sense of legitimacy and credibility to the cryptocurrency, as it paves the way for wider adoption and integration into traditional financial systems.

Increased Institutional Interest in Bitcoin

With the SEC's recognition, institutional investors have started showing more interest in Bitcoin. Major financial institutions such as banks and hedge funds are now exploring ways to include Bitcoin in their portfolios. This increased demand from institutional players has the potential to drive the price of Bitcoin even higher.

Regulatory Clarity Boosts Investor Confidence

One of the biggest challenges for Bitcoin bulls has been the lack of regulatory clarity surrounding cryptocurrencies. However, the SEC's recognition provides a level of clarity that was previously missing. This regulatory framework allows investors to have a better understanding of the risks and benefits associated with investing in Bitcoin.

Bitcoin ETFs on the Horizon

The SEC's recognition of Bitcoin also opens the door for the approval of Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs). ETFs provide an easier and more accessible way for investors to gain exposure to Bitcoin without directly owning the cryptocurrency. The approval of Bitcoin ETFs would likely attract more institutional investors and further propel the price of Bitcoin.

Gold's Future in Question?

The Decline of Gold as a Safe Haven

Gold has long been considered a safe haven asset, providing investors with a hedge against inflation and economic uncertainties. However, recent events have raised questions about the future of gold as an investment.

The Rise of Bitcoin as a Digital Gold

Bitcoin's emergence as a digital store of value has posed a challenge to gold's traditional role. Bitcoin offers many advantages over gold, including its divisibility, portability, and ease of transfer. As more investors recognize these benefits, they may start shifting their investments from gold to Bitcoin, potentially impacting the future demand and value of gold.

Technological Advancements and Digitalization

Another factor that puts gold's future in question is the rapid advancement of technology and the increasing digitalization of financial transactions. As digital payment systems and cryptocurrencies gain popularity, the appeal of physical assets like gold may diminish. The convenience and efficiency offered by digital assets could make them a preferred choice for investors in the coming years.

Changing Investor Preferences

The preferences of investors are evolving, particularly among younger generations. Millennial and Gen Z investors are more inclined to embrace cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin as they seek alternative investment options. This shift in investor preferences could further erode the demand for gold and impact its future prospects.

Conclusion

The recognition of Bitcoin by the SEC has undoubtedly brought joy to Bitcoin bulls, as it signifies a significant milestone in the journey towards mainstream acceptance. The future of gold, on the other hand, faces uncertainties as the emergence of digital assets like Bitcoin challenges its traditional role as a safe haven investment. As technology continues to advance and investor preferences evolve, it will be interesting to see how these dynamics shape the financial landscape in the coming years.

FAQ

Is Bitcoin legal?

Yes, Bitcoin is legal in most countries, including the United States. However, regulations may vary, so it's essential to check the legality of Bitcoin in your specific jurisdiction.

Can I invest in Bitcoin through my traditional brokerage account? Some brokerage firms offer the option to invest in Bitcoin indirectly through specialized investment products like Bitcoin futures or trusts. However, not all traditional brokerage accounts provide this option, so it's best to inquire with your broker.

What is the potential for Bitcoin's future growth? The future growth potential of Bitcoin is subjective and highly speculative. While some believe Bitcoin has the potential to reach even higher valuations, others remain skeptical. It's important to conduct thorough research and consider various factors before making any investment decisions.

How can I secure my Bitcoin investments? It is crucial to store your Bitcoin in a secure digital wallet and follow best security practices, such as enabling two-factor authentication and using strong, unique passwords. Additionally, offline storage options like hardware wallets offer an extra layer of security.

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

O Planetinha

Fumaça verde me entrando pelas narinas e um coro desafinado fazia uma base melódica.

nos confins da galáxia havia um planetinha isolado. Era um planeta feliz.

O homem vestido de mago começava a aparecer por detrás da fumaça verde.

O planetinha recebeu três presentes, mas o seu habitante, o homem, estava num estado de confusão tão grande que ameaçava estragá-los. Os homens já havia escravizado o primeiro presente, a vida; lutavam contra o segundo presente, a morte; e havia alguns que achavam que deviam destruir totalmente o terceiro, o amor, e com isto levar a desordem total ao pobre planetinha perdido, que se chamava Terra.

O coro desafinado entrou antes do "Terra" cantando várias vezes, como se imitasse um eco, "terra-terra-terraaa". Depois de uma pausa dramática, o homem vestido de mago voltou a falar.

Terra, nossa nave mãe.

Neste momento eu me afastei. À frente do palco onde o mago e seu coral faziam apelos à multidão havia vários estandes cobertos com a tradicional armação de quatro pernas e lona branca. Em todos os cantos da praça havia gente, gente dos mais variados tipos. Visitantes curiosos que se aproximavam atraídos pela fumaça verde e as barraquinhas, gente que aproveitava o movimento para vender doces sem pagar imposto, casais que se abraçavam de pé para espantar o frio, os tradicionais corredores que faziam seu cooper, gente cheia de barba e vestida para imitar os hippies dos anos 60 e vender colares estendidos no chão, transeuntes novos e velhos, vestidos como baladeiros ou como ativistas do ônibus grátis, grupos de ciclistas entusiastas.

O mago fazia agora apelos para que nós, os homens, habitantes do isolado planetinha, passássemos a ver o planetinha, nossa nave mãe, como um todo, e adquiríssemos a consciência de que ele estava entrando em maus lençóis. A idéia, reforçada pela logomarca do evento, era que parássemos de olhar só para a nossa vida e pensássemos no planeta.

A logomarca do evento, um desenho estilizado do planeta Terra, nada tinha a ver com seu nome: "Festival Andando de Bem com a Vida", mas havia sido ali colocada estrategicamente pelos organizadores, de quem parecia justamente sair a mensagem dita pelo mago.

Aquela multidão de pessoas que, assim como eu, tinham suas próprias preocupações, não podiam ver o quadro caótico que formavam, cada uma com seus atos isolados, ali naquela praça isolada, naquele planeta isolado. Quando o hippie barbudo, quase um Osho, assustava um casal para tentar vender-lhes um colar, a quantidade de caos que isto acrescentava à cena era gigantesca. Por um segundo, pude ver, como se estivesse de longe e acima, com toda a pretensão que este estado imaginativo carrega, a cena completa do caos.

---

Uma nave-mãe, dessas de ficção científica, habitada por milhões de pessoas, seguia no espaço sem rumo, e sem saber que logo à frente um longo precipício espacial a esperava, para a desgraça completa sua e de seus habitantes.

Acostumados àquela nave tanto quanto outrora estiveram acostumados à sua terra natal, os homens viviam as próprias vidas sem nem se lembrar que estavam vagando pelo espaço. Ninguém sabia quem estava conduzindo a nave, e ninguém se importava.

No final do filme descobre-se que era a soma completa do caos que cada habitante produzia, com seus gestos egoístas e incapazes de levar em conta a totalidade, é que determinava a direção da nave-mãe. O efeito, no entanto, não era imediato, como nunca é. Havia gente de verdade encarregada de conduzir a nave, mas era uma gente bêbada, mau-caráter, que vivia brigando pelo controle da nave e o poder que isto lhes dava. Poder, status, dinheiro!

Essa gente bêbada era atraída até ali pela corrupção das instituições e da moral comum que, no fundo no fundo, era causada pelo egoísmo da população, através de um complexo -- mas que no filme aparece simplificado pela ação individual de um magnata do divertimento público -- processo social.

O homem vestido de mago era mais um agente causador de caos, com sua cena cheia de fumaça e sua roupa estroboscópica, ele achava que estava fazendo o bem ao alertar sua platéia, todos as sextas-feiras, de que havia algo que precisava ser feito, que cada um que estava ali ouvindo era responsável pelo planeta. A sua incapacidade, porém, de explicar o que precisava ser feito só aumentava a angústia geral; a culpa que ele jogava sobre seu público, e que era prontamente aceita e passada em frente, aos familiares e amigos de cada um, atormentava-os diariamente e os impedia de ter uma vida decente no trabalho e em casa. As famílias, estressadas, estavam constantemente brigando e os motivos mais insignificantes eram responsáveis pelas mais horrendas conseqüências.

O mago, que após o show tirava o chapéu entortado e ia tomar cerveja num boteco, era responsável por uma parcela considerável do caos que levava a nave na direção do seu desgraçado fim. No filme, porém, um dos transeuntes que de passagem ouviu um pedaço do discurso do mago despertou em si mesmo uma consiência transformadora e, com poderes sobre-humanos que lhe foram então concedidos por uma ordem iniciática do bem ou não, usando só os seus poderes humanos mesmo, o transeunte -- na primeira versão do filme um homem, na segunda uma mulher -- consegue consertar as instituições e retirar os bêbados da condução da máquina. A questão da moral pública é ignorada para abreviar a trama, já com duas horas e quarenta de duração, mas subentende-se que ela também fora resolvida.

---

No planeta Terra real, que não está indo em direção alguma, preso pela gravidade ao Sol, e onde as pessoas vivem a própria vida porque lhes é impossível viver a dos outros, não têm uma consciência global de nada porque só é possível mesmo ter a consciência delas mesmas, e onde a maioria, de uma maneira ou de outra, está tentando como pode, fazer as coisas direito, o filme é exibido.

Para a maioria dos espectadores, é um filme que evoca reflexões, um filme forte. Por um segundo elas têm o mesmo vislumbre do caos generalizado que eu tive ali naquela praça. Para uma pequena parcela dos espectadores -- entre eles alguns dos que estavam na platéia do mago, o próprio mago, o seguidor do Osho, o casal de duas mulheres e o vendedor de brigadeiros, mas aos quais se somam também críticos de televisão e jornal e gente que fala pelos cotovelos na internet -- o filme é um horror, o filme é uma vulgarização de um problema real e sério, o filme apela para a figura do herói salvador e passa uma mensagem totalmente errada, de que a maioria da população pode continuar vivendo as suas própria vidinhas miseráveis enquanto espera por um herói que vem do Olimpo e os salva da mixórdia que eles mesmos causaram, é um filme que presta um enorme desserviço à causa.

No dia seguinte ao lançamento, num bar meio caro ali perto da praça, numa mesa com oito pessoas, entre elas seis do primeiro grupo e oito do segundo, discute-se se o filme levará ou não o Oscar. Eu estou em casa dormindo e não escuto nada.

@ f977c464:32fcbe00

Kendisini aynada ilk defa gördüğü o gün, diğerleri gibi olduğunu anlamıştı. Oysaki her insan biricik olmalıydı. Sözgelimi sinirlendiğinde bir kaşı diğerinden birkaç milimetre daha az çatılabilirdi veya sevindiğinde dudağı ona has bir açıyla dalgalanabilirdi. Hatta bunların hiçbiri mümkün değilse, en azından, gözlerinin içinde sadece onun sahip olabileceği bir ışık parlayabilirdi. Çok sıradan, öyle sıradan ki kimsenin fark etmediği o milyonlarca minik şeyden herhangi biri. Ne olursa.

Ama yansımasına bakarken bunların hiçbirini bulamadı ve diğer günlerden hiç de farklı başlamamış o gün, işe gitmek için vagonunun gelmesini beklediği alelade bir metro istasyonunda, içinde kaybolduğu illüzyon dağılmaya başladı.

İlk önce derisi döküldü. Tam olarak dökülmedi aslında, daha çok kıvılcımlara dönüşüp bedeninden fırlamış ve bir an sonra sönerek külleşmiş, havada dağılmıştı. Ardında da, kaybolmadan hemen önce, kısa süre için hayal meyal görülebilen, bir ruhun yok oluşuna ağıt yakan rengârenk peri cesetleri bırakmıştı. Beklenenin aksine, havaya toz kokusu yayıldı.

Dehşete düştü elbette. Dehşete düştüler. Panikle üstlerini yırtan 50 işçi. Her şeyin sebebiyse o vagon.

Saçları da döküldü. Her tel, yere varmadan önce, her santimde ikiye ayrıla ayrıla yok oldu.

Bütün yüzeylerin mat olduğu, hiçbir şeyin yansımadığı, suyun siyah aktığı ve kendine ancak kameralarla bakabildiğin bir dünyada, vagonun içine yerleştirilmiş bir aynadan ilk defa kendini görmek.

Gözlerinin akları buharlaşıp havada dağıldı, mercekleri boşalan yeri doldurmak için eriyip yayıldı. Gerçeği görmemek için yaratılmış, bu yüzden görmeye hazır olmayan ve hiç olmayacak gözler.

Her şeyin o anda sona erdiğini sanabilirdi insan. Derin bir karanlık ve ölüm. Görmenin görmek olduğu o anın bitişi.

---

Ben geldiğimde ölmüşlerdi.

Yani bozulmuşlardı demek istiyorum.

Belleklerini yeni taşıyıcılara takmam mümkün olmadı. Fiziksel olarak kusursuz durumdaydılar, olmayanları da tamir edebilirdim ama tüm o hengamede kendilerini baştan programlamış ve girdilerini modifiye etmişlerdi.

Belleklerden birini masanın üzerinden ileriye savurdu. Hınca hınç dolu bir barda oturuyorlardı. O ve arkadaşı.

Sırf şu kendisini insan sanan androidler travma geçirip delirmesin diye neler yapıyoruz, insanın aklı almıyor.

Eliyle arkasını işaret etti.

Polislerin söylediğine göre biri vagonun içerisine ayna yerleştirmiş. Bu zavallılar da kapı açılıp bir anda yansımalarını görünce kafayı kırmışlar.

Arkadaşı bunların ona ne hissettirdiğini sordu. Yani o kadar bozuk, insan olduğunu sanan androidi kendilerini parçalamış olarak yerde görmek onu sarsmamış mıydı?

Hayır, sonuçta belirli bir amaç için yaratılmış şeyler onlar. Kaliteli bir bilgisayarım bozulduğunda üzülürüm çünkü parasını ben vermişimdir. Bunlarsa devletin. Bana ne ki?

Arkadaşı anlayışla kafasını sallayıp suyundan bir yudum aldı. Kravatını biraz gevşetti.

Bira istemediğinden emin misin?

İstemediğini söyledi. Sahi, neden deliriyordu bu androidler?

Basit. Onların yapay zekâlarını kodlarken bir şeyler yazıyorlar. Yazılımcılar. Biliyorsun, ben donanımdayım. Bunlar da kendilerini insan sanıyorlar. Tiplerine bak.

Sesini alçalttı.

Arabalarda kaza testi yapılan mankenlere benziyor hepsi. Ağızları burunları bile yok ama şu geldiğimizden beri sakalını düzeltip duruyor mesela. Hayır, hepsi de diğerleri onun sakalı varmış sanıyor, o manyak bir şey.

Arkadaşı bunun delirmeleriyle bağlantısını çözemediğini söyledi. O da normal sesiyle konuşmaya devam etti.

Anlasana, aynayı falan ayırt edemiyor mercekleri. Lönk diye kendilerini görüyorlar. Böyle, olduğu gibi...

Nedenmiş peki? Ne gerek varmış?

Ne bileyim be abicim! Ahiret soruları gibi.

Birasına bakarak dalıp gitti. Sonra masaya abanarak arkadaşına iyice yaklaştı. Bulanık, bir tünelin ucundaki biri gibi, şekli şemalı belirsiz bir adam.

Ben seni nereden tanıyorum ki ulan? Kimsin sen?

Belleği makineden çıkardılar. İki kişiydiler. Soruşturmadan sorumlu memurlar.

─ Baştan mı başlıyoruz, diye sordu belleği elinde tutan ilk memur.

─ Bir kere daha deneyelim ama bu sefer direkt aynayı sorarak başla, diye cevapladı ikinci memur.

─ Bence de. Yeterince düzgün çalışıyor.

Simülasyon yüklenirken, ayakta, biraz arkada duran ve alnını kaşıyan ikinci memur sormaktan kendisini alamadı:

─ Bu androidleri niye böyle bir olay yerine göndermişler ki? Belli tost olacakları. İsraf. Gidip biz baksak aynayı kırıp delilleri mahvetmek zorunda da kalmazlar.

Diğer memur sandalyesinde hafifçe dönecek oldu, o sırada soruyu bilgisayarın hoparlöründen teknisyen cevapladı.

Hangi işimizde bir yamukluk yok ki be abi.

---

Ama bir son değildi. Üstlerindeki tüm illüzyon dağıldığında ve çıplak, cinsiyetsiz, birbirinin aynı bedenleriyle kaldıklarında sıra dünyaya gelmişti.

Yere düştüler. Elleri -bütün bedeni gibi siyah turmalinden, boğumları çelikten- yere değdiği anda, metronun zemini dağıldı.

Yerdeki karolar öncesinde beyazdı ve çok parlaktı. Tepelerindeki floresan, ışığını olduğu gibi yansıtıyor, tek bir lekenin olmadığı ve tek bir tozun uçmadığı istasyonu aydınlatıyorlardı.

Duvarlara duyurular asılmıştı. Örneğin, yarın akşam kültür merkezinde 20.00’da başlayacak bir tekno blues festivalinin cıvıl cıvıl afişi vardı. Onun yanında daha geniş, sarı puntolu harflerle yazılmış, yatay siyah kesiklerle çerçevesi çizilmiş, bir platformdan düşen çöp adamın bulunduğu “Dikkat! Sarı bandı geçmeyin!” uyarısı. Biraz ilerisinde günlük resmi gazete, onun ilerisinde bir aksiyon filminin ve başka bir romantik komedi filminin afişleri, yapılacakların ve yapılmayacakların söylendiği küçük puntolu çeşitli duyurular... Duvar uzayıp giden bir panoydu. On, on beş metrede bir tekrarlanıyordu.

Tüm istasyonun eni yüz metre kadar. Genişliği on metre civarı.

Önlerinde, açık kapısından o mendebur aynanın gözüktüğü vagon duruyordu. Metro, istasyona sığmayacak kadar uzundu. Bir kılıcın keskinliğiyle uzanıyor ama yer yer vagonların ek yerleriyle bölünüyordu.

Hiçbir vagonda pencere olmadığı için metronun içi, içlerindekiler meçhuldü.

Sonrasında karolar zerrelerine ayrılarak yükseldi. Floresanın ışığında her yeri toza boğdular ve ortalığı gri bir sisin altına gömdüler. Çok kısa bir an. Afişleri dalgalandırmadılar. Dalgalandırmaya vakitleri olmadı. Yerlerinden söküp aldılar en fazla. Işık birkaç kere sönüp yanarak direndi. Son kez söndüğünde bir daha geri gelmedi.

Yine de etraf aydınlıktı. Kırmızı, her yere eşit dağılan soluk bir ışıkla.

Yer tamamen tele dönüşmüştü. Altında çapraz hatlarla desteklenmiş demir bir iskelet. Işık birkaç metreden daha fazla aşağıya uzanamıyordu. Sonsuzluğa giden bir uçurum.

Duvarın yerini aynı teller ve demir iskelet almıştı. Arkasında, birbirine vidalarla tutturulmuş demir plakalardan oluşan, üstünden geçen boruların ek yerlerinden bazen ince buharların çıktığı ve bir süre asılı kaldıktan sonra ağır, yağlı bir havayla sürüklendiği bir koridor.

Diğer tarafta paslanmış, pencerelerindeki camlar kırıldığı için demir plakalarla kapatılmış külüstür bir metro. Kapının karşısındaki aynadan her şey olduğu gibi yansıyordu.

---

Bir konteynırın içini andıran bir evde, gerçi gayet de birbirine eklenmiş konteynırlardan oluşan bir şehirde “andıran” demek doğru olmayacağı için düpedüz bir konteynırın içinde, masaya mum görüntüsü vermek için koyulmuş, yarı katı yağ atıklarından şekillendirilmiş kütleleri yakmayı deniyordu. Kafasında hayvan kıllarından yapılmış grili siyahlı bir peruk. Aynı kıllardan kendisine gür bir bıyık da yapmıştı.

Üstünde mavi çöp poşetlerinden yapılmış, kravatlı, şık bir takım.

Masanın ayakları yerine oradan buradan çıkmış parçalar konulmuştu: bir arabanın şaft mili, üst üste konulmuş ve üstünde yazı okunamayan tenekeler, boş kitaplar, boş gazete balyaları... Hiçbir şeye yazı yazılmıyordu, gerek yoktu da zaten çünkü merkez veri bankası onları fark ettirmeden, merceklerden giren veriyi sentezleyerek insanlar için dolduruyordu. Yani, androidler için. Farklı şekilde isimlendirmek bir fark yaratacaksa.

Onların mercekleri için değil. Bağlantıları çok önceden kopmuştu.

─ Hayatım, sofra hazır, diye bağırdı yatak odasındaki karısına.

Sofrada tabak yerine düz, bardak yerine bükülmüş, çatal ve bıçak yerine sivriltilmiş plakalar.

Karısı salonun kapısında durakladı ve ancak kulaklarına kadar uzanan, kocasınınkine benzeyen, cansız, ölü hayvanların kıllarından ibaret peruğunu eliyle düzeltti. Dudağını, daha doğrusu dudağının olması gereken yeri koyu kırmızı bir yağ tabakasıyla renklendirmeyi denemişti. Biraz da yanaklarına sürmüştü.

─ Nasıl olmuş, diye sordu.

Sesi tek düzeydi ama hafif bir neşe olduğunu hissettiğinize yemin edebilirdiniz.

Üzerinde, çöp poşetlerinin içini yazısız gazete kağıtlarıyla doldurarak yaptığı iki parça giysi.

─ Çok güzelsin, diyerek kravatını düzeltti kocası.

─ Sen de öylesin, sevgilim.

Yaklaşıp kocasını öptü. Kocası da onu. Sonra nazikçe elinden tutarak, sandalyesini geriye çekerek oturmasına yardım etti.

Sofrada yemek niyetine hiçbir şey yoktu. Gerek de yoktu zaten.

Konteynırın kapısı gürültüyle tekmelenip içeri iki memur girene kadar birbirlerine öyküler anlattılar. O gün neler yaptıklarını. İşten erken çıkıp yemyeşil çimenlerde gezdiklerini, uçurtma uçurduklarını, kadının nasıl o elbiseyi bulmak için saatlerce gezip yorulduğunu, kocasının kısa süreliğine işe dönüp nasıl başarılı bir hamleyle yaşanan krizi çözdüğünü ve kadının yanına döndükten sonra, alışveriş merkezinde oturdukları yeni dondurmacının dondurmalarının ne kadar lezzetli olduğunu, boğazlarının ağrımasından korktuklarını...

Akşam film izleyebilirlerdi, televizyonda -boş ve mat bir plaka- güzel bir film oynayacaktı.

İki memur. Çıplak bedenleriyle birbirinin aynı. Ellerindeki silahları onlara doğrultmuşlardı. Mum ışığında, tertemiz bir örtünün serili olduğu masada, bardaklarında şaraplarla oturan ve henüz sofranın ortasındaki hindiye dokunmamış çifti gördüklerinde bocaladılar.

Hiç de androidlere bilinçli olarak zarar verebilecek gibi gözükmüyorlardı.

─ Sessiz kalma hakkına sahipsiniz, diye bağırdı içeri giren ikinci memur. Söylediğiniz her şey...

Cümlesini bitiremedi. Yatak odasındaki, masanın üzerinden gördüğü o şey, onunla aynı hareketleri yapan android, yoksa, bir aynadaki yansıması mıydı?

Bütün illüzyon o anda dağılmaya başladı.

Not: Bu öykü ilk olarak 2020 yılında Esrarengiz Hikâyeler'de yayımlanmıştır.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

              A Cypherpunk's Manifesto

                    by Eric Hughes

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

If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of their interaction. Each party can speak about their own memory of this; how could anyone prevent it? One could pass laws against it, but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all. If many parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other parties. The power of electronic communications has enabled such group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it to.

Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary for that transaction. Since any information can be spoken of, we must ensure that we reveal as little as possible. In most cases personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am. When I ask my electronic mail provider to send and receive messages, my provider need not know to whom I am speaking or what I am saying or what others are saying to me; my provider only need know how to get the message there and how much I owe them in fees. When my identity is revealed by the underlying mechanism of the transaction, I have no privacy. I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must always reveal myself.

Therefore, privacy in an open society requires anonymous transaction systems. Until now, cash has been the primary such system. An anonymous transaction system is not a secret transaction system. An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.

Privacy in an open society also requires cryptography. If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy. Furthermore, to reveal one's identity with assurance when the default is anonymity requires the cryptographic signature.

We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence. It is to their advantage to speak of us, and we should expect that they will speak. To try to prevent their speech is to fight against the realities of information. Information does not just want to be free, it longs to be free. Information expands to fill the available storage space. Information is Rumor's younger, stronger cousin; Information is fleeter of foot, has more eyes, knows more, and understands less than Rumor.

We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any. We must come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions to take place. People have been defending their own privacy for centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret handshakes, and couriers. The technologies of the past did not allow for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.

We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems. We are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic money.

Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.

Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible.

For privacy to be widespread it must be part of a social contract. People must come and together deploy these systems for the common good. Privacy only extends so far as the cooperation of one's fellows in society. We the Cypherpunks seek your questions and your concerns and hope we may engage you so that we do not deceive ourselves. We will not, however, be moved out of our course because some may disagree with our goals.

The Cypherpunks are actively engaged in making the networks safer for privacy. Let us proceed together apace.

Onward.

Eric Hughes hughes@soda.berkeley.edu

9 March 1993

@ 32e18276:5c68e245

I’m going to be on an ordinals panels as one of the people who is counter arguing the claim that they are good for bitcoin. I decided to brush up on the technicals on how inscriptions work. I am starting to see luke’s perspective on how it is exploiting a loophole in bitcoin’s anti-data-spam mechanisms.

Storing data in Bitcoin, the “standard” way

The standard way you add “data” to bitcoin is by calling the OP_RETURN opcode. Bitcoin devs noticed that people were storing data (like the bitcoin whitepaper) in the utxo set via large multisig transactions. The problem with this is that this set is unprunable and could grow over time. OP_RETURN outputs on the other-hand are provably prunable and don’t add to utxo bloat.

Here’s an excerpt from the march 2014 0.9.0 release notes that talks about this:

On OP_RETURN: There was been some confusion and misunderstanding in the community, regarding the OP_RETURN feature in 0.9 and data in the blockchain. This change is not an endorsement of storing data in the blockchain. The OP_RETURN change creates a provably-prunable output, to avoid data storage schemes – some of which were already deployed – that were storing arbitrary data such as images as forever-unspendable TX outputs, bloating bitcoin’s UTXO database. Storing arbitrary data in the blockchain is still a bad idea; it is less costly and far more efficient to store non-currency data elsewhere.

Much of the work on bitcoin core has been focused on making sure the system continues to function in a decentralized way for its intended purpose in the presence of people trying to abuse it for things like storing data. Bitcoin core has always discouraged this, as it is not designed for storage of images and data, it is meant for moving digital coins around in cyberspace.

To help incentive-align people to not do stupid things, OP_RETURN transactions were not made non-standard, so that they are relayable by peers and miners, but with the caveat:

1. They can only push 40 bytes (later increased to 80,83, I’m guessing to support larger root merkle hashes since that is the only sane usecase for op_return)

Bitcoin also added an option called -datacarriersize which limits the total number of bytes from these outputs that you will relay or mine.

Why inscriptions are technically an exploit

Inscriptions get around the datacarriersize limit by disguising data as bitcoin script program data via OP_PUSH inside OP_IF blocks. Ordinals do not use OP_RETURN and are not subjected to datacarriersize limits, so noderunners and miners currently have limited control over the total size of this data that they wish to relay and include in blocks. Luke’s fork of bitcoin-core has some options to fight this spam, so hopefully we will see this in core sometime soon as well.

Inscriptions are also taking advantage of features in segwit v1 (witness discount) and v2/taproot (no arbitrary script size limit). Each of these features have interesting and well-justified reasons why they were introduced.

The purpose of the witness discount was to make it cheaper to spend many outputs which helps the reduction of the utxo set size. Inscriptions took advantage of this discount to store monke jpegs disguised as bitcoin scripts. Remember, bitcoin is not for storing data, so anytime bitcoin-devs accidentally make it cheap and easy to relay data then this should be viewed as an exploit. Expect it to be fixed, or at least provide tools to noderunners for fighting this spam.

Where do we go from here

The interesting part of this story is that people seem to attach value to images stored on the bitcoin blockchain, and they are willing to pay the fee to get it in the block, so non-ideologic miners and people who don’t care about the health and decentralization of bitcoin are happy to pay or collect the fee and move on.

Data should not get a discount, people should pay full price if they want to store data. They should just use op_return and hashes like opentimestamps or any other reasonable protocol storing data in bitcoin.

After going through this analysis I’ve come to the opinion that this is a pretty bad data-spam exploit and bitcoin devs should be working on solutions. Ideological devs like luke who actually care about the health and decentralization of the network are and I’m glad to see it.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Embarking on the journey of operating your own Lightning node on the Bitcoin Layer 2 network is more than just a tech-savvy endeavor; it's a step into a realm of financial autonomy and cutting-edge innovation. By running a node, you become a vital part of a revolutionary movement that's reshaping how we think about money and digital transactions. This role not only offers a unique perspective on blockchain technology but also places you at the heart of a community dedicated to decentralization and network resilience. Beyond the technicalities, it's about embracing a new era of digital finance, where you contribute directly to the network's security, efficiency, and growth, all while gaining personal satisfaction and potentially lucrative rewards.

In essence, running your own Lightning node is a powerful way to engage with the forefront of blockchain technology, assert financial independence, and contribute to a more decentralized and efficient Bitcoin network. It's an adventure that offers both personal and communal benefits, from gaining in-depth tech knowledge to earning a place in the evolving landscape of cryptocurrency.

Running your own Lightning node for the Bitcoin Layer 2 network can be an empowering and beneficial endeavor. Here are 10 reasons why you might consider taking on this task:

1. Direct Contribution to Decentralization: Operating a node is a direct action towards decentralizing the Bitcoin network, crucial for its security and resistance to control or censorship by any single entity.

2. Financial Autonomy: Owning a node gives you complete control over your financial transactions on the network, free from reliance on third-party services, which can be subject to fees, restrictions, or outages.

3. Advanced Network Participation: As a node operator, you're not just a passive participant but an active player in shaping the network, influencing its efficiency and scalability through direct involvement.

4. Potential for Higher Revenue: With strategic management and optimal channel funding, your node can become a preferred route for transactions, potentially increasing the routing fees you can earn.

5. Cutting-Edge Technological Engagement: Running a node puts you at the forefront of blockchain and bitcoin technology, offering insights into future developments and innovations.

6. Strengthened Network Security: Each new node adds to the robustness of the Bitcoin network, making it more resilient against attacks and failures, thus contributing to the overall security of the ecosystem.

7. Personalized Fee Structures: You have the flexibility to set your own fee policies, which can balance earning potential with the service you provide to the network.

8. Empowerment Through Knowledge: The process of setting up and managing a node provides deep learning opportunities, empowering you with knowledge that can be applied in various areas of blockchain and fintech.

9. Boosting Transaction Capacity: By running a node, you help to increase the overall capacity of the Lightning Network, enabling more transactions to be processed quickly and at lower costs.

10. Community Leadership and Reputation: As an active node operator, you gain recognition within the Bitcoin community, which can lead to collaborative opportunities and a position of thought leadership in the space.

These reasons demonstrate the impactful and transformative nature of running a Lightning node, appealing to those who are deeply invested in the principles of bitcoin and wish to actively shape its future. Jump aboard, and embrace the journey toward full independence. 🐶🐾🫡🚀🚀🚀

@ 7d3e7ac0:90e6f183

Read the paper.

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Every night, you draw your curtains without thinking twice. It's instinctive—a simple act that protects your personal space. Yet in our digital lives, we've somehow accepted living in houses made entirely of glass, with countless unseen observers watching our every move.

https://www.fountain.fm/episode/wPZLCJ3fD6vzsWQ3XSE1

Why Privacy Matters to Everyone

Privacy isn't just for those with something to hide; it's a fundamental human need. Think about the conversations you have with friends, the late-night web searches you make, the personal moments you capture in photos. Would you want all of that broadcasted to the world?

I remember my friend Lisa planning a surprise party for her husband. She searched for gift ideas and coordinated with friends through social media. To her dismay, targeted ads for the exact gift she intended to buy started popping up on their shared devices at home. The surprise was ruined. It wasn't malicious, but it was a stark reminder of how our online activities are constantly monitored.

When a major retailer's customer database was breached, my neighbor Sarah discovered her shopping history, credit card details, and even her children's names were exposed to criminals. She hadn't realized how much personal information she'd unknowingly shared through routine purchases. It was a wake-up call that privacy breaches can affect anyone, not just the tech-savvy or those in high-profile positions.

Edward Snowden once said, "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." Privacy isn't about secrecy; it's about autonomy over our personal information.

The Rise of the Cypherpunks

Back in the '90s, a group known as the cypherpunks saw the writing on the wall. They recognized that as we moved into a digital era, our personal freedoms could be at risk. So they took action.

One of them, Eric Hughes, famously wrote, "Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age." They developed encryption tools to protect individual privacy, laying the groundwork for technologies like Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. These innovations were about more than digital money; they were about empowering individuals to take control of their own data.

When Technology Knows Too Much

Fast forward to today, and artificial intelligence (AI) is everywhere—in our phones, homes, and even cars. While AI brings convenience, it also raises serious privacy concerns.

Remember when you mentioned needing new running shoes, and suddenly every ad on your browser was for footwear? It's not your imagination. AI algorithms analyze our conversations, searches, and purchases to predict what we'll want next. But where does it stop?

A few years ago, a major retailer guessed a teenager was pregnant based on her shopping habits before she had told her family. They sent her targeted coupons for baby products, leading to a very uncomfortable situation at home. This isn't just marketing—it's intrusion.

Naomi Brockwell, a privacy advocate, warns, "Our relationship with financial privacy has fundamentally changed. What was once seen as a constitutional right and personal freedom is now simply part of the trade-off for using digital payments. Our baseline for what’s acceptable has shifted." It's a wake-up call that our digital footprints are larger and more revealing than we might think.

Privacy-Preserving AI

While AI often threatens privacy, emerging technologies like federated learning offer hope. This approach allows AI models to learn from data without directly accessing personal information. Imagine your phone improving its predictive text without sending your messages to a central server. It's AI that respects your privacy.

The Watchful Eye: Mass Surveillance and AI

Governments and corporations often justify mass surveillance as a means to keep us safe. But at what cost? When every email, message, or phone call can be monitored, we're sacrificing more than just data—we're giving up our freedom to think and communicate without fear.

Think about how you'd behave if someone followed you around with a camera all day. You might avoid certain places or people, censor your conversations, or feel constantly on edge. That's the chilling effect of mass surveillance.

I spoke with Alex, a journalist who covers political activism. "After attending a peaceful protest, I noticed unusual activity on my devices," he told me. "It made me second-guess my work, wondering who's watching." This isn't paranoia; it's a reality for many who challenge the status quo.

Building Digital Fortresses: Cryptographic Innovations

So how do we reclaim our privacy? Cryptography offers some solutions.

Zero-Knowledge Proofs: Proving Without Revealing

Zero-knowledge proofs allow you to prove you know something without revealing the actual information. Imagine showing a bouncer a card that confirms you're over 21 without exposing your birth date or any other details. In the digital world, this means verifying your identity or eligibility without handing over all your personal data.

Homomorphic Encryption: Secure Processing

Then there's homomorphic encryption, which lets companies process your data without actually seeing it. Think of it like sending a locked suitcase with your belongings; they can weigh it or move it, but they can't open it to see what's inside.

Quantum-Resistant Algorithms: Future-Proofing Privacy

As quantum computers become more powerful, they could potentially break current encryption methods. Quantum-resistant algorithms are being developed to safeguard our data against these future threats. It's like reinforcing your digital locks today to withstand the super lock-picking tools of tomorrow.

Decentralization: Taking Back Control

Decentralization aims to put power back into the hands of individuals. Bitcoin let you be your own bank, controlling your finances without a middleman. Decentralized social media platforms like Nostr, Bluesky or Fascaster allow you to own your content without algorithms dictating what you see or who sees you.

Decentralized Identity Systems

Decentralized identity systems let you prove who you are without revealing more than necessary. It's like showing only your age at a bar instead of handing over your entire driver's license. You maintain control over your personal information.

But with great power comes great responsibility. Without a bank to reset your password or customer service to recover your account, the onus is on you to protect your assets and information.

Practical Tips to Protect Your Privacy

You don't have to be a tech guru to safeguard your privacy. Here are some steps you can take today:

• Use Encrypted Messaging Apps: Switch to apps like Signal, SimpleX or Session for secure communication. Your messages will be end-to-end encrypted, meaning only you and the recipient can read them.

• Limit Social Media Sharing: Be mindful of what you post. Do you really need to share your location or personal details publicly?

• Choose Privacy-Focused Browsers and Search Engines: Use browsers like Brave or Firefox and search engines like DuckDuckGo that don't track your every move.

• Secure Your Passwords: Use strong, unique passwords for each account, and consider a password manager like Bitwarden. Enable two-factor authentication whenever possible.

• Use Encrypted Email Services: Consider email providers like ProtonMail that offer end-to-end encryption for your communications.

• Regularly Audit App Permissions: Check which apps have access to your location, microphone, and contacts. Revoke permissions that aren't necessary.

• Be Wary of Public Wi-Fi: Public networks can be a hotbed for hackers. If you must use them, a VPN like ProtonVPN can add a layer of security.

• Consider Privacy-Focused Alternatives: Explore services like Nextcloud for cloud storage or Jitsi Meet for video conferencing, which prioritize user privacy.

• Keep Software Updated: Regular updates often include security patches. Don't ignore them.

• Stay Informed and Skeptical: Phishing scams are getting more sophisticated. Think before you click on suspicious links or download attachments.

Final Thoughts

Privacy isn't a lost cause; it's a right worth fighting for. As Edward Snowden reminds us, "Privacy is the fountainhead of all other rights."

By taking control of our data and digital habits, we can navigate the online world with greater confidence and peace of mind. After all, wouldn't it be nice to live in a digital home where we decide when to close the curtains?

Read more

OPSEC and Digital Hygiene Plan: https://www.eddieoz.com/opsec-and-digital-hygiene-plan/

@ de496884:72617b81

Hola nostriches. Hoy quiero hacer una publicación a modo de acercamiento al surgimiento de las categorías de género y feminismo. Así que si te interesa el tema haz un esfuerzo, quédate y lee hasta el final.

El «nuevo» feminismo surge en los años 60 en aquellos países desarrollados que acordaron el reconocimiento a los derechos humanos contenidos en la declaración respectiva de la ONU. Entonces, como extensión a dicho reconocimiento es que se gesta el movimiento feminista. A partir de entonces, se vuelve a plantear la relación entre naturaleza y cultura y se llega a la conclusión de que las diferencias sociales van más allá de las diferencias biológicas, lo cual tiene que ver con que hasta la satisfacción de las necesidades elementales como son la alimentación, la vivienda o el vestuario, están condicionadas por construcciones sociales.

Pues resulta que una de las primeras propuestas identificó la subordinación femenina producto de una organización patriarcal, tomando la categoría patriarcado de Max Weber. Es así como la visión de patriarcado se extendió al discurso político y académico. Sin embargo, no existía información acerca del desarrollo histórico de dicha categoría, sistematización, variaciones, etc., debido a que era algo que recién se percibía en sociedad.

Sin embargo, la misma categoría de patriarcado junto a la de relaciones de poder para explicar fenómenos sociales contemporáneos, constituye uno de los principales aportes del feminismo. Es así como han logrado primero visibilizar y luego deconstruir y desmontar una serie de patrones existentes en la cultura que hacían a la mujer subordinarse al hombre, y que estaban presentes en el sistema sexo/género.

Imagen relativa a la lucha contra el patriarcado

Hasta ese momento, en las investigaciones de corte sociológico se podía observar un androcentrismo excesivo al dar cuenta de que el discurso científico giraba en torno al hombre como sujeto y objeto de la investigación. Incluso para muchos positivistas como el mismo Weber, los problemas relativos a las mujeres quedaban en un segundo plano y eran achacados a una supuesta pasividad en el ámbito doméstico-familiar. Dicha pasividad partía de la supuesta inferioridad biológica del género femenino.

El patriarcado entonces era una categoría vacía en sí misma, sin valor explicativo. Desde el punto de vista político pudo ser útil para la movilización pero no resistió la polémica de los críticos del feminismo ni problematizó los conflictos a ser resueltos. Pero por otro lado, un grupo de mujeres -académicas principalmente- se puso manos a la obra en una tarea más pequeña pero con mayores resultados a la larga. Se propusieron generar conocimientos sobre las condiciones de vida de la mujer, buscar en el pasado y el presente los aportes de las mujeres a la sociedad, hacerlas visibles en la historia. Es así como surgen centros académicos, ONG, proyectos, centros de estudios sobre la mujer, etc.

Convendría distinguir entonces dos posturas que acompañaron a la investigación sobre las mujeres: uno que toma como objeto de estudio a la mujer; condiciones de vida, trabajo, cultura, y otra que privilegia a la sociedad como generadora de la subordinación de las mujeres. Mientras la primera perspectiva generaba conocimiento sobre las mujeres en el estudio de las relaciones mujer-hombre y mujer-mujer, la segunda tenía una visión más holística ya que planteaba que hay que estudiar la sociedad ya que la subordinación de las mujeres es producto de la organización de esta, y que no se avanzará solamente estudiando a las mujeres, pues el estudio debe ser más amplio y en diferentes niveles, ámbitos y tiempos.

Es en esta búsqueda donde nace y se desarrolla el concepto de género como categoría social. Es así que los sistemas de género/sexo fueron entendidos como conjuntos de prácticas, símbolos, representaciones, normas y valores sociales que las sociedades construyen a partir de la diferencia anatomofisiológica y que dotan de sentido a los impulsos sexuales, la reproducción y en general a las relaciones de las personas. Por tanto, este sistema pasó a ser el objeto de estudio para comprender la subordinación de la mujer al hombre. Al ser el reconocimiento de una dimensión de la desigualdad social hasta entonces desconocida, se considera la ruptura epistemológica más importante de la segunda mitad del siglo pasado.

Imagen representativa del binarismo de género

Hay que decir que los fenómenos sociales se definen por la relación que guardan entre sí. Es así que la contextualización adquiere gran importancia. Varones y hembras tenemos la capacidad de producir con el cuerpo, pero solo los cuerpos de las hembras pueden gestar y por tanto asegurar la especie humana. Todo grupo humano que pretenda sobrevivir debe asegurarse cierto número de hembras que lo hagan posible. De ahí un poder particular del cuerpo de las hembras que además es económicamente útil. Dicho poder no es en tanto entidad biológica, sino que es la sociedad la que le otorga este poder. En este punto es importante preguntarnos históricamente ¿quiénes han controlado la capacidad reproductiva de las mujeres?, ¿quiénes han tenido la preferencia en el acceso sexual? Para asegurar un control efectivo sobre la reproducción es necesario asegurar el acceso a la sexualidad.

Imagen alegórica al embarazo

Ello también lleva a dirigir el trabajo que hacen porque de lo contrario, las mujeres pudieran tener espacio para representar una amenaza al dominio de los hombres. Es importante atender a las etapas del desarrollo de las mujeres, que permitirá ver cómo se moldean para aceptar la desigualdad y las jerarquías según el género en las distintas sociedades y culturas.

Otro contexto a delimitar es el ámbito doméstico donde históricamente ha estado ubicada la subordinación femenina. Se ha puesto al descubierto que en mujeres que comparten la misma posición de clase y raza, la condición femenina se redefine a lo largo de la vida y que algunas mujeres gozan de poder sobre otras aún en contextos de alta dominación masculina, donde se les inviste de autoridad, creando el sistema zonas de incertidumbre que las divide como género e impide alianzas y se legitima la dominación. Foucault decía que «el poder se ejerce, no se posee», siempre está en peligro de perderse y no basta con normas, leyes, amenazas o castigos. De ahí que los espacios de subordinación sean también espacios de poder de las mujeres. Es en estos espacios donde aparece la inseguridad, la tensión, la confrontación y por ejemplo, las mujeres pueden reclamar la anticoncepción.

Para terminar, es importante tener en cuenta que el género es una forma de desigualdad social que siempre está articulado con otras formas de desigualdad ya sea clase, raza, grupo etario, etc. Hay que pensar la dominación masculina con un comienzo vago en el tiempo, pero que permite desligar la subordinación de las mujeres de la evolución «natural» de la humanidad y entenderla como un proceso histórico. En ese sentido es necesario destacar que, respecto a la raza, en sociedades plurales hay que atender al contexto étnico-cultural ya que en dependencia de las relaciones entre personas de razas distintas, estarán condicionadas las relaciones entre los géneros.

Imagen de mujeres de distintas razas

Por otro lado, si bien es sabido que históricamente el sistema de género social imperante ha contribuido a invisibilizar a la mujer, asociar necesariamente dicha categoría únicamente a ella, lo que hace es nuevamente recrear el absolutismo histórico que tanto daño ha hecho, ahora como lo antagónico al hombre. En la construcción social participan todos los individuos presentes en el sistema género.

Hasta aquí la publicación de hoy, de la cual aun se puede ahondar mucho más, sobre todo en lo referido al origen de la dominación o de la jerarquización del binomio «hombre/mujer» desde un punto de vista antropológico, pero eso quedará pendiente para otro momento. ¡Así que hasta la próxima!, ¡nos vemos en Nostr!

........................................

English version

Hello nostriches. Today I want to make a post by way of an approach to the emergence of the categories of gender and feminism. So if you are interested in the topic make an effort, stay and read to the end.

The "new" feminism emerged in the 60's in those developed countries that agreed to recognize the human rights contained in the respective UN declaration. Then, as an extension of that recognition, the feminist movement was born. From then on, the relationship between nature and culture was raised again and the conclusion was reached that social differences go beyond biological differences, which has to do with the fact that even the satisfaction of elementary needs such as food, housing or clothing are conditioned by social constructions.

It turns out that one of the first proposals identified female subordination as a product of a patriarchal organization, taking Max Weber's category of patriarchy. This is how the vision of patriarchy was extended to political and academic discourse. However, there was no information about the historical development of this category, systematization, variations, etc., because it was something that was only recently perceived in society.

However, the same category of patriarchy, together with that of power relations to explain contemporary social phenomena, constitutes one of the main contributions of feminism. This is how they have first made visible and then deconstructed and dismantled a series of existing patterns in the culture that made women subordinate to men, and that were present in the sex/gender system.

Image relating to the fight against patriarchy

Up to that time, in sociological research, an excessive androcentrism could be observed as scientific discourse revolved around men as the subject and object of research. Even for many positivists such as Weber himself, the problems related to women remained in the background and were blamed on a supposed passivity in the domestic-family sphere. This passivity was based on the supposed biological inferiority of the female gender.

Patriarchy was then an empty category in itself, with no explanatory value. From the political point of view, it could be useful for mobilization, but it did not resist the polemic of feminism's critics, nor did it problematize the conflicts to be resolved. But on the other hand, a group of women - mainly academics - set to work on a smaller task but with greater results in the long run. They set out to generate knowledge about women's living conditions, to search in the past and present for women's contributions to society, to make them visible in history. This is how academic centers, NGOs, projects, women's studies centers, etc., came into being.

It would be convenient to distinguish then two postures that accompanied the research on women: one that takes women as the object of study; living conditions, work, culture, and the other that privileges society as the generator of women's subordination. While the first perspective generated knowledge about women in the study of woman-man and woman-woman relations, the second had a more holistic vision, since it proposed that society must be studied, since the subordination of women is a product of its organization, and that progress will not be made only by studying women, since the study must be broader and at different levels, spheres and times.

It is in this search that the concept of gender as a social category was born and developed. Thus, gender/sex systems were understood as a set of practices, symbols, representations, norms and social values that societies construct on the basis of anatomophysiological differences and that give meaning to sexual impulses, reproduction and, in general, to people's relationships. Therefore, this system became the object of study to understand the subordination of women to men. As the recognition of a hitherto unknown dimension of social inequality, it is considered the most important epistemological breakthrough of the second half of the last century.

Representative image of gender binarism

It must be said that social phenomena are defined by their relationship with each other. Thus, contextualization acquires great importance. Males and females have the capacity to produce with their bodies, but only the bodies of females can gestate and therefore ensure the human species. Any human group that intends to survive must ensure a certain number of females to make it possible. Hence a particular power of the female body, which is also economically useful. This power is not as a biological entity, but it is society that gives it this power. At this point it is important to ask ourselves historically, who has controlled the reproductive capacity of women, who has had the preference in sexual access? To ensure effective control over reproduction, it is necessary to ensure access to sexuality.

Allegorical image of pregnancy

This also leads to directing the work they do because otherwise, women may have room to pose a threat to men's dominance. It is important to pay attention to the stages of women's development, which will allow us to see how they are shaped to accept inequality and gender hierarchies in different societies and cultures.

Another context to delimit is the domestic sphere where female subordination has historically been located. It has been discovered that in women who share the same class and race position, the feminine condition is redefined throughout life and that some women enjoy power over others even in contexts of high male domination, where they are invested with authority, creating the system of uncertainty zones that divide them as a gender and prevent alliances and legitimize domination. Foucault said that "power is exercised, not possessed", it is always in danger of being lost and norms, laws, threats or punishments are not enough. Hence, the spaces of subordination are also spaces of women's power. It is in these spaces where insecurity, tension, confrontation appear and where, for example, women can demand contraception.

To conclude, it is important to keep in mind that gender is a form of social inequality that is always articulated with other forms of inequality, be it class, race, age group, etc. It is necessary to think of male domination with a vague beginning in time, but which allows us to separate the subordination of women from the "natural" evolution of humanity and to understand it as a historical process. In this sense, it is necessary to emphasize that, with respect to race, in plural societies it is necessary to pay attention to the ethno-cultural context since, depending on the relations between people of different races, the relations between genders will be conditioned.

Image of women of different races

On the other hand, although it is known that historically the prevailing social gender system has contributed to make women invisible, to necessarily associate this category only to women is to recreate the historical absolutism that has done so much damage, this time as antagonistic to men. All individuals present in the gender system participate in the social construction.

So much for today's publication, of which we can still go much deeper, especially with regard to the origin of domination or the hierarchization of the binomial "man/woman" from an anthropological point of view, but that will be left for another time. So until next time, see you in Nostr!

Créditos | Credits

Bibliografía consultada | Consulted bibliography:

1. Barbieri, T. (1993). Sobre la categoría género. Una introducción teórico-metodológica. Debates en Sociología. (18). 1-19. https://doi.org/10.18800/debatesensociologia.199301.006

2. Echevarría, D. (2020). Desigualdades de género e interseccionalidad. Análisis del contexto cubano 2008-2018. Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (Programa-Cuba). https://www.clacso.org.ar/libreria-latinoamericana-cm/libro_detalle_resultado.php?id_libro=2346&campo=cm&texto=248

Traducción | Translation:

DeepL

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Chef's notes

Serving these two dishes together will create a delightful centerpiece for your Thanksgiving meal, offering a perfect blend of traditional flavors with a homemade touch.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 30 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 1 - 2 hours
• 🍽️ Servings: 4-6

Ingredients

• 1 whole turkey (about 12-14 lbs), thawed and ready to cook
• 1 cup unsalted butter, softened
• 2 tablespoons fresh thyme, chopped
• 2 tablespoons fresh rosemary, chopped
• 2 tablespoons fresh sage, chopped
• Salt and freshly ground black pepper
• 1 onion, quartered
• 1 lemon, halved
• 2-3 cloves of garlic
• Apple and Sage Stuffing
• 1 loaf of crusty bread, cut into cubes
• 2 apples, cored and chopped
• 1 onion, diced
• 2 stalks celery, diced
• 3 cloves garlic, minced
• 1/4 cup fresh sage, chopped
• 1/2 cup unsalted butter
• 2 cups chicken broth
• Salt and pepper, to taste

Directions

1. Preheat the Oven: Set your oven to 325°F (165°C).
2. Prepare the Herb Butter: Mix the softened butter with the chopped thyme, rosemary, and sage. Season with salt and pepper.
3. Prepare the Turkey: Remove any giblets from the turkey and pat it dry. Loosen the skin and spread a generous amount of herb butter under and over the skin.
4. Add Aromatics: Inside the turkey cavity, place the quartered onion, lemon halves, and garlic cloves.
5. Roast: Place the turkey in a roasting pan. Tent with aluminum foil and roast. A general guideline is about 15 minutes per pound, or until the internal temperature reaches 165°F (74°C) at the thickest part of the thigh.
6. Rest and Serve: Let the turkey rest for at least 20 minutes before carving.
7. Next: Apple and Sage Stuffing
8. Dry the Bread: Spread the bread cubes on a baking sheet and let them dry overnight, or toast them in the oven.
9. Cook the Vegetables: In a large skillet, melt the butter and cook the onion, celery, and garlic until soft.
10. Combine Ingredients: Add the apples, sage, and bread cubes to the skillet. Stir in the chicken broth until the mixture is moist. Season with salt and pepper.
11. Bake: Transfer the stuffing to a baking dish and bake at 350°F (175°C) for about 30-40 minutes, until golden brown on top.

@ bcea2b98:7ccef3c9

If you could accomplish one major goal, what would it be? Why does it matter to you, and how would it change your life or the lives of others?

My ultimate goal is to be part of a mission to Mars one day. I’ve always been fascinated by space exploration.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/757861

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Testing a brand new YakiHonne native client for iOS. Smooth as butter (not penis butter 🤣🍆🧈) with great visual experience and intuitive navigation. Amazing work by the team behind it! * lists * work

Bold text work!

Images could have used nostr.build instead of raw S3 from us-east-1 region.

Very impressive! You can even save the draft and continue later, before posting the long-form note!

🐶🐾🤯🤯🤯🫂💜

@ 361d3e1e:50bc10a8

https://forex-strategy.com/2024/11/07/the-water-crisis-and-the-future-of-humanity/ When Heaven Warns: The Water Crisis and the Future of Humanity What is the connection between the strange clouds in the sky and the future of man in new conditions. What is the best investment now?

haarp #clouds #strange #mystery #truth #crisis #water #flood

@ fa0165a0:03397073

I just tested building a browser plugin, it was easier than I thought. Here I'll walk you through the steps of creating a minimal working example of a browser plugin, a.k.a. the "Hello World" of browser plugins.

First of all there are two main browser platforms out there, Chromium and Mozilla. They do some things a little differently, but similar enough that we can build a plugin that works on both. This plugin will work in both, I'll describe the firefox version, but the chromium version is very similar.

What is a browser plugin?

Simply put, a browser plugin is a program that runs in the browser. It can do things like modify the content of a webpage, or add new functionality to the browser. It's a way to extend the browser with custom functionality. Common examples are ad blockers, password managers, and video downloaders.

In technical terms, they are plugins that can insert html-css-js into your browser experience.

How to build a browser plugin

Step 0: Basics

You'll need a computer, a text editor and a browser. For testing and development I personally think that the firefox developer edition is the easiest to work with. But any Chrome based browser will also do.

Create a working directory on your computer, name it anything you like. I'll call mine hello-world-browser-plugin. Open the directory and create a file called manifest.json. This is the most important file of your plugin, and it must be named exactly right.

Step 1: manifest.json

After creation open your file manifest.json in your text editor and paste the following code:

json { "manifest_version": 3, "name": "Hello World", "version": "1.0", "description": "A simple 'Hello World' browser extension", "content_scripts": [ { "matches": ["<all_urls>"], "js": ["hello.js"] //The name of your script file. // "css": ["hello.css"] //The name of your css file. } ] }

If you wonder what the json file format is, it's a normal text file with a special syntax such that a computer can easily read it. It's the json syntax you see in the code above. Let's go through what's being said here. (If you are not interested, just skip to the next step after pasting this we are done here.)

• manifest_version: This is the version of the manifest file format. It's currently at version 3, and it's the latest version. It's important that you set this to 3, otherwise your plugin won't work.
• name: This is the name of your plugin. It can be anything you like.
• version: This is the version of your plugin. It can be anything you like.
• description: This is the description of your plugin. It can be anything you like.
• content_scripts: This is where you define what your plugin does. It's a list of scripts that will be executed when the browser loads a webpage. In this case we have one script, called hello.js. It's the script that we'll create in the next step.
• matches: This is a list of urls that the script will be executed on. In this case we have <all_urls>, which means that the script will be executed on all urls. You can also specify a specific url, like https://brave.com/*, which means that the script will only be executed on urls that start with https://brave.com/.
• js: This is a list of javascript files that will be executed. In this case we have one file, called hello.js. It's the script that we'll create in the next step.
• css: This is where you can add a list of css files that will be executed. In this case we have none, but you can add css files here if you want to.
• //: Text following these two characters are comments. They are ignored by the computer, You can add comments anywhere you like, and they are a good way to document your code.

Step 2: hello.js

Now it's time to create another file in your project folder. This time we'll call it hello.js. When created, open it in your text editor and paste the following code:

js console.log("Hello World!"); That's javascript code, and it's what will be executed when you run your plugin. It's a simple console.log statement, which will print the text "Hello World!" to the console. The console is a place where the browser prints out messages, and it's a good place to start when debugging your plugin.

Step 3: Load and launch your plugin

Firefox

Now it's time to load your plugin into your browser. Open your browser and go to the url about:debugging#/runtime/this-firefox. You should see a page that looks something like this:

Click the button that says "Load Temporary Add-on...". A file dialog will open, navigate to your project folder and select the file manifest.json. Your plugin should now be loaded and running.

Go to a website, any website, and open the inspector then navigate to the console. You'll find the inspector by right-clicking anywhere within the webpage, and click "Inspector" in the drop-down menu. When opening the console you might see some log messages from the site you visited and... you should see the text "Hello World!" printed there, from our little plugin! Congratulations!

Chrome

Open your browser and go to the url chrome://extensions/. Click the button that says "Load unpacked". A file dialog will open, navigate to your project folder and select the folder hello-world-browser-plugin. Your plugin should now be loaded and running.

Note the difference, of selecting the file manifest.json in firefox, and selecting the folder hello-world-browser-plugin in chrome. Otherwise, the process is the same. So I'll repeat the same text as above: (for those who skipped ahead..)

Go to a website, any website, and open the inspector then navigate to the console. You'll find the inspector by right-clicking anywhere within the webpage, and click "Inspector" in the drop-down menu. When opening the console you might see some log messages from the site you visited and... you should see the text "Hello World!" printed there, from our little plugin! Congratulations!

---

As you can see this isn't as complicated as one might think. Having preformed a "Hello-World!"-project is a very useful and valuable first step. These setup steps are the basics for any browser plugin, and you can build on this to create more advanced plugins.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

As the title states, scratch behind my ear and you get it. 🐶🐾🫡

@ 361d3e1e:50bc10a8

https://forex-strategy.com/2024/11/07/everything-is-repeated-strange-clouds-scared-people-again/ What's next, downpours or earthquakes?: Everything is repeated strange clouds scared people again

mystery #sky #clouds #haarp #truth #crisis

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Test Bounty Note

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

The case against edits

Direct edits are a centralizing force on Nostr, a slippery slope that should not be accepted.

Edits are fine in other, more specialized event kinds, but the kind:1 space shouldn't be compromised with such a push towards centralization, because kind:1 is the public square of Nostr, where all focus should be on decentralization and censorship-resistance.

• Why?

Edits introduce too much complexity. If edits are widespread, all clients now have to download dozens of extra events at the same time while users are browsing a big feed of notes which are already coming from dozens of different relays using complicated outbox-model-based querying, then for each event they have to open yet another subscription to these relays -- or perform some other complicated batching of subscriptions which then requires more complexity on the event handling side and then when associating these edits with the original events. I can only imagine this will hurt apps performance, but it definitely raises the barrier to entry and thus necessarily decreases Nostr decentralization.

Some clients may be implemneted in way such that they download tons of events and then store them in a local databases, from which they then construct the feed that users see. Such clients may make edits potentially easier to deal with -- but this is hardly an answer to the point above, since such clients are already more complex to implement in the first place.

• What do you have against complex clients?

The point is not to say that all clients should be simple, but that it should be simple to write a client -- or at least as simple as physically possible.

You may not be thinking about it, but if you believe in the promise of Nostr then we should expect to see Nostr feeds in many other contexts other than on a big super app in a phone -- we should see Nostr notes being referenced from and injected in unrelated webpages, unrelated apps, hardware devices, comment sections and so on. All these micro-clients will have to implement some complicated edit-fetching logic now?

• But aren't we already fetching likes and zaps and other things, why not fetch edits too?

Likes, zaps and other similar things are optional. It's perfectly fine to use Nostr without seeing likes and/or zaps -- and, believe me, it does happen quite a lot. The point is basically that likes or zaps don't affect the content of the main post at all, while edits do.

• But edits are optional!

No, they are not optional. If edits become widespread they necessarily become mandatory. Any client that doesn't implement edits will be displaying false information to its users and their experience will be completely broken.

• That's fine, as people will just move to clients that support edits!

Exactly, that is what I expect to happen too, and this is why I am saying edits are a centralizing force that we should be fighting against, not embracing.

If you understand that edits are a centralizing force, then you must automatically agree that they aren't a desirable feature, given that if you are reading this now, with Nostr being so small, there is a 100% chance you care about decentralization and you're not just some kind of lazy influencer that is only doing this for money.

• All other social networks support editing!

This is not true at all. Bluesky has 10x more users than Nostr and doesn't support edits. Instagram doesn't support editing pictures after they're posted, and doesn't support editing comments. Tiktok doesn't support editing videos or comments after they're posted. YouTube doesn't support editing videos after they're posted. Most famously, email, the most widely used and widespread "social app" out there, does not support edits of any kind. Twitter didn't support edits for the first 15 years of its life, and, although some people complained, it didn't hurt the platform at all -- arguably it benefitted it.

If edits are such a straightforward feature to add that won't hurt performance, that won't introduce complexity, and also that is such an essential feature users could never live without them, then why don't these centralized platforms have edits on everything already? There must be something there.

• Eventually someone will implement edits anyway, so why bother to oppose edits now?

Once Nostr becomes big enough, maybe it will be already shielded from such centralizing forces by its sheer volume of users and quantity of clients, maybe not, we will see. All I'm saying is that we shouldn't just push for bad things now just because of a potential future in which they might come.

• The market will decide what is better.

The market has decided for Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and TikTok. If we were to follow what the market had decided we wouldn't be here, and you wouldn't be reading this post.

• OK, you have convinced me, edits are not good for the protocol. But what do we do about the users who just want to fix their typos?

There are many ways. The annotations spec, for example, provides a simple way to append things to a note without being a full-blown edit, and they fall back gracefully to normal replies in clients that don't implement the full annotations spec.

Eventually we could have annotations that are expressed in form of simple (human-readable?) diffs that can be applied directly to the post, but fall back, again, to comments.

Besides these, a very simple idea that wasn't tried yet on Nostr yet is the idea that has been tried for emails and seems to work very well: delaying a post after the "submit" button is clicked and giving the user the opportunity to cancel and edit it again before it is actually posted.

Ultimately, if edits are so necessary, then maybe we could come up with a way to implement edits that is truly optional and falls back cleanly for clients that don't support them directly and don't hurt the protocol very much. Let's think about it and not rush towards defeat.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Intro

This short tutorial will help you set up your own Nostr Wallet Connect (NWC) on your own LND Node that is not using Umbrel. If you are a user of Umbrel, you should use their version of NWC.

Requirements

You need to have a working installation of LND with established channels and connectivity to the internet. NWC in itself is fairly light and will not consume a lot of resources. You will also want to ensure that you have a working installation of Docker, since we will use a docker image to run NWC.

• Working installation of LND (and all of its required components)
• Docker (with Docker compose)

Installation

For the purpose of this tutorial, we will assume that you have your lnd/bitcoind running under user bitcoin with home directory /home/bitcoin. We will also assume that you already have a running installation of Docker (or docker.io).

Prepare and verify

git version - we will need git to get the latest version of NWC. docker version - should execute successfully and show the currently installed version of Docker. docker compose version - same as before, but the version will be different. ss -tupln | grep 10009- should produce the following output: tcp LISTEN 0 4096 0.0.0.0:10009 0.0.0.0: tcp LISTEN 0 4096 [::]:10009 [::]:**

For things to work correctly, your Docker should be version 20.10.0 or later. If you have an older version, consider installing a new one using instructions here: https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/

Create folders & download NWC

In the home directory of your LND/bitcoind user, create a new folder, e.g., "nwc" mkdir /home/bitcoin/nwc. Change to that directory cd /home/bitcoin/nwc and clone the NWC repository: git clone https://github.com/getAlby/nostr-wallet-connect.git

Creating the Docker image

In this step, we will create a Docker image that you will use to run NWC.

• Change directory to nostr-wallet-connect: cd nostr-wallet-connect
• Run command to build Docker image: docker build -t nwc:$(date +'%Y%m%d%H%M') -t nwc:latest . (there is a dot at the end)
• The last line of the output (after a few minutes) should look like => => naming to docker.io/library/nwc:latest
• nwc:latest is the name of the Docker image with a tag which you should note for use later.

Creating docker-compose.yml and necessary data directories

• Let's create a directory that will hold your non-volatile data (DB): mkdir data
• Indocker-compose.ymlfile, there are fields that you want to replace (<> comments) and port “4321” that you want to make sure is open (check with ss -tupln | grep 4321which should return nothing).
• Create docker-compose.ymlfile with the following content, and make sure to update fields that have <> comment:

version: "3.8" services: nwc: image: nwc:latest volumes: - ./data:/data - ~/.lnd:/lnd:ro ports: - "4321:8080" extra_hosts: - "localhost:host-gateway" environment: NOSTR_PRIVKEY: <use "openssl rand -hex 32" to generate a fresh key and place it inside ""> LN_BACKEND_TYPE: "LND" LND_ADDRESS: localhost:10009 LND_CERT_FILE: "/lnd/tls.cert" LND_MACAROON_FILE: "/lnd/data/chain/bitcoin/mainnet/admin.macaroon" DATABASE_URI: "/data/nostr-wallet-connect.db" COOKIE_SECRET: <use "openssl rand -hex 32" to generate fresh secret and place it inside ""> PORT: 8080 restart: always stop_grace_period: 1m

Starting and testing

Now that you have everything ready, it is time to start the container and test.

• While you are in the nwcdirectory (important), execute the following command and check the log output, docker compose up
• You should see container logs while it is starting, and it should not exit if everything went well.
• At this point, you should be able to go to http://<ip of the host where nwc is running>:4321 and get to the interface of NWC
• To stop the test run of NWC, simply press Ctrl-C , and it will shut the container down.
• To start NWC permanently, you should execute docker compose up -d , “-d” tells Docker to detach from the session.
• To check currently running NWC logs, execute docker compose logs to run it in tail mode add -f to the end.
• To stop the container, execute docker compose down

That's all, just follow the instructions in the web interface to get started.

Updating

As with any software, you should expect fixes and updates that you would need to perform periodically. You could automate this, but it falls outside of the scope of this tutorial. Since we already have all of the necessary configuration in place, the update execution is fairly simple.

• Change directory to the clone of the git repository, cd /home/bitcoin/nwc/nostr-wallet-connect
• Run command to build Docker image: docker build -t nwc:$(date +'%Y%m%d%H%M') -t nwc:latest . (there is a dot at the end)
• Change directory back one level cd ..
• Restart (stop and start) the docker compose config docker compose down && docker compose up -d
• Done! Optionally you may want to check the logs: docker compose logs

@ d2e97f73:ea9a4d1b

There’s a lot of conversation around the #TwitterFiles. Here’s my take, and thoughts on how to fix the issues identified.

I’ll start with the principles I’ve come to believe…based on everything I’ve learned and experienced through my past actions as a Twitter co-founder and lead:

1. Social media must be resilient to corporate and government control.
2. Only the original author may remove content they produce.
3. Moderation is best implemented by algorithmic choice.

The Twitter when I led it and the Twitter of today do not meet any of these principles. This is my fault alone, as I completely gave up pushing for them when an activist entered our stock in 2020. I no longer had hope of achieving any of it as a public company with no defense mechanisms (lack of dual-class shares being a key one). I planned my exit at that moment knowing I was no longer right for the company.

The biggest mistake I made was continuing to invest in building tools for us to manage the public conversation, versus building tools for the people using Twitter to easily manage it for themselves. This burdened the company with too much power, and opened us to significant outside pressure (such as advertising budgets). I generally think companies have become far too powerful, and that became completely clear to me with our suspension of Trump’s account. As I’ve said before, we did the right thing for the public company business at the time, but the wrong thing for the internet and society. Much more about this here: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1349510769268850690

I continue to believe there was no ill intent or hidden agendas, and everyone acted according to the best information we had at the time. Of course mistakes were made. But if we had focused more on tools for the people using the service rather than tools for us, and moved much faster towards absolute transparency, we probably wouldn’t be in this situation of needing a fresh reset (which I am supportive of). Again, I own all of this and our actions, and all I can do is work to make it right.

Back to the principles. Of course governments want to shape and control the public conversation, and will use every method at their disposal to do so, including the media. And the power a corporation wields to do the same is only growing. It’s critical that the people have tools to resist this, and that those tools are ultimately owned by the people. Allowing a government or a few corporations to own the public conversation is a path towards centralized control.

I’m a strong believer that any content produced by someone for the internet should be permanent until the original author chooses to delete it. It should be always available and addressable. Content takedowns and suspensions should not be possible. Doing so complicates important context, learning, and enforcement of illegal activity. There are significant issues with this stance of course, but starting with this principle will allow for far better solutions than we have today. The internet is trending towards a world were storage is “free” and infinite, which places all the actual value on how to discover and see content.

Which brings me to the last principle: moderation. I don’t believe a centralized system can do content moderation globally. It can only be done through ranking and relevance algorithms, the more localized the better. But instead of a company or government building and controlling these solely, people should be able to build and choose from algorithms that best match their criteria, or not have to use any at all. A “follow” action should always deliver every bit of content from the corresponding account, and the algorithms should be able to comb through everything else through a relevance lens that an individual determines. There’s a default “G-rated” algorithm, and then there’s everything else one can imagine.

The only way I know of to truly live up to these 3 principles is a free and open protocol for social media, that is not owned by a single company or group of companies, and is resilient to corporate and government influence. The problem today is that we have companies who own both the protocol and discovery of content. Which ultimately puts one person in charge of what’s available and seen, or not. This is by definition a single point of failure, no matter how great the person, and over time will fracture the public conversation, and may lead to more control by governments and corporations around the world.

I believe many companies can build a phenomenal business off an open protocol. For proof, look at both the web and email. The biggest problem with these models however is that the discovery mechanisms are far too proprietary and fixed instead of open or extendable. Companies can build many profitable services that complement rather than lock down how we access this massive collection of conversation. There is no need to own or host it themselves.

Many of you won’t trust this solution just because it’s me stating it. I get it, but that’s exactly the point. Trusting any one individual with this comes with compromises, not to mention being way too heavy a burden for the individual. It has to be something akin to what bitcoin has shown to be possible. If you want proof of this, get out of the US and European bubble of the bitcoin price fluctuations and learn how real people are using it for censorship resistance in Africa and Central/South America.

I do still wish for Twitter, and every company, to become uncomfortably transparent in all their actions, and I wish I forced more of that years ago. I do believe absolute transparency builds trust. As for the files, I wish they were released Wikileaks-style, with many more eyes and interpretations to consider. And along with that, commitments of transparency for present and future actions. I’m hopeful all of this will happen. There’s nothing to hide…only a lot to learn from. The current attacks on my former colleagues could be dangerous and doesn’t solve anything. If you want to blame, direct it at me and my actions, or lack thereof.

As far as the free and open social media protocol goes, there are many competing projects: @bluesky is one with the AT Protocol, nostr another, Mastodon yet another, Matrix yet another…and there will be many more. One will have a chance at becoming a standard like HTTP or SMTP. This isn’t about a “decentralized Twitter.” This is a focused and urgent push for a foundational core technology standard to make social media a native part of the internet. I believe this is critical both to Twitter’s future, and the public conversation’s ability to truly serve the people, which helps hold governments and corporations accountable. And hopefully makes it all a lot more fun and informative again.

💸🛠️🌐 To accelerate open internet and protocol work, I’m going to open a new category of #startsmall grants: “open internet development.” It will start with a focus of giving cash and equity grants to engineering teams working on social media and private communication protocols, bitcoin, and a web-only mobile OS. I’ll make some grants next week, starting with $1mm/yr to Signal. Please let me know other great candidates for this money.

@ 82341f88:fbfbe6a2

There’s a lot of conversation around the #TwitterFiles. Here’s my take, and thoughts on how to fix the issues identified.

I’ll start with the principles I’ve come to believe…based on everything I’ve learned and experienced through my past actions as a Twitter co-founder and lead:

1. Social media must be resilient to corporate and government control.
2. Only the original author may remove content they produce.
3. Moderation is best implemented by algorithmic choice.

The Twitter when I led it and the Twitter of today do not meet any of these principles. This is my fault alone, as I completely gave up pushing for them when an activist entered our stock in 2020. I no longer had hope of achieving any of it as a public company with no defense mechanisms (lack of dual-class shares being a key one). I planned my exit at that moment knowing I was no longer right for the company.

The biggest mistake I made was continuing to invest in building tools for us to manage the public conversation, versus building tools for the people using Twitter to easily manage it for themselves. This burdened the company with too much power, and opened us to significant outside pressure (such as advertising budgets). I generally think companies have become far too powerful, and that became completely clear to me with our suspension of Trump’s account. As I’ve said before, we did the right thing for the public company business at the time, but the wrong thing for the internet and society. Much more about this here: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1349510769268850690

I continue to believe there was no ill intent or hidden agendas, and everyone acted according to the best information we had at the time. Of course mistakes were made. But if we had focused more on tools for the people using the service rather than tools for us, and moved much faster towards absolute transparency, we probably wouldn’t be in this situation of needing a fresh reset (which I am supportive of). Again, I own all of this and our actions, and all I can do is work to make it right.

Back to the principles. Of course governments want to shape and control the public conversation, and will use every method at their disposal to do so, including the media. And the power a corporation wields to do the same is only growing. It’s critical that the people have tools to resist this, and that those tools are ultimately owned by the people. Allowing a government or a few corporations to own the public conversation is a path towards centralized control.

I’m a strong believer that any content produced by someone for the internet should be permanent until the original author chooses to delete it. It should be always available and addressable. Content takedowns and suspensions should not be possible. Doing so complicates important context, learning, and enforcement of illegal activity. There are significant issues with this stance of course, but starting with this principle will allow for far better solutions than we have today. The internet is trending towards a world were storage is “free” and infinite, which places all the actual value on how to discover and see content.

Which brings me to the last principle: moderation. I don’t believe a centralized system can do content moderation globally. It can only be done through ranking and relevance algorithms, the more localized the better. But instead of a company or government building and controlling these solely, people should be able to build and choose from algorithms that best match their criteria, or not have to use any at all. A “follow” action should always deliver every bit of content from the corresponding account, and the algorithms should be able to comb through everything else through a relevance lens that an individual determines. There’s a default “G-rated” algorithm, and then there’s everything else one can imagine.

The only way I know of to truly live up to these 3 principles is a free and open protocol for social media, that is not owned by a single company or group of companies, and is resilient to corporate and government influence. The problem today is that we have companies who own both the protocol and discovery of content. Which ultimately puts one person in charge of what’s available and seen, or not. This is by definition a single point of failure, no matter how great the person, and over time will fracture the public conversation, and may lead to more control by governments and corporations around the world.

I believe many companies can build a phenomenal business off an open protocol. For proof, look at both the web and email. The biggest problem with these models however is that the discovery mechanisms are far too proprietary and fixed instead of open or extendable. Companies can build many profitable services that complement rather than lock down how we access this massive collection of conversation. There is no need to own or host it themselves.

Many of you won’t trust this solution just because it’s me stating it. I get it, but that’s exactly the point. Trusting any one individual with this comes with compromises, not to mention being way too heavy a burden for the individual. It has to be something akin to what bitcoin has shown to be possible. If you want proof of this, get out of the US and European bubble of the bitcoin price fluctuations and learn how real people are using it for censorship resistance in Africa and Central/South America.

I do still wish for Twitter, and every company, to become uncomfortably transparent in all their actions, and I wish I forced more of that years ago. I do believe absolute transparency builds trust. As for the files, I wish they were released Wikileaks-style, with many more eyes and interpretations to consider. And along with that, commitments of transparency for present and future actions. I’m hopeful all of this will happen. There’s nothing to hide…only a lot to learn from. The current attacks on my former colleagues could be dangerous and doesn’t solve anything. If you want to blame, direct it at me and my actions, or lack thereof.

As far as the free and open social media protocol goes, there are many competing projects: @bluesky is one with the AT Protocol, nostr another, Mastodon yet another, Matrix yet another…and there will be many more. One will have a chance at becoming a standard like HTTP or SMTP. This isn’t about a “decentralized Twitter.” This is a focused and urgent push for a foundational core technology standard to make social media a native part of the internet. I believe this is critical both to Twitter’s future, and the public conversation’s ability to truly serve the people, which helps hold governments and corporations accountable. And hopefully makes it all a lot more fun and informative again.

💸🛠️🌐 To accelerate open internet and protocol work, I’m going to open a new category of #startsmall grants: “open internet development.” It will start with a focus of giving cash and equity grants to engineering teams working on social media and private communication protocols, bitcoin, and a web-only mobile OS. I’ll make some grants next week, starting with $1mm/yr to Signal. Please let me know other great candidates for this money.

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

Tutorial feito por Grom mestre⚡poste original abaixo:

http://xh6liiypqffzwnu5734ucwps37tn2g6npthvugz3gdoqpikujju525yd.onion/240277/tutorial-criando-e-acessando-sua-conta-de-email-pela-i2p?show=240277#q240277

Bom dia/tarde/noite a todos os camaradas. Seguindo a nossa série de tutoriais referentes a tecnologias essenciais para a segurança e o anonimato dos usuários, sendo as primeiras a openPGP e a I2P, lhes apresento mais uma opção para expandir os seus conhecimentos da DW. Muitos devem conhecer os serviços de mail na onion como DNMX e mail2tor, mas e que tal um serviço de email pela I2P. Nesse tutorial eu vou mostrar a vocês como criar a sua primeira conta no hq.postman.i2p e a acessar essa conta.

É importante que vocês tenham lido a minha primeira série de tutoriais a respeito de como instalar, configurar e navegar pela I2P nostr:nevent1qqsyjcz2w0e6d6dcdeprhuuarw4aqkw730y542dzlwxwssneq3mwpaspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsyp5vcq Esse tutorial é um pré-requisito para o seguinte e portanto recomendo que leia-os antes de prosseguir com o seguinte tutorial. O tutorial de Kleopatra nostr:nevent1qqs8h7vsn5j6qh35949sa60dms4fneussmv9jd76n24lsmtz24k0xlqzyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgecq8f7 é complementar dado que é extremamente recomendado assinar e criptografar as mensagens que seguem por emails pela DW. Sem mais delongas, vamos ao tutorial de fato.

1. Criando uma conta de email no hq.postman

Relembrando: Esse tutorial considera que você já tenha acesso à I2P. Entre no seu navegador e acesse o endereço hq.postman.i2p. O roteador provavelmente já contém esse endereço no seu addressbook e não haverá a necessidade de inserir o endereço b32 completo. Após entrar no site vá para a página '1 - Creating a mailbox' https://image.nostr.build/d850379fe315d2abab71430949b06d3fa49366d91df4c9b00a4a8367d53fcca3.jpg

Nessa página, insira as credenciais de sua preferências nos campos do formulário abaixo. Lembre-se que o seu endereço de email aceita apenas letras e números. Clique em 'Proceed' depois que preencher todos os campos. https://image.nostr.build/670dfda7264db393e48391f217e60a2eb87d85c2729360c8ef6fe0cf52508ab4.jpg

Uma página vai aparecer pedindo para confirmar as credenciais da sua nova conta. Se tudo estiver certo apenas clique em 'Confirm and Create Mailbox'. Se tudo ocorrer como conforme haverá uma confirmação de que a sua nova conta foi criada com sucesso. Após isso aguarde por volta de 5 minutos antes de tentar acessá-la, para que haja tempo suficiente para o servidor atualizar o banco de dados. https://image.nostr.build/ec58fb826bffa60791fedfd9c89a25d592ac3d11645b270c936c60a7c59c067f.jpg https://image.nostr.build/a2b7710d1e3cbb36431acb9055fd62937986b4da4b1a1bbb06d3f3cb1f544fd3.jpg

Pronto! Sua nova conta de email na I2P foi criada. Agora vamos para a próxima etapa: como acessar a sua conta via um cliente de email.

2. Configurando os túneis cliente de SMTP e POP3

O hq.postman não possui um cliente web que nos permite acessar a nossa conta pelo navegador. Para isso precisamos usar um cliente como Thunderbird e configurar os túneis cliente no I2Pd que serão necessários para o Thunderbird se comunicar com o servidor pela I2P.

Caso não tenha instalado o Thunderbird ainda, faça-o agora antes de prosseguir.

Vamos configurar os túneis cliente do servidor de email no nosso roteador. Para isso abra um terminal ou o seu gestor de arquivos e vá para a pasta de configuração de túneis do I2P. Em Linux esse diretório se localiza em /etc/i2pd/tunnels.d. Em Windows, essa pasta se localiza em C:\users\user\APPDATA\i2pd. Na pasta tunnels.d crie dois arquivos: smtp.postman.conf e pop-postman.conf. Lembre-se que em Linux você precisa de permissões de root para escrever na pasta de configuração. Use o comando sudoedit para isso.

Edite-os conforme as imagens a seguir:

Arquivo pop-postman.conf https://image.nostr.build/7e03505c8bc3b632ca5db1f8eaefc6cecb4743cd2096d211dd90bbdc16fe2593.jpg

Arquivo smtp-postman.conf https://image.nostr.build/2d06c021841dedd6000c9fc2a641ed519b3be3c6125000b188842cd0a5af3d16.jpg

Salve os arquivos e reinicie o serviço do I2Pd. Em Linux isso é feito pelo comando: sudo systemctl restart i2pd Entre no Webconsole do I2Pd pelo navegador (localhost:7070) e na seção I2P Tunnels, verifique se os túneis pop-postman e smtp-postman foram criados, caso contrário verifique se há algum erro nos arquivos e reinicie o serviço.

Com os túneis cliente criados, vamos agora configurar o Thunderbird

3. Configurando o Thunderbird para acessar a nossa conta

Abra o Thunderbird e clique em criar uma nova conta de email. Se você não tiver nenhum conta previamente presente nele você vai ser diretamente recebido pela janela de criação de conta a seguir. https://image.nostr.build/e9509d7bd30623716ef9adcad76c1d465f5bc3d5840e0c35fe4faa85740f41b4.jpg https://image.nostr.build/688b59b8352a17389902ec1e99d7484e310d7d287491b34f562b8cdd9dbe8a99.jpg

Coloque as suas credenciais, mas não clique ainda em Continuar. Clique antes em Configure Manually, já que precisamos configurar manualmente os servidores de SMTP e POP3 para, respectivamente, enviar e receber mensagens.

Preencha os campos como na imagem a seguir. Detalhe: Não coloque o seu endereço completo com o @mail.i2p, apenas o nome da sua conta. https://image.nostr.build/4610b0315c0a3b741965d3d7c1e4aff6425a167297e323ba8490f4325f40cdcc.jpg

Clique em Re-test para verificar a integridade da conexão. Se tudo estiver certo uma mensagem irá aparecer avisando que as configurações do servidores estão corretas. Clique em Done assim que estiver pronto para prosseguir. https://image.nostr.build/8a47bb292f94b0d9d474d4d4a134f8d73afb84ecf1d4c0a7eb6366d46bf3973a.jpg

A seguinte mensagem vai aparecer alertando que não estamos usando criptografia no envio das credenciais. Não há problema nenhum aqui, pois a I2P está garantindo toda a proteção e anonimato dos nossos dados, o que dispensa a necessidade de uso de TLS ou qualquer tecnologia similar nas camadas acima. Marque a opção 'I Understand the risks' e clique em 'Continue' https://image.nostr.build/9c1bf585248773297d2cb1d9705c1be3bd815e2be85d4342227f1db2f13a9cc6.jpg

E por fim, se tudo ocorreu como devido sua conta será criada com sucesso e você agora será capaz de enviar e receber emails pela I2P usando essa conta. https://image.nostr.build/8ba7f2c160453c9bfa172fa9a30b642a7ee9ae3eeb9b78b4dc24ce25aa2c7ecc.jpg

4. Observações e considerações finais

Como informado pelo próprio site do hq.postman, o domínio @mail.i2p serve apenas para emails enviados dentro da I2P. Emails enviados pela surface devem usar o domínio @i2pmai.org. É imprescindível que você saiba usar o PGP para assinar e criptografar as suas mensagens, dado que provavelmente as mensagens não são armazenadas de forma criptografada enquanto elas estão armazenadas no servidor. Como o protocolo POP3 delete as mensagens no imediato momento em que você as recebe, não há necessidade de fazer qualquer limpeza na sua conta de forma manual.

Por fim, espero que esse tutorial tenha sido útil para vocês. Que seu conhecimento tenha expandido ainda mais com as informações trazidas aqui. Até a próxima.

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

O aplicativo permite que os usuários se comuniquem com outras pessoas sem ter que fornecer identificadores de usuário, como números de telefone ou endereços de e-mail. é 100% privado e seguro, Por design, garantindo que suas mensagens nunca sejam rastreadas ou armazenadas. O SimpleXChat possui recursos como bate-papo em grupo, envio de arquivos e uma interface amigável para dispositivos móveis, desktop, CLI. O SimpleXChat é um dos aplicativos construídos sobre a plataforma SimpleX, que também serve como um exemplo e aplicativo de referência. O SimpleX Messaging Protocol (SMP) é um protocolo que permite enviar mensagens em uma direção para um destinatário, usando um servidor intermediário. As mensagens são entregues por meio de filas unidirecionais criadas pelos destinatários.

O SMP é executado em um protocolo de transporte (TLS), que fornece integridade, autenticação do servidor, confidencialidade e vinculação do canal de transporte. A Rede SimpleX é o coletivo de servidores SimpleX que facilitam o SMP. As bibliotecas SimpleX Client falam SMP para SimpleX Servers e fornecem uma API de baixo nível, geralmente não destinada a ser usada por aplicativos.

O aplicativo permite que os usuários se comuniquem com outras pessoas sem ter que fornecer identificadores de usuário, como números de telefone ou endereços de e-mail. O SimpleXChat possui recursos como bate-papo em grupo, envio de arquivos e uma interface amigável para dispositivos móveis.

O SimpleX tem como objetivo fornecer uma infraestrutura de mensagens distribuídas que seja segura, privada, confiável, com entrega assíncrona e baixa latência. Ele visa oferecer melhor privacidade de metadados e segurança contra invasores de rede ativos e servidores mal-intencionados em comparação com soluções alternativas de mensagens instantâneas, ao mesmo tempo em que prioriza a experiência do usuário, especialmente em dispositivos móveis.

Por que o SimpleX é único

1. Privacidade total de sua identidade, perfil, contatos e metadados

Ao contrário de outras plataformas de mensagens, o SimpleX não possui identificadores atribuídos aos usuários . Ele não depende de números de telefone, endereços baseados em domínio (como e-mail ou XMPP), nomes de usuário, chaves públicas ou mesmo números aleatórios para identificar seus usuários - não sabemos quantas pessoas usam nossos servidores SimpleX

Para entregar mensagens, o SimpleX usa endereços anônimos emparelhados de filas de mensagens unidirecionais, separadas para mensagens recebidas e enviadas, geralmente por meio de servidores diferentes. Usar o SimpleX é como ter um e-mail ou telefone “gravador” diferente para cada contato e sem problemas para gerenciá-los.

Esse design protege a privacidade de quem você está se comunicando, ocultando-a dos servidores da plataforma SimpleX e de quaisquer observadores. Para ocultar seu endereço IP dos servidores, você pode se conectar aos servidores SimpleX via Tor .

1. A melhor proteção contra spam e abuso Como você não possui um identificador na plataforma SimpleX, ninguém pode entrar em contato com você, a menos que você compartilhe um endereço de usuário único ou temporário, como um código QR ou um link. Mesmo com o endereço de usuário opcional, embora possa ser usado para enviar solicitações de contato de spam, você pode alterá-lo ou excluí-lo completamente sem perder nenhuma de suas conexões.

2. Propriedade, controle e segurança de seus dados

O SimpleX Chat armazena todos os dados do usuário apenas em dispositivos clientes usando um formato de banco de dados criptografado portátil que pode ser exportado e transferido para qualquer dispositivo compatível.

As mensagens criptografadas de ponta a ponta são mantidas temporariamente em servidores de retransmissão SimpleX até serem recebidas e, em seguida, são excluídas permanentemente.

Ao contrário dos servidores de redes federadas (e-mail, XMPP ou Matrix), os servidores SimpleX não armazenam contas de usuários, apenas retransmitem mensagens, protegendo a privacidade de ambas as partes.

Ao contrário dos servidores de redes federadas (e-mail, XMPP ou Matrix), os servidores SimpleX não armazenam contas de usuários, apenas retransmitem mensagens, protegendo a privacidade de ambas as partes.

Não há identificadores ou texto cifrado em comum entre o tráfego do servidor enviado e recebido - se alguém estiver observando, não poderá determinar facilmente quem se comunica com quem, mesmo que o TLS esteja comprometido.

1. Totalmente descentralizado — os usuários são proprietários da rede SimpleX

Você pode usar o SimpleX com seus próprios servidores e ainda se comunicar com pessoas que usam os servidores pré-configurados fornecidos por nós.

A plataforma SimpleX usa um protocolo aberto e fornece SDK para criar bots de bate-papo , permitindo a implementação de serviços com os quais os usuários podem interagir por meio de aplicativos de bate-papo SimpleX. A rede SimpleX é totalmente descentralizada e independente de qualquer criptomoeda ou qualquer outra plataforma, exceto a Internet.

Você pode usar o SimpleX com seus próprios servidores ou com os servidores fornecidos por nós.

Características SimpleXchat • Mensagens criptografadas por E2E com remarcação e edição

• Imagens e arquivos criptografados por E2E

• Grupos secretos descentralizados apenas os usuários sabem que eles existem

• Mensagens de voz criptografadas por E2E

• Mensagens desaparecidas

• Chamadas de áudio e vídeo criptografadas com E2E

• Banco de dados criptografado portátil — mova seu perfil para outro dispositivo

• Modo de navegação anônima exclusivo do SimpleX Chat

O que torna o SimpleX privado

https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_4e6fa7bc41d22d7a9672fa23b04b7aa6d69938d7013ac1ea31212a854e6d1e97.jpg Identificadores par a par anônimos temporários O SimpleX usa endereços emparelhados anônimos temporários e credenciais para cada contato do usuário ou membro do grupo. Ele permite entregar mensagens sem identificadores de perfil de usuário, fornecendo melhor privacidade de metadados do que alternativas.

Troca de chaves fora de banda Muitas plataformas de comunicação são vulneráveis ​​a ataques MITM por servidores ou provedores de rede. Para evitar que os aplicativos SimpleX passem chaves únicas fora de banda, quando você compartilha um endereço como um link ou um código QR. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_9065e2600cf42d0bcf7bb89deb674eb0630c590bd043b1f8c92272011ec7a2ec.jpg

2 camadas de criptografia de ponta a ponta Protocolo de catraca dupla — mensagens OTR com sigilo de encaminhamento perfeito e recuperação de invasão. Criptobox NaCL em cada fila para evitar a correlação de tráfego entre as filas de mensagens se o TLS estiver comprometido. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_defe978ea10526b657bf35e6809f4385c82c7eca58b91ae3a0e81447dbf0bda3.jpg

Verificação da integridade da mensagem Para garantir a integridade as mensagens são numeradas sequencialmente e incluem o hash da mensagem anterior. Se alguma mensagem for adicionada, removida ou alterada, o destinatário será alertado. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_debf9317b88a015af37f8c610d4e1671bc495d1a80c2b6ea090d202fb332ba84.jpg Camada adicional de criptografia do servidor

Camada adicional de criptografia do servidor para entrega ao destinatário, para evitar a correlação entre o tráfego do servidor recebido e enviado se o TLS estiver comprometido. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_13793f89276380e221bd15f6173fe1221f550993a0902a249b5ba86e5fe1d237.jpg

Mistura de mensagens para reduzir a correlação Os servidores SimpleX atuam como nós de mistura de baixa latência — as mensagens recebidas e enviadas têm ordem diferente. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_1c7146ca7b3871ff1de184be78785e9e0c45cf2567f6147b260009d9c74925ed.jpg

Transporte TLS autenticado seguro Somente o TLS 1.2/1.3 com algoritmos fortes é usado para conexões cliente-servidor. A impressão digital do servidor e a ligação do canal evitam ataques MITM e de repetição. A retomada da conexão é desativada para evitar ataques de sessão. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_515af3c35a729f3dd47619965f76e3a8499ad1fe7694f2bbab14404cf5a77f6a.jpg

Acesso opcional via Tor Para proteger seu endereço IP, você pode acessar os servidores via Tor ou alguma outra rede de sobreposição de transporte. Para usar o SimpleX via Tor, instale o aplicativo Orbot e habilite o proxy SOCKS5 (ou VPN no iOS ). https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_0c8f651db74c9ae2ab4d4424972b21d64af8dab2aa5364d4b140898bebfc42b0.jpg

Filas de mensagens unidirecionais Cada fila de mensagens passa mensagens em uma direção, com diferentes endereços de envio e recebimento. Ele reduz os vetores de ataque, em comparação com os corretores de mensagens tradicionais e os metadados disponíveis. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_a7b6103be59dbffb242e6b5d371767f6df3219a1cad2a0f05a278cfb7596ad3d.jpg

Várias camadas de preenchimento de conteúdo SimpleX usa preenchimento de conteúdo para cada camada de criptografia para frustrar ataques de tamanho de mensagem. Faz mensagens de tamanhos diferentes parecerem iguais para os servidores e observadores de rede. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_6ac8491d3e0236460bb914ea5dc1a23fea03e6c598cef6643949eea38e5fad44.jpg

A rede SimpleX diferente de outras redes P2P ao ser composta por clientes e servidores sem depender de um componente centralizado. Ele usa filas de mensagens unidirecionais redundantes (simplex) para comunicação, eliminando a necessidade de endereços exclusivos globalmente. As solicitações de conexão são protegidas contra ataques man-in-the-middle e as filas de mensagens simples são usadas pelos clientes para criar cenários de comunicação mais complexos. Os servidores não armazenam nenhuma informação do usuário e os usuários podem mudar de servidor com interrupção mínima.

Rede SimpleX

Simplex Chat fornece a melhor privacidade combinando as vantagens de redes P2P e federadas. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_062b212b3c43e9cab9e7290e6a052012c54acabadfeb962190ffe9783647f356.jpg

Ao contrário das redes P2P

Todas as mensagens são enviadas pelos servidores, proporcionando melhor privacidade de metadados e entrega de mensagens assíncronas confiáveis, evitando muitos problemas de redes P2P .

1. As redes P2P dependem de alguma variante do DHT para rotear mensagens. Os projetos DHT precisam equilibrar a garantia de entrega e a latência. O SimpleX tem melhor garantia de entrega e menor latência do que o P2P, pois a mensagem pode ser passada de forma redundante por vários servidores em paralelo, utilizando os servidores escolhidos pelo destinatário. Em redes P2P a mensagem é passada por nós O(log N) sequencialmente, usando nós escolhidos pelo algoritmo.

2. O design SimpleX, ao contrário da maioria das redes P2P, não possui identificadores globais de usuário de qualquer tipo, mesmo temporários, e usa apenas identificadores temporários emparelhados, fornecendo melhor anonimato e proteção de metadados.

3. O P2P não resolve o problema do ataque MITM e a maioria das implementações existentes não usa mensagens fora de banda para a troca inicial de chaves. O SimpleX usa mensagens fora de banda ou, em alguns casos, conexões seguras e confiáveis ​​pré-existentes para a troca inicial de chaves.

4. As implementações P2P podem ser bloqueadas por alguns provedores de Internet (como BitTorrent ). O SimpleX é agnóstico de transporte - ele pode funcionar sobre protocolos da Web padrão, por exemplo, WebSockets.

5. Todas as redes P2P conhecidas podem ser vulneráveis ​​ao ataque Sybil , porque cada nó é detectável e a rede opera como um todo. As medidas conhecidas para mitigá-lo exigem um componente centralizado ou uma prova de trabalho cara . A rede SimpleX não tem capacidade de descoberta de servidor, é fragmentada e opera como várias sub-redes isoladas, impossibilitando ataques em toda a rede.

6. As redes P2P podem ser vulneráveis ​​a ataques DRDoS , quando os clientes podem retransmitir e amplificar o tráfego, resultando em negação de serviço em toda a rede. Os clientes SimpleX apenas retransmitem o tráfego de conexão conhecida e não podem ser usados ​​por um invasor para amplificar o tráfego em toda a rede.

Ao contrário das redes federadas

Os servidores de retransmissão SimpleX NÃO armazenam perfis de usuário, contatos e mensagens entregues, NÃO se conectam entre si e NÃO há diretório de servidores. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_abadeb8361026101dc2e5888217cd7620d7cf01233a7961071bb07c49f7f9f0e.jpg

os servidores fornecem filas unidirecionais para conectar os usuários, mas não têm visibilidade do grafo de conexão de rede — somente os usuários têm. https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_0f281d6b89e96efcc9334384ae9f251c529feb136748dd0846e249a715e2a5e3.jpg

Simplex explicado

1. O que os usuários experimentam https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_157aa796dd3953b830e5643a5e98bb07b09d1ab8737a4f8b39d26e3637902ae8.jpg Você pode criar contatos e grupos e ter conversas bidirecionais, como em qualquer outro messenger.

Como trabalhar com filas unidirecionais e sem identificadores de perfil de usuário?

1. Como funciona https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_fda66ead74bed1a72139cf9ce9cbe96eea7a09b9007151a576124f8cab39952d.jpg

Para cada conexão, você usa duas filas de mensagens separadas para enviar e receber mensagens por meio de servidores diferentes.

Os servidores passam mensagens apenas de uma maneira, sem ter uma imagem completa da conversa ou das conexões do usuário.

1. O que os servidores veem https://nostr.build/i/nostr.build_e95db233e71ef8ff53590e740095429338c8aba8fba846431d81112ffba01932.jpg

Os servidores possuem credenciais anônimas distintas para cada fila e não têm conhecimento da identidade dos usuários.

A implementação Roteamento de Mensagens Privadas na Rede SimpleX é um marco significativo na evolução do Protocolo de Mensagens SimpleX, elevando a privacidade dos usuários a outro patamar! https://image.nostr.build/f77c4336cb335cb87dab6645bbac7a8f6a99d8b8e7a787511918c740558b5be7.jpg

Qual é o problema? https://image.nostr.build/4ad92ca6d702155c97849fce854f6c3101ac979b21781620500edd357ab6d7a3.jpg

Design da rede Simplex sempre se concentrou na proteção da identidade do usuário no nível do protocolo de mensagens - não há identificadores de perfil de usuário de qualquer tipo no design do protocolo, nem mesmo números aleatórios ou chaves criptográficas. Porém, até este lançamento, a rede SimpleX não tinha proteção integrada de identidades de transporte de usuários - endereços IP. Como anteriormente os usuários só podiam escolher quais retransmissores de mensagens usar para receber mensagens, esses retransmissores poderiam observar os endereços IP dos remetentes e, se esses retransmissores fossem controlados pelos destinatários, os próprios destinatários também poderiam observá-los - seja modificando o código do servidor ou simplesmente rastreando todos os endereços IP conectados.

Para contornar essa limitação, muitos usuários se conectaram a retransmissores de rede SimpleX via Tor ou VPN – para que os retransmissores dos destinatários não pudessem observar os endereços IP dos usuários quando eles enviassem mensagens. Ainda assim, foi a limitação mais importante e mais criticada da rede SimpleX pelos usuários.

O que é roteamento de mensagens privadas e como funciona?

O roteamento de mensagens privadas é um marco importante para a evolução da rede SimpleX. É um novo protocolo de roteamento de mensagens que protege os endereços IP dos usuários e as sessões de transporte dos retransmissores de mensagens escolhidos por

Seus contatos. O roteamento de mensagens privadas é, efetivamente, um protocolo de roteamento cebola de 2 saltos inspirado no design do Tor, mas com uma diferença importante - o primeiro retransmissor (encaminhamento) é sempre escolhido pelo remetente da mensagem e o segundo (destino) - pelo destinatário da mensagem. Desta forma, nenhum lado da conversa pode observar o endereço IP ou a sessão de transporte do outro.

Ao mesmo tempo, os retransmissores escolhidos pelos clientes remetentes para encaminhar as mensagens não conseguem observar para quais conexões (filas de mensagens) as mensagens são enviadas, devido à camada adicional de criptografia ponta a ponta entre o remetente e o retransmissor de destino, semelhante ao funcionamento do roteamento cebola na rede Tor, e também graças ao design do protocolo que evita quaisquer identificadores repetidos ou não aleatórios associados às mensagens, que de outra forma permitiriam correlacionar as mensagens enviadas para diferentes conexões como enviadas pelo mesmo usuário. Cada mensagem encaminhada para o retransmissor de destino é adicionalmente criptografada com uma chave efêmera única, para ser independente das mensagens enviadas para diferentes conexões.

O protocolo de roteamento também evita a possibilidade de ataque MITM pelo retransmissor de encaminhamento, que fornece ao certificado as chaves de sessão do servidor de destino para o cliente remetente que são assinadas criptograficamente pelo mesmo certificado que está incluído no endereço do servidor de destino, para que o cliente possa verifique se as mensagens são enviadas para o destino pretendido e não interceptadas.

O diagrama abaixo mostra todas as camadas de criptografia usadas no roteamento de mensagens privadas: https://image.nostr.build/c238546e47b00dfea742ab1fc008ff51811240025a603dfbcc94b5bc14b5aa88.jpg

e2e - duas camadas de criptografia ponta a ponta entre clientes remetentes e receptores, uma das quais usa algoritmo de catraca dupla E2EE Post-quantum. Essas camadas de criptografia também estão presentes na versão anterior do protocolo de roteamento de mensagens.

s2d - criptografia entre o cliente remetente e o retransmissor de destino do destinatário . Essa nova camada de criptografia oculta os metadados da mensagem (endereço de conexão de destino e sinalizador de notificação de mensagem) da retransmissão de encaminhamento.

f2d - nova camada de criptografia adicional entre retransmissores de encaminhamento e destino , protegendo contra correlação de tráfego caso o TLS seja comprometido - não há identificadores ou texto cifrado em comum entre o tráfego de entrada e saída de ambos os retransmissores dentro da conexão TLS.

d2r - camada de criptografia adicional entre o retransmissor de destino e o destinatário, protegendo também da correlação de tráfego caso o TLS seja comprometido.

TLS - criptografia de transporte TLS 1.3. Para que o roteamento privado funcione, tanto a retransmissão de encaminhamento quanto a de destino devem suportar o protocolo de mensagens atualizado - ele é compatível com a versão 5.8 das retransmissões de mensagens.

https://image.nostr.build/2edbb7721c3ccf8a21274e96e25ee076c3522323870d92b73dbd1f6bda66fce8.jpg

Passo a passo do aplicativo nostr:nprofile1qqsvnx99ww0sfall7gpv2jtz4ftc9v6wevgdd7g4hh7awkpfvwlezugpzdmhxue69uhhqatjwpkx2urpvuhx2ue0chkv5c

Backup e Recuperação de Dados:

• instalação do aplicativo.

• Exportação do banco de dados Backup.

• Importação do Backup do banco de dados.

• Baixe e Instale o Aplicativo:

• baixar o SimpleXchat no F-droid ou Obtainium.

F-droid

https://simplex.chat/fdroid/

https://f-droid.org/packages/chat.simplex.app/

Obtainium.

https://github.com/simplex-chat/simplex-chat

• Faça o download e instale o aplicativo em seu dispositivo móvel.

Criando seu perfil:

1. Criar perfil:

2. Clique em “CRIE SEU PERFIL”, contatos e mensagens são armazenados localmente em seu dispositivo.

https://image.nostr.build/e109c9fd5ea327640f0af2d6396aaa7e7d85594c6b20fd6ed426a558195a0021.jpg

1. Nome de Exibição exemplo: Alex teste :-)

2. Toque em "Criar" para configurar seu perfil e começar a usar o SimpleXchat.

https://image.nostr.build/96a1c59d370d554ada31e91301857825af7975b29eb82fe8fcb5cbba9d40bf23.jpg

1. Endereço SimpleX:

2. Clique no nome “Criar endereço SimpleX “

3. clicar em " continuar "

Ou Clicar em " Não criar endereço " pode criá-lo mais tarde.

https://image.nostr.build/cb91c0c1d43ce6c1a310cf2547cc88510529db3c2a5ce17ca79ec5d9269cb58e.jpg

https://image.nostr.build/47595ab6c17183c267fab2892a8d188b2e9fe29f067c8d96afec2ddbb9feda95.jpg

1. Notificação privadas

2. Escolha o tipo de notificação que prefere 3 opções.

Escolha a opção aberta em “ USAR BATE- PAPO “

https://image.nostr.build/96027dc0c47bdcb8a9c5017592bd6828f8e2d752883c826c08105aec340f1d81.jpg

• Backup e Recuperação de Dados:

• Cópia de segurança. “Clicar no canto superior lado esquerdo na foto de perfil“

Selecione a opção “Senha e Exportação de Banco de Dados“

https://image.nostr.build/7918c90aec373af57ccdcb1194e9277ab85aabadf83ac1d35065ec2a9f2b0aef.jpg

Desabilite a opção “O bate-papo está em execução ”

Clique em “parar”

https://image.nostr.build/8473fac2cef41d35451abcf8b40101630caf92b30f01e51767df1cc428dd8a70.jpg

https://image.nostr.build/bdd691b738712f98107c7da404d693d9cccce58c2afb89a2d6f649190e13a3e2.jpg

Seu banco de dados de bate-papo tem 4 opções.

• Senha do banco de dados

• Exportar banco de dados

• Importar banco de dados

• Excluir banco de dados

Clique na primeira opção " Senha do banco de dados "

• O Banco de Dados tem seus contatos e grupos e é protegido por sua senha que criptografa o banco de dados. Recomenda-se trocar essa senha padrão.

https://image.nostr.build/91859f269fbca9d02009652f2f9b3f76abcaa9de8647b48b5d20bee291e32ba3.jpg

Clicar na primeira opção " Senha de banco de dados "

Lembre-se de usar uma senha forte.

Após adicionar senha clique em “Atualizar senha do banco de dados”

https://image.nostr.build/3d84eb9954080589ea79050420300baa7e095f1dfc37c925ec4abf7abb047675.jpg

Vai aparecer um aviso.

Alterar senha do banco de dados? A senha de criptografia do banco de dados será atualizada e armazenada no keystore. Guarde a senha em um local seguro, você NÃO poderá alterá-la se a perder.

https://image.nostr.build/61dcdfdb82764df8855ef9e15c453b42d9c87fd23ea9e797ea066ad31f94fd61.jpg

Só clique em “Atualizar” demora 1 minuto aparece a mensagem “banco de dados criptografado!” Só clique em “ok”

https://image.nostr.build/8c303857ae63b803792f71273b4891f7adcfdbc3d0a428ecde2abbfef168781d.jpg

• Clique na opção 2.

Exportar banco de dados.

https://image.nostr.build/91859f269fbca9d02009652f2f9b3f76abcaa9de8647b48b5d20bee291e32ba3.jpg

Tem duas poções para salvar na memória do Celular, Pendrive, componentes externos de sua preferência.

• Por padrão Vai abrir a memória do celular para salvar o arquivo backup criptografado na pasta de sua escolha.

• Pra guardei no pendrive é necessário um cabo OTG para salvar o backup criptografado. Conecte um cabo OTG no celular, alguns celulares já confirmam automaticamente e entram diretamente na pasta do seu pendrive outros aparece um aviso pra aceitar pendrive. Depois basta selecionar o pendrive e salvar o backup.

https://image.nostr.build/c3bd4ca72270d651f4ea7125ac697cd11cb47316e4f0d18e8dfef732579ae77b.jpg

• Clique na opção

1. Importar banco de dados.

https://image.nostr.build/91859f269fbca9d02009652f2f9b3f76abcaa9de8647b48b5d20bee291e32ba3.jpg

• Caso você perca seu celular, você não tem acesso ao backup. Mas se você tiver salvo no pendrive ou componentes externos, basta seguir as etapas a seguir.

• Faça a instalação do aplicativo e crie uma nova conta, selecione a opção "Senha e Exportação de Banco de Dados" e desabilite a opção "Chat em Execução". Isso permitirá que você faça a importação do backup.

Clique na opção Importar banco de dados.

Selecione o artigo do backup no pendrive ou na pasta dentro do novo celular só basta clicar no arquivo.

https://image.nostr.build/47cac70f4ba0520c060da98b4b3559f621757d98b4f963b1b1fd2cc522eafa45.jpg

Vai aparecer um aviso.

Importa banco de dados de Chat?

Seu banco de dados do Chat atual será EXCLUÍDO ou SUBSTITUÍDO pelo importado.

Essa ação não pode ser desfeita - Seu perfil, contatos, mensagens e arquivos serão perdidos de forma irreversível.

Só clique em "importar"

https://image.nostr.build/fdfa5e4ba2b6cd1a2b9116633da3f8a7cf91f41dd6d5739582f4e112ae384f7a.jpg

Vai aparecer um aviso.

Banco de dados de chat Importado.

Reinicie o aplicativo para usar o banco de dados do chat Importado.

Só clique em "ok"

Depois Habilite a opção "o bate-papo está parado"

https://image.nostr.build/1f261f36262d5a6cf593b5cb09abdb63ace7bf63f0e66bee7b949850972b3f92.jpg

A senha do banco de dados é necessária para abrir o Chat.

Digite a senha do seu banco de dados.

Depois é só clicar em "salvar senha e abrir Chat"

Pronto foi feita a recuperação de todos os meus dados, incluindo contatos, mensagens e grupos✅️

https://image.nostr.build/28f13ac654c68c890495cbf9689d09946b7af1ecc00a796b9ffd6d64059f4516.jpg

https://image.nostr.build/aae866f7577995bda6735e0a5e4683770bac2af845ae8b552da6526c4f589f08.jpg

Protegendo sua Privacidade no SimpleX Chat.

https://image.nostr.build/88fe0bf337105a3be94754c64bedfbe17d35c586714aa225d0179a379f9a1f71.jpg

Recentemente, tive uma experiência interessante ao explorar as opções de privacidade e segurança no SimpleX Chat. Uma funcionalidade que me chamou a atenção foi a opção de senha de auto destruição, que oferece uma camada adicional de proteção aos dados sensíveis.

Ao configurar o SimpleX Chat para usar senha de auto destruição, percebi o quão poderosa essa ferramenta pode ser para proteger minha privacidade. Após ativar essa opção, qualquer tentativa de acessar meu perfil precisa da senha escolhida por mim. E, se alguém tentasse forçar a abertura do aplicativo, eu posso simplesmente digitar a senha de auto destruição seria apresentado um perfil vazio, sem histórico de conversas. Essa função e bem útil em situações extremas.

A configuração da senha de auto destruição é simples mas poderosa.

Basta acessar as configurações de privacidade e segurança.

https://image.nostr.build/4fb6166656b544c645f316dfc4dad3b9e787b280745992dab30786b0bd0c2ee5.jpg

Aberta na opção de bloqueio SimpleX.

https://image.nostr.build/b866d08644b64884101aae6d011248a3557ac80bcc6e442ae8f62bdb3ee69776.jpg

mudar para a opção de senha. Em seguida, é possível escolher se deseja ativar a senha de auto destruição e inserir a senha desejada.

https://image.nostr.build/867d375825640721ee888e524455fb539df50be87df901dcf0ccfa19f2267576.jpg

Só basta adicionar a senha.

https://image.nostr.build/5bfb500816f814eab189283a64086ad47f32671d8e42558f3f911676ff4df741.jpg

https://image.nostr.build/59323fa6900d4f3b27b39b032f7c2cffdbf379a77c53ed9180c0ace0ca903950.jpg

Pronto. Está Ativado a senha de auto destruição.

https://image.nostr.build/511f82832d1e72d0363cfc5b7b201aaba56f65cfa00360d1c1f4d8d188bb3cdf.jpg

Uma vez configurada, a senha de auto destruição garante que todos os dados, incluindo backups, sejam eliminados permanentemente se a senha de auto destruição for inserida ao desbloquear o aplicativo.

Tenha um backup no pendrive ou em outro local guardado.

https://image.nostr.build/dfbbc5ef805194cc00a09fb690fc76896ada9a9d3f98e8b141f52c72342e2625.jpg

https://image.nostr.build/32a771a0ba2bae47f45f900fc765ffbeae0374724a1a0140c0f2cef83a2e5c2f.jpg

Essa funcionalidade oferece uma tranquilidade adicional ao utilizar o SimpleX Chat, pois sei que meus dados estão protegidos contra acesso não autorizado. Além disso, a capacidade de criar um perfil vazio para ocultar a identidade real é uma ferramenta valiosa em situações críticas , proteger meus dados sensíveis e manter minha privacidade intacta.

https://medium.com/@alexemidio/o-simplexchat-%C3%A9-uma-plataforma-de-mensagens-revolucion%C3%A1rias-que-redefinem-a-privacidade-sendo-o-4690f2a1b2d4

Podcast muito bom no @optoutpod com o criador @epoberezkin https://youtu.be/LrLsS7-woN0

Site : https://simplex.chat/

Protocolo de bate-papo: https://github.com/simplex-chat/simplex-chat/blob/stable/docs/protocol/simplex-chat.md

Whitepaper, incluindo modelagem de ameaças: https://github.com/simplex-chat/simplexmq/blob/stable/protocol/overview-tjr.md

Execute seu próprio servidor SimpleX SMP: https://github.com/simplex-chat/simplexmq

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=chat.simplex.app

Como auto-hospedar servidor Simplexchat

https://youtu.be/p1NF68KIt7M?si=Nhwa8ZajmAvke6lW

https://youtu.be/p1NF68KIt7M?si=uZqOtVu0sLWLXBJX

https://simplex.chat/docs/server.html

https://github.com/simplex-chat/simplexmq

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

SISTEMA OPERACIONAL MÓVEIS

GrapheneOS : nostr:nevent1qqs8t76evdgrg4qegdtyrq2rved63pr29wlqyj627n9tj4vlu66tqpqpzdmhxue69uhk7enxvd5xz6tw9ec82c30qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqppcqec9

CalyxOS : nostr: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

LineageOS : nostr:nevent1qqsgw7sr36gaty48cf4snw0ezg5mg4atzhqayuge752esd469p26qfgpzdmhxue69uhhwmm59e6hg7r09ehkuef0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpnvm779

SISTEMA OPERACIONAL DESKTOP

Tails : nostr:nevent1qqsf09ztvuu60g6xprazv2vxqqy5qlxjs4dkc9d36ta48q75cs9le4qpzemhxue69uhkummnw3ex2mrfw3jhxtn0wfnj7q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqz34ag5t

Qubes OS : nostr:nevent1qqsp6jujgwl68uvurw0cw3hfhr40xq20sj7rl3z4yzwnhp9sdpa7augpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ehx7um5wghxyctwvshsz9thwden5te0dehhxarj9ehhsarj9ejx2a30qyg8wumn8ghj7mn09eehgu3wvdez7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09uqjxamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3dwejhy6txd9jkgtnhv4kxcmmjv3jhytnwv46z7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpremhxue69uhkummnw3ez6er9wch8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59uj3ljr8

Kali linux : nostr:nevent1qqswlav72xdvamuyp9xc38c6t7070l3n2uxu67ssmal2g7gv35nmvhspzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqswt9rxe

Whonix : nostr:nevent1qqs85gvejvzhk086lwh6edma7fv07p5c3wnwnxnzthwwntg2x6773egpydmhxue69uhkummnw3ez6an9wf5kv6t9vsh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59uq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wd4hk6tcpzemhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnrdqhxu6twdfsj7qfywaehxw309ahx7um5wgh8ymm4dej8ymmrdd3xjarrda5kuetjwvhxxmmd9uq3wamnwvaz7tmzw33ju6mvv4hxgct6w5hxxmmd9uq3qamnwvaz7tmwduh8xarj9e3hytcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhszrnhwden5te0dehhxtnvdakz7qg7waehxw309ahx7um5wgkkgetk9emk2mrvdaexgetj9ehx2ap0sen9p6

Kodachi : nostr:nevent1qqsf5zszgurpd0vwdznzk98hck294zygw0s8dah6fpd309ecpreqtrgpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhszgmhwden5te0dehhxarj94mx2unfve5k2epwwajkcmr0wfjx2u3wdejhgtcpremhxue69uhkummnw3ez6er9wch8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59uq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wd4hk6tcpzamhxue69uhkyarr9e4kcetwv3sh5afwvdhk6tcpzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghszfrhwden5te0dehhxarj9eex7atwv3ex7cmtvf5hgcm0d9hx2unn9e3k7mf0qyvhwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnzdahxwcn0denjucm0d5hszrnhwden5te0dehhxtnvdakz7qgkwaehxw309ahx7um5wghxycmg9ehxjmn2vyhsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ehx7um5wghxyctwvshs94a4d5

PGP

Openkeychain : nostr:nevent1qqs9qtjgsulp76t7jkquf8nk8txs2ftsr0qke6mjmsc2svtwfvswzyqpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqs36mp0w

Kleopatra : nostr:nevent1qqspnevn932hdggvp4zam6mfyce0hmnxsp9wp8htpumq9vm3anq6etsppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpuaeghp

Pgp : nostr:nevent1qqsggek707qf3rzttextmgqhym6d4g479jdnlnj78j96y0ut0x9nemcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgptemhe

Como funciona o PGP? : nostr:nevent1qqsz9r7azc8pkvfmkg2hv0nufaexjtnvga0yl85x9hu7ptpg20gxxpspremhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59upzqjagapkjm9ufdhynxlp72qrfrzfawvt4wt7cr795rhw6tkyaxt0yqvzqqqqqqy259fhs

Por que eu escrevi PGP. - Philip Zimmermann.

nostr:nevent1qqsvysn94gm8prxn3jw04r0xwc6sngkskg756z48jsyrmqssvxtm7ncpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtchzxnad

VPN

Vpn : nostr:nevent1qqs27ltgsr6mh4ffpseexz6s37355df3zsur709d0s89u2nugpcygsspzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqshzu2fk

InviZible Pro : nostr:nevent1qqsvyevf2vld23a3xrpvarc72ndpcmfvc3lc45jej0j5kcsg36jq53cpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdupzqjagapkjm9ufdhynxlp72qrfrzfawvt4wt7cr795rhw6tkyaxt0yqvzqqqqqqy33y5l4

Orbot: nostr:nevent1qqsxswkyt6pe34egxp9w70cy83h40ururj6m9sxjdmfass4cjm4495stft593

I2P

i2p : nostr:nevent1qqsvnj8n983r4knwjmnkfyum242q4c0cnd338l4z8p0m6xsmx89mxkslx0pgg

Entendendo e usando a rede I2P : nostr:nevent1qqsxchp5ycpatjf5s4ag25jkawmw6kkf64vl43vnprxdcwrpnms9qkcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpvht4mn

Criando e acessando sua conta Email na I2P : nostr:nevent1qqs9v9dz897kh8e5lfar0dl7ljltf2fpdathsn3dkdsq7wg4ksr8xfgpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpw8mzum

APLICATIVO 2FA

Aegis Authenticator : nostr:nevent1qqsfttdwcn9equlrmtf9n6wee7lqntppzm03pzdcj4cdnxel3pz44zspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzvuhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqscvtydq

YubiKey : nostr:nevent1qqstsnn69y4sf4330n7039zxm7wza3ch7sn6plhzmd57w6j9jssavtspvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzueyvgt

GERENCIADOR DE SENHAS

KeepassDX: nostr:nevent1qqswc850dr4ujvxnmpx75jauflf4arc93pqsty5pv8hxdm7lcw8ee8qpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpe0492n

Bitwaden: nostr:nevent1qqs0j5x9guk2v6xumhwqmftmcz736m9nm9wzacqwjarxmh8k4xdyzwgpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpwfe2kc

KeePassXC: nostr:nevent1qqsgftcrd8eau7tzr2p9lecuaf7z8mx5jl9w2k66ae3lzkw5wqcy5pcl2achp

CHAT MENSAGEM

SimpleXchat : nostr:nevent1qqsds5xselnnu0dyy0j49peuun72snxcgn3u55d2320n37rja9gk8lgzyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgmcmj7c

Briar : nostr:nevent1qqs8rrtgvjr499hreugetrl7adkhsj2zextyfsukq5aa7wxthrgcqcg05n434

Element Messenger : nostr:nevent1qqsq05snlqtxm5cpzkshlf8n5d5rj9383vjytkvqp5gta37hpuwt4mqyccee6

Pidgin : nostr:nevent1qqsz7kngycyx7meckx53xk8ahk98jkh400usrvykh480xa4ct9zlx2c2ywvx3

E-MAIL

Thunderbird: nostr:nevent1qqspq64gg0nw7t60zsvea5eykgrm43paz845e4jn74muw5qzdvve7uqrkwtjh

ProtonMail : nostr:nevent1qqs908glhk68e7ms8zqtlsqd00wu3prnpt08dwre26hd6e5fhqdw99cppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpeyhg4z

Tutonota : nostr:nevent1qqswtzh9zjxfey644qy4jsdh9465qcqd2wefx0jxa54gdckxjvkrrmqpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43qygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqs5hzhkv

k-9 mail : nostr:nevent1qqs200g5a603y7utjgjk320r3srurrc4r66nv93mcg0x9umrw52ku5gpr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuumhd9ehxtt9de5kwmtp9e3kstczyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgacflak

E-MAIL-ALIÁS

Simplelogin : nostr:nevent1qqsvhz5pxqpqzr2ptanqyqgsjr50v7u9lc083fvdnglhrv36rnceppcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqp9gsr7m

AnonAddy : nostr:nevent1qqs9mcth70mkq2z25ws634qfn7vx2mlva3tkllayxergw0s7p8d3ggcpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqs6mawe3

NAVEGADOR

Navegador Tor : nostr:nevent1qqs06qfxy7wzqmk76l5d8vwyg6mvcye864xla5up52fy5sptcdy39lspzemhxue69uhkummnw3ezuerpw3sju6rpw4ej7q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzdp0urw

Mullvap Browser : nostr:nevent1qqs2vsgc3wk09wdspv2mezltgg7nfdg97g0a0m5cmvkvr4nrfxluzfcpzdmhxue69uhhwmm59e6hg7r09ehkuef0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpj8h6fe

LibreWolf : nostr:nevent1qqswv05mlmkcuvwhe8x3u5f0kgwzug7n2ltm68fr3j06xy9qalxwq2cpzemhxue69uhkummnw3ex2mrfw3jhxtn0wfnj7q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzuv2hxr

Cromite : nostr:nevent1qqs2ut83arlu735xp8jf87w5m3vykl4lv5nwkhldkqwu3l86khzzy4cpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqs3dplt7

BUSCADORES

Searx : nostr:nevent1qqsxyzpvgzx00n50nrlgctmy497vkm2cm8dd5pdp7fmw6uh8xnxdmaspr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqp23z7ax

APP-STORE

Obtainium : nostr:nevent1qqstd8kzc5w3t2v6dgf36z0qrruufzfgnc53rj88zcjgsagj5c5k4rgpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdupzqjagapkjm9ufdhynxlp72qrfrzfawvt4wt7cr795rhw6tkyaxt0yqvzqqqqqqyarmca3

F-Droid : nostr:nevent1qqst4kry49cc9g3g8s5gdnpgyk3gjte079jdnv43f0x4e85cjkxzjesymzuu4

Droid-ify : nostr:nevent1qqsrr8yu9luq0gud902erdh8gw2lfunpe93uc2u6g8rh9ep7wt3v4sgpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsfzu9vk

Aurora Store : nostr:nevent1qqsy69kcaf0zkcg0qnu90mtk46ly3p2jplgpzgk62wzspjqjft4fpjgpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzrpmsjy

RSS

Feeder : nostr:nevent1qqsy29aeggpkmrc7t3c7y7ldgda7pszl7c8hh9zux80gjzrfvlhfhwqpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqzyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgsvzzjy

VIDEOO CONFERENCIA

Jitsi meet : nostr:nevent1qqswphw67hr6qmt2fpugcj77jrk7qkfdrszum7vw7n2cu6cx4r6sh4cgkderr

TECLADOS

HeliBoard : nostr:nevent1qqsyqpc4d28rje03dcvshv4xserftahhpeylu2ez2jutdxwds4e8syspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsr8mel5

OpenBoard : nostr:nevent1qqsf7zqkup03yysy67y43nj48q53sr6yym38es655fh9fp6nxpl7rqspzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqswcvh3r

FlorisBoard : nostr:nevent1qqsf7zqkup03yysy67y43nj48q53sr6yym38es655fh9fp6nxpl7rqspzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqswcvh3r

MAPAS

Osmand : nostr:nevent1qqsxryp2ywj64az7n5p6jq5tn3tx5jv05te48dtmmt3lf94ydtgy4fgpzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqs54nwpj

Organic maps : nostr:nevent1qqstrecuuzkw0dyusxdq7cuwju0ftskl7anx978s5dyn4pnldrkckzqpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezumtp0p5k6ctrd96xzer9dshx7un8qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpl8z3kk

TRADUÇÃO

LibreTranslate : nostr:nevent1qqs953g3rhf0m8jh59204uskzz56em9xdrjkelv4wnkr07huk20442cpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzeqsx40

REMOÇÃO DOS METADADOS

Scrambled Exif : nostr:nevent1qqs2658t702xv66p000y4mlhnvadmdxwzzfzcjkjf7kedrclr3ej7aspyfmhxue69uhk6atvw35hqmr90pjhytngw4eh5mmwv4nhjtnhdaexcep0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpguu0wh

ESTEGANOGRAFIA

PixelKnot: nostr:nevent1qqsrh0yh9mg0lx86t5wcmhh97wm6n4v0radh6sd0554ugn354wqdj8gpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdupzqjagapkjm9ufdhynxlp72qrfrzfawvt4wt7cr795rhw6tkyaxt0yqvzqqqqqqyuvfqdp

PERFIL DE TRABALHO

Shelter : nostr:nevent1qqspv9xxkmfp40cxgjuyfsyczndzmpnl83e7gugm7480mp9zhv50wkqpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzdnu59c

PDF

MuPDF : nostr:nevent1qqspn5lhe0dteys6npsrntmv2g470st8kh8p7hxxgmymqa95ejvxvfcpzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqs4hvhvj

Librera Reader : nostr:nevent1qqsg60flpuf00sash48fexvwxkly2j5z9wjvjrzt883t3eqng293f3cpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqz39tt3n

QR-Code

Binary Eye : nostr:nevent1qqsz4n0uxxx3q5m0r42n9key3hchtwyp73hgh8l958rtmae5u2khgpgpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzdmn4wp

Climático

Breezy Weather : nostr:nevent1qqs9hjz5cz0y4am3kj33xn536uq85ydva775eqrml52mtnnpe898rzspzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgpd3tu8

ENCRYPTS

Cryptomator : nostr:nevent1qqsvchvnw779m20583llgg5nlu6ph5psewetlczfac5vgw83ydmfndspzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsx7ppw9

VeraCrypt : nostr:nevent1qqsf6wzedsnrgq6hjk5c4jj66dxnplqwc4ygr46l8z3gfh38q2fdlwgm65ej3

EXTENSÕES

uBlock Origin : nostr:nevent1qqswaa666lcj2c4nhnea8u4agjtu4l8q89xjln0yrngj7ssh72ntwzql8ssdj

Snowflake : nostr:nevent1qqs0ws74zlt8uced3p2vee9td8x7vln2mkacp8szdufvs2ed94ctnwchce008

CLOUD

Nextcloud : nostr:nevent1qqs2utg5z9htegdtrnllreuhypkk2026x8a0xdsmfczg9wdl8rgrcgg9nhgnm

NOTEPAD

Joplin : nostr:nevent1qqsz2a0laecpelsznser3xd0jfa6ch2vpxtkx6vm6qg24e78xttpk0cpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsyh28gd5ke0ztdeyehc0jsq6gcj0tnzatjlkql3dqamkja38fjmeqrqsqqqqqpdu0hft

Standard Notes : nostr:nevent1qqsv3596kz3qung5v23cjc4cpq7rqxg08y36rmzgcrvw5whtme83y3s7tng6r

MÚSICA

RiMusic : nostr:nevent1qqsv3genqav2tfjllp86ust4umxm8tr2wd9kq8x7vrjq6ssp363mn0gpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqg42353n

ViMusic : nostr:nevent1qqswx78559l4jsxsrygd8kj32sch4qu57stxq0z6twwl450vp39pdqqpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzjg863j

PODCAST

AntennaPod : nostr:nevent1qqsp4nh7k4a6zymfwqqdlxuz8ua6kdhvgeeh3uxf2c9rtp9u3e9ku8qnr8lmy

VISUALIZAR VIDEO

VLC : nostr:nevent1qqs0lz56wtlr2eye4ajs2gzn2r0dscw4y66wezhx0mue6dffth8zugcl9laky

YOUTUBE

NewPipe : nostr:nevent1qqsdg06qpcjdnlvgm4xzqdap0dgjrkjewhmh4j3v4mxdl4rjh8768mgdw9uln

FreeTube : nostr:nevent1qqsz6y6z7ze5gs56s8seaws8v6m6j2zu0pxa955dhq3ythmexak38mcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqs5lkjvv

LibreTube : nostr:nevent1qqstmd5m6wrdvn4gxf8xyhrwnlyaxmr89c9kjddvnvux6603f84t3fqpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43qygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsswwznc

COMPARTILHAMENTO DE ARQUIVOS

OnionShare : nostr:nevent1qqsr0a4ml5nu6ud5k9yzyawcd9arznnwkrc27dzzc95q6r50xmdff6qpydmhxue69uhkummnw3ez6an9wf5kv6t9vsh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59uq3uamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3dv3jhvtnhv4kxcmmjv3jhytnwv46z7qgswaehxw309ahx7tnnw3ezucmj9uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tcpzamhxue69uhkyarr9e4kcetwv3sh5afwvdhk6tcpzemhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnrdqhxu6twdfsj7qgswaehxw309ahx7um5wghx6mmd9uqjgamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwfhh2mnywfhkx6mzd96xxmmfdejhyuewvdhk6tcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qythwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgu3wvfskuep0qyv8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnrw4e8yetwwshxv7tf9ut7qurt

Localsend : nostr:nevent1qqsp8ldjhrxm09cvvcak20hrc0g8qju9f67pw7rxr2y3euyggw9284gpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzuyghqr

Wallet Bitcoin

Ashigaru Wallet : nostr:nevent1qqstx9fz8kf24wgl26un8usxwsqjvuec9f8q392llmga75tw0kfarfcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyp9636rd9ktcjmwfxd7ru5qxjxyn6uch2uhas8utg8wa5hvf6vk7gqcyqqqqqqgvfsrqp

Samourai Wallet : nostr:nevent1qqstcvjmz39rmrnrv7t5cl6p3x7pzj6jsspyh4s4vcwd2lugmre04ecpr9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucn0denkymmwvuhxxmmd9upzqjagapkjm9ufdhynxlp72qrfrzfawvt4wt7cr795rhw6tkyaxt0yqvzqqqqqqy3rg4qs

CÂMERA

opencamera : nostr:nevent1qqs25glp6dh0crrjutxrgdjlnx9gtqpjtrkg29hlf7382aeyjd77jlqpzpmhxue69uhkumewwd68ytnrwghsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqssxcvgc

OFFICE

Collabora Office : nostr:nevent1qqs8yn4ys6adpmeu3edmf580jhc3wluvlf823cc4ft4h0uqmfzdf99qpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsj40uss

TEXTOS

O manifesto de um Cypherpunk : nostr:nevent1qqsd7hdlg6galn5mcuv3pm3ryfjxc4tkyph0cfqqe4du4dr4z8amqyspvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqzal0efa

Operations security ( OPSEC) : nostr:nevent1qqsp323havh3y9nxzd4qmm60hw87tm9gjns0mtzg8y309uf9mv85cqcpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqz8ej9l7

O MANIFESTO CRIPTOANARQUISTA Timothy C. May – 1992. : nostr:nevent1qqspp480wtyx2zhtwpu5gptrl8duv9rvq3mug85mp4d54qzywk3zq9gpvemhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330g6x6dm8ddmxzdne0pnhverevdkxxdm6wqc8v735w3snquejvsuk56pcvuurxaesxd68qdtkv3nrx6m6v3ehsctwvym8q0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2q3qfw5wsmfdj7ykmjfn0sl9qp533y7hx96h9lvplz6pmhd9mzwn9hjqxpqqqqqqz5wq496

Declaração de independência do ciberespaço

• John Perry Barlow - 1996 : nostr:nevent1qqs2njsy44n6p07mhgt2tnragvchasv386nf20ua5wklxqpttf6mzuqpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygzt4r5x6tvh39kujvmu8egqdyvf84e3w4e0mq0ckswamfwcn5eduspsgqqqqqqsukg4hr

The Cyphernomicon: Criptografia, Dinheiro Digital e o Futuro da Privacidade. escrito por Timothy C. May -Publicado em 1994. :

Livro completo em PDF no Github PrivacyOpenSource.

https://github.com/Alexemidio/PrivacyOpenSource/raw/main/Livros/THE%20CYPHERNOMICON%20.pdf Share

@ 9ca8f9b2:70031a71

Opinion about Phoenix Wallet (iphone)

Personally, I love this App! The developers of this app have worked so hard over the years to make the UI of this app as simple and smoothe as it can possibly be as a non custodial wallet.

WalletScrutiny #nostrOpinion

Join the conversation!

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Table Of Content

• Unveiling Bitcoin's Legacy Amid Debt Ceiling Debates

• Bitcoin's Decentralized Nature

• Bitcoin as a Store of Value

• Bitcoin's Role in International Remittances

• Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities

• Bitcoin and Financial Inclusion

• Conclusion

• FAQ

In today's fast-paced digital age, cryptocurrencies have taken the world by storm. Among them, Bitcoin stands tall as the pioneer and most prominent cryptocurrency. As financial systems evolve and debt ceiling debates continue to shape economic policies, it is crucial to examine the legacy of Bitcoin and its impact on the financial landscape. This article aims to delve into the intricacies of Bitcoin's legacy and how it intertwines with the ongoing discussions surrounding debt ceilings. By exploring the factors contributing to the money in motion phenomenon and understanding the role of Bitcoin, we can gain valuable insights into the future of finance.

Unveiling Bitcoin's Legacy Amid Debt Ceiling Debates

The concept of money in motion refers to the dynamic nature of funds circulating within an economy. It encompasses various financial transactions, investments, and movements that shape economic activities. When exploring the legacy of Bitcoin amid debt ceiling debates, it is essential to recognize the unique characteristics that set it apart from traditional currencies.

Bitcoin's Decentralized Nature

One of the key aspects that define Bitcoin's legacy is its decentralized nature. Unlike traditional currencies that are controlled by central banks and governments, Bitcoin operates on a decentralized network known as blockchain. This decentralized structure provides several advantages, including enhanced security, transparency, and the ability to bypass traditional financial intermediaries. As debt ceiling debates raise concerns about the stability of traditional financial systems, Bitcoin's decentralized nature offers a potential solution to mitigate these risks.

Bitcoin as a Store of Value

Bitcoin's emergence as a store of value has been instrumental in shaping its legacy. With a limited supply capped at 21 million coins, Bitcoin exhibits scarcity, making it an attractive option for individuals seeking to preserve their wealth. Amid debt ceiling debates, where economic uncertainties prevail, Bitcoin's status as a decentralized store of value becomes even more appealing. Investors can hedge against inflation and potential economic downturns by allocating a portion of their portfolio to Bitcoin.

Bitcoin's Role in International Remittances

Remittances, the act of sending money across borders, play a significant role in global economies. Traditional remittance channels often involve hefty fees and slow transaction times. Bitcoin has emerged as a viable alternative, offering faster, more cost-effective international transfers. By utilizing Bitcoin's decentralized network, individuals can send and receive funds with reduced friction, bypassing intermediaries and lowering transaction costs. In the context of debt ceiling debates, Bitcoin's role in facilitating seamless cross-border transactions becomes increasingly relevant.

Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities

Bitcoin's legacy also includes its interaction with regulatory frameworks worldwide. As cryptocurrencies gained popularity, governments and regulatory bodies have been grappling with how to incorporate them into existing financial systems. Debt ceiling debates often shed light on the need for effective regulations to address economic challenges. While regulations can provide stability and protect consumers, they should also foster innovation and maintain the core principles of decentralization that define cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Striking the right balance is crucial to harnessing the potential benefits of cryptocurrencies while mitigating risks.

Bitcoin and Financial Inclusion

Financial inclusion, the accessibility and availability of financial services to individuals and businesses, remains a pressing global challenge. Bitcoin's legacy intertwines with the pursuit of financial inclusion by providing an alternative financial system that is accessible to anyone with an internet connection. This opens up opportunities for the unbanked and underbanked populations to participate in economic activities and access financial services. Amid debt ceiling debates, where financial systems' stability is under scrutiny, Bitcoin's potential to foster financial inclusion gains even greater significance.

Conclusion

The legacy of Bitcoin amid debt ceiling debates encompasses its decentralized nature, role as a store of value, facilitation of international remittances, interaction with regulatory frameworks, and potential for financial inclusion. As the world grapples with economic uncertainties, Bitcoin's unique characteristics offer solutions and opportunities for individuals and the financial system as a whole. By embracing the potential of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, we can pave the way for a more inclusive, efficient, and resilient financial future.

FAQ

What is Bitcoin's role in the legacy of money in motion amid debt ceiling debates? Bitcoin plays a significant role in the legacy of money in motion amid debt ceiling debates. Its decentralized nature, ability to serve as a store of value, facilitation of international remittances, and interaction with regulatory frameworks all contribute to shaping the future of finance in the midst of these discussions.

How does Bitcoin's decentralized nature impact its legacy amid debt ceiling debates? Bitcoin's decentralized nature ensures that it is not subject to the control of central banks or governments. This characteristic provides a potential solution to the risks associated with debt ceiling debates and offers enhanced security, transparency, and the ability to bypass traditional financial intermediaries.

Why is Bitcoin considered a store of value amid debt ceiling debates? Bitcoin's limited supply and scarcity make it an attractive option for individuals seeking to preserve their wealth amid debt ceiling debates. As economic uncertainties prevail, Bitcoin's status as a decentralized store of value provides a hedge against inflation and potential economic downturns.

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.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

The newspaper barons are all into crypto, now

Watching the outsized-impact we crypto enthusiasts (I'm including Bitcoin in that category), had on the 2024 USA presidential election, was a sobering affair. At the moment, our impact is primarily over the voting box, but, already, indirectly, (over Elon Musik, Donald Trump, and Jack Dorsey, etc.) through our sheer wealth (and the ingenuity that brought us that wealth) being able to influence the voting population, by changing/shifting the communications channels and influencing what is written there.

Elon even reached deep into his foreign-learned bag of political tricks and started handing out money, directly, to petition signers.

Survival of the fittest, ongoing

Now, you all know that I have full respect for an expert player, when I see one, so no hating the hustle, from my side. We all play the hand we are dealt, and the political game is now such a pigsty, that you have to get a bit dirty, to have a chance at winning. Trying to stay neat and above the fray cost Republicans the last election.

It was the most dramatic display of the greatest power following the best money, that has been seen, since the Medici family began minting gold coins. The entire world is in shock. Change is upon us.

He who has the best money, makes the rules.

On a smaller, but not insignificant scale, private wealth and access to Bitcoin funding, have allowed quite a few of us Nostriches, to dedicate time and energy toward promoting and developing the New Internet. Whereas, other people's hobby is increasingly the night shift at the gas station, or doing something mind-numbing, to escape the realities of their current economic misery.

You don't need money to be here, but you can spend more time here, if you have money. And we are here, writing the rules. We call them NIPs.

Same ole, same ole

But back to us Bitcoiners...

I increasingly don't see us morally any different than the clever people crowding into any safe asset, during any financial crisis. Like the people who bought agricultural land, gold, and Swiss Francs, before the Reichsmark melted down. The people who had that stuff, mostly managed to keep it, and their children and grandchildren have inherited it. Or they managed to marry back into families, that have done so, by remaining in the same social class, through beauty or talent.

We Bitcoiners have a good narrative to go along with our flight to economic safety, but everyone has that narrative. Humans have a conscience and need to justify their own actions, to themselves. I'm also a goldbug, you see, and a stockholder, and all three assets are rife with the same virtuous narrative.

How do we save our financial behinds, without being evil?

Some people are simply more situationally aware and have more agency, by nature and circumstances, and they adapt faster. It's not mere intelligence, rather, it also requires a willingness to act and take risks. There's an element of chance to it, but it's still always the same types of people ending up with the assets, with the winners slightly shifting with each round, due to evolution and changes in the environment.

Charity was invented, to get such people to willingly share their assets, or the fruits of their assets, for the common good. So, rather than fret over the morality of the asset, itself, the better response is to consider stepping up your charity (effort or payments), to balance out the inevitable negative impact of the coming Age of Bitcoin Inequality.

Coming down from the ATH

Even now, Bitcoin isn't the only safe asset; it's just the most-fungible and partitionable one, so that it's the one most akin to money. And lines are being blurred, as corporations, funds, governments, and insurers discharge dollars and stock up on harder reserve assets, including Bitcoin.

They can hear the money printers rolling out, already, because nobody can print-n-spend, like Trump can. Let's not forget that the money for the last big bump came from the infamous Trump stimmy checks, that lots of us stacked on crypto.

As Bitcoin flows into such markets, the power will rest with both groups (the direct-hodlers and the title-holders), although the hodlers will initially have the upper hand. I say, initially because many hodlers will need to discharge or invest Bitcoin, to live off of it, but the others don't need to, so it should eventually even out. It could take dozens or even hundreds of years to rebalance. By then, the world will be a very different place, and we don't know if Bitcoin will even still be a part of it.

Assets come, assets go, and I'm just glad I didn't let down my forefathers, by leaving them with the first generation, who failed to adapt. Even if I'm a bit late, to the Bitcoin game, the ball is still in play.

May the best money win. And may it be mine. And may I do good with it.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

Unsucking the feed is real

As a Nostrich with an interesting, thought-provoking, and informative feed... a feed so good, that we're creating clients just to look at that feed... a feed that puts a lie to the idea that Nostr is nothing, but people reposting from Twitter or rehashing worn-out Bitcoin memes... a feed that I personally and increasingly enjoy perusing... I am here to tell you that the feed is real.

It's taken me over a year, to produce this feed. I literally spent hours and hours, day in and day out, scouring the Nostrverse for people worth introducing other people to. It was brutally difficult, as I was fighting the inherent nature of the Nostr clients and relays, in their current, most-popular form.

It goes like so...

Here are the steps I took, that sometimes weren't possible to take, until I tried to take them, and that still will sometimes break your client because the clients are often intentionally designed to steer you into having one particular feed:

1) Make a screenshot of your current relay list and copy your follows list. 2) Unsubscribe from all the relays, that you are currently subscribed to. Your feed should disappear. If it doesn't, or it doesn't allow for this, switch to a different client app because yours is corrupted. 3) Unfollow everyone. Delete the whole list. You are taking your follows private, which will invariably result in only following npubs whose stuff you actually want to see, since there's no longer any virtue-signaling going on. Also, it's easier to explain having no list, than a very short one. If your client doesn't allow for this, or starts throwing error messages and freezing up, then switch to a different client app because yours is corrupted. 4) Curate your copied follows list. Go line by line and look at the feed produced by the npub on that list. * Do you want to see that in your feed, going forward? * Do they produce original content and/or are they interesting conversationalists, in the replies? * Have they been active, within the past three months? * Are they simply good friends or real-life acquaintances, that you want to keep tabs on? * If not, cross out their name. * If you have been following someone because they repost or quote interesting things, look at who they've been reposting and follow them, instead. 5) Of the npubs remaining on your list, go through and select the 10 most interesting ones, and look at the reposts and quotes in their feed, and their topical lists like \"Favorites\", \"Devs\", \"Recipes\", etc. (Not their follows list, unless it's quite short, as follows tend to be full of people they follow for social-signaling or client-functional reasons, that they don't actively look at.) Find some new follows, there. 6) Now, set up a personal relay and add all the follows, that made the cut, to your allowed-npubs list. Do not add people to the list, just to make them feel better, or because you feel guilty, as they follow you, or to keep them from yelling at you. Remember, they can't see the list! 7) Think about the topics you find interesting, and add an allowed-keywords list (this is better than hashtags, as it searches the entire content of the notes), with the OR operator (these allowed npubs OR these allowed topics). 8) Make sure that you choose words likely to find the content you are most-interested in, and not people just ranting about it or spamming (those are great additions to your relay's block-list). If you are Muslim, for instance, instead of "Islam" or "shariah", choose "hadith" or "riba", as those are words more-likely to be used by people who know what they are talking about. If you are into bread baking, add "sourdough", "rye", "yeast", or "whisk", but don't add "bread" or "carbs". Once a note from those people shows up in your feed, and their feed looks like someone interesting, you can add their npub to your allow list. Remember: The topics are there to find people to add to the allow list, not merely for their own sake, as this is not a topical relay, but a personal one. 9) Open up a faucet (or relay syncing) with some of the big relays you previously unsubscribed from, some WoT relays, and some of the paid relays (nostr.land, nostr.wine, nostr21.com, and sovbit.host, for example). Your relay will filter that feed and only accept the events from the people and topics on your list. As your relay becomes more popular, npubs will begin writing directly to it, and the connections to other relays will sink in significance. 10) Go to your client of choice and subscribe to your new relay. Also subscribe to some topical relays, or curated neighborhood relays, you find interesting or your frens are running. This is an easy way to find new, interesting npubs, to add to your own relay.

That's a lot of work, you say? Yes, but the result is great, and you are now fully in-charge of your own feed. You also -- here's the cool part -- have a feed good enough, that other people can add your feed to theirs and enjoy your manual curation. As you refine and expand your feed, theirs will also be refined, in parallel. You are now an official Nostr Community Curator. My sincere congratulations.

Why is this so hard?

This is only a lot of work because the clients aren't designed to interact with relays, to this extent, as they were created to service mega-relays, download all their crap to your local cache, and adjust the feed over the follows/mutes lists. This was an idea borne of the axiom that Relays Are Hard, so there will only ever be a handful of them, where we'd all clump together and the relay operators would never judge the quality of someone's content. Then, some unusually clever people made relays increasingly easy, and the mailbox communication model was invented, and here we are.

What we have now, and that is slowly growing in popularity, among the #NostrIntelligentsia, are Nostr clients aimed at curating and viewing individual relays or personalized sets of smaller or more-specialized relays. The reigning client devs refused to give us those clients, and most of us aren't up to developing our own clients, so the relay devs took matters into their own hands and made the clients themselves. The free market remains undefeated.

This is a total game-changer. Last one to board this train is a rotten egg.

Originally, relays were supposed to be completely stupid and clients were supposed to be completely smart, but it's now actually the other way around, because most relay devs have a market-born incentive to make their content highly customizable and appealing to individuals (so that more people run relays).

But what about algos?

Can't you just slap an algo on top of Damus, Lol, or Primal relays, and get the same result? I would argue... no. No, you can't. Or, rather, only in the short to medium term.

Running your own relay, is running your own server. You are now intellectually independent, at a machine-level, and therefore a fully sovereign consumer. If you then use algos to control your own server, or in a client that subscribes to your own server, then you can further-refine a feed that is already in a high-to-you-signal state, rather than risking an algo inching you toward the Consensus Feed.

I have noticed that my own feed is slowly drifting away from the ReplyGuy-Cryptobot-Porny-Bitcoin-Meme Dumpster Fire, that almost everyone else is looking at, and it's due to running my own relay. If I use DVMs, those algos sometimes refer to relays I intentionally avoid, so they return results according to those relays. The results are as underwhelming, as you would expect, and often are simply 31 flavors of the Trending List.

But, that isn't your problem, anymore. From here, you can actively expand and refine your feed, over your whitelist, the topics, and your personally-managed algos.

Happy Nostr-ing!

@ 45bda953:bc1e518e

PREFACE

This is a controversial rambling, just thoughts on some interesting phenomena with regards to the evolution of societal norms, comparisons and oddities with regards to the distinct differences of understanding and mentality of people a couple millennia ago. I touch on cultural fundamentals, feminism, masculinity, information warfare and the protection of what makes society function, the protection of women from harm. It has some comic relief elements worked in to just soften the dark and morbid reality of recorded human history.

...

The Streisand Effect

In 2002 or 2003, I am not certain, a dude named Kenneth was being flown along the coast taking pictures from a helicopter. Flying past Barbara Streisand's luxury coastal home in Malibu California he took another pretty picture. This picture among hundreds was posted on a website where they were documenting and measuring coastal erosion with the intent to help make informed policy decisions. He was being flown by, out at sea and not directly over her property. It caused her much emotional distress. He was sued $50 million for violating her privacy. She believed it to be an invasion of her privacy, like Nancy Pelosi believed the January 6 invasion of Capitol was a violent insurrection. Imagine that. The lawsuit was chucked out by the courts and she was ordered to pay Kenneth $177,000 to cover his legal expenses. Before the lawsuit the image had been downloaded six times. Obviously it had gone viral after the lawsuit. Since the lawsuit, well... man, wow, certain scummy 4chan meme drenched websites were on fire. Everyone was talking about Barbara Streisand and sharing pictures and jokes of her house for weeks. It was ironic and hilarious. The purpose of the lawsuit was to remove the picture from the internet and the result was everyone was poking fun at her expensive mansion. The memes, I can't even...

Imagine the precedent set and lawsuits against google for satellite maps and street view had her case won.

In this situation there were a few weird coincidences. I will label it, the cause, the desire and the outcome. None of them were predictable because the collective social internet was so fresh it changed how everything worked.

The cause: Guy flies and takes pictures for research, probably does not even know it's her house.

The desire: She wants the picture removed and receive compensation for her emotional distress. Nothing less than $50 million will be sufficient.

The outcome: A new type of cause and affect is discovered with regards to a world where everyone has equal access to the masses. No longer are celebrities talking at us through small or large square windows in our theatres and homes. We get to talk back at them and about them and explore their weaknesses and failures. We get to embarrass and humiliate them if they do not behave like decent normal people should. We don't mind their ivory towers. Just don't pick on the average Joe anymore, the average Joe collectively has a voice more powerful than yours now. Like Leonardo DiCaprio preaching about global warming from his private jet. We don't care about you flier miles, just don't be a hypocrite.

Which got me thinking. As a peasant, proletariat, a plebeian, how do you make your voice heard in a time where there is no media? I am not talking about no social media, I mean ancient times, no media. No local newspaper where you can post a missing cat picture. No radio with which to advertise your business. Nothing. A time where the king has a dude who shouts decrees from a paper on a hill. Those type of times.

It bothered me, thankfully I have an extensive library of history available to study and find an answer to this interesting question. I found it in the book of Judges in a wild west of ancient savagery where kings would cut off the heads of men just to bed the latters wives. A time where woman were property. Yes, crazy wild times.

Let us set a precedent for this cultural phenomenon and work our way back to media, the virality of said media and the subsequent outrage generated by the news spread by the channels/mediums of media. An ancient example of problem, reaction, solution.

First let's discover an ancient outrage on a smaller more localised platform and then scale it up to something more spectacular.

Genesis Chapter 34

1: Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. ---She wanted to make friends with other girls and was allowed to leave her families protection unescorted.--- 2: And when in Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of that country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and violated her. ---In those days, princes were literally just the son of the chief in the settlement, they were nothing special and they were common and illiterate agrarian goat herders, just like Jacob. You could find a prince every 30 kilometres in those regions at the time. A dime a dozen.--- 5: And Jacob heard that he defiled Dinah his daughter. Now his sons were with his livestock in the field; so Jacob held his peace until they came. 7: And the sons of Jacob came in from the field when they heard it; and the men were grieved and very angry, because he had done a disgraceful thing in Israel by lying with Jacob's daughter, a thing which ought not be done. ---The modern definition of non consensual laying is rape. It is still a thing that ought not be done to this very day.--- 8: But Hamor spoke with them, saying, "The soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him as a wife."--- Now I see this guy as trying to appease the group of angry men, appealing to taking the responsibility of caring for the violated girl off her families hands as she is now become a liability. Her worth has been "degraded" by loss of virginity. Her brothers felt this violation was disrespectful, not only to their sister but also to their entire family. Imagine a guy rapes your sister and then pops in the next day and is like "Bro, she resisted, but I love her more than she could possibly understand. WTF."--- 9: And make marriages with us; give your daughters to us, and take our daughters to yourselves. 10: So you shall dwell with us, and the land shall be before you. Dwell and trade in it, and acquire possessions for yourselves in it.” 11: Then Shechem said to her (Dinah's) father and her brothers, “Let me find favor in your eyes, and whatever you say to me I will give. 12: Ask me ever so much dowry and gift, and I will give according to what you say to me; but give me the young woman as a wife.” 13: But the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father, and spoke deceitfully, because he had defiled Dinah their sister. ---The Israelite brothers must have read Sun Tzu, because they were at a huge numerical disadvantage. This might be why these Hivite gents were so confident in confronting them directly. They probably had a whole entourage of armed men with them during these negotiations. It's just the way men meet in barbaric times. With more and bigger spears.--- 14: And they said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a reproach to us. ---They opted to have a literal dick measuring contest. The first in recorded history.--- 15: But on this condition we will consent to you: If you will become as we are, if every male of you is circumcised, 16: then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters to us; and we will dwell with you, and we will become one people. 17: But if you will not heed us and be circumcised, then we will take our daughter and be gone.” ---Now Abraham had himself circumcised as an adult being the first dude to undertake the procedure. He made it obligatory that his male descendants should all be circumcised a few days after birth. To the modern observer this "command" from god to slice off a piece of your dick seems stupid. But is it? Thought experiment. Let's say Bob lives in dangerous times with dangerous men in a desert where there are no modern ablution facilities. John rocks up at a Bob's tent and claims he is family of Bob travelling far and asks for hospitality and to be hosted for the night. Bob is like hmm, "He speaks my language, he has a similar complexion to me, but his bandit buddies might be hiding behind a hill waiting for his signal when me and my family are fast asleep." So Bob gives him lots of nice wine to drink and they break bread together. Later John needs to take a piss, Bob tells him that he also wants to take a leak, Bob walks with John behind a bush. John pulls up his robe whips out his dick and Bob can then decide how he is going to handle the situation from there. Seeing John's uncircumcised appendage Bob is safe to assume that him and his family are in danger. Also think of how vulnerable John is with his pants down draining the main vein, it might be Bob's opportune and only moment to strike first and unexpectedly. Bet you never heard an explanation like that in favour of having a cut foreskin. A secret sign of sign of familiarity. As a pragmatist I have interpreted all God's commandments following common sense and useful logic to explain them.--- 18: And their words pleased Hamor and Shechem, Hamor’s son. 19: So the young man did not delay to do the thing, because he delighted in Jacob’s daughter. ---He was like LFG bring that knife I'm ready. I can imagine Shia LaBeouf playing this part in the NETFLIX original series.

--- He was more honourable than all the household of his father. ---I think this simply means the bravest. Being circumcised as a little kid is easier when you have no say in the matter. You require more mental fortitude as a grown man to voluntarily submit to this procedure. Like playing Russian roulette with a fully loaded revolver.---

20: And Hamor and Shechem his son came to the gate of their city, and spoke with the men of their city, saying: 21: “These men are at peace with us. Therefore let them dwell in the land and trade in it. For indeed the land is large enough for them. Let us take their daughters to us as wives, and let us give them our daughters. 22: Only on this condition will the men consent to dwell with us, to be one people: if every male among us is circumcised as they are circumcised. 23: Will not their livestock, their property, and every animal of theirs be ours? Only let us consent to them, and they will dwell with us.” --- They really had to make it sound like a good deal.

24: And all who went out of the gate of his city heeded Hamor and Shechem his son; every male was circumcised, all who went out of the gate of his city.

25: Now it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain, that two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, each took his sword and came boldly upon the city and killed all the males. 26: And they killed Hamor and Shechem his son with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah from Shechem’s house, and went out. ---I must admit that this is as awesome as 300 or some Herculean feat. These okes were Alpha Chads.--- 27: The sons of Jacob came upon the slain, and plundered the city, because their sister had been defiled. ---So they sent their sister as a gift to show good faith albeit deceitfully I doubt she was wise to their plan. They knew that the guy cannot have sex with her because time has to pass for his wound to heal.--- 28: They took their sheep, their oxen, and their donkeys, what was in the city and what was in the field, 29: and all their wealth. All their little ones and their wives they took captive; and they plundered even all that was in the houses. ---The small tribe of Israelites probably had a baby boom as a people because of the influx of women gained through this specific conquest.---

30: Then Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, “You have troubled me by making me obnoxious among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites; and since I am few in number, they will gather themselves together against me and kill me. I shall be destroyed, my household and I.”

31: But they said, “Should he treat our sister like a harlot?” --- To all the feminists who say "How dare you deny a girl the freedom to go where she wants a chase her dreams. Girls can do anything! Girl power!" No, they just end up in some sleazeball's harem. Girls can only do "anything" in Western Civilisation because men have agreed on a very specific set of moral principles which are Christian in nature. Biblical record teaches us why we have freedom, how to facilitate and maintain these freedoms. If you are a feminist you should find a good man and thank him for disciplining his base desires and holds you up with esteem and respect. Feminists are destroying the pedestal men built to support them. But I digress once again.

So now we know why ancient women were under men's protection as their most valuable possession. Women could not acquire and retain agency by themselves for themselves by reason of their physical vulnerability in a wilderness of savages. Not rocket science, just common sense. When cows are money women are not entrepreneurs. There are technological and societal advances required before womens gain of agency and independence is possible.

We have just witnessed how a small group of men conspired and through cunning devised a strategy wherewith they managed to avenge a wrong committed against them. Tooth for teeth and eye for eyes. Violence begets escalation of violence. It might be the first time a nation went to war over a woman's honour. It's not the last time nations went to war over a woman either.

About 600 hundred years later, circa 1100 BC.

Judges 19

1: And it came to pass in those days, when there was no king in Israel, that there was a certain Levite staying in the remote mountains of Ephraim. He took for himself a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. ---A concubine is a woman under the legal protection of a man who performs the same duties as a wife but does not receive the same status and social recognition as a wife. She cohabits and even bears children. Sounds rough and unpleasant. Almost like a type of slave. A concubine is rarely given in marriage and more frequently exchanged like a good. I believe that the man was legally obligated to support and protect her but anyone can imagine that this is not the ideal outcome for a woman of any culture born in any age. It must have sucked.--- 2: But his concubine played the harlot against him, and went away from him to her father’s house at Bethlehem in Judah, and was there four whole months. ---Here it helps to have some perspective on where the Overton window was lying when this episode of history was recorded and happened. To a lesser extent it was similar just a century or two ago. Have you watched Roland Emmerich's movie The Patriot starring Mel Gibson and Heath Ledger. Do you remember the scene where they had to tie Gabriel Martin (Heath) up when he spent the night over at his sweethearts house. This was because her father had to be able to guarantee the chastity of his daughter on the day of her wedding. No unmarried girl could freely travel alone about the countryside without being under supervision and when she was permitted to court a suitor, a chaperone was required to escort the couple. This was to ensure that no accusation of unseemly behaviour could be made without angering the man who is responsible for her protection. If a girl was raped there were massacres. Some cultures even had intrusive forms of testing the bride to be for proof of virginity, sometimes before and sometimes after the marriage bed. If a woman was a product in a transaction or given as a bride she was required to be a virgin unless she was sold as a whore, meaning for a cheap price. The father, brothers and later the husband carried responsibility for her chaste and loyal behaviour. This does not mean that men behaved with honour. Most were self righteous pigs. But many were good husbands and fathers.--- 3: Then her husband arose and went after her, to speak kindly to her and bring her back, having his servant and a couple of donkeys with him. So she brought him into her father’s house; and when the father of the young woman saw him, he was glad to meet him. 4: Now his father-in-law, the young woman’s father, detained him; and he stayed with him three days. So they ate and drank and lodged there. ---She was not having indiscriminate affairs with random men. She just missed her family and ran away. She would not have been labelled a harlot if she was travelling with her husbands blessing and an escort for protection, she ran away and he could not protect her or be witness to her behaviour. Almost like being guilty by association but more like being guilty for lack of evidence. She becomes Schrodinger's cat. Faithful? Unfaithful? You could not know even with the box open.--- 5: Then it came to pass on the fourth day that they arose early in the morning, and he stood to depart; but the young woman’s father said to his son-in-law, “Refresh your heart with a morsel of bread, and afterward go your way.” 6: So they sat down, and the two of them ate and drank together. Then the young woman’s father said to the man, “Please be content to stay all night, and let your heart be merry.” 7: And when the man stood to depart, his father-in-law urged him; so he lodged there again. 8: Then he arose early in the morning on the fifth day to depart, but the young woman’s father said, “Please refresh your heart.” So they delayed until afternoon; and both of them ate. 9: And when the man stood to depart—he and his concubine and his servant—his father-in-law, the young woman’s father, said to him, “Look, the day is now drawing toward evening; please spend the night. See, the day is coming to an end; lodge here, that your heart may be merry. Tomorrow go your way early, so that you may get home.” 10: However, the man was not willing to spend that night; so he rose and departed, and came opposite Jebus (that is, Jerusalem). With him were the two saddled donkeys; his concubine was also with him. 11: They were near Jebus, and the day was far spent; and the servant said to his master, “Come, please, and let us turn aside into this city of the Jebusites and lodge in it.” 12: But his master said to him, “We will not turn aside here into a city of foreigners, who are not of the children of Israel; we will go on to Gibeah.”---The city of Jerusalem would would not be conquered by king David for another 100 years. This guy did not want to trust foreigners who did not respect his culture and customs with the security of his party. It seems wise. He opted to stay with people who were kin.--- 13: So he said to his servant, “Come, let us draw near to one of these places, and spend the night in Gibeah or in Ramah.” 14: And they passed by and went their way; and the sun went down on them near Gibeah, which belongs to Benjamin. 15: They turned aside there to go in to lodge in Gibeah. And when he went in, he sat down in the open square of the city, for no one would take them into his house to spend the night. ---He arrived late during the day as well making it difficult to arrange lodging at the last minute.--- 16: Just then an old man came in from his work in the field at evening, who also was from the mountains of Ephraim; he was staying in Gibeah, whereas the men of the place were Benjamites. 17: And when he raised his eyes, he saw the traveller in the open square of the city; and the old man said, “Where are you going, and where do you come from?” 18: So he said to him, “We are passing from Bethlehem in Judah toward the remote mountains of Ephraim; I am from there. I went to Bethlehem in Judah; now I am going to the house of the Lord. But there is no one who will take me into his house, 19: although we have both straw and fodder for our donkeys, and bread and wine for myself, for your female servant, and for the young man who is with your servant; there is no lack of anything.”

20: And the old man said, “Peace be with you! However, let all your needs be my responsibility; only do not spend the night in the open square.” ---The old man knew how lawless his city was and did not want to leave the Levite vulnerable in the town square, unfortunately the strangers presence in the city was already noted.--- 21: So he brought him into his house, and gave fodder to the donkeys. And they washed their feet, and ate and drank. 22: As they were enjoying themselves, suddenly certain men of the city, perverted men, surrounded the house and beat on the door. They spoke to the master of the house, the old man, saying, “Bring out the man who came to your house, that we may know him carnally!” 23: But the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brethren! I beg you, do not act so wickedly! Seeing this man has come into my house, do not commit this outrage. ---He is asking them nicely without physical authority to respect his private property.--- 24: Look, here is my virgin daughter and the man’s concubine; let me bring them out now. Humble them, and do with them as you please; but to this man do not do such a vile thing!” ---How sad that a woman's honour is traded for a mans personal safety. This history is definitely not a heroes epic.--- 25: But the men would not heed him. So the man took his concubine and brought her out to them. And they knew her and abused her all night until morning; and when the day began to break, they let her go. ---Many modern day scholars of the humanist persuasion pull up their noses at Biblical texts precisely because of these types of occurrences recorded in it. When a historian is willing to record for posterity their failures as well as their victories it only garners trust that the history is true and unmolested by those who would wish to hide and twist the truth to suit their narrative or motives. The aftershock of this event was and is still significant and warrants explanation to the descendants of these people to help them understand their current reality at the time of learning it 2800-2000 years ago. The Bible is not a toy, it is also not a fairy tale. It is the most comprehensive exposition of the human condition currently available for study.--- 26: Then the woman came as the day was dawning, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her master was, till it was light. 27: When her master arose in the morning, and opened the doors of the house and went out to go his way, there was his concubine, fallen at the door of the house with her hands on the threshold. 28: And he said to her, “Get up and let us be going.” But there was no answer. So the man lifted her onto the donkey; and the man got up and went to his place. ---The modern reader of this might feel a crime of murder and rape was committed. I assure you that this is not the crime. The crime here is that private property was vandalised and destroyed. I pity the woman with my modern Western mind. But as a student of history I have to face the fact that the man was the victim in his day and age. The emotions and pain of this event is not described and could not be described in it's full detail. We do not know if a distraught and scared man was lying inside the house crying, being shushed and detained by his host? I doubt that this was the case, I can only speculate. We only have the information which was deemed sufficient and necessary to be carved onto a slab of stone or scribed onto papyrus. Historians of ages past were not as privileged as I to be able to write and babble thousands of words without the laborious cost which written or carved words claimed from the ancient and even more recent thinkers. Modern critics of ancient texts are not sufficiently recognising these costs. We learn more important lessons from histories scandals than we do from it's triumph's.--- 29: When he entered his house he took a knife, laid hold of his concubine, and divided her into twelve pieces, limb by limb, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel. 30: And so it was that all who saw it said, “No such deed has been done or seen from the day that the children of Israel came up from the land of Egypt until this day. Consider it, confer, and speak up!” --- Wait what? This guy gone did what? He chopped his wife into 12 pieces? If there was a king which there was not he could have made a plea for justice. If there was a court he could have made a claim. If he had a gun he could have shot them all in a righteous fury. He wanted justice but justice did not have a door for him to knock on. His own people whom he chose to trust above the foreigner abused his trust. It is here where I solemnly confer that it's better to not have expectations of valour from people you don't know, don't trust if you can help it. No one is coming to save you. I'm sorry? I forgot to explain why he couriered his concubines corpse all across the country you say. He did it because he did not have a mobile phone, facebook, twitter, newspapers, radio, or cable TV from where he could broadcast the injustice and pain he and his deceased concubine was subjected to. He knew to get his situation trending on the network of human conversation he had to create sensation. A Streisand effect but intentionally. A rallying cry, like Peanut the squirrel, just a bit more gruesome.---

Judges 21

1: So all the children of Israel came out, from Dan to Beersheba, as well as from the land of Gilead, and the congregation gathered together as one man before the Lord at Mizpah.  2: And the leaders of all the people, all the tribes of Israel, presented themselves in the assembly of the people of God, four hundred thousand foot soldiers who drew the sword. 3 (Now the children of Benjamin heard that the children of Israel had gone up to Mizpah.) Then the children of Israel said, “Tell us, how did this wicked deed happen?” 4: So the Levite, the husband of the woman who was murdered, answered and said, “My concubine and I went into Gibeah, which belongs to Benjamin, to spend the night. 5: And the men of Gibeah rose against me, and surrounded the house at night because of me. They intended to kill me, but instead they ravished my concubine so that she died. 6: So I took hold of my concubine, cut her in pieces, and sent her throughout all the territory of the inheritance of Israel, because they committed lewdness and outrage in Israel. 7: Look! All of you are children of Israel; give your advice and counsel here and now!”

8: So all the people arose as one man, saying, “None of us will go to his tent, nor will any turn back to his house; 9: but now this is the thing which we will do to Gibeah: We will go up against it by lot. 10: We will take ten men out of every hundred throughout all the tribes of Israel, a hundred out of every thousand, and a thousand out of every ten thousand, to make provisions for the people, that when they come to Gibeah in Benjamin, they may repay all the vileness that they have done in Israel.” 11: So all the men of Israel were gathered against the city, united together as one man.

12: Then the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, “What is this wickedness that has occurred among you? 13: Now therefore, deliver up the men, the perverted men who are in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and remove the evil from Israel!” But the children of Benjamin would not listen to the voice of their brethren, the children of Israel. 14: Instead, the children of Benjamin gathered together from their cities to Gibeah, to go to battle against the children of Israel. 15: And from their cities at that time the children of Benjamin numbered twenty-six thousand men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who numbered seven hundred select men. 16: Among all this people were seven hundred select men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair’s breadth and not miss. 17: Now besides Benjamin, the men of Israel numbered four hundred thousand men who drew the sword; all of these were men of war. ---A civil war in which 65100 men were slain broke out among distantly related brethren. The idea I am trying to convey is that if a man has no speech he cannot campaign for his desired cause. Sensation and virality propels speech into the public arena of popular discourse and is discussed until the prevailing message is precise and clear. If there is no shock factor your speech falls on the ground before your feet. If your speech aligns with the general narrative everyone agrees and nods but the impact of your speech is marginal.

I am glad that we are in a new age where human beings are not so atrociously violated by men with power as it was in ancient times. No wait, it's still a problem. Women are still abused and brothers are still violating each others property and different groups with different interests are still bombing the shit out of each other.

What gives me hope is this.

The internet has dropped the barriers of audible speech and enabled everyone equal access to generate Streisand effects of their own making. Purposely and accidentally.

We are the new mainstream media. Podcasters, influencers, youtubers, and bloggers. We get to decide and form narratives and we get to put our ideas in the arena to battle for acceptance and prominence. The world is now our oyster just as much as it was Barbara Streisand's in the golden age of Hollywood before the internet was there to humble her. Time will tell if we are collectively better custodians of this responsibility than celebrities, corporations and governments. The responsibility of forming the narrative. Not centrally, but decentralised. Let good ideas form and old ideas rest.

Can we be a voice of reason and bring peace and order to a chaotic clown world through the power of speech and ideas? I can only hope.

Echdel

bitbib

@ f462d21e:1390b6b1

eyJfaWQiOiI2Njk1ZmZjZDUyYTMzYTg2YTMxOGUxYzAiLCJ1c2VybmFtZSI6ImtoYWxlZCIsImZlZWRiYWNrU2NvcmUiOjAsImNyZWF0ZWRfb24iOiIyMDI0LTA3LTE2VDA1OjA2OjIxLjA0OFoiLCJ0cmFkZXMiOjEsInRyYWRpbmdQYXJ0bmVycyI6MSwicHVibGljS2V5IjoiZGI0MzViZjAzYzU4Zjk4NTEwMzZiODZkYjI4OGIxMTJkYWRkYzAzMjc5ZTQ0MzkzOTY2MzkzYzE0MDQ3OWEwYyIsImZlZWRiYWNrIjp7ImZlZWRiYWNrIjowLCJwYWdlciI6eyJ0b3RhbEl0ZW1zIjowfSwibWVzc2FnZSI6Im5vIHJlc3VsdHMgZm91bmQifX0=

@ df478568:2a951e67

I'm writing a long form post from the Yakihonne app I downloaded from the Aurora store. I signed in using Amber. This means I never needed to enter my private key into the app. I also didn't provide an email, nor password.

This is a link to Clark Moody's Dashboard I made by clicking a button and pasting the link.

This post won't be too long as I'm testing the software out, but it's not so bad for being so new. It even let's you save drafts.

https://nostree.me/marc26z@nostrplebs.com/ 869,210

@ b184e3ed:27924b0d

When I joined AA, this question started to haunt my thoughts during those frequent nighttime anxiety attacks. Among all the chaos in my life, there were a few things I was certain of. And one of those things was the certainty of never having felt God, I didn't even know that God was something you could feel. For me, when I started the 12-step program, God was a social construct, something humans had invented to control a society thirsty for basic survival instincts. And perhaps I wasn't so wrong, but like everything in life, this was only half the truth. Despite my deep cognitive analysis that my anxiety forced me to do almost every night for hours, often until the first ray of sun pierced my bedroom window, my spiritual bias didn't allow me to see the whole picture, or a complete reality. On that side, there had always been a void Later, I realized that this emptiness was the main cause of all my problems. From there came that feeling of always being incomplete, that anxiety of always feeling like something was missing, that need to always want to fill voids that weren't mine, without realizing that it was only creating more emptiness within me Once, in those heart-to-heart talks that we in AA call sponsorship, my soul expressed the painful doubt, 'What does it mean to feel God?' My sponsor simply replied, 'I assure you that when you feel God, you won't doubt that what you feel is God. There is no doubt in matters of God. And so I left, with that answer that left me right where I started. And with more doubts. Why is there no doubt in matters of God?

After thinking about it for so long, I paused for a few seconds. I closed my eyes and decided, for the first time, to talk to this so-called God. I let go of all my feelings, all my disbelief, and I prepared myself to accept anything different from what I already had, because what I had wasn't working for me at all. With all sincerity and feeling a pressure in my chest, closer to my heart than usual, I asked in a low voice God, what does it feel like to feel you? What should I do to feel you? What's the manual for feeling you? I've tried everything, I don't know what else to do, what else to plan. I accept that I need to feel you. Everyone tells me that when I feel you, everything will make sense and only then will I start to let go of this violent need to consume my drug of choice. But nobody tells me how. What am I not seeing? Please, give me something. I can't take it anymore, I'm running out of strength, I'm wasting my life stuck in the same cycle. I can't do this anymore, help me feel you. Then a pain began to flow, but a particular one that every addict knows, that soul-deep pain that comes from emptiness, that pain that turns on the faucet of tears that began to flow non-stop. I allowed myself to feel that pain, everything turned dark and negative, suicidal thoughts returned, hate, resentment, selfishness, depression, all together, all that is lived in darkness, all that is felt in solitude, all that came from emptiness. And only by feeling it, could I see where that deep pain came from, I could visualize the path it left behind. For the first time, I recognized my spiritual emptiness. And it was only then that I began to see the whole picture of my life. Doubt has no place in the things of God because God is not logic, God is not reason, much less a manual. Doubt comes from logic, therefore where there is doubt, there is also an absence of God, emptiness. And right at the moment of recognizing that, very specific images came to my mind. My sponsor hugging me for the first time when I arrived and interviewed me. With that hug came the words, 'You're not alone, you're already in a safe harbor, we'll be with you from start to finish. One day at a massive AA event, right in the middle of a workshop dynamic, that deep and sincere hug my fellow sufferer and I shared, in the midst of deep crying with our eyes closed, someone guided our arms to each other. To end up keeping each other company in that darkness we had always gone through alone. That trip to a Group Anniversary outside the city, where a fellow member of my group and I were simply enjoying the scenery, the wind on our faces, and laughing at the craziness of our daily lives, this on my motorcycle on the highway. That hug it took me years to find in the arms of my younger sister, right after arriving after a writing session. That hug of forgiveness to my mother and father that I had never been able to give before because I didn't want to go through the pain that came with feeling. Those few seconds in the rain that we spent lost on our way to the new location of our Group that I experienced in the company of a fellow member. Seeing a new person arrive with a desire to start their process. Connecting in the same feeling and emotion that comes with the death of a best friend. Serving a cup of coffee to that fellow member who returns after months of absence. Arriving at the group with hope of seeing that fellow member who hasn't been coming for weeks and little is known about what happened, but they no longer come to meetings. Day after day, their chair remains empty. And then start letting go of their defenses and their craziness. Standing in front of several strangers, with my head held high, my gaze firm, saying my name and then, 'I am a drug addict. To say, 'I feel like shit, but I'm here for whatever I can contribute. To feel like I'm that support for those who were my support when I was at rock bottom. And not just feel it, but also be able to be it. And that, to mention just a few of the scenes that came to my mind, then I understood 'I had already felt God.' I wasn't lacking spirituality, I wasn't lacking God, I just needed to stay still for a moment to feel it. And to feel that he has always been there. And that he will never leave my side. So today I can answer my own question, 'That's what it feels like to feel God' but not just any God. But a very special one, the God of the 4th and 5th step addicts and alcoholics...

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/756957

@ cf6b9d54:11ef2370

As interest in Hamster Kombat declines, PAWS surges, outperforming the once-top Telegram Mini App. Once a leading tap-to-earn game on Telegram, Hamster Kombat has seen a steep decline in its user base and engagement due to political backlash, bans and new competition.

Hamster Kombat boasted 300 million users in August, but as of Nov. 5, the game has only 41 million active monthly players — an 86% decrease.

Meanwhile, Paws, a newly launched Mini App on Telegram, has surged in popularity, reaching 20.5 million users in its first eight days, surpassing Hamster Kombat’s growth trajectory.

According to IntoTheBlock (ITB) data, on Sept. 27, active Hamster Kombat addresses peaked at around 772,330. Since then, user activity and token interest have waned, falling more than 36% in the past week.

Token price and activity plummet Hamster Kombat’s challenges are reflected in its HMSTR token price, which has fallen nearly 70% from an all-time high of $0.01 on Sept. 26 to about $0.0022 as of Nov. 4, according to CoinGecko data. This decline correlates with lower network engagement and fewer daily active users.

This downward trend is reinforced by ITB’s active addresses ratio (AAR) chart — which calculates the ratio of active addresses to addresses holding HMSTR — revealing a 30-day low of just 0.34% active users.

Still, according to ITB data, the total addresses holding HMSTR have continued to increase, establishing a 30-day high of 3.5 million holders on Nov. 4.

Compared to the performance of other popular Telegram games, a pattern emerges, as seen with the Dogs (DOGS) token airdrop, which dropped from $0.0014 to $0.0004 between August and Nov. 4.

The DOGS AAR chart also shows a steady drop in activity alongside the token’s falling value, hitting a 30-day low of 0.27% active users on Nov. 3.

Scrutiny and volatility response Hamster Kombat has faced criticism from Iranian government officials and has been hit with rumors of bans in Uzbekistan, which have since been proven inaccurate.

The Hamster Kombat team previously told Cointelegraph that its future plans include payment system integration, launching new games and including non-fungible tokens (NFTs) as in-game assets.

One falls, one rises In stark contrast to the fall of Hamster Kombat’s network activity and token price, the Paws Mini App saw over 11 million users join in the first two days alone.

A Nov. 4 announcement on the Paws Telegram channel said that 10 million wallets had connected to the app and it had one million followers on the project’s X account.

source

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

One popular plot formula for movies is having two very different people trade places through some mysterious means. It may be kids trading places with adults. It may be the rich person trading places with the poor person. It may be the city person trading places with the country person. The more different the two people, the more comical the effects of trading places is.

All Christians are in a storyline of two very different people trading places. It isn’t the story of rich/poor, young/old, or city/country, it is the trading places of the woefully inadequate and sinful trading places with the perfect and sinless. This isn’t a comedy. In so many ways it seems like a tragedy. The one who deserves punishment and death gets forgiveness and eternal life. The one who deserves worship and praise gets punishment and a torturous death.

Unfortunately most of us are not thankful enough for the wonderful benefits we get from this trade and don’t feel the horror we should at what was done to our perfect God, Creator, and Savior.

Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. (2 Corinthians 5:17-21) {emphasis mine}

What a wonderful, glorious turn of events in our personal story that we become “a new creature” in Christ; we “become the righteousness of God in Him.” What a tragedy and unfathomable sacrifice that our Creator God, “who knew no sin,” became “sin on our behalf.” We are part of the most unfair trade, and we benefit so incredibly much and yet we take it for granted most of the time.

For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; (1 Peter 3:18) {emphasis mine}

We, the unjust, were made just so we can be forgiven and face God almighty. Our Creator, Jesus Christ, the just was made sin for us and died to pay the penalty we deserved for our rejection of God, selfishness, dishonesty, and general ignoring of our Creator.

I don’t think we comprehend how much we don’t deserve the Salvation we received and how much Jesus didn’t deserve the treatment He got throughout history, but especially in His death and separation from God on the cross. We feel severe pain when we are separated from our close friends and/or family. Jesus, part of the 3-in-1 God, was separated from God the Father and God the Spirit. It was like us having a limb cut off. They are one God, so severing one from the rest was the greatest torment that He could ever go through. It was worse than infinite, eternal Jesus limiting Himself to a mortal, finite body to live on earth as a man. It was worse than being tortured and killed in the most painful way ever designed by man. Perfect, holy Jesus was made sin, so He could no longer be in the presence of the Father. We need to thank Him every single day for what He did for us. (I know I don’t thank Him enough.)

Surely our griefs He Himself bore,\ And our sorrows He carried;\ Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,\ Smitten of God, and afflicted.\ But He was pierced through for our transgressions,\ *He was crushed for our iniquities*;\ The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,\ And by His scourging we are healed.\ All of us like sheep have gone astray,\ Each of us has turned to his own way;\ But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all\ To fall on Him**. (Isaiah 53:4-6) {emphasis mine}

Look at all the replacement language in this passage:

• “our griefs He Himself bore”

• “our sorrows He carried”

• “He was pierced through for our transgressions”

• “He was crushed for our iniquities”

• “The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him”

• “by His scourging we are healed”

• “the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him”

Because of what Jesus did for us, He took the grief, sorrows, piercing, crushing, chastening, and scourging that we deserved. He took on the burden and guilt of our iniquity.

For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth; and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls. ( 1 Peter 2:21-25) {emphasis mine}

How amazing is it that our loving Creator came down to earth and lived a perfect life as “an example for you to follow?” How unfathomable is it that He took our sins into Himself changing Him from the Holy Lamb to a sinner judged and separated from God? How incredible is it that we get His righteousness because He willingly took on our sins? How can we ever show enough gratefulness for what He has done for us?

This next passage is a passage of the greatest joy imaginable and what all believers have to look forward to:

Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “Death is swallowed up in victory. (1 Corinthians 15:50-54) {emphasis mine}

The day is coming that we will not just be justified by Jesus’s sacrifice, but we will be changed from perishable to imperishable and from mortal to immortal. “In the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised.”

As the passage continues, “but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 15:57)

Trust Jesus.\ \ your sister in Christ,

Christy

@ fb5986f6:4173af9d

Instalación de proxmox: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUXX1dKAGxA

No Solo Hacking - Virtualización con Proxmox https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaWpaNX_rL8&list=PLznRNLIWBPwH5Li7Co2i57rUVhve7m_ZQ

@ a039ecde:18bc0b8c

Ensure top-notch food safety standards with Telsen’s food hygiene app, designed to simplify daily tasks and streamline hygiene management. This user-friendly app supports businesses in maintaining compliance by digitising checklists, tracking cleaning schedules, and providing timely reminders. Ideal for restaurants, catering services, and food manufacturers, Telsen’s app improves operational efficiency and helps meet stringent hygiene regulations. With real-time updates and easy-to-use features, our app is a vital tool for enhancing food safety practices. Choose Telsen’s food hygiene app for comprehensive, reliable hygiene management at your fingertips.

@ fc792576:bab046e9

Russian Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov said he does not know whether Vladimir Putin plans to congratulate Donald Trump on his election victory, but he recalled that the United States is an unfriendly country involved in a war against Russia.

"As for congratulations, I am not aware of the president's plans to congratulate Trump," Peskov told reporters in response to a question on the matter.

At the same time, he noted: “Let’s not forget that we are talking about an unfriendly country that is directly and indirectly involved in a war against our state.”

Peskov was asked whether he thought Trump might be offended if Putin did not congratulate him on his victory, and whether this would worsen relations between Russia and the US even more.

"It is practically impossible to worsen things further; relations are at their historical lowest point. And what happens next will depend on the next US leadership. President Putin has repeatedly said that he is open to constructive dialogue based on justice, equality and a willingness to take each other's concerns into account. And President Putin maintains this attitude. He has repeatedly confirmed it. At the moment, the US administration is diametrically opposed. We will see what happens in January," Peskov said.

In general, the elections, he noted, are an internal matter for the United States. "We, of course, are closely monitoring all the information flows that are coming from overseas on this matter, we are analyzing the words that are being said, and of course, we will mainly draw conclusions based on the statements, on the topics that are on our agenda, when they come in," the Kremlin representative said.

In addition, conclusions will be drawn based on the first concrete steps, Peskov added.

At the same time, the press secretary reminded that this will have to wait, since the current US president will continue to perform his duties for at least another month and a half.

At the same time, responding to a clarification about what would happen if Trump made friendly statements, Peskov said: “As our diplomats say, eventual discussions are inappropriate here.”

@ 569d3ee7:6120020e

Enhance user experience with Responsive Website Design Orange County by Urban Geko. Our team creates mobile-first designs that adapt perfectly to any device, ensuring seamless usability and higher engagement. With responsive design, your website will load fast, look stunning, and function flawlessly across smartphones, tablets, and desktops. Urban Geko specializes in blending creativity with technology to deliver dynamic, interactive websites that leave lasting impressions. Whether you’re a local business or a global enterprise, our Orange County experts ensure your website is future-ready. Partner with Urban Geko for innovative web solutions that elevate your brand.

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

****The disappointment I feel with the passivity and lack of critical thinking of the previous and current adult generation is currently at maximum levels...

If someone tells me that I would be alive to watch Orwellian systems being pedaled by countries that call themselves "1st World Countries" I wouldn't not have believe it...

If someone tells me that the political system called "democracy" will become a joke, where the political arena is controlled by the donors and therefore the "elected" politicians will bend over to please their donors and their interests instead to work for the people.... I wouldn't have believe it...

If someone tells me that the West would support unjust causes, fund extremist to support the interests of the pharmaceutical, the energy and the military industrial complex... I would not have believe it...

If someone tells me that the united West, will ban books, and attack people with corrupted law enforcement due to their ideology, religious believes or simply for telling inconvenient truth's as official or citizen journalists, scientists, doctors, whistleblowers... I wouldn't have believe it...

But here we are and is all happening...

The minority, those aware of what is at stake, can keep doing their part, but the amount of NPC characters, sold outs, traitors and corrupt officials is overwhelming, and IMO , until we don't separate the money from the state this will just get worst until it breaks...

And when someone or a group starts spreading hope, telling you not to worry, asking you to do nothing, telling you they are in control and they will take down the corrupted web harming your country, you are most probably being gaslighted and surrendering your power to a psychological operation built to neutralize you,

What can we do? Few suggestions:

1. Information is empowering, read, inform yourself, do not use the main stream media only, expand your sources of information, question more
2. Get involve with your community
3. Research and demand accountability for the elected officials when they do not behave correctly or work against the interest of your city.
4. Write to the elected officials when new laws are to be approved, demand explanations if they are harming your town/city, organize, collect signatures and perform referendums to remove political bad actors from office
5. Organize the community to understand the law and your rights, look for volunteer lawyers to give free lectures and recommend literature to digest, consider going to law school lectures, the more informed you are the better prepared to fight back for your constitutional rights
6. Lead by example
7. Try listening more
8. Do not trust any news, no matter the source, verify

@ 85a99262:6d44d234

Searching for local SEO services in Auckland? Look no further than Team Empathy. Our team specialises in optimising websites for improved local search visibility in Auckland. With targeted strategies and customised approaches, we help businesses dominate the local search results and attract more qualified leads from their community. Trust Team Empathy to boost your business's local presence and drive more customers to your doorstep in Auckland.

@ b425f50d:bb0ee063

Organise, manage, and share your brand’s images effortlessly with Brandkit’s image library software. Designed for marketing teams and brand managers, this software provides a centralised, secure platform to store and retrieve high-quality images, ensuring consistency and accessibility. Brandkit’s intuitive image library software enhances productivity and collaboration, reducing time spent searching for assets. Streamline your visual content strategy and keep your team aligned with Brandkit’s innovative image management solution. Experience the simplicity and efficiency of a robust image library that keeps your visual assets organised and easy to use.

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

Introduction

Nowadays, businesses and individuals are adopting Bitcoin as a method of payment. It's no surprise, given the security, speed, and cost-efficiency associated with it, specially using the LN. However, despite the numerous advantages, Bitcoin still faces challenges in terms of privacy, fees, and scalability.

What is ARK?

A Layer 2 protocol for Bitcoin designed to solve some of the Bitcoin Network challenges, to improve its efficiency, security and scalability. The protocol aims to enhance the functionality of Bitcoin by addressing its current limitations by using a shared UTXO model that enables anonymous, off-chain payments through an untrusted intermediary called the Ark Service Provider (ASP). ASPs are always-on servers that provide liquidity to the network, similar to how Lightning service providers work but without the time consuming opening and close and balancing of channels.

Interoperability with the Lighting Network?

Ark will function as a liquidity network that operates like Lightning, but without introducing liquidity constraints or a direct link between the sender and receiver. It uses virtual UTXOs, to enable anonymous, scalable, off-chain payments. ASPs provide liquidity to the network and charge fees for their services.

ARK will address key issues with deploying capital into the Lightning Network providing a layer that settles transactions without the requirement for a specific infrastructure to remain online, as is the case with Lightning, while still providing assurances of the private custody of funds. How: - Ark can interoperate with Lightning by attaching HTLCs (Hashed Timelock Contracts) and PTLCs (Point Time Locked Contracts) to a pool transaction. Attached HTLCs live under another shared UTXO called the HTLCs outputs, which expires after four-weeks. - Ark service providers forward HTLCs to the broader Lightning Network the moment after HTLCs are attached to a pool transaction. This requires Ark service providers to run routing nodes on the Lightning Network with well-established outgoing channels. Ark users can also get paid from Lightning using HTLC-nested vTXOs.

Last but not least, the Ark Service Provider will serve not only as a liquidity provider but as a Coin-Join coordinator and a Lightning service provider.

How does ARK compares with the Lighting Network?

• https://image.nostr.build/00dba22e23022333d9a767fb015e2d89b7e2e0e5aa73345eaea53bd59c5ecc56.jpg

Conclusion

The ARK protocol is an exciting development, addressing many of the challenges faced by Bitcoin Network today. ARK promises to enhance, above all, privacy and scalability, making it a valuable addition to the rapidly growing Bitcoin ecosystem.

_

Sources and recommended watching and reading:

• Ark Whiteboard Masterclass with Burak & Robin - MUST WATCH
• ArkPillMe
• GitHub
• Community Telegram Channel
• ARK video from Bitcoin Miami 2023
• ARK presentation from Bitcoin Miami 2023

@ d035f771:37c0030d

Pink Bins is your trusted provider for high-quality waste bins in Auckland, offering a variety of sizes for all types of waste disposal needs. Whether for home, business, or construction sites, our bins are designed for durability and convenience. With prompt delivery, flexible rental terms, and competitive prices, Pink Bins ensures your waste management process is easy and efficient. Our team is dedicated to providing exceptional customer service, making us a top choice for waste solutions in Auckland. Choose Pink Bins for reliable and hassle-free waste bin rentals that meet your unique project demands.

@ 3ad01248:962d8a07

The 2024 election is finally over! I'm sure all of you are tired of the constant emails and calls from political candidates asking for your vote. I know for sure that I am! With that being a said election night 2024 was a bloodbath for the Democrats. Not only did Kamala Harris not win the presidency, the Democrats lost the Senate and will most likely will not win back the House of Representatives.

The Republican will now control all three branches of the federal government for the first time in a while. What they decide to do with this new found power is going to be interesting because they don't have a super majority in the senate or the house. They are going to have to work with Democrats to get anything done, which after this election if pretty much a non-starter.

It is cool that Trump won and all but I honestly don't know how is going to change from a Biden to a Trump presidency. The Democrats are not going to give Trump a win on anything because they have nothing to lose over the next 4 years. Who do they have waiting in the wings to take over the lead the Democrat party? Gavin Newsome? He can't even run California right. AOC? The Squad? Crypto hater Elizabeth Warren? Yea right. Democrats have effectively lost their way and do not know how to connect to the average voter right now. As long as the focus on abortion, gender and race identity they will continue to lose the average voter.

The average voter cares about the economy and putting food on the table. They care about crime and keeping their community safe. They care about securing the border and making sure people immigrate to this country through the proper channels. It's not really that hard if you think about it. In my opinion the Democrat party is talking to a constituent that will be the majority maybe in another 20 years, and the issues the talk about now resonate more with that cohort but they are not a majority of the voting public. How the Democrat party doesn't understand this is beyond me and frankly I don't care if they do.

They will either adapt of wither away as a political party. I would love to see the emergence of more political parties that could decentralize more of the political power among different stakeholders.

What Happens Over The Next 4 Years

Now that Trump has been elected as the 47th president of the United States what does that mean for America and the world? Needless to say there are some massive shifts coming on the foreign policy front that much is certain.

Ukraine

Lets start with Ukraine. Trump being elected is definitely a negative for Ukrainians that want to keep fighting and not cede land to Russia. What I see happening is Trump demanding that Ukraine give up the land they lost to Russia because they will not send more military hardware to help they continue the fight. Ukrainian leadership will not like this but their hands are effective tied at this point.

The US is the biggest backer of Ukraine and when they so no more weapons there isn't much they can do about it. Europe hasn't stepped up in a real way and provided the support they need despite the war being on the doorstep. I get Trump's thinking on this. If Europe isn't going to step up why should America foot the bill. The consequences of letting Russia get away with this has more impact on Europe than America. Time will tell what will happen with this conflict but it safe to say right now its a wait and see situation.

https://youtu.be/m3AUefhHjfI?si=4WH1Q-PVs8yOeDTP

The lesson that dictators will learn from this is they can take land with impunity because the so called "free world" will do nothing to stop them. What happens when China invades Taiwan? This is going to happen as a result of Trump winning. China sees a America that is more inward facing and not a global force that will intervene in the affairs of other countries. It's going to be an interesting 4 years.

Israel/Gaza War

Trump winning the election gives Israel and Bibi Netanyahu the green light to pursue their genocidal campaign in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. You can expect more people to be killed in Gaza and I wouldn't doubt if the death toll hits 100k by next year. Israel isn't trying to take out Hamas, they are forcibly removing the Palestinians from northern Gaza and killing as many as they can. There have been videos circulating online of far right Israeli settlers that want to reoccupy Gaza. This has been a plan in the making for a long time. Don't believe me? Watch this video!

https://youtu.be/mF6B5UVupyA?si=B58TXv135B5LnjrC

https://youtu.be/Q7fXNwZoH9I?si=nSI1SmBxeimCv4g6

Trump will do nothing to stand in the way of this happening which probably means a wider regional war with Israel vs the Arab world is not off the table. Guess who get drawn into that war to help defend its "greatest ally". Be careful what you wish for America.

Bitcoin

The one thing I think a Trump administration will have a positive effect on is the Bitcoin price and regulations. If you are a Biticoner you are aware of President Trump's 180 on Bitcoin. 4 years he thought it was a scam to now in 2024 wanting to create a strategic Bitcoin reserve and speaking at the Bitcoin conference. Pretty wild stuff right! As the election results were coming in last night you saw the Bitcoin price rise and reach a new ATH with the prospect of a Trump win.

Now that this has become a reality, I fully expect Bitcoin to reach 6 figures over the next 6-12 months. The creation of a Bitcoin strategic reserve or the simple act of not selling confiscated Bitcoin will be enough to drive the price higher. The higher the price goes, the more attention it gets. NGU in full effect. While I don't what the regulatory front looks like for Bitcoin under Trump, it should be less hostile than the Biden/Harris regime. I think pushing for the removal of capital gains taxes on Bitcoin and making Bitcoin legal tender should be the next goal to achieve.

Overall a Trump win is bullish for Bitcoin and I am excited to see what the next 4 years looks like without the federal government actively trying to put the squeeze on Bitcoin.

I hope the Trump administration is successful and keeps its promises to the American people, especially the one about freeing Ross Ulbricht. Ross deserves to be free and with his family. Let Edward Snowden come home too. God Bless America.

Bitcoin #Politics

@ 361d3e1e:50bc10a8

https://forex-strategy.com/2024/11/06/5-star-hotels-in-turkey-are-affected-by-a-new-virus/ 5-star hotels in Turkey are affected by a new virus The disease mainly affects children, but adults also complain of severe consequences

turkey #virus #holiday #Coxsackie #travel

@ ffbcb706:b0574044

In aanloop naar het debat over de begroting van BZK, EZ en JenV rondom digitale zaken, stuurden wij samen met Waag Futurelab en Commons Network een brief aan de Tweede Kamer Commissie Digitale Zaken.In aanloop naar het debat over de begroting van BZK, EZ en JenV rondom digitale zaken, stuurden wij samen met Waag Futurelab en Commons Network een brief aan de Tweede Kamer Commissie Digitale Zaken.\ Het debat over de digitale zaken begroting zal aanstaande maandag 11 november plaatsvinden. Om de politiek aan te sporen om de regie te pakken op digitale autonomie, stuurden wij, samen met Waag Futurelab en Commons Network een brief aan de commissie. In de brief opperen wij enkele punten voor het debat die eveneens aansluiten op de agenda Digitale Open Strategische Autonomie (DOSA) van Economische Zaken.

We bepleiten hierin dat de overheid moet investeren in een open digitale infrastructuur om onze digitale autonomie te vergroten, innovatie en economische groei te stimuleren en onze fundamentele waarden te beschermen.

Allereerst stellen we dat het gebruik en de ontwikkeling van bestaande alternatieven voor digitale producten en diensten die zijn gebaseerd op publieke waarden vergroot moet worden. Dit kan de overheid doen door te investeren in tools als De Digitale Spoelkeuken, door in aanbestedingen te richten op digitale autonomie en publieke waarden en door in te zetten op digitale gemeenschapsgoederen.

Ook benadrukken we dat er (markt)ruimte gecreëerd moet worden voor alternatieve producten en diensten. Alternatieven moeten zo meer ruimte krijgen om te kunnen concurreren in digitale markten.

Ten slotte stellen we dat we nieuwe alternatieve producten en diensten moeten ontwikkelen die zijn gebaseerd op publieke waarden. Dit kan bijvoorbeeld gestimuleerd worden door het opzetten van een fonds zoals het Duitse Sovereign Tech Fund. 

De gehele brief aan de Tweede Kamer commissie kun je hier downloaden.

Dit is een repost van https://publicspaces.net/2024/11/06/in-onze-brief-aan-de-commissie-digitale-zaken-zetten-we-digitale-autonomie-op-de-agenda/

@ 126a29e8:d1341981

¿Por qué hacer hacer un plan de herencia?

Si apuestas por Bitcoin como una forma soberana de preservar el valor de tu esfuerzo a lo largo del tiempo y el espacio, seguramente ya estés pensando en el futuro. Pero, ¿has pensado en lo que pasará con esos satoshis que tanto cuesta reunir cuando ya no estés? ¿Tus herederos sabrán cómo acceder a ellos o será como buscar un tesoro enterrado sin mapa?

Objetivos del plan de herencia

- Hacer que tu bitcoin llegue de forma segura a tus herederos una vez que mueras (¡no antes!) - Minimizar el riesgo de robo manteniendo seguridad y privacidad - Prevenir disputas entre herederos - Evitar problemas legales

¡No te compliques!

Siguiendo el principio K.I.S.S. vamos a intentar diseñar un sistema simple. Cualquier sistema va a funcionar mejor si no complicas demasiado las cosas. Ten en cuenta que tu familia estará leyendo el Plan con la noticia reciente de tu propio fallecimiento. Hay que dejarlo todo bien detallado y no dar nada por hecho. Lo más probable es que tus herederos no tengan el nivel técnico que tú tienes hoy.

🔑 La prioridad son tus herederos; no tu ego

Plan de Acción

Es recomendable una estrategia de recuperación independiente a los dispositivos que uses. Es decir, diseñar el plan para que los fondos puedan recuperarse con las semillas, passphrase y contraseñas.

No hay soluciones perfectas. No existe una única forma correcta de hacer un plan de herencia así que deberás diseñar el plan que mejor se adapte a ti y a tu situación.

Locus de Control

🧠 El locus de control (Julian B. Rotter, 1954) es un concepto psicológico que explica por qué, en situaciones problemáticas, las personas pueden decidir esforzarse por conseguir lo que desean o, por el contrario, dejar que las cosas sigan su propio curso.

Este concepto se divide en dos tipos principales:

1. Locus de control interno: Creencia de que las propias acciones y decisiones son las principales causas de los resultados que se experimentan en la vida. Esto puede motivar a tomar un rol más activo en la consecución de objetivos y en la resolución de problemas.
2. Locus de control externo: Las personas con un locus de control externo creen que los factores externos, como la suerte, el destino, las circunstancias o las acciones de otras personas, son los principales determinantes de sus resultados. Esto lleva a una actitud de mayor pasividad ante las situaciones, al sentir que se tiene poco control sobre los resultados.

Aplicado al plan de herencia vamos a intentar mantener un locus de control interno, es decir, que la custodia y la recuperación de los fondos dependa todo lo posible de nosotros, en lugar de soluciones de terceros.

Ejemplos Locus de control externo:

Smart Contract

Un contrato no es más que un acuerdo entre dos o más partes, un entorno donde se define lo que se puede hacer, cómo se puede hacer, qué pasa si algo no se hace. Es decir, unas reglas de juego que permiten a todas las partes que lo aceptan entender en qué va a consistir la interacción que van a realizar. Sin embargo, los contratos tradicionales pueden presentar un problema: están sujetos a interpretación.

Por otro lado, los contratos inteligentes tienen la capacidad de poder ejecutarse de manera autónoma y automática a través de códigos informáticos, lo que evita tener que pasar por interpretaciones de terceros, ya que las características de inmutabilidad y transparencia de la blockchain de Bitcoin velan por la confiabilidad de estos “contratos”.

El código en un smart contract contiene las reglas por las cuales las partes acuerdan interactuar en la “relación”. En dado caso que las reglas predefinidas se cumplan, el “contrato” será ejecutado automáticamente.

Los problemas que plantea un plan de herencia, ¿pueden ser resueltos con un simple smart contract?; ¿un poseedor de bitcoin puede usar software para transferirlos automáticamente a sus herederos al morir sin la intervención de un notario o cualquier tercera parte? Por supuesto que se puede. El problema es que hay que confiar en el software de un tercero y tus herederos tendrían que acceder a ese software. Cedes el control de tus fondos a un tercero, no los controlas tu.

Oráculo vs Dispositivo de hombre muerto

¿Cómo sabrá el software que alguien está muerto? Hay 2 formas de resolver esto:

• Oráculo
• Dispositivo de hombre muerto

Oráculo

Un oráculo es un programa de software de un tercero independiente que recopila datos y los pone a disposición de quien quiera utilizarlos o de una interface. Ejemplo simplificado:

El Smart Contract de un Plan de Herencia → Oráculo → datos de la persona → ¿Está muerto? → Sus Bitcoin → Herederos

Contras:

• Requiere que confíes completamente en un tercero, el oráculo.
• Si hay un error …… tus bitcoin ya han sido transferidos de forma irrevocable
• ¿Qué pasa si hay alguien con el mismo nombre y fecha de nacimiento y muere?
• ¿Qué pasa si el oráculo desaparece?

Dispositivo de Hombre Muerto (Dead Man’s Switch)

Se trata de confirmar que una persona está muerta por omisión, por no realizar una acción específica. Su fallo para actuar causa que ocurra otra acción.

El mecanismo es sencillo: Cada cierto tiempo hay que hacer una determinada acción para que no se active el DHM. Esta determinada acción puede ser iniciar sesión en una página web o responder a un email automático. Si se realiza esa acción en el momento requerido entonces el reloj se pone a cero y el DHM no se dispara. Y así sucesivamente. Si se te olvida realizar esa determinada acción, se activa el DHM y tus bitcoin serán enviados a tus herederos y se distribuirán en la forma en que tu decidiste.

La premisa es que harás esa determinada acción salvo que estés muerto. Pero pueden ocurrir otras causas diferentes de la muerte que hagan que tu no puedas desactivar el DHM: desastres naturales, lesiones o enfermedades, pérdida de credenciales, pérdida de tus dispositivos, existencia de malos actores, …

Algunas personas utilizan servicios de email con DHM para informar a sus herederos de que ellos tienen bitcoin y que han dejado instrucciones para ellos en una determinada localización. Pero sin poner información confidencial.

Aquí tienes un estupendo tutorial de nostr:npub1dlfezkj445xzatnyu2up3t9m46wxk0vmtmjyuxd2qs8mp8cd8nws8mcdx0 para configurar un Dispositivo de Hombre Muerto de la forma más soberana posible:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsefQ1xbw68

Gestor de Contraseñas

Algunos gestores de contraseñas tienen algún tipo de mecanismo de autorización de cuenta inactiva. El Administrador de cuentas inactivas permite a los usuarios compartir algunos datos de sus cuentas o notificar a otras personas después de un determinado período de inactividad.

¿Qué recibirán los contactos de confianza? Los contactos solo recibirán una notificación cuando tu cuenta esté inactiva durante cierto tiempo. Si decides que tus contactos solo reciban una notificación cuando tu cuenta esté inactiva, recibirán un mensaje de correo electrónico con la línea de asunto y el contenido que escribiste durante la configuración. Agregaremos un mensaje de correo electrónico en el que explicaremos que dejaste programado que se enviase un correo electrónico en tu nombre cuando ya no utilices la cuenta.

Si decides compartir datos con tu/s contacto/s de confianza, el mensaje de correo electrónico también incluirá una lista de los datos que elegiste compartir con tu contacto y un enlace desde el que podrán descargarlos.

Habría que dejar una nota en el testamento o en tu plan de acceso para que tus herederos sepan que les va a llegar un email con los datos para poder acceder a tus bitcoin.

La habilidad para definir complejos criterios de gasto combinada con la absoluta garantía de una cadena de bloques inmutable remodelará la forma en que controlamos nuestros bitcoin y la forma de planificar la herencia y la sucesión.

Liana Wallet

En Bitcoin es posible crear complejas condiciones de gasto combinando miniscript, timelocks y/o multifirmas y un buen ejemplo de ello es Liana, una wallet con la que podrías transmitir tus bitcoins a tus herederos tras tu fallecimiento, sin compartir tu semilla.

Liana se centra en el uso de timelocks de Bitcoin, permitiendo que algunas claves sean válidas sólo después de que dejes de usar la tuya durante un tiempo determinado. Esto se ejecuta directamente por la propia red Bitcoin (contrato inteligente) sin la participación de terceros. El bloqueo temporal se "actualiza" cada vez que mueves tus monedas, así que mientras uses la wallet con regularidad, tu familia no tendrá acceso hasta que lo necesite.

Partes del Plan de Herencia

1. Elección de ayudantes

• No más de 3 personas (idealmente 2)
• Conseguir datos de contacto para que tus herederos puedan contactarles
• Criterios de elección:
  • Confianza
  • Conocimientos técnicos
  • Que no se conozcan entre si

2. Plan de Acceso

2.A) Inventario: Cuánto bitcoin tienes, dónde están y cómo acceder a ellos.

• Recopilar información de cuentas, wallets y aplicaciones.
• Localizar todos tus dispositivos (teléfonos, PC, Laptops, HWW, semillas en metal, paperwallets, opendime, bitcoin Casascius, etc.)
• Recopilar contraseñas y accesos
• Hacer limpieza, ordenar, consolidar, optimizar.

Ejemplo Tabla Plan de Acceso

2.B) Localización

• Dónde está cada cosa (dispositivos, cuadernos, …)
• Redundancia: Varias copias separadas geográficamente
• Separación de poderes
• Usar sellos de seguridad (con nº de referencia, fecha y firma)
• Carta manuscrita

2.C) Carta a los herederos

- Precauciones - Lista de ayudantes - Inventario y localización de claves privadas - Testamento - Despedida

Consideraciones sobre la carta: No la deposites en notaría y guárdala separada de las semillas y fácil de encontrar para tus herederos. Al igual que con las copias de seguridad de las semillas, también conviene hacer copias de la carta. Muchas cosas pueden cambiar desde que redactes la primera versión hasta que fallezcas por lo que conviene hacer revisiones periódicas.

⚠️ Errores comunes en la carta a los herederos: - No hacer plan de herencia. No importa tu edad o cuánto bitcoin tengas. Empieza a poner orden y preparar tu plan. - Letra no legible. Si tienes letra de médico, mejor escribir la carta en el ordenador. - No evaluar posibles fallos.

3. Legal ¿A quién se los otorgo?

- Consulta el impuesto de sucesiones de tu comunidad. - La muerte del causante actúa como un cortafuegos, aunque no haya declarado ante el fisco sus fondos. - Recomendación: Consulta a un experto en la materia sobre tu caso personal.

Evaluación S.U.R.E.

Pasado un tiempo suficiente, esperamos que una o más partes de nuestro plan fallará y no resulte según lo planeado. Esto puede deberse a un error humano, error de los medios electrónicos, desastre natural, cambios tecnológicos, cambios en nuestras relaciones y un montón de variables posibles. Uno o dos de estos fallos no deberían resultar en una pérdida total de nuestros bitcoin.

La evaluación S.U.R.E. consiste en evaluar la seguridad, usabilidad, resiliencia y eficiencia de nuestro plan. - Seguridad: Valorar qué pasaría si una parte del plan se ve comprometida. Que pasaría si un mal actor se apropia de uno de tus backups o dispositivos o accede a una de las localizaciones. - Usabilidad: Facilidad/dificultad de usar el método de forma segura para gente no técnica/experta. - Resiliencia: No tener un punto único de fallo. O cuantos puntos de fallo darán lugar a una pérdida catastrófica. - Eficiencia. Capacidad de lograr un efecto deseado con el mínimo de recursos posibles. Menos es mejor. Se trata de reducir la complejidad de las claves, passphrases, contraseñas y localizaciones sin afectar negativamente los otros 3 elementos.

Bibliografía

📙 Cryptoasset Inheritance Planning - Pamela Morgan.

🎧Pod de nostr:npub1yn3hc8jmpj963h0zw49ullrrkkefn7qxf78mj29u7v2mn3yktuasx3mzt0 junto a nostr:npub1q7cq5mce269pcstj8le369m72ypzl53qsvlszcemqfh6hk0mtlkq7v9jv9 y nostr:npub12aqfngts2xc0z0n47lyfx03p8prhz4kqcel29mukgwydeuatawqqg5dvgy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yI_JP1loEtk

👀 Artículo en nostr:npub1qqqqq2jx95am9ds78hklmqzdqt0eqawnx0eln8cqz3pdsqw7rchs9rc6ad por @heptapodae: https://estudiobitcoin.com/como-hacer-tu-plan-de-herencia-bitcoin/

@ 6bae33c8:607272e8

I need to calm myself from the election dopamine and focus on the task at hand. I went 4-1 last week to kick of Q3, so I haven’t blown it yet. One week at a time, one 4-1 or 5-0 at a time is how you do it.

Bengals at Ravens — The Bengals are playing better of late, maybe make it Bengals +6, but I’m staying away on the short week.

Giants vs Panthers — The Panthers are a good sell high, and the Giants are playing okay. I’ll say Giants -4.5 and probably lay the wood.

Patriots at Bears — The Bears are the buy-low off the bad loss. I’ll make it Patriots +7.5 and lay the wood.

Bills at Colts — The Bills are on a roll, but the Colts are scrappy in their way. I’ll say Bills -4 and stay away.

Vikings at Jaguars — Man, Trevor Lawrence threw a disastrous pick to lose last week. I’ll say Vikings -2.5. Would consider Minnesota.

Broncos at Chiefs — The Broncos got schooled against an explosive Ravens team, but might be a buy low. Probably Broncos +7.5, I’m thinking.

Falcons at Saints — The Saints have no skill players except Alvin Kamara. Let’s make it Falcons -3 and probably stay away.

49ers at Buccaneers — Both teams are desperate for a win, the 49ers off the bye and the Bucs off the short week. I’ll say 49ers -2.5 and probably lay the wood.

Steelers at Indigenous Peoples — The Steelers off the bye feel like a good spot here against an IP team fortunate to win its last two games. I’ll say Steelers +2.5 and consider them.

Titans at Chargers — The Titans are bad. I’ll make it Titans +8.5 and maybe take the Chargers.

Jets at Cardinals — The Cardinals are playing well, but the Jets still have players. I’ll say Jets +2.5 and stay away.

Eagles at Cowboys — The Cowboys are a train wreck. Eagles -7.5 and stay away.

Lions at Texans — The Lions might be the league’s best team, and the Texans can’t pass protect. I’ll say Lions -3.5, but probably stay away.

Dolphins at Rams — This is actually a good game with everyone healthy again. I’ll say Dolphins +2 and stay away.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

TL;DR: J.D. Vance recently observed that many in the Democratic Party are attempting to manufacture trust from the top down, neglecting the fact that genuine trust is often born from grassroots connections. There's indeed a stark contrast between trust that's artificially constructed through manipulation and censorship, and trust that's organically cultivated from the ground up.

Trump's vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance appeared on podcast host Joe Rogan's show earlier in November. According to Vance, large parts of the Democratic Party are trying to create higher trust from above, without understanding that the previously high trust once arose organically: "I think that a lot of them are trying to reimpose that social trust from the top."

Most people understand the importance of high trust. Political scientist Robert D. Putnam, for example, has shown that large social capital, in the form of trust and networks, is a key factor for economic growth, cooperation, and problem-solving. See e.g. his book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2000).

The low trust today is widespread. Trust in the American federal government is at historically low levels. Trust in the media is at rock-bottom levels. Even trust in doctors and hospitals has plummeted: at the beginning of 2024, the proportion of people who reported "a great deal of trust" had dropped to 40%, from 72% in April 2020. This can be concerning, as individuals with low trust in doctors and hospitals will be less likely to follow their advice and recommendations. It's therefore not surprising that many want to "rebuild trust" (this was the theme of the World Economic Forum's annual meeting this year).

How much trust is actually reasonable?

But how much trust is actually reasonable? To determine this, one can ask whether an institution has acted reliably in the past, whether it possesses the knowledge and ability required to deliver what is promised, and whether its interests are in line with our own.

The low trust figures among Americans are likely a reflection of the fact that many of them today question the extent to which the answers to these questions are actually affirmative. During the pandemic, medical experts in the UK incorrectly predicted that hundreds of thousands of people would die. In the US, the leading infectious disease expert misled the public about, among other things, face masks, the sitting president lied about both the effectiveness and safety of vaccines, a British health minister wanted to "scare the pants off people," and virus experts even conspired to mislead about the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. All while social media companies, under pressure from governments, were forced to censor information that was actually correct.

Trust - built on sand or on solid ground?

It's possible to continue on the current path and try to improve trust figures by limiting access to information. For instance, if the public doesn't get access to negative information about authorities or experts, the measured trust can increase. But in that case, trust is merely built on sand, waiting to be undermined by the inexorable forces of truth.

But there's another possibility. Building relationships that are genuine and honest, listening to each other without judgment, and communicating without misleading. Doing things that really matter, and doing them well, showing competence and reliability through actions. In this way, trust can grow naturally and organically. A trust built on solid ground, not on sand. A delicate task. But presidential election or not, isn't it time for us to start building a future where this form of trust is the obvious foundation?

@ 361d3e1e:50bc10a8

https://forex-strategy.com/2024/11/06/trump-is-back-in-the-white-house/ Trump is back in the White House The 47th president of the United States knows what to do with the deep state.

usa #trump #politics #maga #vote2024 #elections2024 #pepublicans

@ f462d21e:1390b6b1

eyJfaWQiOiI2Njk1ZmZjZDUyYTMzYTg2YTMxOGUxYzAiLCJ1c2VybmFtZSI6ImtoYWxlZCIsImZlZWRiYWNrU2NvcmUiOjAsImNyZWF0ZWRfb24iOiIyMDI0LTA3LTE2VDA1OjA2OjIxLjA0OFoiLCJ0cmFkZXMiOjEsInRyYWRpbmdQYXJ0bmVycyI6MSwicHVibGljS2V5IjoiZGI0MzViZjAzYzU4Zjk4NTEwMzZiODZkYjI4OGIxMTJkYWRkYzAzMjc5ZTQ0MzkzOTY2MzkzYzE0MDQ3OWEwYyJ9

@ f462d21e:1390b6b1

eyJfaWQiOiI2Njk1ZmZjZDUyYTMzYTg2YTMxOGUxYzAiLCJ1c2VybmFtZSI6ImtoYWxlZCIsImZlZWRiYWNrU2NvcmUiOjAsImNyZWF0ZWRfb24iOiIyMDI0LTA3LTE2VDA1OjA2OjIxLjA0OFoiLCJ0cmFkZXMiOjEsInRyYWRpbmdQYXJ0bmVycyI6MSwicHVibGljS2V5IjoiZGI0MzViZjAzYzU4Zjk4NTEwMzZiODZkYjI4OGIxMTJkYWRkYzAzMjc5ZTQ0MzkzOTY2MzkzYzE0MDQ3OWEwYyJ9

@ f462d21e:1390b6b1

eyJfaWQiOiI2Njk1ZmZjZDUyYTMzYTg2YTMxOGUxYzAiLCJ1c2VybmFtZSI6ImtoYWxlZCIsImZlZWRiYWNrU2NvcmUiOjAsImNyZWF0ZWRfb24iOiIyMDI0LTA3LTE2VDA1OjA2OjIxLjA0OFoiLCJ0cmFkZXMiOjEsInRyYWRpbmdQYXJ0bmVycyI6MSwicHVibGljS2V5IjoiZGI0MzViZjAzYzU4Zjk4NTEwMzZiODZkYjI4OGIxMTJkYWRkYzAzMjc5ZTQ0MzkzOTY2MzkzYzE0MDQ3OWEwYyJ9

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Table Of Content

• Understanding the Bitcoin Sale

• Potential Reasons for the Sale

• Impact on the Market

• Market Response and Investor Sentiment

• Conclusion

• FAQ

The cryptocurrency market is known for its volatility and the constant fluctuations in asset prices. In 2023, a significant Bitcoin sale took place, capturing the attention of investors and enthusiasts alike. Long-term investors made a decision to sell off nearly 50,000 BTC, leading to discussions about the implications of this sale and the factors that might have influenced it.

Understanding the Bitcoin Sale

The sale of nearly 50,000 BTC by long-term investors suggests a shift in market dynamics. These investors, who had held their Bitcoin for an extended period, decided to realize their profits and exit their positions. Such large-scale sales can have a considerable impact on the market, affecting Bitcoin's price and overall market sentiment.

Potential Reasons for the Sale

Several factors might have influenced long-term investors to sell off their Bitcoin holdings:

Profit-taking

Long-term investors often accumulate Bitcoin with the intention of selling it at a higher price in the future. If they believed that the current price levels provided a satisfactory return on their investment, they may have chosen to take profits.

Market Conditions

Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile, and investors closely monitor market trends. If they perceived a potential downturn or correction in Bitcoin's price, they may have decided to sell to protect their gains or minimize potential losses.

Portfolio Diversification

Investors may have decided to rebalance their investment portfolios by reducing their exposure to Bitcoin. Diversifying their holdings across various asset classes can help manage risk and potentially enhance long-term returns.

Personal Circumstances

Individual investors may have had specific personal or financial reasons for selling their Bitcoin. These could include the need for liquidity, funding other investment opportunities, or addressing personal financial obligations.

Impact on the Market

A significant sale of Bitcoin by long-term investors can have a short-term impact on the market. Depending on the volume of the sale and the prevailing market conditions, it may lead to a temporary decline in Bitcoin's price due to increased selling pressure. However, market dynamics are complex, and the impact of such sales can vary depending on the overall market sentiment and the response of other market participants.

Market Response and Investor Sentiment

The response to this significant Bitcoin sale largely depends on investor sentiment and market perception. Some investors may interpret it as a sign of decreasing confidence in Bitcoin's long-term prospects. Others may see it as a natural occurrence in a market characterized by profit-taking and portfolio adjustments. The market's response to such events can offer insights into the overall sentiment and provide valuable information for future investment decisions.

Conclusion

The significant Bitcoin sale by long-term investors in 2023 highlights the dynamic nature of the cryptocurrency market. Investors' decisions to sell off nearly 50,000 BTC can be influenced by various factors, including profit-taking, market conditions, portfolio diversification, and personal circumstances. While such sales can impact the market in the short term, it is essential to consider them within the broader context of market dynamics and individual investment strategies.

FAQ

What is the significance of the significant Bitcoin sale by long-term investors? The significant Bitcoin sale by long-term investors indicates a shift in market dynamics and can impact Bitcoin's price and overall market sentiment.

Why did long-term investors decide to sell off nearly 50,000 BTC? There can be several reasons behind the decision to sell, including profit-taking, market conditions, portfolio diversification, and personal circumstances.

How does such a sale affect the market? A significant sale of Bitcoin can lead to a temporary decline in its price due to increased selling pressure. However, the impact on the market depends on various factors and the response of other market participants.

What does this sale suggest about investor sentiment towards Bitcoin? The response to the sale can vary among investors. Some may view it as a lack of confidence in Bitcoin's long-term prospects, while others may see it as a natural occurrence in a volatile market.

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.

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

@ 1123ece2:7d1e00c0

Welcome to The Refinery.

“The Christ of John’s Gospel” is the theme for the coming Sunday Morning teachings that focus on John’s unique portrayal of the Christ.

We will continue this series through to the end of the year.

Today we are discussing, When Religion Gets Sick.

John 2:15-16 NKJV

15 When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables.

16 And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!”

Scripture Reading

John 2:13-25 NKJV

Jesus Cleanses the Temple

13 Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

14 And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business.

15 When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables.

16 And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!”

17 Then His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up.”

18 So the Jews answered and said to Him, “What sign do You show to us, since You do these things?”

19 Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

20 Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”

21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said.

The Discerner of Hearts

23 Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did.

24 But Jesus did not commit Himself to them, because He knew all men,

25 and had no need that anyone should testify of man, for He knew what was in man.

A famous preacher once asked, “What is worse than having no religion?”

Then after a pause, he answered his own question, “Having no religion is bad, but having the wrong kind of religion is even worse.”

I believe having a sick religion may be worse than having no religion at all.

Jesus was concerned with sick religion as indicated by his driving the money changes out of the temple.

Much of Judaism had gotten sick, and the Great Physician Himself had come to bring healing.

What did Jesus see in the temple that caused such aggressive action?

The lost sense of awe and respect for God.

The Jews had lost the profound sense of awe and respect for God.

Look carefully at what Jesus observed when He visited the temple.

Many Jewish patrons were coming and going.

They had little respect for what took place in the temple, namely, communion with God.

They bought and sold animals, and they exchanged money as if the court of the Gentiles was a marketplace.

God had intended the temple to be a meeting place for human beings and Himself.

He had not intended the temple to be a den of thieves.

He wanted it to be a place of prayer.

Christians often lose their sense of awe and reverence for God as well don't they.

As people go about the routine of Bible study and church attendance, they can lose reverence for God.

The Lord, His church, and His book become rather ordinary.

Jesus’ is anger was aroused when He saw a lost sense of awe and reference for His Father.

Religion can get sick when the sense of the wonder of God departs from a person or a group of people.The lost sense of the cost of religion.

The Jews had lost sight of the cost of serving the Lord.

The presentation of the animals in temple sacrifice represented a commitment on the part of the worshippers.

God wanted the Jews to present the best animals out of their flocks.

This would mean that they gave their best to God.

When Jesus walked into the temple, He saw that religion had been made cheap.

People were told, “Leave your animals at home and buy one in the temple.”

Purchasing animals from the temple merchants cheapened the sacrificial system.

And this angered the Master.

Modern Christians have lost sight of the cost of commitment.

Following Christ and belonging to a church have become cheap.

The German Pastor, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, during World War Two, said that when Jesus calls a man to follow Him, He calls him to die to himself.

Nothing short of total commitment will satisfy the Saviour.

The lost sense of the outsider.

The Jews had lost the sense of the Gentiles’ need.

The place where the money changers and merchants did business was in the court of the Gentiles.

This was a place within the temple precinct where Gentiles, outsiders, could come and learn of the Lord.

Most of the Jews in Jesus’ time were not concerned for the Gentiles.

They were concerned about their rituals but not for the mission of being a blessing to the nations that God had given them.

Modern Christians can lose the sense of the outsider.

The church can easily become an exclusive club with a preoccupation for its membership.

Religion gets sick when people turn inward and do not look outward for the sinners.

Conclusion.

How is the health of your Christian expression?

If you do not mind, let’s have a checkup.

Is there a great thrill over the greatness and grandeur of God?

Or are you taking shortcuts?

Are you asking for the minimal requirements?

Then what about your concern for others?

Let’s keep our religion healthy and growing.

Until next time

Stay in the Blessings

I really want to encourage you to be diligent with your Bible study time, because God has so much more for us than we can get from just going to church once or twice a week and hearing someone else talk about the Word.

When you spend time with God, your life will change in amazing ways, because God is a Redeemer. Theres nothing thats too hard for Him, and He can make you whole, spirit, soul and body!

You’re important to God, and you’re important to us at The Refinery.

When it comes to prayer, we believe that God wants to meet your needs and reveal His promises to you.

So whatever you’re concerned about and need prayer for we want to be here for you! Or even if you just want to say Hi, you can contact us at www.refinerylife.org

2024 IS A YEAR OF DECISIONS AND OPEN DOORS

© www.refinerylife.org  2013-2024 All rights reserved. Except as permitted under the Australian Copyright Act 1968, no part of this Article may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, communicated or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission.

This episode is brought to you by Refinery Life Australia:

If you enjoy The Refinery Life Radio Podcast you can help support The Refinery by doing the following:

Sow an offering: Bitcoin: bc1qqh6720t2zagj72dyfj348az698tdut3hlecaj4

Online: https://www.refinerylife.org/donate/

If you do send an offering then please email us so that we can say thank you

Subscribe on iTunes | Spotify | YouTube | TuneIn | Rumble | Flare | Zap.Stream | Fountain |

Share The Refinery with your friends and family

Subscribe to the newsletter on www.refinerylife.org

Follow The Refinery on Twitter | Nostr | Instagram | Fountain |

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

Who is the Cult of the Dead Cow (cDc)?

A known USA based hacktivist group. According to the record in Wikipedia, it was started in 1984 at the Farm Pac slaughterhouse by Grandmaster Ratte' (aka Swamp Ratte'), Franken Gibe, Sid Vicious, and three BBS SysOps

You can check their member list in their web site

Thinks of the cDc group that I have found quite interesting

• Group member Drunkfux (Jesse Dryden) is the grand nephew of Charlie Chaplin
• In 1991, the group began distributing music in the form of cassette tape albums
• In November 1994, the group claimed responsibility for giving President Ronald Reagan Alzheimer's disease, claiming to have done so in 1986 with a blowgun
• In 1995, the group declared war on the Church of Scientology stating "We believe that El Ron Hubbard [sic] is actually none other than Heinrich Himmler of the SS, who fled to Argentina and is now responsible for the stealing of babies from hospitals and raising them as 'super-soldiers' for the purpose of overthrowing the U.S. Fed. Govt. in a bloody revolution. We fear plans for a 'Fourth Reich' to be established on our home soil under the vise-like grip of oppression known as Scientology!"
• On January 7, 1999, the group joined with an international coalition of hackers to denounce a call to cyber-war against the governments of China and Iraq
• In February 2000, the group was the subject of an 11 minute documentary short titled "Disinformation".
• In February 2000, a member of the group by the code-name Mudge briefed President Bill Clinton on "Internet security".
• In 2003 the tool created by the group by the name of Six/Four System became the first product of a hacker group to receive approval from the United States Department of Commerce for export of strong encryption
• Member by the name of "Psychedelic Warlord" is congressman Beto O'Rourke, an American politician who served as the U.S. representative for Texas's 16th congressional district from 2013 to 2019. A member of the Democratic Party, party's nominee for the U.S. Senate in 2018, candidate for the presidential nomination in 2020, and the party's nominee for the 2022 Texas gubernatorial election.

Do they have a political affiliation?

From the previous section we could at least assume that they sympathize with the USA Democratic party, they supported President Bill Clinton and claimed responsibility for doing serious harm to President Ronald Reagan, I could not find any information if the government opened an investigation about this allegation or not.

Their latest contribution?

Recently, they have developed an application framework by the name of Veilid, described as "like TOR" but for apps.

This application framework, if adopted by many developers will improve privacy by default for applications developed under that framework. The web site claim that it is open source

You can review the information and project at the web site: VEILID

In the Web site the group describe it as follows:

"Veilid allows anyone to build a distributed, private app. Veilid gives users the privacy to opt out of data collection and online tracking. Veilid is being built with user experience, privacy, and safety as our top priorities. It is open source and available to everyone to use and build upon."

"Veilid goes above and beyond existing privacy technologies and has the potential to completely change the way people use the Internet. Veilid has no profit motive, which puts us in a unique position to promote ideals without the compromise of capitalism."

Summary

Veilid seems to be exactly what is needed at the moment to bring privacy to the masses, even though TOR is doing a very good job and with the improved throughput its usage experience has improved, having a native privacy oriented FOSS application framework is paramount.

Most people is not technically savvy and therefore, not skilled in cyber security, they are constantly victims of cyber crime in many forms and shapes. eliminating one vector of attack by making the applications to opt out of data collection and online tracking from the get go is a step in the right direction, the question is, Would developers in general use the framework? Considering the ads will not be a possible source of income if the framework is used, well... Time will say...

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

How disappointing to observe Bitcoiners still using mainly YouTube to distribute their own content or content of interest for the community...

It would be nice if more Bitcoiners , specially the ones with channels start sharing as well in Odysee or other platforms less centralized and totalitarian...

BTC

Bitcoin

Odysee

Nostr

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

What is Bitaxe?

Bitaxe is an open source ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) Bitcoin miner that has been making waves in the cryptocurrency community. This innovative project aims to empower miners at every level with powerful, efficient, and low-cost mining solutions.

It is a fully open source ASIC Bitcoin miner developed by Skot9000, an advocate for open-source innovation in the Bitcoin space.

With all software and hardware specs available on GitHub, this project aims to provide miners with a transparent and accessible platform for Bitcoin mining.

https://image.nostr.build/db35c2a028e9f740181daabe2deef4e707653fa2d82f1602086e0ac4b5ee84fd.png

Pros

1. Open Source: The Bitaxe is fully open source, allowing users to access and modify its source code, hardware designs, and build gerbers for PCB ordering.

2. Low Cost: Bitaxe offers low-cost solutions for miners, making it an attractive option for those looking to enter the world of Bitcoin mining without breaking the bank.

3. Efficient: The Bitaxe series is designed to be power-efficient, utilizing either the Bitmain BM1387 or BM1397 ASICs for SHA256 hashing.

Cons

1. Technical Complexity: Being an open-source project, users are required to be technically savvy to set up and maintain the miner, which could pose challenges for those without experience.

2. Bricking Potential: Like any complex technology, there is a risk of bricking (rendering the device unusable) the Bitaxe if not handled properly.

Summary

The Bitaxe represents an exciting development in the world of Bitcoin mining, offering a low cost, efficient, and open-source solution for miners. While it may present some challenges for users who are new to the technology or lack technical expertise, the potential benefits far outweigh these drawbacks. As the project continues to evolve and gain traction, we can expect to see further improvements in performance, accessibility, and innovation within the Bitcoin mining landscape.

Where can I get more information

Go to their Github page: https://github.com/skot/bitaxe

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/659572

@ 3c7dc2c5:805642a8

🧠Quote(s) of the week:

'If you made $500,000 per day, every single day since the Great Pyramids were built, you would have less than half of what the US Gov has borrowed since January 2024. Opt-out. Buy Bitcoin' -BitcoinTeddy

If Trump wins, you’re going to want to own Bitcoin. If Harris wins, you’re going to want to own Bitcoin.

🧡Bitcoin news🧡

Let me start this week's Weekly Recap with the upcoming election.

Whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump wins the election, it doesn't matter. The only thing we know for sure will happen is that the debt (ceiling) will grow.

The scariest thing to happen on Halloween this year? The US Treasury added a mind-boggling $105 billion to the national debt in a single day on the 3rd of November, and the total now stands at $35.95 trillion.

So with the upcoming election, everything changes, but nothing changes. They all print, print, and print. Whoever is in charge, can not resist the urge to kick the can down the road and steal from future generations.

'There is no red. There is no blue. There is the State. And there is you.' - WalkerAmerika

If Trump wins, you’re going to want to own Bitcoin. If Harris wins, you’re going to want to own Bitcoin.

On the 29th of October:

➡️Bitcoin just reached a new ATH in the Shitcoin called Euro.

➡️3.161 BTC. That's the amount of Bitcoin that didn't end up in a Pool wallet today, or a Wall Street miners wallet, or an ETF. One out of 144 blocks mined today went to a sovereign individual who constructed his or her own block using their own node and hardware.

Zero middlemen... great thread. Worth your time: https://x.com/JStefanop1/status/1851080807747551476

Vires in Numerus!

➡️Florida's Chief Financial Officer urges the State Board of Administration to add BTC to the Florida Growth Fund. The states are coming, brace yourself.

➡️+$76m Bitcoin leveraged shorts got liquidated overnight. Rekt! Don't do leverage people!

➡️Dennis Porter and his team SatoshiActFund is doing God's work: "I can confirm that for the first time in US history, a Democrat lawmaker in a Democrat trifecta state will introduce legislation to defend the rights of Bitcoiners.

This is a key move that will redefine the political movement for Bitcoin for years to come. Bitcoin is in alignment with American values like freedom and equality. Americans from both sides of the aisle deeply understand the potential of Bitcoin to provide for a more prosperous future. As we enter the 2024 election, it is more important than ever that Bitcoin maintains its position as a non-partisan technology. For the USA to greatly benefit from Bitcoin, both sides must embrace the technology which is why the news of ‘Bitcoin Rights’ making its way through a deep blue state is so important. Extreme partisan rhetoric seeks to pit Americans against Americans. Neighbors against neighbors. Bitcoin is a tool that can bridge the political divide and unite our country. The future is bright when we pursue a world where Bitcoin is used as a tool for unity and peace. More news on this will continue as we enter 2025."

➡️Just last week, Charles Schwab gave MicroStrategy the worst possible equity ranking of F.

Meanwhile, MSTR is up nearly 20% in the last 5 trading days, and MicroStrategy is over $8.4 billion in profit on its Bitcoin position.

On the 30th of October:

➡️BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF took in $599 million today as they bought 8820 Bitcoin. Madness

'BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF has surpassed $30 billion in assets in record time. The fastest-growing ETF in history' -Bitcoin Magazine

➡️MicroStrategy announces intention to raise $21b of equity and $21b of convertible debt. One word: CONVICTION!

Saylor wants to buy $42 billion in BTC over the next 3 years. At current prices, that works out to ~577,160 BTC. Only ~492,750 BTC will be issued over the next 3 years. Hello, supply shock! You have no idea how high we are going.

➡️Other companies have lettuce hands:

Reddit sold the majority of its Bitcoin before BTC started pumping in October — SEC filing.

On the 31st of October:

➡️Massive net inflows this week, US Spot ETFs now hold over 1 million.

➡️MicroStrategy is now worth $4.8 Billion more than Coinbase.

Let that sink in: MicroStrategy is a company that changed from making software to buying BlTC0lN in 2020. They own 252,220 BlTC0lN worth $17 billion, which is 1% of all Bitcoin that will ever exist.

MicroStrategy's stock has gone up 1,500% since 1999, beating Microsoft's 1,460%.

Meanwhile, look what happened to Coinbase after they announced their stock buybacks instead of buying Bitcoin as a treasury reserve asset. Classic!

➡️US Treasury releases report on how stablecoins increase the demand for US debt.

On the 1st of November:

➡️'Bitcoin up 10% in October.

When September and Oct have been green, Bitcoin has continued going up for the rest of the year about 31% on average. That would push Bitcoin to $91,000 by the end of this year.' - Bitcoin Archive

➡️The Central Bank of Argentina (BCRA) began to artistically display Bitcoin miners and other mining machines today.

It is the first Central Bank in the world to do so.

We know that at least 5 countries are mining Bitcoin with government resources. El Salvador, Bhutan, UAU, Ethiopia and Argentina.

➡️Metaplanet has been the best-performing stock year to date in Japan. I wonder why!?

➡️ Bitcoin hash rate going absolutely ballistic. Bitcoin is by far the most secure decentralized Network on planet Earth.

➡️Short-term holders panicked as $BTC dropped below $70,000, and over $2 billion was sent to exchanges at a loss, the most since the Yen carry trade unwound when Bitcoin fell to $49K. Freaking lettuce hands.

➡️Strive Asset Management, co-founded by Vivek Ramaswamy, announces it’s embracing Bitcoin in Texas. Managing $1.7B, Strive reports a core part of its business moving forward will be “integrating Bitcoin into standard portfolios of everyday Americans.”

➡️Florida holds $800 million in crypto-related investments - Florida State CFO

On the 3rd of November:

➡️'Bitcoin always dumps right before the U.S. elections. But look at what happens next' -CryptoRover

As we have seen before. The Shake phase: Push up, shake out, break out.

➡️Cartwright, a multi-billion dollar UK pension fund, just announced a 3% Bitcoin allocation. As a percentage, this is 30x higher than the Wisconsin Pension Fund's allocation, and the largest allocation of any Sovereign Fund in the world so far.

Source: https://corporate-adviser.com/cartwright-calls-on-uk-institutional-investors-to-back-bitcoin/

➡️ Europe's largest telco Deutsche/T-mobile started mining Bitcoin using surplus renewable energy! The move monetizes surplus renewable energy and helps stabilize the grid.

The convergence of energy, finance, and Bitcoin, once a theory, is now starting to play out.

Patrick Hansen: "If successful at scale, it could be a game changer for Germany's energy transition and serve as an alternative to energy storage or the conversion of excess energy to gas (both in their early days and not without their challenges).

In 2024, renewable sources accounted for around 65% of Germany's electricity generation. Challenges with surplus energy have led to negative electricity prices at times, even requiring Germany to pay other countries for excess power.

This is not a small actor chasing a headline. Deutsche Telekom is the largest telecom provider in Europe with a 40% market share in mobile services in Germany. Deutsche Telekom has been running various validator nodes for other proof-of-stake networks, and a bitcoin node for quite a while too."

On the 4th of November:

➡️$725 billion Bernstein predicts Bitcoin to hit $200,000 by 2025, regardless of the US election outcome.

➡️State of Michigan pension fund still HODLs its $7 million in Bitcoin ETFs, SEC filing reveals

💸Traditional Finance / Macro:

On the 30th of October:

👉🏽 Charlie Bilello: "1. Stocks: all-time high 2. Home Prices: all-time high 3. Gold: all-time high 4. Bitcoin: all-time high 5. National Debt: all-time high 6. Core CPI Inflation: >3% for 41 straight months, the longest period of high inflation since the early 1990s 7. Fed: cutting rates again next week"

On the 1st of November:

👉🏽Market wiped out almost $1 TRILLION from US stocks.

On the 2nd of November:

👉🏽Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway now holds a record $325.2 BILLION of cash. This cash balance alone is larger than the market cap of all but 27 public companies in the world.

🏦Banks:

On the 28th of October:

👉🏽More like $2.5 trillion worth of toxic CLO products + U.S. Treasuries that are deeply underwater.

Financelot on the 25th of October: 'The Federal Reserve's emergency BTFP dropped by $7 billion this week, with only $59 billion remaining. In 5 weeks BTFP will be $0, pulling all remaining emergency liquidity away from struggling banks. Thus completing the Federal Reserve's rug pull on the financial system.

🌎Macro/Geopolitics:

On the 28th of October:

👉🏽 'Market Interest Rates are surging as inflation expected to skyrocket again!' 'The US 10-year yield is at 4.29%... 1968 all over again where no one wants to buy U.S. Treasuries. Interest rates are about to double to 9%' - Financelot

Something to consider is the shift in de bond market. Investors are selling off long-term bonds in favor of equities or other riskier investments, resulting in bond prices falling, and yields rising. If we are going to reach that 9%, personally I don't think so. At the moment inflation isn't as extreme + the debt is way too big to let inflation run high just like in the 60's and the 70's.

👉🏽 Last week I shared how German car manufacturer Volkswagen is for the first time in its 87-year history planning to close production sites in its home market. They will close 3 manufacturing plants in the upcoming months.

'The number of state workers in Germany is going up, but with accelerating deindustrialization, the unemployment rate is also going up and reached 6%. However, 6% do not include 5,5 Million long-term unemployed on welfare payments, true unemployment rate is 18%.'

Now let's dive into the numbers. Arbeitslosenquote is 6% with ~2.79 Million people. Then you have 5.5 million people ALG II or Bürgergeld you are not in the unemployment statistics. Implied with 6% is a workforce of 46.5 Million people. Add 5.5 long term unemployed people -> 52M -> (2.79+5.5)/52 =~15.9%. Not quite the 18% as stated by Michael A. Arouret, but still quite high.

On the 29th of October:

👉🏽'The market is getting even more concentrated:

The market cap of the largest US stock is now ~750 TIMES larger than the 75th percentile stock, near the most since 1932. Over the last 8 years, this difference has TRIPLED. Furthermore, the market is currently even more concentrated than it was during the 2000 Dot-com bubble. As seen below, the largest US stock in 2000 peaked at ~6000 TIMES larger than the 75th percentile stock. The only other time that current levels of market concentration were seen was during the Great Depression.'-TKL

👉🏽'Another day, another record high for gold which is up $225 since the Fed rate cut a month ago, and just $225 away from $3000. It is also up 11 of the past 14 days.' -ZeroHedge

👉🏽Jeroen Blokland: "Many assets, including (quality) stocks, physical gold, and Bitcoin are flying this month. But not bonds! Global Government Bonds (hedged, EUR) are down nearly 2% this month, increasing this year's loss. And this is without taking inflation into account. Should you have stuck (again) to the outdated 60-40 portfolio (60% equities, 40% bonds) narrative, or something similar, your relative decline in purchasing power to investors that got rid of bonds and bought scarce assets (like gold and Bitcoin) is (again) massive! What is left to argue against diversifying beyond equities and bonds?"

Just to elaborate on the above:

👉🏽China is working on a $1.6 TRILLION debt stimulus to boost the economy - Reuters

👉🏽The US Treasury: 'We expect to buy up to $30BLN in off-the-fun securities for liquidity support.'

Something's brewing. Print money to buy your own debt. Like using your credit card to pay the same credit card bill. And that something is: FED REVERSE REPO USE FALLS TO $155B FOR FIRST TIME SINCE 2021 Down $46BN overnight. Market about to find out what real tightening is. Normally when this money market fund liquidity leaves RRP it goes into U.S. Treasuries, driving yields down. Instead, the U.S. 10-year yield rocketed to 4.365% this week.

On the 31st of October:

The pound is falling - the biggest fall in more than 18 months. On top of that:

👉🏽"Average 5-year yield since 2020 2.0%. But if you were lucky enough to buy a 5-year bond 5 years ago and kept it to maturity, your yield = return would have been 0.50%. Average inflation since 2020: 4.6%. In the case of the bond bought 5 years ago and keeping it to maturity, the cumulative inflation drag is 24%! Any bond decision in the past 5 to 10 years will result in the same result: a negative real return.' -Jeroen Blokland

On the 1st of November:

👉🏽'The US economy adds 12,000 jobs in October, BELOW expectations of 106,000. The unemployment rate was 4.1%, in line with expectations of 4.1%. This marks the lowest number of US jobs added since July 2021.

Again a DISASTROUS jobs report. And the prior two months' job gains have been REVISED DOWN BY 112,000. Manufacturing jobs loss: 46,000. Manufacturing jobs have declined in 4 out of the last 5 months by a total of 88,000.

👉🏽 'Despite talks of de-dollarisation, America remains (by far) the world's financial hegemon • US stock exchanges capture more than half of global free-float market capitalization. (hence overvalued) • US share of global stockmarket is 2.3 times its share of global GDP — the highest-ever ratio' - Agathe Demarais

On the 3rd of October:

👉🏽Germany will have the second-lowest public investment ratio of all EU countries in 2025 (EU Commission forecast).

Shouldn't addressing the underinvestment problem be of higher priority for finance minister Lindner than cutting taxes for corporations and high-income earners? Unfortunately, the Netherlands isn't far off either. The common problem of the EU is insufficient investment.

👉🏽'Federal government spending spiked 9.7% in Q3 2024 from the previous quarter, marking the largest jump since Q1 2021.

This was driven by a 14.9% jump in defense expenditures, the largest jump in 21 years. Since 2020, government expenditures have risen 30% and hit a new record of $5.04 trillion. Federal spending has been one of the largest contributors to GDP growth over the last 2 years.

The government has now contributed to economic growth for 9 consecutive quarters, with Q3 posting the largest addition over the past year. Government spending is at crisis levels.' -TKL

🎁If you have made it this far I would like to give you a little gift:

Lyn Alden's  October public newsletter is available now:

https://lynalden.com/october-2024-newsletter/…

It discusses four macro catalysts that she will be monitoring in the year or so ahead.

Four Major Macro Catalysts to Watch: 1. U.S. Election (Late 2024) 2. Debt Ceiling (Early 2025) 3. Expiring Tax Cuts (End of 2025) 4. Bank Lending Trends

Great read!

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 a zap.

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

⭐ Many thanks⭐

Felipe - Bitcoin Friday!

▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

What is BOLT12

Bitcoin Lightning Network protocol BOLT12 is a proposed upgrade to the existing BOLT11 protocol, designed to enable re-usable payment requests, increased receiver privacy, and better censorship resistance.

Background:

BOLT11 was the previous version of the protocol, which has been widely used since its inception. . BOLT12 aims to address some of the shortcomings of BOLT11 and provide a more streamlined experience for users.

Current Adoption:

While BOLT12 is still in the development phase, there have been some early adopters and testers who have already implemented the new protocol:

1. Phoenix Wallet

https://image.nostr.build/fd798202b6f6d7ad4e462eb5456e458a1b88b6fd882c472c3230eed378beab63.png

From version 2.3.1 (Jul 3, 2024), Phoenix Wallet has introduced support for BOLT12, a Lightning Network specification that aims to improve payment requests and receiver privacy. Offers are the Lightning equivalent to a Bitcoin address: it's a reusable, static payment request that can be used for donation use cases, or to easily pay/get paid by your friends. Since BOLT12 is not yet well supported, Phoenix keep displaying a BOLT11 invoice by default.

From version 2.3.3 (Jul 11, 2024) the wallet supports paying BIP353 DNS addresses. It allows users to have a user@domain email-like handle, which are much easier to share with friends or on social networks than a BOLT12 offer

This wallet uses very innovative features and is, IMO, best in class of all the non custodial Lighting Network wallets, from the ones new to the technology to the most advanced.

I always run the “mass adoption test” with a small sample of my family and friends that are not tech savvy and this wallet passed with flying colors, after the installation and without my assistance they managed to use the wallet to receive and send sats.

1. Zeus Wallet

https://image.nostr.build/6e8b176dec133a1b412467dee0074bf14b7e8e8ce38cbaf5ca13eee2754bb48f.png

ZEUS Wallet is a mobile Bitcoin wallet and * node management * app that offers full functionalities of a Bitcoin Lightning wallet. It enables users to make Bitcoin payments and manage their Lightning nodes from their mobile device

This wallet does not pass the “mass adoption test” , the test users were not comfortable with the user interface neither understood most of the settings.

For the advance users that manage their own nodes, this mobile wallet is best in class.

Adoption summary: The widespread adoption is still awaited, as many users and merchants are yet to upgrade to the new protocol.

PROS & CONS

https://image.nostr.build/db35c2a028e9f740181daabe2deef4e707653fa2d82f1602086e0ac4b5ee84fd.png

Pros:

1. Re-usable payment requests

2. Increased receiver privacy

3. Better censorship resistance

Cons:

1. Complexity of implementation

2. Compatibility with older nodes and applications which could lead fragmentation

Next Steps:

Many developers are working to improve and implement the protocol ensuring a smooth transition. As the protocol is refined and tested, it is expected to become more widely adopted.

Here the web addresses of few projects actively working on BOLT12:

1. https://ocean.xyz/
2. https://zeusln.com/
3. https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1551/files
4. https://twelve.cash/
5. https://clams.tech/
6. https://www.roygbiv.guide/
7. https://www.ridethelightning.info/
8. https://github.com/gudnuf/bolt12-covenant-zapper
9. https://lampo.devcrew.cc/
10. https://github.com/urza/payto
11. https://strike.me/blog/bolt12-playground/ 12, https://phoenix.acinq.co/
12. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/plasma-core-lightning-wallet/id6468914352
13. https://satsto.me/
14. https://dplus.plus/offer
15. https://x.com/eltordev

For updates, specs or to get involved with BOLT12, bookmark the main website:

https://www.bolt12.org

What are your thoughts about BOLT12?

Did I missed any wallet that has implemented it already?

Which one is your favorite wallet, custodial or non custodial, supporting BIP353 DNS addresses?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/735926

@ 35f3a26c:92ddf231

What is a Bitcoin spot ETF?

Is an asset that tracks the price of Bitcoin.

Why is it considered a game changer?

Institutional investors and wealthy individuals, using large investment firms like Blackrock, Fidelity or Ark among others, will be able to acquire the asset with low risk, since these investment firms are highly regulated. These investors have above 15 trillion dollars invested in these large firms and therefore, it is expected that these firms will allocate at least 1% of their portfolios to it. That will be mean a minimum of $150 billions into Bitcoin, which is remarkable considering the current market cap of the asset is currently $570 billion.

An injection of minimum $150 billions translates in a huge demand for Bitcoin with massive potential for price appreciation.

Current mayor players

Until now, very few large institutions have acquired Bitcoin, examples are Tesla Inc (Nasdaq: TSLA) and Microstrategy (Nasdaq: MSTR), which wrote a document labeled "A summary of some of the key considerations for corporations to keep in mind when investing in bitcoin". The link to the document:

https://www.microstrategy.com/en/bitcoin/documents/key-considerations-for-corporate-investment-in-bitcoin

Let's check the math

Amount of Bitcoins mined per day:

• Bitcoins mined per block: 6.25

• Time in minutes to mine one block (approx): 10

• Minutes in one day: 1440

• Blocks mined per day: 144 -> (1440 / 10 = 144)

• Bitcoins mined per day: 900 -> ( 144 x 6.25 = 900)

After the halving, since the Bitcoins mined per block will be reduced to 3.125, we will only have 450 mined per day.

*Bitcoins available for trading*:

• Around 4 million across exchanges
• 900 per day injected in the market

Assumptions

• Miners are selling all 900 freshly mined Bitcoins
• Financial institutions will allocate at least 1% of their portfolio into Bitcoin

Assuming Miners sell all 900 every day (which is worst case scenario), this means, that in order for the price of Bitcoin to keep the current price (around $29.4K as I write this article), $26.5 millions are needed in the market to buy those 900 fresh mined every day, $795 million per month, $9.54 billion per year.

Projections in price appreciation

Bear in mind that the projection can't be linear since there are many additional variables to factor in, specially qualitative non quantifiable ones as potential financial crisis, absurd regulations, more ETF delays, governments corruption, wars, pandemics, etc...

In terms of price appreciation, a 15X is plausible, which would rocket the price of Bitcoin to around $441K as soon as the $150 billion are deployed to acquire it.

Now, consider that this is worst case scenario and valid only until the end of this halving (the amount of mined Bitcoin per day will be reduced by half after it), next one is around the end of April 2024.

What happens with the numbers after the Halving?

After the halving, with the current amount of financial energy injected into Bitcoin ($26.5 million), the price would potentially double to around $58.8K, and if 1% of the investment companies applying for an ETF is injected, the math take the potential price of Bitcoin to $882K as soon as that 1% is deployed.

Time frame for price appreciation?

Unknown, but I would assume before the end of 2024, Why? Because the ETFs are being yet again delayed for Blackrock and Fidelity until December 2023 by the SEC (Security Exchange Commission) in USA.

But USA is not the only country where large Investment Companies are applying for ETFs, it is true that the two largest ones are in USA, but there are many more that combined across the world would add up to a massive additional amount of capital injected into Bitcoin.

The first ETF to go public will be in Europe

Jacobi Asset Management, issuer of an equity structure for digital assets in Europe with the first Bitcoin ETF, with a total portfolio of approx. $4.8 billion. Assuming 1% (worst scenario) of its portfolio will be deployed into Bitcoin, additional $48 million would be injected. The launch of this ETF was "July 2023", I will assume this capital will be injected between August and December 2023.

Professional investors can already let them know of their interest in their web site:

https://jacobiam.com/jacobi-ft-wilshire-bitcoin-etf/

Long term impact?

We can divide the long term impact into two arenas:

• Asset appreciation
• Attempts to control the asset

Long terms asset appreciation

As explained before, the more capital is deployed into the asset, and the more time passes, the more valuable and scarce it becomes (one halving every 4 years) and therefore, Bitcoin will continue to appreciate over time by "a lot".

Extrapolate the financial institutions portfolio investment to 5% of 15 trillion dollars, then to 10% and so on. Considering that Bitcoin is the best asset in terms of appreciation of the last 10 years, it is plausible that institutional investors will be eager to put more than 1% of their portfolios into Bitcoin, I would assume that 5% for the most conservative and 20% for the most aggressive will be logical.

You do the math, you will get numbers that will explain why so many financial analyst come with such a high numbers in their predictions of the future price of Bitcoin.

Attempts to control the asset in the long term

Recently I read a post from Chris Blec in X, his post was quite interesting, it reads "Pfizer convinced billions of people to inject a mysterious chemical into their body multiple times but you don't think Blackrock can convince normies that their fork is the real Bitcoin?"

A provocative post which opens the door for debate, one that I am certain is being discussed for years already close doors among the Bitcoin community.

Potential Attack vectors

• Forking Bitcoin into POS: Blackrock or a union of Investment corporations could influence with their resources some key developers and miners to fork Bitcoin into a PoS (Proof of Stake) chain, basically centralizing and controlling Bitcoin. A fork creates a new chain and the users will decide which chain is Bitcoin, users decide by changing their Node into the new chain or not, one Node, one Vote.
• Forking Bitcoin to reduce the block time to 1 minute: With the excuse to reduce the validation transaction time. This will imply many changes that will lead to mining 9000 per day instead of the 900 as of today, reducing the scarcity by increasing the offer and therefore reducing the price
• Forking Bitcoin to increase the block size: This was attempted before, Jonathan Bier in his book The Blocksize War: The battle over who controls Bitcoin’s protocol rules does a decent job explaining the depths of the attack. But in summary leads to centralization of control of the network

Countermeasures

• Education: In my opinion, education is key, those investment funds manage money from wealthy investors, if those investors understand the ethos of Bitcoin and why the asset is so scarce and valuable, they will fight back together with the individual investors for those changes not to be pedaled into the chain. At the end, greed is a very strong motivator and Satoshi understood that perfectly and therefore it is accounted for in the design.

• Awareness: A considerable percentage of the Bitcoin investors are well informed and therefore, fear can't be use as a trigger, as it was the case of the pharmaceuticals and their experimental drugs, the investment companies could use their resources to create campaigns pushing their narrative, but the community will see through that and counter it in the social networks quite fast, in my opinion, in the age of information, the legacy MSM (Main Stream Media) can't easily steer the Bitcoin ecosystem opinion as they could have done with the population up to the 90s, now is a real challenge for them. Proof of that is that they have been fighting Bitcoin with everything they got until now. They short it, talk trash it as much as they could in the legacy MSM, call it rat poison, stated that it will go to zero (while secretly buying it...) and after all that, now they are lining up to buy it and speaking highly of the asset.

• Run your own Node: Bitcoin has endured 14 years of attacks and survived thanks to the community and investors, we need to stay vigilant and protect it, run at least one Node at home, remember, one Node, one Vote.

Can you think of additional countermeasures?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/226279

@ fd78c37f:a0ec0833

Author: Taryn Christiansen @ DoraHacks

Abstract

This article discusses the Fifth Estate and how Elon Musk’s ideas about free speech will affect crypto and the potential for network states if the Trump administration enters office.

Over the past decade, legacy media has become increasingly less influential in how people consume information. Besides those who remain obsequious to the two political parties and their respective information engines like CNN and Fox News, people have grown suspicious of any information relayed from those institutions, which is unfortunate. Not because what they distribute as information is, in fact, faithful to the truth and that people are confused, but because these institutions do at times appear to be in service to interests that do not uphold democratic norms and virtues that are necessary for a democracy’s well-being. And the worst part is that they are unwilling to admit it. It’s one thing for a business model to revolve around certain biases geared toward specific outcomes; it is another to do so and act as if one is an exemplar of journalistic integrity and a torch bearer of truth. This kind of hypocritical behavior exacerbates people’s skepticism and often leads to an excess of distrust, resulting in a complete collapse of faith in a country’s institutions. And one thing is certain: trust in one’s institutions and the belief that they act in good faith are essential to democracy. To take a current and relevant example, a complete distrust in the voting process means a democracy’s collapse. If individuals believe that the voting process they participate in is rigged and that the results are misaligned with the truth, with what people envision for the future of their country, democracy will not last long. The people will not identify with those who lead the country; they will see an administration that has unjustly stolen power and who is, therefore, against democracy. Whether or not such distrust is appropriate within the United States today is not the point here. The fact is that people do distrust the voting process, and that’s a problem.

There are institutions, then, that have to be maintained for a democracy to work. Institutions that distribute information is an example of this. Now, one reason for the current distrust in legacy media has been the inception of what is called the Fifth Estate. The notion of an ‘estate’ is derived from what has been historically referred to as the chief sources of power within a state. In the past, European societies were conceived of having three domains of power: the clergy, who controlled the religious institutions that dominated the West for centuries; the aristocracy, who owned land and status; and the people, which consisted of peasants and merchants. After the invention of the printing press, where information could be widely disseminated, and literacy rates amongst the general population grew, the press and news media arose as a fourth estate, which obtained an additional foothold in power within society. These four estates have been the traditional domains of power that control and operate a society’s institutions.

Of course, the degree of power each estate holds in competition with the others has historically shifted. The rise of news media disrupted the hierarchy of power maintained throughout the Middle Ages and up to the Enlightenment, with the Catholic Church having increasingly less influence over society. And the Fifth Estate poses the potential for another shift in power. But what is the Fifth Estate?

The Fifth Estate is made possible by the internet and consists of the prevalence of non-legacy and independent reporters, journalists, and media sources. Podcasts are an excellent example of this, especially the ones that title themselves distributors of information regarding politics, technology, and socio-cultural events. But the archetypal example is social media. On platforms like X and Facebook, communication can be held between anyone, and the power to share and promote one’s opinion is made available to everyone, regardless of whether one has a position of power. The Fifth Estate has decentralized and democratized much of what legacy media was first purposed to do, influencing the growing distrust amongst the people toward their institutions. In the 20th century, the United States committed acts abroad like the Gulf of Tonkin in the Vietnam War, supported coups that removed democratically elected leaders in foreign countries, and the Iran-contra affair, which demonstrated that the United States was not the Western hero across the globe it presented itself as. It was prone to the same corruptive blunders and self-interested behaviors that it accused its enemies of; it was just good at concealing it from the public. However, as technology advanced and power became redistributed by the internet, these kinds of occurrences, which previously were not common knowledge, came to the forefront of American consciousness. America could no longer maintain its moral mythos, and a great disillusionment occurred.

While this kind of transparency provided by the Fifth Estate is generally good because, presumptively, the truth is good, its decentralized and open-access nature can also cause problems. The other estates possess a more robust institutional infrastructure and are easier to regulate and hold responsible when they err. However, in the case of social media, how to regulate this space is more nuanced due to its unprecedented nature. For instance, people have a First Amendment right to free speech in the United States, so deplatforming those who may share bad or false information on these platforms, at least prima facie, violates their rights. On the other hand, as many argue, the First Amendment does not entitle one to promote their false and potentially harmful speech, and therefore, should not be provided a space to express their opinions. But who decides what is good and bad information? The government? The companies that own these platforms? How will it be ensured that everyone acts in good faith and for the best interest of all? Should private companies really have the power to control a platform that has recently become a direct line of communication between the people and their representatives? Or are people capable of differentiating this information for themselves? The questions are endless and complicated and involve interminable controversy because of the diverse viewpoints within the country. Left-leaning folks tend to want safer, more regulated platforms for speech. People who lean more right on the issue tend to argue for a marketplace of ideas, where better speech will out-compete the worse. And there are many more opinions in between.

Although the diversity of opinion within these novel issues is not bad in itself but can typically be good, the fall of legacy media can aggravate the degree of separation between the various sides of a given issue, leading to an excess of unshared presuppositions. Suppose no institution helps shape a shared perspective. In that case, there are less common and continuous assumptions that people view the world through and use to resolve and make compromises in collective decision-making. It becomes a network with increasingly discontinuous nodes, which are then unable to feedback to one another due to the loss of direct communication and the need to relate by more remote and irrelevant pathways. This slowly shuts off one’s ability to understand and sympathize with another person’s unfamiliar beliefs. That’s not to say it’s better to have one institution over a plurality within one domain, but having one that provides a foundation within a domain, one that’s general but cohesive enough to facilitate civil discourse on disagreements, is helpful. So, although legacy media certainly doesn’t fulfill this role anymore, if it ever did, something that would help deal with the excess of diversity within podcasts, journalism, and news media is beneficial for a collective. There needs to be a healthy balance between the two.

Whatever the best and most rational solutions to these problems are, the upcoming election presents a potential route some of these may go. Former president Donald Trump has recently gained the support of Elon Musk, and, as is widely known, Musk claims to be both a free-speech absolutist and a strong advocate of deregulation. With Trump publicly expressing that he will give Musk a role in his administration, it stands to reason that Musk’s views will have an impact on policy and may potentially influence what role the Fifth Estate plays in society, especially regarding social media, being that he is the majority shareholder of X. With a hand in both government and the Fifth Estate, his political ideas will likely be pivotal in how the United States’ future unfolds if the Trump administration enters into office. The rest of the article will be concerned with locating some potentialities that may arise from this. The first is that, since Trump has espoused a pro-crypto view, and because Musk and Trump are both for deregulation, it seems likely that if Gary Gensler decides, or is forced, to step down from the SEC chair, there may be inroads toward some crypto endeavors being seen as a matter of free speech due to ‘code is speech’ precedent. The second is that, if this is the case, some of the motivation regarding network states may be lost, and pursuing this project can become less pertinent in terms of its initial goals, like technological advancement in a more unregulated space.

Musk bought Twitter in 2022 because he believed it to be a stand for free speech, which he saw as under threat due to what he often refers to as the ‘woke mind virus.’ Whatever the specific political beliefs this virus supposedly holds, Musk sees it as silencing opposing views by enforcing certain social virtues that should outweigh considerations of free discussion, speech, and inquiry. In short, he believes this virus is a potential threat to truth, which perhaps should be the principal value of a free, democratic, liberal society. With the publication of the Twitter files, there is compiling evidence that the government pressured social media platforms to adhere to a set of ideological standards during the 2016 election and the pandemic that amounted to the de-platforming of individuals, the suppression of dissenting opinions, and, ultimately, governmental control of these novel information sources. By purchasing Twitter, Musk’s purported aim is to establish a public town square for a free exchange of ideas that is decentralized and impervious to control by the state. This expresses Musk’s belief in less regulation, especially regarding matters of free speech.

Now, because Musk is a controversial figure, many have an immediate suspicion about his claims. However, Jack Dorsey, the founder of Twitter, shares similar concerns. It is simply a fact that government sectors attempted to interfere with and regulate social media. Dorsey has expressed his worries about this, saying that social media should resist centralized control. Whether Musk or Dorsey are correct, the question of if and how social media should be regulated is something society has to wrestle with, and their opinions have good reasons to support their positions. But others have good reasons for their positions, too. People like Sam Harris and Jonathan Haidt are examples of opposing views on this. Harris says in a podcast, "I think social media has been the technology that has deranged us ... We have effectively been enrolled in a psychological experiment to which no one gave consent ... It's just been terrible. I just think it's been bad for society in almost every respect." Harris and Haidt may not necessarily advocate for direct governmental intervention in social media, but they certainly don’t hold the town square view like Musk. They believe social media produces too few beneficial consequences for it to be held in such high esteem. Whatever the solution is, real proposals to this problem will be pivotal in how the future plays out.

Before discussing how Musk’s involvement in the Trump administration may affect crypto in light of what has been stated above, as well as how this impacts the standing of network states, it’s important to flag the more philosophical nature of this question by distinguishing between a moral argument for free speech, and a legal one. Whereas a legal claim about free speech expresses a descriptive argument, which amounts to saying that, according to a system of laws that is comprised of specific legal facts, other facts follow, a moral claim about free speech says something about how free speech should be implemented within a society, which is normative. In other words, a moral claim not only says that certain facts about free speech exist, where those facts can be either socially constructed or be part of some natural order, but also that those facts are good and that society should adhere to, and its members' action should be guided by, those facts about free speech. That is, a moral claim provides further, more robust reasons that extend outside of the law for what a society should do about free speech, which also points to certain ends expressed by the underlying principles that inform the claim being made. It’s important to distinguish these two ways free speech can be justified because conflating them produces confusion that tends to cause people to talk past one another in discussions about free speech, which obstructs potential progress in how people conceive of technological progress and the actual progress itself.

So, regarding morality, what principle(s) justifies Musk’s position on this issue? For instance, does he mean absolute free speech will produce the best consequences within society, or for individuals? Or does he mean that absolute free speech respects people’s fundamental rights, independent of the consequences? A lasting contribution to the former approach comes from John Stuart Mill, who believed that free speech is the best way to get nearer to the truth by individuals challenging one another’s opinions and beliefs, which will also psychologically revitalize truth in the minds of those within the society. Free speech promotes a lively and truth-seeking population. While he believed in a limit to free speech, such as a prohibition on outright calls to violence - and I assume Musk does as well, otherwise his position is somewhat untenable in a liberal democracy - Mill did believe that both of these produced highly valuable consequences. By constant exposure to a diversity of thought and evidence for differing opinions; by not being able to take one’s views for granted, and by having to reconsider one’s position because other members of society are free to express their disagreements, the best consequences for society may be produced. A contemporary and famous proponent of this today is Joe Rogan, who has reaffirmed his position in many of his podcasts, saying that bad speech, which means speech that spreads false information, should be beaten by better speech that is aligned with truth. The state and society should not regulate speech but properly promote it by allowing individuals to express themselves freely.

But there are objections to this. Does a perpetual heightening of the quantity of speech mean that truth will somehow reveal itself? Doesn’t quality also matter, which means there should be mechanisms at play that promote ideal civil norms in rational discourse, ones that delegitimize some forms of speech? Or, more fundamentally, what is our relationship to the truth, and does absolute free speech actually present a route to it? Maybe, but it’s not obvious. Because the principle under discussion concerns consequences, an objection that claims worse consequences will ensue is a creditable counter. And if a society implements absolute free speech, whatever that precisely means, and it results in a complete distrust of one’s democratic institutions, and the society collapses, it’s not clear that free speech was actually a good in service to the group; it led to its demise.

On the other hand, Musk may mean something like rights rather than consequences. It is a fundamental right of human beings, one that respects their basic and deserved dignity, to be able to speak freely and publicly without governmental suppression. Again, this is plausible. But how far does one’s right to free speech go? Are there other rights that may outweigh it under certain conditions? These are complicated questions, and the aim is not to propose definite answers but to cast light on what may be meant when the First Amendment, and free speech more generally, is invoked because justifications about its applications can be unclear. For example, if Musk's definition of free speech merely refers to the Constitution and the First Amendment, then his claim is merely legal and not moral. This would be perfectly legitimate, and in regard to claiming free speech is a justification for crypto, this would amount to saying that the First Amendment protections extend to the technology. But that would also mean his pejorative ‘woke mind virus,’ which, when expressed, tends to have moral undertones, plays no role in any seriously proposed argument for free speech. He would always be making a legal point. But when he speaks about the issue, it seems he’s making the further claim that, as a society, we should adhere to the Constitution, which would suggest reasons for why the document possesses normative value independent of its legal worth. Given his seriousness when discussing these topics, his willingness to spend billions of dollars on a company, his commitment to developing it, and doing so for the sake of a purported principle, it’s safe to think those reasons are moral.

Nevertheless, whether he means explicitly something legal, moral, or both doesn’t necessarily make a difference in whether attempts will be made to lessen or clarify crypto’s regulation. Because Musk and Trump are both advocating for deregulation, and because crypto is often conceived by its communities as technology purposed toward decentralization, and therefore, in principle, lessens the need for governmental regulation, it stands to reason that crypto will be given more space to advance as a technology. And because Musk and Trump are taking a deregulating approach toward crypto, recent articles suggest that the Trump administration may pick Hester Peirce as Gary Gensler’s replacement as SEC chairperson. Given her libertarian leanings and statements about these issues, the First Amendment may substantially affect how crypto will be handled under Trump if she's picked. Sage D. Young writes in an article in January from Unchained that “Pierce finds the idea of government imposing a regime where developers must seek permission to write code ‘terrifying.’” And at an SEC oversight hearing in September, Peirce stated, "[The SEC has] fallen down on our duty as a regulator not to be precise.” Her general position seems to be that it should be up to consumers and developers to ultimately decide crypto’s future, and not regulators, expressing concerns about government stifling innovation and technological advancement.

Whether Peirce is picked or not, it’s clear that the Trump administration is looking for someone with these kinds of policy positions. Other regulatory agencies like the CFTC will also impact this, but as many within the crypto community will celebrate, with Gary Gensler removed, further steps can be taken to develop the technology. And legal precedents like ‘code is speech’ provide a legal avenue to argue that the First Amendment should protect crypto. Peter Van Valkenburgh, the research director at Coin Center, offers an extensive argument for why electronic cash and digital exchange should be protected under free speech laws and why they should also protected under the Fourth Amendment as well.

Interestingly, in that article, Valkenburgh also makes a moral argument that makes the claim that interprets the ends of political rights as autonomy and human dignity, which should be seen as expanding on his legal claims. Whether that further claim is correct or not, he believes there are plenty of legal precedents to argue that crypto is protected under the Constitution, especially if the technology is interpreted as expressing political and social ideas, which makes regulating it appear as suppressing free expression. Of course, there is substantial disagreement about this, and it’s not clear whose right about the issue. However, a Trump administration would make a pro-crypto legal interpretation more likely to obtain.

Now, lastly, in several previous articles posted on the Dora Research Blog, much attention was paid to network states and their development as a theory. Trump’s policy position on crypto affects this as well. It was stated above that an anti-regulatory stance on crypto impacts some of the initial motivation behind network states and, as many of Balaji’s examples of one-commandments for network states in his book would suggest, a Trump administration would address those issues and perhaps satisfy the desire for new states outside of nation-states, causing network states to lose salience. Not entirely, of course, but at least on the technology front. And if so, then it will be interesting to see how the ideas around network states interact with the potential for a more unregulated space in blockchain technology. For instance, one of the aims of network states is to present a one-premise critique of preexisting nation-states that will be used to create a network state. Any critique directed toward the obstruction of technological advancement may be resolved, and efforts can be made toward advancing the technology for preexisting nation-states rather than trying to do so in a new, independent state.

@ 0e501ec7:de5ef3a4

Vandaag stonden we op tussen de monocultuurwoestijnen, beschut door een smalle Sleedoornhaag. Onze schoenen hadden een vaag gele schijn gekregen van de wandeling in het donker gisteren, en we wisten niet of het landbouwvergif of pollen was. We stonden op met het licht, om 7. Het was koud en vochtig, de fietsen waren nat. We fietsten, met fluohes. We fietsten en we fietsten. Tim wou graag de militaire kerkhoven bezoeken, en de info lezen. Ik volgde hem. We fietsten verder, ik nam foto's. Ik nam foto's van agrifabrieken, en kerken. Ze lijken op elkaar, soms. Tegen de middag hielden we halt, ik had honger, voor het normaal middaguur. Dat zorgde even voor een akkefietje, niets groots. We bezochten ook in de namiddag eerstewereldoorlogkerkhoven, frans, duits, italiaans, van de vs. ik vroeg Tim wat hij zo interessant vond aan de oorlog, hij verdedigde zichzelf, ik probeerde duidelijk te maken dat dat niet nodig was. Mijn schrijfsels lopen nogal door elkaar vandaag (30/10). Beter dan niets, ik krijg het toch niet geordend. Wat is er zo leuk aan schrijven? Ik vind het wel ontspannend. Vandaag was ik triest over de supermarkt, de lege dorpen, de lege monocultuur velden, het verdwenen landschap, het verdwenen leven.

@ 0e501ec7:de5ef3a4

Vandaag vertrokken we uit Parijs. Ik ben blij terug op het ritme van mijn lichaam en het licht te kunnen leven, ipv laat op te blijven in de stedelijke drukte en socialiteit. Het was fijn in Parijs, eerst was ik heel overprikkeld, zo groot die stad, zo veel mensen! Onvoorsteldbaar. En moe, maar dat komt ook van te gast te zijn bij onbekende mensen denk ik. Ik moet altijd eerst een paar dagen acclimatiseren, een houding vinden. Ze waren wel heel vriendelijk en gastvrij, die familie van Tim, ik ben hun echt dankbaar dat we bij hun konden blijven. 

Maar Parijs is wel een mooie stad. Uiteindelijk zag ik, niet geheel gewenst, toch wat toeristische dingetjes (ik moest het eifeltorenplein oasseren onderweg naar het bos om in te wandelen, en op weg naar het museum passeerden we nog wat bekende pleinen en het louvre), wat eigenlijk ook wel leuk was. Veel ervan is vooral opschepperij, maar het is wel mooi gemaakt en leuk om eens te zien. 

Ik was ook zeer blij Marte gezien te hebben! Altijd leuk, een bekend gezicht. Zij was ook nog aan het wennen aan Parijs, maar al iets meer kennende dan ik, ze doet er al een maandje stage bij Unesco. Dat gaf ons de buitenkans om ook het Unescogebouw te bezoeken, dat was ook een geweldige impressie. Er was net een evenement bezig, rond de arabische week die ze houden. Een feest van culturen :). Ook wel een beetje hoogdravend en exlusief natiurlijk, maar ze doen wel coole dingen daar.

Vandaag fietsten we dus weg. Het was al laat tegen dat we vertrokken geraakten, en toen was Tim zijn jas en de kaarten ook nog vergeten in het appartement. Moesten we wachten op de shift van de vongierge om eraan te kunnen. Balen, maat het gaf ons wel de tijd om de kettingen de poetsen! Die waten enorm vuil geworden van de modderpaadjes waarop we Parijs hadden benaderd. Het was een drukke fietstocht, door wijken en grote straten, via enorm chaotische fietspaden. Het was leuk, ik ontspande, droomde weg, had inzichten en ideeën, neuriede en zong. Toen werd het donker, we fietsten verder, maar niet lang meer. Bu staan we aan de rand van wat een golfterrein lijkt te zijn, terwijl de lucht nog sterk oplicht van de Stad. Net naast ons is een grote elektriciteitspaal, die tevreden (?) zoemt. 

De blog is een beetje chaotisch aan het zijn, het is moeilijk  om consistent te zijn jn de momenten waarop ik schrijf. Vaak heb ik er eigenlijk geen zin in, dan doe ik het niet. Soms begin ik random te typen op een leeg moment, die zet ik er ook op. Ik hoop dat dat niet te verwarrend is :). Bedankt om te lezen, veel liefs! 

@ 0e501ec7:de5ef3a4

We zitten in de bus. Het is donker buiten, ik weet echt niet wat ik hier wil schrijven. Maar heb geen zin om te lezen, en geen zin om te scrollen, en geen zin om rond te kijken of rond te dolen in mijn hoofd. Na de mail van Connie en mijn geschreven antwoord, daagde het mij dat ik meer wou schrijven. Ik haal er een soort voldoening uit, ik kom er in thuis, het kost me niet te veel moeite. Dat zijn allemaal kenmerken van een goeie activiteit voor als je moe bent! En dat ben ik ook, moe. Het was weer een gevulde dag, en we zijn nog niet rond. Vanmiddag vertrokken we met de metro naar virtysurseine, om de kraak la kunda te bezoeken. Een voormalig kinderdagverblijf, waar nu 60-70 mensen wonen. De huurprijzen in parijs zijn echt enorm, het is zeer moeilijk om een woonplaats te vinden. Deze mensen vinden hier dus onderdak, en kunnen niet zo makkelijk ergens anders heen. Echter dreigt er in april volgend jaar een uitzetting te komen. Om mensen te verzamelen en awareness te vergroten, organiseerden ze deze week evenementen, ook om de buurt te betrekken. Gisteren was een filmavond rond Palestina, vandaag was er een kleine markt, met groenten, fruit, brownies en pannenkoeken, en tweedehandskleren. We voelden ons eerst wat oncomfortabel, niemand kennende en de taal niet helemaal meester is het niet zo simpel om zomaar te blenden in de groep. Om drie begon er een boxinitiatie, ik kreeg na veel aandringen mijn twee companons ook overtuigd om mee te doen. Het was zeer gelijkaardig aan de boxlessen in de Meubelfabriek in Gent, en echt tof. Het gaf ons ook de kans om wat aan de babbel te geraken achteraf. In de avond gingen we naar een ander gebeuren, ook gevonden op radar.squat, maar een helemaal andere vibe! Het heette Atelier de l'Artivisme, en het was een antipub groep die (niet-reclame)posters maakte. Wij maakten er ook eentje, en babbelden een beetje. Het vond plaats in een autonome bibliotheek, vol met boeken dus. Ik vind het altijd geweldig om door de boeken te snuisteren.

@ cb20eb8e:3d031b50

''The Frequency of Life"

At first, this phrase sounded mysterious, almost abstract, as if it linked a digital currency to the very rhythm of life. Yet, over time, this concept has come to symbolize my journey of self-discovery, resilience, and transformation. For me, Bitcoin is more than just technology or investment; it’s a philosophy, a frequency that has guided me toward true freedom and helped me reimagine my life’s purpose.

Uncovering Family Secrets and Redefining My Identity

My journey began with a painful family secret that upended everything I thought I knew. The discovery that I was adopted shook my identity to the core. For years, I had felt a subtle but unrelenting control within my family, primarily from my stepfather, whose influence shaped much of my childhood. My brother later revealed the full extent of our stepfather’s control, bringing the truth into sharp focus. This revelation was both liberating and terrifying, forcing me to confront the lies and manipulations that had defined my past.

Suddenly, I found myself questioning everything. Who was I without these imposed narratives? This painful process pushed me to seek a path of honesty, autonomy, and freedom—concepts that felt foreign but increasingly vital to my well-being. Amid this struggle for identity and independence, I encountered Bitcoin, though I wouldn’t fully grasp its significance until years later.

An Unexpected Introduction to Bitcoin and Returning to the Struggles of Daily Life

In 2012, during a trip to Thailand, I met a Russian friend, Victor. Amid the colorful chaos of Bangkok, Victor spoke passionately about a strange, new digital currency called Bitcoin. Skeptical yet intrigued, I decided to buy four Bitcoin, following his encouragement. But back home, the stresses of daily life soon consumed me again, and I forgot about Bitcoin entirely. It seemed like a distant, almost irrelevant experiment.

Back in the routines of everyday life, I faced familiar struggles. I struggled to find work that felt meaningful, a job where my ideas were valued and my contributions acknowledged. The pressures to conform, to fit into a world that didn’t resonate with my true self, left me feeling trapped and restless. I felt like a slave to routines that drained my spirit. Each day felt like a battle against an invisible force that kept me from the freedom I craved. Eventually, this frustration led me down a darker path.

Falling into Darkness and Hitting a Personal Turning Point

The daily grind, coupled with unresolved pain from my family’s revelations, drove me toward unhealthy habits. I began using drugs, drinking, and letting negativity grow until it filled every corner of my life. I was slipping into a spiral, struggling to find anything that felt worthwhile. Then one Monday morning, in the depths of my struggle, I found myself under the influence of cocaine, sitting on a bench as parents walked their children to school. In that moment, the reality of my life hit me hard. I saw myself clearly, and it was devastating. I realized I was a stranger to the person I wanted to become. That was my rock bottom.

From that day forward, I vowed to make serious changes. I swore off hard drugs and began to search for something real, something that would connect me to a purpose beyond temporary escape. It was the beginning of a painful but essential transformation, a process of reclaiming my life and redefining my future. This journey of healing ultimately led me to reconnect with an old friend who would help me see Bitcoin in a way I never had before.

Reconnecting with an Old Friend and Rediscovering Bitcoin’s True Potential

As I began to focus on my growth, I reconnected with Leon Wankum, a friend from my primary school days, who, coincidentally, also knew Victor from Thailand. During our conversations, I opened up about my journey, sharing how I had changed since the darkness of my past. Our talks naturally led to Bitcoin, which I had forgotten about since my time in Thailand. Leon, however, had dedicated himself to understanding Bitcoin deeply, and he shared his insights with a passion that rekindled my own interest.

Leon’s explanations were transformative. With his philosophical perspective, he explained Bitcoin as more than a currency; he saw it as a vehicle for autonomy, a tool that could offer financial freedom and, perhaps, spiritual independence. In many ways, he became like an ancient Greek teacher, guiding me through the layers of Bitcoin’s philosophy. Under Leon’s mentorship, I began to grasp the depth of Bitcoin—not just its value as an asset, but its potential to change how we engage with power, control, and freedom. Talking to him felt like stepping into a new world, one where each principle of Bitcoin aligned with my personal journey toward independence and truth.

Finding Freedom in Bitcoin’s Decentralized Philosophy

The more I learned, the more Bitcoin resonated with me. I began to see how its principles of decentralization and transparency paralleled my own desire to break free from the control and illusions of my past. Bitcoin operated beyond the reach of traditional institutions and power structures, and I wanted my life to reflect that same freedom. Just as Bitcoin exists independently, governed only by its own transparent network, I realized I could structure my life based on my values, free from the influence of my family’s secrets.

Over time, I also discovered a deeper, almost spiritual connection to Bitcoin’s "frequency"—the steady rhythm of its time chain, the immutable records of its transactions, the stability amid volatility. This frequency mirrored my own quest for resilience and autonomy. I began to view decentralization not just as a financial principle but as a personal one, a way to root myself in my own truth, free from the dependence and darkness of my past.

Embracing New Routines and Personal Growth Through Bitcoin’s Philosophy

Inspired by Bitcoin’s principles, I started building routines that aligned with my new mindset. I took control of my finances, setting long-term goals and learning the value of patience and discipline. Bitcoin’s commitment to transparency reminded me of the importance of honesty and clarity in my relationships, while its decentralization taught me the power of autonomy and self-trust.

I also found myself letting go of anything that didn’t support my vision of a free, authentic life. My old habits faded as I built a future based on values of resilience and independence. I was no longer willing to compromise or live according to someone else’s expectations. Every aspect of my life began to reflect my dedication to freedom, transparency, and personal responsibility.

The Spiritual Connection of Bitcoin’s Frequency and Looking to the Future

As I continued my journey, I realized that Bitcoin’s "frequency" had become a guiding resonance in my life. The rhythm of Bitcoin’s timechain mirrored my own growth, teaching me to find balance and stability within myself. I felt that, just as Bitcoin’s decentralized structure allowed it to exist independently, I, too, could live in alignment with my own values and truths. This frequency of life—this resonance of freedom and authenticity—has come to define not just my journey with Bitcoin but my journey with myself.

Now, as I look back, I see Bitcoin as more than a financial tool or an investment. It’s a model of resilience, a guide for choosing light over darkness, and a symbol of life’s true rhythm. Each of us has the opportunity to find our own frequency, to create a life that resonates with who we truly are. For me, Bitcoin was the key to unlocking this understanding, helping me connect my past struggles with a future built on clarity, purpose, and freedom.

In sharing my story, I hope others can see that it’s never too late to find their own path. Whether through Bitcoin or another journey, each of us has the power to tune into what truly matters and build a life that aligns with our deepest values. It’s a journey that requires courage and resilience, but in the end, it leads us closer to our true selves.

This story is just one part of where I’m headed. There’s so much more I’m working toward, so many more lessons and connections to be made. If any of this resonates with you, maybe it’s because we’re all trying to find a little bit of freedom and authenticity in our lives. And if my journey inspires you to find your own path, that’s even better.

This is just the beginning, and I’m grateful to share it. If you’re into this, feel free to share it too. We’re all on this ride together.

Mick Henssler 🕷️🕸️

@ 015c8941:3ea77b51

the US could gain a strategic advantage over other countries that are contemplating starting a bitcoin reserve and can reinforce the US’ influence over global financial standards

@ 3584cea4:0951bbef

The understanding of a caregiver and healthcare advocate for my mom.

I have been involved in one way or another in the insurance business for a long time. I run a small insurance brokerage which primarily caters to my family and friends of friends. In that role, we perform a needs assessment with prospective clients' & family members to understand what keeps them up at night to help them build a tailor fitted protection plan for their families.

As part of that process I get a good sense of one’s financial obligations, specific cultural and family values that need to be factored and a general indication of their health status.

However, in the most recent year, I have been unexpectedly thrust into (and gladly accepted) the role of caregiver and health care advocate for my mom. As her dementia is quite severe and had been getting worse until recently. That combined with a series of strokes she experienced earlier this year, has left her unable to retain her independence and live by herself.

As such, I’ve had to understand the inner workings of aspects of the insurance industry that apply to older people that I was quite unfamiliar with.

One of the most poignant observations while on this journey for my mom’s complete recovery became clear to me about two weeks ago when we met with mom’s neurologist where we both met her for the first time after 7 months of trying to get a visit. There is a 4 month lead time to get an appointment and we missed one in June (work emergencies back home in PA). Hence, the rescheduled appointment 4 months later which was about 2 weeks ago.

Before I describe that visit, I need to explain what my experience has been working with the 6+ different medical specialists and mom’s PCP has been like for me.

The healthcare professionals I've encountered have been a mixed bag, of mostly kind, genuinely caring, overworked and underappreciated professionals. This accounts for >95% of my encounters with healthcare workers most recently.

Many of these healthcare institutions still use fax machines and mostly operate on 1990s tech. Healthcare workers are graded regularly not so much on the quality of the healthcare they provide to their patients, but how well they follow the rules that have been established by whichever governance body regulates the important incentives. If you know anyone that works in the healthcare industry and are able to follow the incentives, it doesn’t take much clicking and googling to see that it’s usually big pharma at the tail end of their incentive structure.

It’s my subjective opinion most (>95%) of the people in healthcare want to and believe they are doing the right thing. However, they are so overwhelmed, they sometimes don’t see the irony in their recommendations (a topic for another essay) or behavior that often leaves me baffled and wondering (out loud sometimes) “did they just say that”. With that said, it is of this 95% I speak of in this essay, the genuinely caring but overworked and under appreciated healthcare providers. From the physician’s assistants, to the doctors, specialists, nurses and so on.

How the visits typically play out.

We’re waiting for an hour or more to be seen (even with an appointment on the books).

Eventually, someone will come out to the waiting area to call my mom’s name and from there we are escorted to a private observation room. In the observation room we’ll sit and wait some more, sometimes just a few minutes other times longer.

After a few minutes, if we are lucky, someone else (presumably a nurse or PA) comes in to ask a few questions, checks mom’s vitals and make a few notes in her chart/records.

Sometimes moments “lay - tor” [spoken in a thick french accent] the actual doctor comes in. Other times we may be waiting an additional 30 minutes or more in the observation room.

The actual time spent with the doctor once they meet us in the observation room is usually 5-10 minutes depending on the office, then we are off to scheduling and referrals to get future appointments scheduled and on the books. The whole event from the time we walk into the office to departure is usually less than 2 hours. But, it’s OK if it ends up being a little longer as I always budget these appointments for 4 hours. Otherwise, the day’s schedule begins to fall apart, I miss meetings, calls and other demands on my time and stress ensues and I don’t like this type of stress.

Getting back to the point of this essay, mom’s neurologist.

We were waiting in the observation room by ourselves for what seemed to be a good 20 minutes, so I decided to quickly run out to the car and check on Wiggles. She had been out in the car making sure the AC was working for about an hour and a half at that point.

Sure enough the neurologist showed up while I was away. She entered the observation room to find my mom, by herself (and nonverbal). The doctor was somewhat confused and was looking around for someone to ask about my mom and get a sense of what she was supposed to be doing to/with her.

Arriving in time to see the neuro with a crayon and scratch pad in hand attempting to hand it over to my mom in hopes she would be able to say/explain herself in writing. It was more funny than anything. You have to know my mom to understand her attitude about a lot of what is going on around her. As my mom watched the neuro with crayon and paper in hand, she was likely thinking “I am old, retired, I only have to do things I want to do, and pen and paper sounds an awful lot like work. So, you can keep it and I’ll wait for my son.

Some additional context about this doctor's office. I would consider it one of the larger ones in the area, highly recommended, this is a very busy office with many employees hurriedly bustling about the hallways and bouncing from one observation room to another.

Back to the observation room. The neuro was likely alone with mom for just a moment before I returned from the doggy in the car check.

I expected this doctor visit to be like the rest and that I was going to get maybe 2 minutes with this doctor and she would be off seconds later to the next patient and observation room.

But that was not all the case. The neurologist engaged with my mom for a period, probably a good 15-20 minutes, without and prior to barely acknowledging I was even in the room. This is likely procedural, their way of making sure my mom is not a victim or being abused in some form. This was unusual, but oddly appreciated. But, most importantly my mom’s neurologist educated me on a few things regarding my mom’s health and spent almost an hour with us altogether. My mom’s neuro got more context around my mom and her lifestyle leading to this delicate state in her health. More than any other doctor my mom had been seeing. I can tell the neuro was slightly impressed or entertained (hard to tell the difference sometimes) that I understood what my mom was saying. Observing my mom and I interact as an outsider does look weird to people when in public and add to that visual a cane corso usually in a sit position right beside us. Self-admittedly, even funnier when she is scolding me about something I am doing or asking her to do.

I digress!

At the end of mom’s neuro visit, the doctor gave us her office and personal information so that I may contact her day/night/weekend for anything “you don’t have to wait for business hours if you have any questions or if any health concerns should arise.” While I have not tested those numbers to confirm their validity, I do believe she was being genuine in her gesture.

In conclusion, and all that to say, It was overall the best doctor visit I’ve had with respect to this situation I find myself in with my mom.

Don’t get me wrong, all the other doctors mean well. But the bandwidth simply isn’t there. As such, this is not a judgment on all the beautiful and caring people that have cared for my mom and countless others in the past and into the future. These are just the facts from these boots on the ground as I see it.

As for the brain damage to my mom’s left frontal lobe, it has diminished slightly and continues to shrink. It’s not all permanently damaged. But, there is no knowing at her age (86) how much repair we can expect or whether her speech will ever return. But my family and I are optimistic. As for mom’s speech or lack there of, a little peace and quiet never killed anyone. In many ways, mom is lucky because I sometimes wish I didn’t have to speak. I miss those days often. But being in Florida, especially now, is more important, so we are good with what needs to be done.

As for mom’s neurologist, I will do something nice for her. The next appointment is in February, let’s hope I don’t have to use that private number before then.

Mom’s neuro might have the initials of KBMD, but that’s just a guess.

BrainThings #LivingWithLala #caregiver #doctors #neurologist

@ b8a9df82:6ab5cbbd

Last week, I got to experience the energy of Buenos Aires—a city as lively as it is massive. My journey began with a painfully long flight (easily my worst yet), but my excitement to meet everyone face-to-face kept me going. Despite being exhausted, I couldn’t wait to explore the city, take in the sights, and feel its unique vibe.

Buenos Aires was even bigger than I’d anticipated. I’d heard it was large, but I was still surprised by the sheer size of the avenues and the steady stream of traffic. It has a European feel—somewhat like Madrid—but with a laid-back attitude that’s far different from Berlin’s intensity. One thing I didn’t expect, though, was the cost; I thought it would be more affordable, but it was closer to European prices. Still, I quickly found myself adapting to its rhythms and taking in all the city had to offer.

Then came the Airbnb situation. Our first place was a disaster—mouldy, noisy, and with a broken bathroom. After some frustrating back-and-forth with the host, we decided to find somewhere else. We ended up switching apartments and moved from a place with issues to another one with even more issues... but we made it work. This was by far the worst experience, yet somehow it became part of the adventure.

Once I settled in, I was thrilled to finally meet the local community I’d been working with remotely for weeks. There’s nothing quite like getting to hug the people you’ve only seen on a screen. The Nostr community here, known as La Crypta, was incredibly welcoming, and working from their community center made me feel like I belonged. I’ll be writing more about this wonderful group soon!

In the days leading up to the conference, my schedule was packed with last-minute prep for both the conference itself and Nostr Day. One of the biggest lessons I learned was to let go of control. In Buenos Aires, things run on a different kind of timing—schedules are flexible, and punctuality isn’t a priority. I came with a detailed plan, but I soon realised I’d need to adjust and go with the flow. Once I did, I could really enjoy each moment as it came.

The language barrier was another challenge. I don’t speak Spanish (turns out Duolingo didn’t quite prepare me!), so I often needed others to help translate, which meant that sometimes details got a little lost. Still, we made it work, and the Nostr booth turned out to be a hit. People stopped by to chat, learn, and hang out, which was exactly what we’d hoped for. We wanted to make Nostr accessible to everyone—from content creators to developers—and seeing people’s enthusiasm to join the protocol was rewarding.

One of the highlights of the week was moderating the Nostr panel on the main stage, as well as speaking on another one. I was nervous leading up to it, especially with the sound issues that made it hard to hear other panelists. But despite those hiccups, the experience turned out great. The panelists were awesome and engaging, and I left feeling inspired and grateful.

After two intense conference days spent in dark, noisy spaces, we wrapped things up with Nostr Day at La Crypta. Conferences can be draining, and I found myself missing my regular routines—morning workouts, sunlight, and a bit of peace and quiet. Originally, we had a packed agenda for Nostr Day, but after a late Halloween celebration the night before, everyone was ready for a slower pace. We adjusted and turned it into a relaxed networking day, sitting outside, sharing Mate, and soaking up the fresh air. It was the perfect way to connect at a comfortable pace.

This week in Buenos Aires showed me just how open and curious people are about Nostr. From exploring the ecosystem together to helping new users get their first taste of it, it was a week of shared learning and connection. Thank you to everyone who poured their heart and energy into making this experience unforgettable. And a special thanks to Buenos Aires for feeding me endless amounts of incredible meat! After over 20 years as a vegetarian, I recently started eating meat again, and I have to say—it felt amazing.

Next stop: SatsConf!

@ 29216785:2a636a70

One year ago I wrote the article Why Nostr resonates in Dutch and English after I visited the Bitcoin Amsterdam 2023 conference and the Nostrdam event. It got published at bitcoinfocus.nl (translated in Dutch). The main reason why I wrote that piece is that I felt that my gut feeling was telling me that Nostr is going to change many things on the web.

After the article was published, one of the first things I did was setting up this page on my website: https://sebastix.nl/nostr-research-and-development. The page contains this section (which I updated on 31-10-2024):

One metric I would like to highlight is the number of repositories on Github. Compared to a year ago, there are already more than 1130 repositories now on Github tagged with Nostr. Let's compare this number to other social media protocols and decentralized platforms (24-10-2024):

• Fediverse: 522
• ATProto: 159
• Scuttlebot: 49
• Farcaster: 202
• Mastodon: 1407
• ActivityPub: 444

Nostr is growing. FYI there are many Nostr repositories not hosted on Github, so the total number of Nostr reposities is higher. I know that many devs are using their own Git servers to host it. We're even capable of setting up Nostr native Git repositories (for example, see https://gitworkshop.dev/repos). Eventually, Nostr will make Github (and other platforms) absolute.

Let me continue summarizing my personal Nostr highlights of last year.

Organising Nostr meetups

This is me playing around with the NostrDebug tool showing how you can query data from Nostr relays. Jurjen is standing behind me. He is one of the people I've met this year who I'm sure I will have a long-term friendship with.

OpenSats grant for Nostr-PHP

In December 2023 I submitted my application for a OpenSats grant for the further development of the Nostr-PHP helper library. After some months I finally got the message that my application was approved... When I got the message I was really stoked and excited. It's a great form of appreciation for the work I had done so far and with this grant I get the opportunity to take the work to another higher level. So please check out the work done for so far:

• https://nostr-php.dev
• https://github.com/nostrver-se/nostr-php

Meeting Dries

One of my goosebumps moments I had in 2022 when I saw that the founder and tech lead of Drupal Dries Buytaert posted 'Nostr, love at first sight' on his blog. These types of moments are very rare moment where two different worlds merge where I wouldn't expect it. Later on I noticed that Dries would come to the yearly Dutch Drupal event. For me this was a perfect opportunity to meet him in person and have some Nostr talks. I admire the work he is doing for Drupal and the community. I hope we can bridge Nostr stuff in some way to Drupal. In general this applies for any FOSS project out there.
Here is my recap of that Drupal event.

Attending Nostriga

A conference where history is made and written. I felt it immediately at the first sessions I attended. I will never forget the days I had at Nostriga. I don't have the words to describe what it brought to me.

I also pushed myself out of my comfort zone by giving a keynote called 'POSSE with Nostr - how we pivot away from API's with one of Nostr superpowers'. I'm not sure if this is something I would do again, but I've learned a lot from it.
You can find the presentation here. It is recorded, but I'm not sure if and when it gets published.

Nostr billboard advertisement

This advertisment was shown on a billboard beside the A58 highway in The Netherlands from September 2nd till September 16th 2024. You can find all the assets and more footage of the billboard ad here: https://gitlab.com/sebastix-group/nostr/nostr-ads. My goal was to set an example of how we could promote Nostr in more traditional ways and inspire others to do the same. In Brazil a fundraiser was achieved to do something similar there: https://geyser.fund/project/nostrifybrazil.

Volunteering at Nostr booths growNostr

This was such a great motivating experience. Attending as a volunteer at the Nostr booth during the Bitcoin Amsterdam 2024 conference. Please read my note with all the lessons I learned here.

The other stuff

• The Nostr related blog articles I wrote past year:
  • Run a Nostr relay with your own policies (02-04-2024)
  • Why social networks should be based on commons (03-01-2024)
  • How could Drupal adopt Nostr? (30-12-2023)
  • Nostr integration for CCHS.social (21-12-2023)
• https://ccns.nostrver.se 
  CCNS stands for Community Curated Nostr Stuff. At the end of 2023 I started to build this project. I forked an existing Drupal project of mine (https://cchs.social) to create a link aggregation website inspired by stacker.news. At the beginning of 2024 I also joined the TopBuilder 2024 contest which was a productive period getting to know new people in the Bitcoin and Nostr space.
• https://nuxstr.nostrver.se 
  PHP is not my only language I use to build stuff. As a fullstack webdeveloper I also work with Javascript. Many Nostr clients are made with Javascript frameworks or other more client-side focused tools. Vuejs is currently my Javascript framework I'm the most convenient with. With Vuejs I started to tinker around with Nuxt combined with NDK and so I created a starter template for Vue / Nuxt developers.
• ZapLamp
  This is a neat DIY package from LNbits. Powered by an Arduino ESP32 dev board it was running a 24/7 livestream on zap.stream at my office. It flashes when you send a zap to the npub of the ZapLamp.
• https://nosto.re 
  Since the beginning when the Blossom spec was published by @hzrd49 and @StuartBowman I immediately took the opportunity to tinker with it. I'm also running a relay for transmitting Blossom Nostr events wss://relay.nosto.re.
• Relays I maintain
  I really enjoy to tinker with different relays implementations. Relays are the fundamental base layer to let Nostr work.

I'm still sharing my contributions on https://nostrver.se/ where I publish my weekly Nostr related stuff I worked on. This website is built with Drupal where I use the Nostr Simple Publish and Nostr long-form content NIP-23 modules to crosspost the notes and long-form content to the Nostr network (like this piece of content you're reading).

The Nostr is the people

Just like the web, the web is people: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCgvkslCzTo 

the people on nostr are some of the smartest and coolest i’ve ever got to know. who cares if it doesn’t take over the world. It’s done more than i could ever ask for. - @jb55

Here are some Nostriches who I'm happy to have met and who influenced my journey in Nostr in a positive way.

• Jurjen
• Bitpopart
• Arjen
• Jeroen
• Alex Gleason
• Arnold Lubach
• Nathan Day
• Constant
• fiatjaf
• Sync

Coming year

Generally I will continue doing what I've done last year. Besides the time I spent on Nostr stuff, I'm also very busy with Drupal related work for my customers. I hope I can get the opportunity to work on a paid client project related to Nostr. It will be even better when I can combine my Drupal expertise with Nostr for projects paid by customers.

Building a new Nostr application

When I look at my Nostr backlog where I just put everything in with ideas and notes, there are quite some interesting concepts there for building new Nostr applications. Filtering out, I think these three are the most exciting ones:

• nEcho, a micro app for optimizing your reach via Nostr (NIP-65)
• Nostrides.cc platform where you can share Nostr activity events (NIP-113)
• A child-friendly video web app with parent-curated content (NIP-71)

Nostr & Drupal

When working out a new idea for a Nostr client, I'm trying to combine my expertises into one solution. That's why I also build and maintain some Nostr contrib modules for Drupal.

• Nostr Simple Publish
  Drupal module to cross-post notes from Drupal to Nostr
• Nostr long-form content NIP-23
  Drupal module to cross-post Markdown formatted content from Drupal to Nostr
• Nostr internet identifier NIP-05
  Drupal module to setup Nostr internet identifier addresses with Drupal.
• Nostr NDK
  Includes the Javascript library Nostr Dev Kit (NDK) in a Drupal project.

One of my (very) ambitious goals is to build a Drupal powered Nostr (website) package with the following main features:

• Able to login into Drupal with your Nostr keypair
• Cross-post content to the Nostr network
• Fetch your Nostr content from the Nostr content
• Serve as a content management system (CMS) for your Nostr events
• Serve as a framework to build a hybrid Nostr web application
• Run and maintain a Nostr relay with custom policies
• Usable as a feature rich progressive web app
• Use it as a remote signer

These are just some random ideas as my Nostr + Drupal backlog is way longer than this.

Nostr-PHP

With all the newly added and continues being updated NIPs in the protocol, this helper library will never be finished. As the sole maintainer of this library I would like to invite others to join as a maintainer or just be a contributor to the library. PHP is big on the web, but there are not many PHP developers active yet using Nostr. Also PHP as a programming language is really pushing forward keeping up with the latest innovations. 

Grow Nostr outside the Bitcoin community

We are working out a submission to host a Nostr stand at FOSDEM 2025. If approved, it will be the first time (as far as I know) that Nostr could be present at a conference outside the context of Bitcoin. The audience at FOSDEM is mostly technical oriented, so I'm really curious what type of feedback we will receive.

Let's finish this article with some random Nostr photos from last year. Cheers!

@ 361d3e1e:50bc10a8

https://forex-strategy.com/2024/11/05/years-of-preparation-for-the-destruction-of-the-farms-in-valencia/ Years of preparation for the destruction of the farms in Valencia Spain destroys hundreds of dams every year. In the photo, the sky over Valencia, the day before the rain.

spain #flooding #crisis #billgates #food #haarp

@ 79db13d6:e7aa15f1

Opinion about Blockchair Extension for Chrome (others)

The only portfolio that doesn't leak your balances and calculates it client-side. Respect

WalletScrutiny #nostrOpinion

Join the conversation!

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

Today is Election Day here in the US, and it's a big deal.

As of now, this is my bet on the vote:

For myself, as I did in 2020, I will be voting for Donald Trump.

My biggest reasons for this are as follows: 1. Dismantling the bureaucracy. 2. Financial Freedom 3. Food Freedom

There are others, but those are my top three.

For me, the fact that unelected bureaucrats essentially run our government (Joe Biden is still our President right now, though no one has seen or heard from him in months) is our largest red flag. I think it is our biggest priority to return to a place where the people we elect to run our government actually run our government.

Trump swung and missed on this in his first term, but with his commitment to RFK and having people on his side like Vivek, I do not think he will sing and miss this time.

Next is financial freedom. The Biden-Harris administration has been incredibly hostile to what I am calling financial freedom. They mostly got their policies from the Warren camp, which hates digital currencies.

Being a part of Bitcoin startups for most of the Biden admin, I have seen this first hand. Operation Chokepoint 2.0 was a real thing and it was scary living through it. Actively seeing the government try to de-bank you was something I never would have thought was possible in the 'Land of the Free.'

The fact that the gov could de-bank you at all was an even bigger catalyst of how necessary a neutral, open, digital, and global money was critical for not only freedom itself, but our future.

Trump clearly is the better candidate regarding this. Yes, he may have launched a grifting shitcoin, but he doesn't want my industry — and financial freedom itself — dead. This is a no-brainer.

Andreessen Horowitz had a great podcast summarizing this that is worth the listen. It sums up where I sit as opposed to the current administration.

Trump has also promised to free Ross, which is absolutely necessary.

Last is food freedom.

I think the US is going the absolute wrong direction when it comes to health and food. In the name of saving animals and climate, food guidelines have been captured by this horrible, anti-human ideology.

I personally think it's not only necessary but good for humans to eat lots of beef and just meat in general. So much of what we've been told about nutrition and cholesterol is blatantly wrong.

Only one side of the aisle is trying to mandate this in the name of 'science.' I think they are wrong.

There is also only one side of the aisle that is anti-seed oils. I haven't eaten seed oils for almost four years, and bringing that mainstream, I think, is incredibly important. RFK is leading the way here. Trump putting him in a position of power to 'Make America Healthy Again,' I believe, is a fantastic initiative and one that is at the forefront for me for this election.

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

We finally have an event other than soccer!

Freebitcoin is taking wagers on the Las Vegas Grand Prix.

Here's how to optimally allocate a hypothetical 2k sats on this event (according to RBOA):

| Driver | Wager | |--------|--------| | Vertappen | 486 | | Norris | 521 | | Leclerc | 456 | | Alonso | 6 | | Hamilton | 63 | | Piastri | 107 | | Tsunoda | 4 | | Perez | 12 | | Sainz | 243 | | Russell | 63 | | Stroll | 2 | | Ocon | 4 | | Ganyu | 1 | | Bottas | 2 | | Albon | 4 | | Hulkenberg | 7 | | Gasly | 4 | | Magnussen | 6 |

Enjoy your winnings

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/754549

@ e97aaffa:2ebd765d

Uma interessante discussão que aconteceu na conferência de Bitcoin nos Países Baixos deste ano. Não é algo técnico sobre bitcoin, mas sim, mais sobre economia e política monetária, mas aconselho muito a sua visualização.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoNGKUqO8Bc

Logo no início, Willem Middelkoop defende uma tese muito interessante, os bancos centrais mantém ouro como um plano de emergência, como uma medida extrema para evitar um cenário de hiperinflação, poderiam restabelecer o padrão ouro para salvar as economias.

Vamos analisar a distribuição do ouro disponível nas reservas dos centrais, inclui a quantidade de ouro em toneladas e o correspondente valor em milhões:

Na tabela também inclui o agregado monetário M2.

O EUA é o país com mais ouro, 8133 toneladas, mas apenas corresponde a 4% do seu respetivo M2.

Na tabela, os países com rácio superior a 100%, como a Venezuela, Líbano, Turquia e Rússia, tem uma característica em comum: são países com bastante ouro e estão a atravessar uma grave crise económica e monetária, fazendo com que o M2 esteja demasiado desvalorizado, ficando os valores muito enviesados, não correspondendo ao real valor da economia.

Uma surpresa (pela negativa) é o Canadá, que tem uma das maiores economias mundiais, mas não tem qualquer ouro. Na mesma situação estão Israel, Noruega, Nova Zelândia e outros de menor dimensão.

Portugal está bastante bem situado, na 13° posição, mas as reservas de ouro correspondem a 12% do M2.

Reavaliação

Na tabela, recolhi dados de 121 países, a soma dos M2, são 121 trilhões de dólares, mas o ouro é apenas 3.1 trilhões de dólares, correspondendo apenas a 2.5%.

Vamos fazer um exercício, sem qualquer rigor, se voltássemos ao padrão ouro, logo, o ouro detido pelos países teria de ter um valor aproximado às somas dos respectivos M2. Isso provocaria uma reavaliação do preço do ouro em 3900%.

É claro que este x39, é apenas teórico, na prática possivelmente seria inferior, os governos tomarem outras medidas extremas para contornar o problema, como confiscar o ouro dos cidadãos.

Se ouro valoriza-se 3900%:

Conclusão

Se isto um dia acontecer, é pouco provável mas concordo com o Willem Middelkoop: Se houver uma hiperinflação ou uma descredibilização completa da moeda FIAT, os bancos centrais terão que efectuar medidas extremas, como fizeram em Bretton Woods.

Se a medida extrema é voltar ao padrão ouro, tenho muitas dúvidas, aqueles países que tem bastante ouro até poderão optar, mas os outros, certamente irão optar por outra ou por várias commodities. Só que isto tornaria altamente complexo o comércio internacional e os câmbios entre moedas. Durante um período seria muito confuso, mas a médio prazo, inevitavelmente um padrão irá sobressair, será adotado pela generalidade dos países.

Se é bitcoin, acho pouco provável, os países vão preferir o ouro porque já têm reservas consideráveis e conseguem o controlar. Os estados nunca vão querer perder o controle da moeda.

@ 06639a38:655f8f71

• I published a blog 1 year later, why Nostr still resonates
  https://nostrver.se/blog/1-year-later-why-nostr-still-resonates 
• This blog is also cross-posted to Nostr: link here
• I'm running a promenade signer 
• I've worked out some Nostr the protocol explained sketches
   
• Did some improvements on the relay response handling in the websocket client within the Nostr-PHP library
• Worked on integrating the TLV part of NIP-19 which is a struggle in the Nostr-PHP library

@ 5a69e82d:aa41c382

Dhruv Bansal, CSO dan Co-Founder Unchained mengeksplorasi prinsip-prinsip dan sejarah yang mengarah pada penciptaan Bitcoin dan mengajukan pertanyaan: "Apa yang telah dilakukan Satoshi"?

Bitcoin sering dibandingkan dengan internet pada tahun 1990an, namun saya yakin analogi yang lebih baik adalah dengan telegraf pada tahun 1840an.[^1]

Telegraf adalah teknologi pertama yang mengirimkan data yang dikodekan dengan kecepatan mendekati cahaya dalam jarak jauh. Ini menandai lahirnya industri telekomunikasi. Internet, meskipun skalanya lebih besar, kontennya lebih kaya, dan many-to-many, bukan one-to-one, pada dasarnya masih merupakan teknologi telekomunikasi.

Baik telegraf maupun internet bergantung pada model bisnis di mana perusahaan mengerahkan modal untuk membangun jaringan fisik dan kemudian membebankan biaya kepada pengguna untuk mengirim pesan melalui jaringan ini. Jaringan AT&T secara historis mengirimkan telegram, panggilan telepon, paket TCP/IP, pesan teks, dan sekarang TikTok.

Transformasi masyarakat melalui telekomunikasi telah menghasilkan kebebasan yang lebih besar namun juga sentralisasi yang lebih besar. Internet telah meningkatkan jangkauan jutaan pembuat konten dan usaha kecil, namun juga memperkuat jangkauan perusahaan, otoritas pusat, dan lembaga lain yang memiliki posisi yang cukup baik untuk memantau dan memanipulasi aktivitas online.

Namun Bitcoin bukanlah akhir dari transformasi apa pun—ini adalah awal dari sebuah transformasi. Seperti halnya telekomunikasi, Bitcoin akan mengubah kebiasaan umat manusia dan kehidupan sehari-harinya. Memprediksi seluruh cakupan perubahan saat ini sama dengan membayangkan internet saat hidup di era telegraf.

Seri ini mencoba membayangkan masa depan dengan memulai dari masa lalu. Artikel awal ini menelusuri sejarah mata uang digital sebelum Bitcoin. Hanya dengan memahami kegagalan proyek-proyek sebelumnya, kita dapat memahami apa yang membuat Bitcoin berhasil—dan bagaimana hal itu menyarankan metodologi untuk membangun sistem desentralisasi di masa depan.

Daftar isi

1. Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar
   1. Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat
   2. Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat
   3. Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif
2. Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi
   1. Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama
   2. Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua
   3. Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang
3. Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?
   1. Gunakan Pasar Eksternal
   2. Gunakan Pasar Internal
4. Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin
   1. Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin sudah Ada
   2. Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus
   3. Waktu Menutup semua Penyebaran
   4. Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus
5. Kesimpulan

Klaim utama dari artikel ini adalah bahwa Bitcoin dapat dianggap sebagai adaptasi dari proyek B-money Dai yang menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menciptakan uang. Hanya beberapa minggu setelah artikel ini pertama kali diterbitkan, email baru muncul di mana Satoshi mengaku tidak terbiasa dengan B-money, namun mengakui bahwa Bitcoin dimulai “tepat dari titik itu.” Mengingat bukti baru ini, kami yakin klaim utama ini, meskipun tidak akurat secara historis, masih merupakan cara yang bermakna dan bermanfaat untuk memikirkan asal usul Bitcoin.

Bagaimana Satoshi Nakamoto Memikirkan Bitcoin?

Satoshi memang cerdas, tetapi Bitcoin tidak muncul begitu saja.

Bitcoin mengulangi pekerjaan yang ada di bidang kriptografi, sistem terdistribusi, ekonomi, dan filsafat politik. Konsep proof-of-work sudah ada jauh sebelum digunakan dalam uang dan cypherpunk sebelumnya seperti Nick Szabo, Wei Dai, & Hal Finney mengantisipasi dan memengaruhi desain Bitcoin dengan proyek-proyek seperti bit gold, B-money, dan RPoW. Pertimbangkan bahwa, pada tahun 2008, ketika Satoshi menulis white paper Bitcoin[^2], banyak ide penting Bitcoin telah diusulkan dan/atau diimplementasikan:

• Mata uang digital harus berupa jaringan P2P
• Proof-of-work adalah dasar penciptaan uang
• Uang diciptakan melalui lelang
• Kunci publik kriptografi digunakan untuk menentukan kepemilikan dan transfer koin
• Transaksi dikelompokkan menjadi beberapa blok
• Blok dirangkai bersama melalui proof-of-work
• Semua blok disimpan oleh semua peserta

Bitcoin memanfaatkan semua konsep ini, tetapi Satoshi tidak menciptakan satu pun konsep tersebut. Untuk lebih memahami kontribusi Satoshi, kita harus menentukan prinsip Bitcoin mana yang tidak ada dalam daftar.

Beberapa kandidat yang jelas adalah persediaan Bitcoin yang terbatas, konsensus Nakamoto, dan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan. Tapi apa yang mendorong Satoshi pada ide ini?

Artikel ini mengeksplorasi sejarah mata uang digital dan menyatakan bahwa fokus Satoshi pada kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah hal yang menyebabkan Bitcoin mengatasi tantangan yang mengalahkan proyek-proyek sebelumnya seperti bit gold dan B-money.

Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar

Bitcoin sering digambarkan sebagai sistem terdesentralisasi atau terdistribusi. Sayangnya, kata “desentralisasi” dan “terdistribusi” sering kali membingungkan. Ketika diterapkan pada sistem digital, kedua istilah tersebut mengacu pada cara aplikasi monolitik dapat didekomposisi menjadi jaringan bagian-bagian yang berkomunikasi.

Untuk tujuan kita, perbedaan utama antara sistem terdesentralisasi dan terdistribusi bukanlah topologi diagram jaringannya, namun cara mereka menegakkan aturan. Kami meluangkan waktu di bagian berikut untuk membandingkan sistem terdistribusi dan desentralisasi dan memotivasi gagasan bahwa sistem desentralisasi yang kuat adalah pasar.

Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat

Dalam hal ini, kami mengartikan “terdistribusi” sebagai sistem apa pun yang telah dipecah menjadi beberapa bagian (sering disebut sebagai "node") yang harus berkomunikasi, biasanya melalui jaringan.

Insinyur perangkat lunak semakin mahir dalam membangun sistem yang terdistribusi secara global. Internet terdiri dari sistem terdistribusi yang secara kolektif berisi miliaran node. Kita masing-masing memiliki simpul di saku kita yang berpartisipasi dan bergantung pada sistem ini.

Namun hampir semua sistem terdistribusi yang kita gunakan saat ini diatur oleh beberapa otoritas pusat, biasanya administrator sistem, perusahaan, atau pemerintah yang saling dipercaya oleh semua node dalam sistem.

Otoritas pusat memastikan semua node mematuhi aturan sistem dan menghapus, memperbaiki, atau menghukum node yang gagal mematuhinya. Mereka dipercaya untuk melakukan koordinasi, menyelesaikan konflik, dan mengalokasikan sumber daya bersama. Seiring waktu, otoritas pusat mengelola perubahan pada sistem, memperbarui atau menambahkan fitur, dan memastikan bahwa node yang berpartisipasi mematuhi perubahan tersebut.

Manfaat yang diperoleh sistem terdistribusi karena mengandalkan otoritas pusat juga disertai dengan biaya. Meskipun sistem ini kuat terhadap kegagalan node-nodenya, kegagalan otoritas pusat dapat menyebabkan sistem berhenti berfungsi secara keseluruhan. Kemampuan otoritas pusat untuk mengambil keputusan secara sepihak berarti menumbangkan atau menghilangkan otoritas pusat sudah cukup untuk mengendalikan atau menghancurkan keseluruhan sistem.

Terlepas dari adanya trade-off ini, jika ada persyaratan bahwa satu partai atau koalisi harus mempertahankan otoritas pusat, atau jika peserta dalam sistem tersebut puas dengan mengandalkan otoritas pusat, maka sistem terdistribusi tradisional adalah solusi terbaik. Tidak diperlukan blockchain, token, atau sistem desentralisasi serupa.

Secara khusus, kasus VC atau mata uang kripto yang didukung oleh pemerintah, dengan persyaratan bahwa satu pihak dapat memantau atau membatasi pembayaran dan membekukan akun, adalah kasus penggunaan yang sempurna untuk sistem terdistribusi tradisional.

Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat

Kami menganggap “desentralisasi” memiliki arti yang lebih kuat daripada “terdistribusi”: sistem desentralisasi adalah bagian dari sistem terdistribusi yang tidak memiliki otoritas pusat. Sinonim yang mirip dengan “desentralisasi” adalah “peer-to-peer” (P2P).

Menghapus otoritas pusat memberikan beberapa keuntungan. Sistem terdesentralisasi:

• Tumbuh dengan cepat karena tidak ada hambatan untuk masuk—siapa pun dapat mengembangkan sistem hanya dengan menjalankan node baru, dan tidak ada persyaratan untuk registrasi atau persetujuan dari otoritas pusat.
• Kuat karena tidak ada otoritas pusat yang kegagalannya dapat membahayakan berfungsinya sistem. Semua node adalah sama, jadi kegagalan bersifat lokal dan jaringan merutekan sekitar kerusakan.
• Sulit untuk ditangkap, diatur, dikenakan pajak, atau diawasi karena tidak adanya titik kendali terpusat yang dapat ditumbangkan oleh pemerintah.

Kekuatan inilah yang menjadi alasan Satoshi memilih desain Bitcoin yang terdesentralisasi dan peer-to-peer:

“Pemerintah pandai memotong… jaringan yang dikendalikan secara terpusat seperti Napster, namun jaringan P2P murni seperti Gnutella dan Tor tampaknya masih mampu bertahan.” - Satoshi Nakamoto, 2008

Namun kekuatan ini juga disertai dengan kelemahan. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi bisa menjadi kurang efisien karena setiap titik harus memikul tanggung jawab tambahan untuk koordinasi yang sebelumnya diambil alih oleh otoritas pusat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi juga sering dilanda perilaku yang bersifat penipuan dan bertentangan. Terlepas dari persetujuan Satoshi terhadap Gnutella, siapa pun yang menggunakan program berbagi file P2P untuk mengunduh file yang ternyata kotor atau berbahaya memahami alasan mengapa berbagi file P2P tidak pernah menjadi model utama untuk transfer data online.

Satoshi tidak menyebutkannya secara eksplisit, namun email adalah sistem terdesentralisasi lainnya yang menghindari kendali pemerintah. Dan email juga terkenal sebagai spam.

Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif

Akar masalahnya, dalam semua kasus ini adalah, bahwa perilaku kejahatan (menyebarkan file buruk, mengirim email spam) tidak dihukum, dan perilaku kooperatif (menyebarkan file bagus, hanya mengirim email berguna) tidak dihargai. Sistem desentralisasi yang mengandalkan partisipannya untuk menjadi aktor yang baik gagal untuk berkembang karena sistem tersebut tidak dapat mencegah aktor jahat untuk ikut berpartisipasi.

Tanpa memaksakan otoritas pusat, satu-satunya cara untuk menyelesaikan masalah ini adalah dengan menggunakan insentif ekonomi. Aktor yang baik, menurut definisinya, bermain sesuai aturan karena mereka secara inheren termotivasi untuk melakukannya. Pelaku kejahatan, menurut definisinya, adalah orang yang egois dan licik, namun insentif ekonomi yang tepat dapat mengarahkan perilaku buruk mereka ke arah kebaikan bersama. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi melakukan hal ini dengan memastikan bahwa perilaku kooperatif menguntungkan dan perilaku kejahatan merugikan.

Cara terbaik untuk menerapkan layanan terdesentralisasi yang kuat adalah dengan menciptakan pasar di mana semua pelaku, baik dan buruk, dibayar untuk menyediakan layanan tersebut. Kurangnya hambatan masuk bagi pembeli dan penjual di pasar yang terdesentralisasi mendorong skala dan efisiensi. Jika protokol pasar dapat melindungi partisipan dari penipuan, pencurian, dan penyalahgunaan, maka pelaku kejahatan akan merasa lebih menguntungkan untuk mengikuti aturan atau menyerang sistem lain.

Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi

Namun pasar itu rumit. Mereka harus memberi pembeli dan penjual kemampuan untuk mengirimkan penawaran dan permintaan serta menemukan, mencocokkan, dan menyelesaikan pesanan. Kebijakan tersebut harus adil, memberikan konsistensi yang kuat, dan menjaga ketersediaan meskipun terjadi masa-masa yang tidak menentu.

Pasar global saat ini sangat mumpuni dan canggih, namun menggunakan barang-barang tradisional dan jaringan pembayaran untuk menerapkan insentif di pasar yang terdesentralisasi bukanlah hal yang baru. Setiap penggabungan antara sistem desentralisasi dan uang fiat, aset tradisional, atau komoditas fisik akan menimbulkan kembali ketergantungan pada otoritas pusat yang mengontrol pemroses pembayaran, bank, dan bursa.

Sistem terdesentralisasi tidak dapat mentransfer uang tunai, mencari saldo rekening perantara, atau menentukan kepemilikan properti. Barang-barang tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi. Hal sebaliknya tidak benar—sistem tradisional dapat berinteraksi dengan Bitcoin semudah aktor lainnya (begitu mereka memutuskan ingin melakukannya). Batasan antara sistem tradisional dan desentralisasi bukanlah sebuah tembok yang tidak dapat dilewati, melainkan sebuah membran semi-permeabel.

Ini berarti bahwa sistem yang terdesentralisasi tidak dapat melaksanakan pembayaran dalam mata uang barang tradisional apa pun. Mereka bahkan tidak dapat menentukan saldo rekening yang didominasi fiat atau kepemilikan real estat atau barang fisik. Seluruh perekonomian tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi.

Menciptakan pasar yang terdesentralisasi membutuhkan perdagangan barang-barang baru yang terdesentralisasi yang dapat dibaca dan ditransfer dalam sistem yang terdesentralisasi.

Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama

Contoh pertama dari “barang terdesentralisasi” adalah kelas komputasi khusus yang pertama kali diusulkan pada tahun 1993 oleh Cynthia Dwork dan Moni Naor.[^3]

Karena adanya hubungan mendalam antara matematika, fisika, dan ilmu komputer, komputasi ini memerlukan energi dan sumber daya perangkat keras di dunia nyata—hal ini tidak dapat dipalsukan. Karena sumber daya di dunia nyata langka, komputasi ini juga langka.

input untuk komputasi ini dapat berupa data apa pun. Keluaran yang dihasilkan adalah “bukti” digital bahwa pengkomputasian telah dilakukan pada data input yang diberikan. Pembuktian mengandung “kesulitan” tertentu yang merupakan bukti (statistik) dari sejumlah pekerjaan komputasi tertentu. Yang terpenting, hubungan antara data input, pembuktian, dan pekerjaan komputasi asli yang dilakukan dapat diverifikasi secara independen tanpa perlu mengajukan banding ke otoritas pusat mana pun.

Gagasan untuk menyebarkan beberapa data input bersama dengan bukti digital sebagai bukti kerja komputasi dunia nyata yang dilakukan pada input tersebut sekarang disebut “proof-of-work”.[^4] Proof-of-work adalah, jika menggunakan ungkapan Nick Szabo, “biaya yang tidak dapat ditiru”. Karena proof-of-work dapat diverifikasi oleh siapa pun, maka proof-of-work merupakan sumber daya ekonomi yang dapat dibaca oleh semua peserta dalam sistem desentralisasi. Proof-of-work mengubah penghitungan data menjadi barang yang terdesentralisasi. Dwork & Naor mengusulkan penggunaan komputasi untuk membatasi penyalahgunaan sumber daya bersama dengan memaksa peserta untuk memberikan proof-of-work dengan tingkat kesulitan minimum tertentu sebelum mereka dapat mengakses sumber daya:

“Dalam makalah ini kami menyarankan pendekatan komputasi untuk memerangi penyebaran surat elektronik. Secara umum, kami telah merancang mekanisme kontrol akses yang dapat digunakan kapan pun diinginkan untuk membatasi, namun tidak melarang, akses ke sumber daya.” - Dwoak & Naor, 1993

Dalam proposal Dwork & Naor, administrator sistem email akan menetapkan tingkat kesulitan bukti kerja minimum untuk mengirimkan email. Pengguna yang ingin mengirim email perlu melakukan sejumlah komputasi yang sesuai dengan email tersebut sebagai data input. Bukti yang dihasilkan akan dikirimkan ke server bersamaan dengan permintaan pengiriman email.

Dwork & Naor menyebut kesulitan proof-of-work sebagai “fungsi penetapan harga” karena, dengan menyesuaikan kesulitan tersebut, “otoritas penetapan harga” dapat memastikan bahwa sumber daya bersama tetap murah untuk digunakan bagi pengguna yang jujur dan rata-rata, namun mahal bagi pengguna yang mencari untuk mengeksploitasinya. Di pasar pengiriman email, administrator server adalah otoritas penetapan harga; mereka harus memilih “harga” untuk pengiriman email yang cukup rendah untuk penggunaan normal namun terlalu tinggi untuk spam.

Meskipun Dwork & Naor membingkai proof-of-work sebagai disinsentif ekonomi untuk memerangi penyalahgunaan sumber daya, nomenklatur “fungsi penetapan harga” dan “otoritas penetapan harga” mendukung interpretasi yang berbeda dan berbasis pasar: pengguna membeli akses ke sumber daya dengan imbalan komputasi pada tingkat yang sama. harga yang ditetapkan oleh pengontrol sumber daya.

Dalam interpretasi ini, jaringan pengiriman email sebenarnya adalah pengiriman email perdagangan pasar yang terdesentralisasi untuk komputasi. Kesulitan minimum dari proof-of-work adalah harga yang diminta untuk pengiriman email dalam mata uang komputasi.

Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua

Namun komputasi bukanlah mata uang yang baik.

Bukti yang digunakan untuk “memperdagangkan” komputasi hanya valid untuk input yang digunakan dalam komputasi tersebut. Hubungan yang tidak dapat dipecahkan antara bukti spesifik dan input tertentu berarti bahwa proof-of-work untuk satu input tidak dapat digunakan kembali untuk input yang berbeda.

Proof-of-work awalnya diusulkan sebagai mekanisme kontrol akses untuk membatasi email spam. Pengguna diharapkan memberikan bukti kerja bersama email apa pun yang ingin mereka kirim. Mekanisme ini juga dapat dianggap sebagai pasar di mana pengguna membeli pengiriman email dengan komputasi pada harga yang dipilih oleh penyedia layanan email.

Batasan ini berguna – dapat digunakan untuk mencegah pekerjaan yang dilakukan oleh satu pembeli di pasar kemudian dibelanjakan kembali oleh pembeli lain. Misalnya, HashCash, implementasi nyata pertama dari pasar pengiriman email, menyertakan metadata seperti stempel waktu saat ini dan alamat email pengirim dalam data masukan untuk penghitungan bukti kerja. Bukti yang dihasilkan oleh pengguna tertentu untuk email tertentu, tidak dapat digunakan untuk email yang berbeda.

Namun ini juga berarti bahwa komputasi bukti kerja adalah barang yang dipesan lebih dahulu. Dana tersebut tidak dapat dipertukarkan, tidak dapat dibelanjakan kembali,[^5] dan tidak memecahkan masalah kebutuhan yang terjadi secara kebetulan. Properti moneter yang hilang ini mencegah komputasi menjadi mata uang. Terlepas dari namanya, tidak ada insentif bagi penyedia pengiriman email untuk ingin mengakumulasikan HashCash, karena akan ada uang tunai sebenarnya.

Adam Back, penemu HashCash, memahami masalah berikut:

"Hashcash tidak dapat ditransfer secara langsung karena untuk membuatnya didistribusikan, setiap penyedia layanan hanya menerima pembayaran dalam bentuk tunai yang dibuat untuk mereka. Anda mungkin dapat menyiapkan pencetakan gaya digicash (dengan chaumian ecash) dan meminta bank hanya mencetak uang tunai pada penerimaan tabrakan hash yang ditangani. Namun ini berarti Anda harus mempercayai bank untuk tidak mencetak uang dalam jumlah tak terbatas untuk digunakan sendiri." - Adam Back, 1997

Kita tidak ingin menukar komputasi yang dibuat khusus untuk setiap barang atau jasa yang dijual dalam perekonomian yang terdesentralisasi. Kita menginginkan mata uang digital serba guna yang dapat langsung digunakan untuk mengoordinasikan pertukaran nilai di pasar mana pun.

Membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi namun tetap terdesentralisasi merupakan tantangan yang signifikan. Mata uang membutuhkan unit yang dapat dipertukarkan dengan nilai yang sama yang dapat ditransfer antar pengguna. Hal ini memerlukan model penerbitan, definisi kriptografi kepemilikan dan transfer, proses penemuan dan penyelesaian transaksi, dan buku besar historis. Infrastruktur ini tidak diperlukan ketika bukti kerja hanya dianggap sebagai “mekanisme kontrol akses”.

Terlebih lagi, sistem desentralisasi adalah pasar, jadi semua fungsi dasar mata uang ini harus disediakan melalui penyedia layanan berbayar… dalam satuan mata uang yang sedang dibuat!

Seperti mengkompilasi compiler pertama, permulaan jaringan listrik yang gelap, atau evolusi kehidupan itu sendiri, pencipta mata uang digital dihadapkan pada masalah bootstrapping: bagaimana mendefinisikan insentif ekonomi yang mendasari mata uang yang berfungsi tanpa memiliki mata uang yang berfungsi di dalamnya yang akan mendenominasikan atau membayar insentif tersebut.

Komputasi dan mata uang adalah barang pertama dan kedua di pasar yang terdesentralisasi. Proof-of-work sendiri memungkinkan pertukaran komputasi tetapi mata uang yang berfungsi memerlukan lebih banyak infrastruktur. Butuh waktu 15 tahun bagi komunitas cypherpunk untuk mengembangkan infrastruktur tersebut.

Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang

Kemajuan dalam masalah bootstrapping ini berasal dari penyusunan batasan yang tepat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi harus menjadi pasar. Pasar terdiri dari pembeli dan penjual yang saling bertukar barang. Pasar terdesentralisasi untuk mata uang digital hanya memiliki dua barang yang dapat dibaca di dalamnya:

1. Komputasi melalui proof-of-work
2. Unit mata uang yang kita coba bangun

Oleh karena itu, satu-satunya perdagangan pasar yang memungkinkan adalah antara kedua barang tersebut. Komputasi harus dijual untuk satuan mata uang atau setara dengan satuan mata uang harus dijual untuk komputasi. Menyatakan hal ini sangatlah mudah—bagian tersulitnya adalah menata pasar ini sehingga sekadar menukar mata uang untuk komputasi akan mem-bootstrap semua kemampuan mata uang itu sendiri!

Seluruh sejarah mata uang digital yang berpuncak pada white paper Satoshi tahun 2008 adalah serangkaian upaya yang semakin canggih dalam menata pasar ini. Bagian berikut mengulas proyek-proyek seperti bit gold milik Nick Szabo dan B-money milik Wei Dai. Memahami bagaimana proyek-proyek ini menyusun pasar mereka dan mengapa mereka gagal akan membantu kita memahami mengapa Satoshi dan Bitcoin berhasil.

Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi Dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?

Fungsi utama pasar adalah penemuan harga. Oleh karena itu, komputasi perdagangan pasar untuk mata uang harus menemukan harga komputasi itu sendiri, dalam satuan mata uang tersebut.

Kita biasanya tidak memberikan nilai moneter pada komputasi. Kita biasanya menghargai kapasitas untuk melakukan komputasi karena kita menghargai output dari komputasi, bukan komputasi itu sendiri. Jika keluaran yang sama dapat dilakukan dengan lebih efisien, dengan komputasi yang lebih sedikit, hal ini biasanya disebut “kemajuan”.

Proof-of-work mewakili komputasi spesifik yang keluarannya hanya berupa bukti bahwa komputasi tersebut telah dilakukan. Menghasilkan bukti yang sama dengan melakukan lebih sedikit komputasi dan lebih sedikit pekerjaan tidak akan menghasilkan kemajuan—hal ini akan menjadi bug. Oleh karena itu, komputasi yang terkait dengan Proof-of-work merupakan hal yang aneh dan baru untuk dicoba dihargai.

Ketika bukti kerja dianggap sebagai disinsentif terhadap penyalahgunaan sumber daya, maka bukti kerja tidak perlu dinilai secara tepat dan konsisten. Yang terpenting adalah penyedia layanan email menetapkan tingkat kesulitan yang cukup rendah sehingga tidak terlihat oleh pengguna yang sah, namun cukup tinggi sehingga menjadi penghalang bagi pelaku spam. Oleh karena itu, terdapat beragam “harga” yang dapat diterima dan setiap peserta bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga mereka sendiri, dengan menerapkan fungsi penetapan harga lokal.

Namun satuan mata uang dimaksudkan agar dapat dipertukarkan, masing-masing memiliki nilai yang sama. Karena perubahan teknologi dari waktu ke waktu, dua unit mata uang yang dibuat dengan tingkat kesulitan proof-of-work yang sama—yang diukur dengan jumlah komputasi yang sesuai—mungkin memiliki biaya produksi yang sangat berbeda di dunia nyata, yang diukur dengan waktu, energi, dan/atau modal untuk melakukan komputasi tersebut. Ketika komputasi dijual dengan menggunakan mata uang, dan biaya produksi yang mendasarinya bervariasi, bagaimana pasar dapat memastikan harga yang konsisten?

Nick Szabo dengan jelas mengidentifikasi masalah harga ini ketika menjelaskan bit gold:

"Masalah utamanya...adalah bahwa skema pembuktian kerja bergantung pada arsitektur komputer, bukan hanya matematika abstrak yang didasarkan pada "siklus komputasi" abstrak. ...Jadi, ada kemungkinan untuk menjadi produsen berbiaya sangat rendah (dengan beberapa kali lipat besarnya) dan membanjiri pasar dengan bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Mata uang terdesentralisasi yang diciptakan melalui proof-of-work akan mengalami kelebihan pasokan dan penurunan pasokan seiring dengan perubahan pasokan komputasi seiring waktu. Untuk mengakomodasi volatilitas ini, jaringan harus belajar menghitung harga secara dinamis.

Mata uang digital awal mencoba memberi harga pada komputasi dengan mencoba mengukur “biaya komputasi” secara kolektif. Wei Dai, misalnya, mengusulkan solusi praktis berikut dalam B-money:

"Jumlah unit moneter yang diciptakan sama dengan biaya upaya komputasi dalam sekeranjang komoditas standar. Sebagai contoh, jika sebuah masalah memerlukan waktu 100 jam untuk diselesaikan pada komputer yang dapat menyelesaikannya dengan cara yang paling ekonomis, dan diperlukan 3 keranjang standar untuk membeli 100 jam waktu komputasi pada komputer tersebut di pasar terbuka, maka setelah solusi terhadap masalah tersebut disiarkan, setiap orang mengkredit rekening penyiar sebanyak 3 unit." - Dai, 1998

Sayangnya, Dai tidak menjelaskan bagaimana pengguna dalam sistem yang seharusnya terdesentralisasi seharusnya menyetujui definisi “keranjang standar”, komputer mana yang memecahkan masalah tertentu “paling ekonomis”, atau biaya komputasi di “pasar terbuka”. Mencapai konsensus di antara semua pengguna mengenai kumpulan data bersama yang berubah-ubah terhadap waktu adalah masalah penting dalam sistem desentralisasi!

Agar adil bagi Dai, dia menyadari hal ini:

“Salah satu bagian yang lebih bermasalah dalam protokol B-money adalah penciptaan uang. Bagian dari protokol ini mengharuskan semua [pengguna] memutuskan dan menyetujui biaya perhitungan tertentu. Sayangnya karena teknologi komputasi cenderung berkembang pesat dan tidak selalu bersifat publik, informasi ini mungkin tidak tersedia, tidak akurat, atau ketinggalan jaman, yang semuanya akan menyebabkan masalah serius pada protokol." - Dai, 1998

Dai kemudian mengusulkan mekanisme penetapan harga berbasis lelang yang lebih canggih yang kemudian dikatakan Satoshi sebagai titik awal idenya. Kita akan kembali ke skema lelang di bawah ini, tapi pertama-tama mari kita beralih ke bit gold, dan pertimbangkan wawasan Szabo tentang masalahnya.

Gunakan Pasar Eksternal

Szabo mengklaim bahwa proof-of-work harus “diberi stempel waktu dengan aman”:

"Bukti kerja diberi stempel waktu yang aman. Ini harus bekerja secara terdistribusi, dengan beberapa layanan stempel waktu berbeda sehingga tidak ada layanan stempel waktu tertentu yang perlu diandalkan secara substansial." - Szabo, 2005

Szabo tertaut ke halaman sumber daya tentang protokol penandaan waktu yang aman tetapi tidak menjelaskan algoritme spesifik apa pun untuk penandaan waktu yang aman. Ungkapan “aman” dan “fesyen terdistribusi” mempunyai pengaruh yang besar di sini, sehingga dapat mengatasi kerumitan dalam mengandalkan satu (atau banyak) layanan “di luar sistem” untuk penandaan waktu.[^6]

Waktu pembuatan unit mata uang digital penting karena menghubungkan komputasi yang dilakukan dengan biaya produksi di dunia nyata.

Terlepas dari ketidakjelasan implementasi, Szabo benar—waktu pembuatan proof-of-work merupakan faktor penting dalam menentukan harga karena terkait dengan biaya komputasi:

"…Namun, karena bit gold diberi stempel waktu, waktu yang dibuat serta tingkat kesulitan matematis dari pekerjaan tersebut dapat dibuktikan secara otomatis. Dari sini, biasanya dapat disimpulkan berapa biaya produksi selama periode waktu tersebut..." - Szabo, 2005

"Menyimpulkan" biaya produksi adalah hal yang penting karena bit gold tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat bit gold dengan melakukan perhitungan yang sesuai. Tanpa kemampuan untuk mengatur penerbitan, bit gold sama dengan barang koleksi:

"…Tidak seperti atom emas yang dapat dipertukarkan, tetapi seperti halnya barang-barang kolektor, pasokan dalam jumlah besar selama jangka waktu tertentu akan menurunkan nilai barang-barang tersebut. Dalam hal ini, emas kecil bertindak lebih seperti barang-barang kolektor daripada seperti emas..." - Szabo, 2005

Bit gold memerlukan proses eksternal tambahan untuk menciptakan unit mata uang yang sepadan:

“…[B]it Gold tidak dapat dipertukarkan berdasarkan fungsi sederhana, misalnya, panjang tali. Sebaliknya, untuk membuat unit yang dapat dipertukarkan, dealer harus menggabungkan potongan-potongan bit gold dengan nilai berbeda ke dalam satuan yang lebih besar kira-kira dengan nilai yang sama. Hal ini serupa dengan apa yang dilakukan banyak pedagang komoditas saat ini untuk memungkinkan pasar komoditas bekerja. Kepercayaan masih terdistribusi karena perkiraan nilai dari kumpulan tersebut dapat diverifikasi secara independen oleh banyak pihak lain dengan cara yang sebagian besar atau seluruhnya otomatis." - Szabo, 2005

Mengutip Szabo, “untuk menguji nilai… bit gold, dealer memeriksa dan memverifikasi tingkat kesulitan, masukan, dan stempel waktu”. Dealer yang mendefinisikan “unit yang lebih besar dengan nilai yang kira-kira sama” menyediakan fungsi penetapan harga yang serupa dengan “keranjang komoditas standar” Dai. Unit yang dapat dipertukarkan tidak dibuat dalam bentuk bit gold ketika bukti kerja diproduksi, hanya kemudian ketika bukti tersebut digabungkan menjadi “unit yang kira-kira bernilai sama” oleh dealer di pasar di luar jaringan.

Yang patut disyukuri, Szabo mengakui kelemahan ini:

"…Potensi kelebihan pasokan yang awalnya tersembunyi karena inovasi tersembunyi dalam arsitektur mesin adalah potensi kelemahan dalam bit gold, atau setidaknya ketidaksempurnaan yang harus diatasi oleh lelang awal dan pertukaran ex post bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Sekali lagi, meskipun belum sampai pada (yang sekarang kita kenal sebagai) solusinya, Szabo menunjukkan solusinya: karena biaya komputasi berubah seiring waktu, jaringan harus merespons perubahan pasokan komputasi dengan menyesuaikan harga uang.

Gunakan Pasar Internal

Dealer Szabo akan menjadi pasar eksternal yang menentukan harga (bundel dari) bit gold setelah penciptaannya. Apakah mungkin menerapkan pasar ini di dalam sistem dan bukan di luar sistem?

Mari kita kembali ke Wei Dai dan B-money. Seperti disebutkan sebelumnya, Dai mengusulkan model alternatif berbasis lelang untuk pembuatan B-money. Desain Satoshi untuk Bitcoin meningkat secara langsung pada model lelang B-money[^7]:

“Jadi saya mengusulkan subprotokol penciptaan uang alternatif, di mana [pengguna]… memutuskan dan menyetujui jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat setiap periode, dengan biaya pembuatan uang tersebut ditentukan melalui lelang. Setiap periode pembuatan uang adalah dibagi menjadi empat tahap, sebagai berikut:

Planning. Para [pengguna] menghitung dan bernegosiasi satu sama lain untuk menentukan peningkatan jumlah uang beredar yang optimal untuk periode berikutnya. Apakah [jaringan] dapat mencapai konsensus atau tidak, mereka masing-masing menyiarkan kuota penciptaan uang mereka dan komputasi makroekonomi apa pun yang dilakukan untuk mendukung angka tersebut.

Bidding. Siapapun yang ingin membuat B-money menyiarkan tawaran dalam bentuk dimana x adalah banyaknya B-money yang ingin dibuatnya, dan y adalah soal yang belum terselesaikan dari kelas soal yang telah ditentukan. Setiap masalah di kelas ini harus memiliki biaya nominal (katakanlah dalam MIPS-years) yang disetujui secara publik.

Computation. Setelah melihat penawaran, pihak yang mengajukan penawaran pada tahap penawaran sekarang dapat menyelesaikan masalah dalam penawarannya dan menyiarkan solusinya. Penciptaan uang.

Money creation. Setiap [pengguna] menerima tawaran tertinggi (di antara mereka yang benar-benar menyiarkan solusi) dalam hal biaya nominal per unit B-money yang dibuat dan memberikan kredit kepada akun penawar sesuai dengan itu."
- Dai, 1998

B-money membuat kemajuan signifikan menuju struktur pasar yang tepat untuk mata uang digital. Ini berupaya untuk menghilangkan dealer eksternal Szabo dan memungkinkan pengguna untuk terlibat dalam penemuan harga dengan menawar satu sama lain secara langsung.

Namun menerapkan proposal Dai seperti yang tertulis akan menjadi sebuah tantangan:

• Dalam fase "Planning”, pengguna menanggung beban menegosiasikan “peningkatan optimal jumlah uang beredar untuk periode berikutnya”. Bagaimana “optimal” harus didefinisikan, bagaimana pengguna harus bernegosiasi satu sama lain, dan bagaimana hasil negosiasi tersebut dibagikan tidak dijelaskan.
• Terlepas dari apa yang direncanakan, fase “Bidding” memungkinkan siapa saja untuk mengajukan “tawaran” untuk membuat B-money. Tawaran mencakup jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat serta jumlah bukti kerja yang sesuai sehingga setiap penawaran adalah harga, jumlah perhitungan yang bersedia dilakukan oleh penawar tertentu untuk membeli sejumlah tertentu. dari B-money.
• Setelah penawaran diserahkan, fase “Computation” terdiri dari peserta lelang yang melakukan proof-of-work yang mereka tawarkan dan menyiarkan solusi. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencocokkan penawar dengan solusi yang disediakan. Yang lebih problematis adalah tidak jelasnya bagaimana pengguna dapat mengetahui bahwa semua penawaran telah diajukan – kapan fase “Bidding” berakhir dan fase “Computation” dimulai?
• Masalah-masalah ini berulang dalam fase “Money creation”. Karena sifat proof-of-work, pengguna dapat memverifikasi bahwa bukti yang mereka terima dalam solusi adalah asli. Namun bagaimana pengguna dapat secara kolektif menyepakati serangkaian “tawaran tertinggi”? Bagaimana jika pengguna yang berbeda memilih set yang berbeda, baik karena preferensi atau latensi jaringan?

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi kesulitan dalam melacak data dan membuat pilihan secara konsisten, namun B-money memerlukan pelacakan tawaran dari banyak pengguna dan membuat pilihan konsensus di antara mereka. Kompleksitas ini menghalangi penerapan B-money.

Akar dari kompleksitas ini adalah keyakinan Dai bahwa tingkat “optimal” penciptaan B-money harus berfluktuasi seiring waktu berdasarkan “perhitungan makroekonomi” penggunanya. Seperti bit gold, B-money tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat unit B-money dengan menyiarkan tawaran dan kemudian melakukan proof-of-work yang sesuai.

Baik Szabo maupun Dai mengusulkan penggunaan pasar pertukaran mata uang digital untuk komputasi, namun baik bit gold maupun B-money tidak menentukan kebijakan moneter untuk mengatur pasokan mata uang di pasar ini.

Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin

Sebaliknya, kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah salah satu tujuan utama Satoshi dalam proyek Bitcoin. Dalam postingan milis pertama tempat Bitcoin diumumkan, Satoshi menulis:

“Akar permasalahan mata uang konvensional adalah kepercayaan yang diperlukan agar mata uang tersebut dapat berfungsi. Bank sentral harus dipercaya untuk tidak merendahkan mata uang tersebut, namun sejarah mata uang fiat penuh dengan pelanggaran terhadap kepercayaan tersebut.” - Satoshi, 2009

Satoshi selanjutnya menjelaskan masalah lain dengan mata uang fiat seperti perbankan cadangan fraksional yang berisiko, kurangnya privasi, pencurian & penipuan yang merajalela, dan ketidakmampuan melakukan pembayaran mikro. Namun Satoshi memulai dengan isu penurunan nilai oleh bank sentral—dengan kekhawatiran mengenai kebijakan moneter.

Satoshi ingin Bitcoin pada akhirnya mencapai pasokan sirkulasi terbatas yang tidak dapat terdilusi seiring waktu. Tingkat penciptaan Bitcoin yang “optimal”, bagi Satoshi, pada akhirnya akan menjadi nol.

Tujuan kebijakan moneter ini, lebih dari karakteristik lain yang mereka miliki secara pribadi (atau kolektif!), adalah alasan Satoshi “menemukan” Bitcoin, blockchain, konsensus Nakamoto, dll. —dan bukan orang lain. Ini adalah jawaban singkat atas pertanyaan yang diajukan dalam judul artikel ini: Satoshi memikirkan Bitcoin karena mereka fokus pada penciptaan mata uang digital dengan persediaan terbatas.

Pasokan Bitcoin yang terbatas bukan hanya tujuan kebijakan moneter atau meme bagi para Bitcoiner untuk berkumpul. Penyederhanaan teknis penting inilah yang memungkinkan Satoshi membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi sementara B-money Dai tetap menjadi postingan web yang menarik.

Bitcoin adalah B-money dengan persyaratan tambahan berupa kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan. Seperti banyak penyederhanaan teknis lainnya, pembatasan kebijakan moneter memungkinkan kemajuan dengan mengurangi ruang lingkup. Mari kita lihat bagaimana masing-masing fase pembuatan B-money disederhanakan dengan menerapkan batasan ini.

Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin Sudah Ada

Dalam b-money, setiap “periode penciptaan uang” mencakup fase “Perencanaan”, di mana pengguna diharapkan untuk membagikan “perhitungan makroekonomi” mereka yang membenarkan jumlah b-money yang ingin mereka ciptakan pada saat itu. Tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi yaitu pasokan terbatas dan emisi nol tidak sesuai dengan kebebasan yang diberikan b-money kepada pengguna individu untuk menghasilkan uang. Oleh karena itu, langkah pertama dalam perjalanan dari bmoney ke bitcoin adalah menghilangkan kebebasan ini. Pengguna bitcoin perorangan tidak dapat membuat bitcoin. Hanya jaringan bitcoin yang dapat membuat bitcoin, dan hal ini terjadi tepat sekali, pada tahun 2009 ketika Satoshi meluncurkan proyek bitcoin.

Satoshi mampu menggantikan fase “Perencanaan” b-money yang berulang menjadi satu jadwal yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya di mana 21 juta bitcoin yang dibuat pada tahun 2009 akan dilepaskan ke peredaran. Pengguna secara sukarela mendukung kebijakan moneter Satoshi dengan mengunduh dan menjalankan perangkat lunak Bitcoin Core yang kebijakan moneternya dikodekan secara keras.

Hal ini mengubah semantik pasar bitcoin untuk komputasi. Bitcoin yang dibayarkan kepada penambang bukanlah hal baru yang diterbitkan; itu melainkan baru dirilis ke peredaran dari persediaan yang ada.

Pandangan ini sangat berbeda dari klaim naif bahwa “penambang bitcoin menciptakan bitcoin”. Penambang Bitcoin tidak menciptakan bitcoin, mereka membelinya. Bitcoin tidak berharga karena “bitcoin terbuat dari energi”—tetapi nilai bitcoin didemonstrasikan dengan dijual untuk mendapatkan energi.

Mari kita ulangi sekali lagi: bitcoin tidak dibuat melalui proof-of-work, bitcoin dibuat melalui konsensus.

Desain Satoshi menghilangkan persyaratan untuk fase “Perencanaan” yang berkelanjutan dari b-money dengan melakukan semua perencanaan terlebih dahulu. Hal ini memungkinkan Satoshi untuk membuat kebijakan moneter yang sehat namun juga menyederhanakan penerapan bitcoin.

Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus

Kebebasan yang diberikan kepada pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang menimbulkan beban yang sesuai bagi jaringan bmoney. Selama fase “Penawaran” jaringan b-money harus mengumpulkan dan membagikan “tawaran” pembuatan uang dari banyak pengguna yang berbeda.

Menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menghasilkan uang akan meringankan beban jaringan bitcoin. Karena seluruh 21 juta bitcoin sudah ada, jaringan tidak perlu mengumpulkan tawaran dari pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang, jaringan hanya perlu menjual bitcoin sesuai jadwal Satoshi yang telah ditentukan.

Jaringan bitcoin dengan demikian menawarkan konsensus harga permintaan untuk bitcoin yang dijualnya di setiap blok. Harga tunggal ini dihitung oleh setiap node secara independen menggunakan salinan blockchainnya. Jika node memiliki konsensus pada blockchain yang sama (poin yang akan kita bahas nanti) mereka semua akan menawarkan harga permintaan yang sama di setiap blok.[^8]

Bagian pertama kalkulasi harga konsensus menentukan berapa banyak bitcoin yang akan dijual. Hal ini diperbaiki oleh jadwal rilis Satoshi yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung jumlah yang sama untuk blok tertentu:

$ bitcoin-cli getblockstats <block\_height> {... "subsidy": 6250000000, ... } # 6.25 BTC

Bagian kedua dari harga yang diminta secara konsensus adalah jumlah komputasi yang akan menjual subsidi saat ini. Sekali lagi, semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung nilai yang sama (kita akan meninjau kembali kalkulasi tingkat kesulitan ini di bagian berikutnya):

$ bitcoin-cli getdifficulty {... "result": 55621444139429.57, ... }

Bersama-sama, subsidi dan kesulitan jaringan menentukan permintaan bitcoin saat ini sebagai mata uang komputasi. Karena blockchain berada dalam konsensus, harga ini adalah harga konsensus.

Pengguna b-money juga dianggap memiliki konsensus “blockchain” yang berisi riwayat semua transaksi. Namun Dai tidak pernah memikirkan solusi sederhana berupa konsensus tunggal yang meminta harga untuk pembuatan b-money baru, yang hanya ditentukan oleh data di blockchain tersebut.

Sebaliknya, Dai berasumsi bahwa penciptaan uang harus berlangsung selamanya. Oleh karena itu, pengguna individu perlu diberdayakan untuk mempengaruhi kebijakan moneter – seperti halnya mata uang fiat. Persyaratan yang dirasakan ini membuat Dai merancang sistem penawaran yang mencegah penerapan b-money.

Kompleksitas tambahan ini dihilangkan dengan persyaratan Satoshi mengenai kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya.

Waktu Menutup Semua Penyebaran

Dalam fase “Komputasi” b-money, pengguna individu akan melakukan komputasi yang telah mereka lakukan dalam penawaran sebelumnya. Dalam bitcoin, seluruh jaringan adalah penjual – tetapi siapa pembelinya?

Di pasar pengiriman email, pembelinya adalah individu yang ingin mengirim email. Otoritas penetapan harga, penyedia layanan email, akan menetapkan harga yang dianggap murah bagi individu namun mahal bagi pelaku spam. Namun jika jumlah pengguna yang sah bertambah, harganya masih bisa tetap sama karena kekuatan komputasi masing-masing pengguna akan tetap sama.

Di b-money, setiap pengguna yang menyumbangkan tawaran untuk pembuatan uang selanjutnya harus melakukan sendiri jumlah komputasi yang sesuai. Setiap pengguna bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga berdasarkan pengetahuan mereka tentang kemampuan komputasi mereka sendiri.

Jaringan bitcoin menawarkan satu harga yang diminta dalam komputasi subsidi bitcoin saat ini. Namun tidak ada penambang individu yang menemukan blok yang melakukan komputasi sebanyak ini.[^9] Blok pemenang penambang individu adalah bukti bahwa semua penambang secara kolektif melakukan jumlah komputasi yang diperlukan. Pembeli bitcoin dengan demikian adalah industri penambangan bitcoin global.

Setelah mencapai konsensus harga yang diminta, jaringan bitcoin tidak akan mengubah harga tersebut sampai lebih banyak blok diproduksi. Blok-blok ini harus berisi proof-of-work dengan harga yang diminta saat ini. Oleh karena itu, industri pertambangan tidak punya pilihan jika ingin “melakukan perdagangan” selain membayar harga yang diminta saat ini dalam komputasi.

Satu-satunya variabel yang dapat dikontrol oleh industri pertambangan adalah berapa lama waktu yang dibutuhkan untuk memproduksi blok berikutnya. Sama seperti jaringan bitcoin yang menawarkan satu harga yang diminta, industri pertambangan juga menawarkan satu penawaran—waktu yang diperlukan untuk menghasilkan blok berikutnya yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini.

Untuk mengimbangi peningkatan kecepatan perangkat keras dan minat yang berbeda-beda dalam menjalankan node dari waktu ke waktu, kesulitan proof-of-work ditentukan oleh rata-rata bergerak yang menargetkan jumlah rata-rata blok per jam. Jika dihasilkan terlalu cepat, kesulitannya akan meningkat. - Nakamoto, 2008

Satoshi dengan sederhana menjelaskan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan, yang sering disebut sebagai salah satu ide paling orisinal dalam implementasi bitcoin. Hal ini benar, namun alih-alih berfokus pada daya cipta solusi, mari kita fokus pada mengapa penyelesaian masalah sangat penting bagi Satoshi.

Proyek-proyek seperti bit gold dan b-money tidak perlu membatasi nilai tukar pada saat penciptaan uang karena mereka tidak memiliki pasokan tetap atau kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Periode penciptaan uang yang lebih cepat atau lebih lambat dapat dikompensasikan melalui cara lain, misalnya melalui pajak. Dealer eksternal memasukkan token bit gold ke dalam bundler yang lebih besar atau lebih kecil atau pengguna b-money mengubah tawaran mereka.

Namun tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi mengharuskan bitcoin memiliki tingkat pelepasan bitcoin yang telah ditentukan untuk diedarkan. Membatasi laju (statistik) produksi blok dari waktu ke waktu adalah hal yang wajar dalam bitcoin karena laju produksi blok adalah laju penjualan pasokan awal bitcoin. Menjual 21 juta bitcoin selama 140 tahun adalah proposisi yang berbeda dibandingkan membiarkannya dijual dalam 3 bulan.

Selain itu, bitcoin sebenarnya dapat menerapkan batasan ini karena blockchain adalah “protokol cap waktu aman” milik Szabo. Satoshi menggambarkan bitcoin sebagai yang pertama dan terutama sebagai “server stempel waktu terdistribusi secara peer-to-peer,” dan implementasi awal kode sumber bitcoin menggunakan “rantai waktu” dunia, bukan “blockchain” untuk menggambarkan struktur data bersama yang mengimplementasikan pasar proof-of-work bitcoin.[^10]

Tidak seperti bit gold atau b-money, token dalam bitcoin tidak mengalami kelebihan pasokan. Jaringan bitcoin menggunakan penyesuaian kesulitan untuk mengubah harga uang sebagai respons terhadap perubahan pasokan komputasi.

Algoritme penyesuaian ulang kesulitan Bitcoin memanfaatkan kemampuan ini. Blockchain konsensus digunakan oleh peserta untuk menghitung penawaran historis yang dibuat oleh industri pertambangan dan menyesuaikan kembali kesulitan agar bisa mendekati waktu blok target.

Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus

Rantai penyederhanaan yang disebabkan oleh tuntutan kebijakan moneter yang kuat meluas ke fase “penciptaan uang” dari b-money.

Tawaran yang diajukan pengguna di b-money mengalami masalah “tidak ada yang dipertaruhkan”. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencegah pengguna mengajukan tawaran dengan sejumlah besar b-money untuk pekerjaan yang sangat sedikit. Hal ini mengharuskan jaringan untuk melacak tawaran mana yang telah diselesaikan dan hanya menerima “tawaran tertinggi…dalam hal biaya nominal per unit b-money yang dibuat” untuk menghindari tawaran yang mengganggu tersebut. Setiap peserta b-money harus melacak seluruh tawaran senilai buku pesanan, mencocokkan tawaran dengan perhitungan selanjutnya, dan hanya menyelesaikan pesanan yang telah selesai dengan harga tertinggi.

Masalah ini merupakan contoh dari masalah konsensus yang lebih umum dalam sistem desentralisasi, yang juga dikenal sebagai “Byzantine generals” atau terkadang masalah “pembelanjaan ganda” dalam konteks mata uang digital. Berbagi urutan data yang identik di antara semua peserta merupakan suatu tantangan dalam jaringan yang saling bermusuhan dan terdesentralisasi. Solusi yang ada untuk masalah ini – yang disebut “algoritma konsensus Byzantine-fault tolerant (BFT)” – memerlukan koordinasi sebelumnya di antara peserta atau mayoritas (>67%) peserta agar tidak berperilaku bermusuhan.

Bitcoin tidak harus mengelola buku pesanan dalam jumlah besar karena jaringan bitcoin menawarkan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal. Ini berarti node bitcoin dapat menerima blok pertama (valid) yang mereka lihat yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini—tawaran gangguan dapat dengan mudah diabaikan dan merupakan pemborosan sumber daya penambang.

Komputasi harga berdasarkan konsensus memungkinkan pencocokan pesanan beli/jual dalam bitcoin dilakukan secara antusias, dengan sistem siapa cepat dia dapat. Berbeda dengan b-money, pencocokan pesanan yang cepat ini berarti bahwa pasar bitcoin tidak memiliki fase—pasar ini beroperasi terus-menerus, dengan harga konsensus baru dihitung setelah setiap pesanan dicocokkan (blok ditemukan). Untuk menghindari percabangan yang disebabkan oleh latensi jaringan atau perilaku bertentangan, node juga harus mengikuti aturan rantai terberat. Aturan penyelesaian pesanan yang serakah ini memastikan bahwa hanya tawaran tertinggi yang diterima oleh jaringan.

Kombinasi algoritma yang antusias dan serakah ini, dimana node menerima blok valid pertama yang mereka lihat dan juga mengikuti rantai terberat, adalah algoritma BFT baru yang dengan cepat menyatu pada konsensus tentang urutan blok. Satoshi menghabiskan 25% dari white paper bitcoin untuk mendemonstrasikan klaim ini.[^11]

Kita telah menetapkan di bagian sebelumnya bahwa harga permintaan konsensus bitcoin itu sendiri bergantung pada konsensus blockchain. Namun ternyata keberadaan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal inilah yang memungkinkan perhitungan pasar untuk mencocokkan pesanan dengan penuh semangat, dan itulah yang pertama-tama mengarah pada konsensus!

Terlebih lagi, “konsensus Nakamoto” yang baru ini hanya mengharuskan 50% peserta untuk tidak bertentangan, sebuah kemajuan yang signifikan dibandingkan dengan kondisi sebelumnya. Seorang cypherpunk seperti Satoshi membuat terobosan ilmu komputer teoretis ini, dibandingkan dengan akademisi tradisional atau peneliti industri, karena fokus mereka yang sempit pada penerapan uang yang sehat, dibandingkan algoritma konsensus umum untuk komputasi terdistribusi.

Kesimpulan

B-money adalah kerangka kerja yang kuat untuk membangun mata uang digital tetapi tidak lengkap karena tidak memiliki kebijakan moneter. Membatasi b-money dengan jadwal rilis yang telah ditentukan untuk bitcoin mengurangi cakupan dan menyederhanakan implementasi dengan menghilangkan persyaratan untuk melacak dan memilih di antara tawaran pembuatan uang yang diajukan pengguna. Mempertahankan kecepatan sementara dari jadwal rilis Satoshi menghasilkan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan dan memungkinkan konsensus Nakamoto, yang secara luas diakui sebagai salah satu aspek paling inovatif dalam implementasi bitcoin.

Ada lebih banyak hal dalam desain bitcoin daripada aspek yang dibahas sejauh ini. Kita memfokuskan artikel ini pada pasar “utama” dalam bitcoin, pasar yang mendistribusikan pasokan awal bitcoin ke dalam sirkulasi.

Artikel berikutnya dalam seri ini akan mengeksplorasi pasar penyelesaian transaksi bitcoin dan kaitannya dengan pasar pendistribusian pasokan bitcoin. Hubungan ini akan menyarankan metodologi bagaimana membangun pasar masa depan untuk layanan terdesentralisasi selain bitcoin.

Sumber artikel: HOW DID SATOSHI THINK OF BITCOIN? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-did-satoshi-think-of-bitcoin

Diterjemahkan oleh: Abengkris

[^1]: Judul seri ini diambil dari pesan telegraf pertama dalam sejarah, yang dikirimkan oleh Samuel Morse pada tahun 1844: “What hath God wrought?”.

[^2]: Bitcoin: Sistem Uang Elektronik Peer-to-Peer, tersedia di: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

[^3]: Pricing via Processing or Combatting Junk Mail oleh Dwork dan Naor. tersedia di:
https://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/../../pvp.pdf

[^4]: Meskipun merupakan pencetus ide tersebut, Dwork & Naor tidak menciptakan “proof-of-work”—julukan tersebut kemudian diberikan pada tahun 1999 oleh Markus Jakobsson dan Ari Juels.

[^5]: Proyek RPoW Hal Finney adalah upaya untuk menciptakan proof-of-work yang dapat ditransfer, tetapi bitcoin tidak menggunakan konsep ini karena tidak memperlakukan komputasi sebagai mata uang. Seperti yang akan kita lihat nanti ketika kita memeriksa bit gold dan b-money, komputasi tidak dapat berupa mata uang karena nilai komputasi berubah seiring waktu sementara unit mata uang harus memiliki nilai yang sama. Bitcoin bukanlah komputasi, bitcoin adalah mata uang yang dijual untuk komputasi.

[^6]: Pada saat ini, beberapa pembaca mungkin percaya bahwa saya meremehkan kontribusi Dai atau Szabo karena kontribusi mereka tidak jelas atau tidak jelas dalam beberapa hal. Perasaan saya justru sebaliknya: Dai dan Szabo pada dasarnya benar dan fakta bahwa mereka tidak mengartikulasikan setiap detail seperti yang dilakukan Satoshi tidak mengurangi kontribusi mereka. Sebaliknya, hal ini seharusnya meningkatkan apresiasi kita terhadap hal tersebut, karena hal ini menunjukkan betapa menantangnya munculnya mata uang digital, bahkan bagi para praktisi terbaiknya.

[^7]: Postingan b-money Dai adalah referensi pertama dalam white paper Satoshi, tersedia di: http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt

[^8]: Ada dua penyederhanaan yang dilakukan di sini: 1. Jumlah bitcoin yang dijual di setiap blok juga dipengaruhi oleh biaya transaksi pasar, yang berada di luar cakupan artikel ini, namun tetap menunggu pekerjaan selanjutnya. 2. Kesulitan yang dilaporkan oleh bitcoin bukanlah jumlah perhitungan yang diharapkan; seseorang harus mengalikannya dengan faktor proporsionalitas.

[^9]: Setidaknya sejak masa lalu yang buruk ketika Satoshi adalah satu-satunya penambang di jaringan.

[^10]: Bitcoin is Time klasik dari Gigi adalah pengenalan yang bagus tentang hubungan mendalam antara bitcoin dan waktu, tersedia di: https://dergigi.com/2021/01/14/bitcoin-is-time/

[^11]: Satoshi melakukan kesalahan baik dalam analisis mereka di buku putih maupun implementasi awal bitcoin berikutnya dengan menggunakan aturan “rantai terpanjang” dan bukan aturan “rantai terberat”.

@ 5a69e82d:aa41c382

Dhruv Bansal, CSO dan Co-Founder Unchained mengeksplorasi prinsip-prinsip dan sejarah yang mengarah pada penciptaan Bitcoin dan mengajukan pertanyaan: "Apa yang telah dilakukan Satoshi"?

Bitcoin sering dibandingkan dengan internet pada tahun 1990an, namun saya yakin analogi yang lebih baik adalah dengan telegraf pada tahun 1840an.[^1]

Telegraf adalah teknologi pertama yang mengirimkan data yang dikodekan dengan kecepatan mendekati cahaya dalam jarak jauh. Ini menandai lahirnya industri telekomunikasi. Internet, meskipun skalanya lebih besar, kontennya lebih kaya, dan many-to-many, bukan one-to-one, pada dasarnya masih merupakan teknologi telekomunikasi.

Baik telegraf maupun internet bergantung pada model bisnis di mana perusahaan mengerahkan modal untuk membangun jaringan fisik dan kemudian membebankan biaya kepada pengguna untuk mengirim pesan melalui jaringan ini. Jaringan AT&T secara historis mengirimkan telegram, panggilan telepon, paket TCP/IP, pesan teks, dan sekarang TikTok.

Transformasi masyarakat melalui telekomunikasi telah menghasilkan kebebasan yang lebih besar namun juga sentralisasi yang lebih besar. Internet telah meningkatkan jangkauan jutaan pembuat konten dan usaha kecil, namun juga memperkuat jangkauan perusahaan, otoritas pusat, dan lembaga lain yang memiliki posisi yang cukup baik untuk memantau dan memanipulasi aktivitas online.

Namun Bitcoin bukanlah akhir dari transformasi apa pun—ini adalah awal dari sebuah transformasi. Seperti halnya telekomunikasi, Bitcoin akan mengubah kebiasaan umat manusia dan kehidupan sehari-harinya. Memprediksi seluruh cakupan perubahan saat ini sama dengan membayangkan internet saat hidup di era telegraf.

Seri ini mencoba membayangkan masa depan dengan memulai dari masa lalu. Artikel awal ini menelusuri sejarah mata uang digital sebelum Bitcoin. Hanya dengan memahami kegagalan proyek-proyek sebelumnya, kita dapat memahami apa yang membuat Bitcoin berhasil—dan bagaimana hal itu menyarankan metodologi untuk membangun sistem desentralisasi di masa depan.

Daftar isi

1. Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar
   1. Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat
   2. Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat
   3. Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif
2. Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi
   1. Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama
   2. Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua
   3. Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang
3. Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?
   1. Gunakan Pasar Eksternal
   2. Gunakan Pasar Internal
4. Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin
   1. Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin sudah Ada
   2. Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus
   3. Waktu Menutup semua Penyebaran
   4. Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus
5. Kesimpulan

Klaim utama dari artikel ini adalah bahwa Bitcoin dapat dianggap sebagai adaptasi dari proyek B-money Dai yang menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menciptakan uang. Hanya beberapa minggu setelah artikel ini pertama kali diterbitkan, email baru muncul di mana Satoshi mengaku tidak terbiasa dengan B-money, namun mengakui bahwa Bitcoin dimulai “tepat dari titik itu.” Mengingat bukti baru ini, kami yakin klaim utama ini, meskipun tidak akurat secara historis, masih merupakan cara yang bermakna dan bermanfaat untuk memikirkan asal usul Bitcoin.

Bagaimana Satoshi Nakamoto Memikirkan Bitcoin?

Satoshi memang cerdas, tetapi Bitcoin tidak muncul begitu saja.

Bitcoin mengulangi pekerjaan yang ada di bidang kriptografi, sistem terdistribusi, ekonomi, dan filsafat politik. Konsep proof-of-work sudah ada jauh sebelum digunakan dalam uang dan cypherpunk sebelumnya seperti Nick Szabo, Wei Dai, & Hal Finney mengantisipasi dan memengaruhi desain Bitcoin dengan proyek-proyek seperti bit gold, B-money, dan RPoW. Pertimbangkan bahwa, pada tahun 2008, ketika Satoshi menulis white paper Bitcoin[^2], banyak ide penting Bitcoin telah diusulkan dan/atau diimplementasikan:

• Mata uang digital harus berupa jaringan P2P
• Proof-of-work adalah dasar penciptaan uang
• Uang diciptakan melalui lelang
• Kunci publik kriptografi digunakan untuk menentukan kepemilikan dan transfer koin
• Transaksi dikelompokkan menjadi beberapa blok
• Blok dirangkai bersama melalui proof-of-work
• Semua blok disimpan oleh semua peserta

Bitcoin memanfaatkan semua konsep ini, tetapi Satoshi tidak menciptakan satu pun konsep tersebut. Untuk lebih memahami kontribusi Satoshi, kita harus menentukan prinsip Bitcoin mana yang tidak ada dalam daftar.

Beberapa kandidat yang jelas adalah persediaan Bitcoin yang terbatas, konsensus Nakamoto, dan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan. Tapi apa yang mendorong Satoshi pada ide ini?

Artikel ini mengeksplorasi sejarah mata uang digital dan menyatakan bahwa fokus Satoshi pada kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah hal yang menyebabkan Bitcoin mengatasi tantangan yang mengalahkan proyek-proyek sebelumnya seperti bit gold dan B-money.

Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar

Bitcoin sering digambarkan sebagai sistem terdesentralisasi atau terdistribusi. Sayangnya, kata “desentralisasi” dan “terdistribusi” sering kali membingungkan. Ketika diterapkan pada sistem digital, kedua istilah tersebut mengacu pada cara aplikasi monolitik dapat didekomposisi menjadi jaringan bagian-bagian yang berkomunikasi.

Untuk tujuan kita, perbedaan utama antara sistem terdesentralisasi dan terdistribusi bukanlah topologi diagram jaringannya, namun cara mereka menegakkan aturan. Kami meluangkan waktu di bagian berikut untuk membandingkan sistem terdistribusi dan desentralisasi dan memotivasi gagasan bahwa sistem desentralisasi yang kuat adalah pasar.

Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat

Dalam hal ini, kami mengartikan “terdistribusi” sebagai sistem apa pun yang telah dipecah menjadi beberapa bagian (sering disebut sebagai "node") yang harus berkomunikasi, biasanya melalui jaringan.

Insinyur perangkat lunak semakin mahir dalam membangun sistem yang terdistribusi secara global. Internet terdiri dari sistem terdistribusi yang secara kolektif berisi miliaran node. Kita masing-masing memiliki simpul di saku kita yang berpartisipasi dan bergantung pada sistem ini.

Namun hampir semua sistem terdistribusi yang kita gunakan saat ini diatur oleh beberapa otoritas pusat, biasanya administrator sistem, perusahaan, atau pemerintah yang saling dipercaya oleh semua node dalam sistem.

Otoritas pusat memastikan semua node mematuhi aturan sistem dan menghapus, memperbaiki, atau menghukum node yang gagal mematuhinya. Mereka dipercaya untuk melakukan koordinasi, menyelesaikan konflik, dan mengalokasikan sumber daya bersama. Seiring waktu, otoritas pusat mengelola perubahan pada sistem, memperbarui atau menambahkan fitur, dan memastikan bahwa node yang berpartisipasi mematuhi perubahan tersebut.

Manfaat yang diperoleh sistem terdistribusi karena mengandalkan otoritas pusat juga disertai dengan biaya. Meskipun sistem ini kuat terhadap kegagalan node-nodenya, kegagalan otoritas pusat dapat menyebabkan sistem berhenti berfungsi secara keseluruhan. Kemampuan otoritas pusat untuk mengambil keputusan secara sepihak berarti menumbangkan atau menghilangkan otoritas pusat sudah cukup untuk mengendalikan atau menghancurkan keseluruhan sistem.

Terlepas dari adanya trade-off ini, jika ada persyaratan bahwa satu partai atau koalisi harus mempertahankan otoritas pusat, atau jika peserta dalam sistem tersebut puas dengan mengandalkan otoritas pusat, maka sistem terdistribusi tradisional adalah solusi terbaik. Tidak diperlukan blockchain, token, atau sistem desentralisasi serupa.

Secara khusus, kasus VC atau mata uang kripto yang didukung oleh pemerintah, dengan persyaratan bahwa satu pihak dapat memantau atau membatasi pembayaran dan membekukan akun, adalah kasus penggunaan yang sempurna untuk sistem terdistribusi tradisional.

Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat

Kami menganggap “desentralisasi” memiliki arti yang lebih kuat daripada “terdistribusi”: sistem desentralisasi adalah bagian dari sistem terdistribusi yang tidak memiliki otoritas pusat. Sinonim yang mirip dengan “desentralisasi” adalah “peer-to-peer” (P2P).

Menghapus otoritas pusat memberikan beberapa keuntungan. Sistem terdesentralisasi:

• Tumbuh dengan cepat karena tidak ada hambatan untuk masuk—siapa pun dapat mengembangkan sistem hanya dengan menjalankan node baru, dan tidak ada persyaratan untuk registrasi atau persetujuan dari otoritas pusat.
• Kuat karena tidak ada otoritas pusat yang kegagalannya dapat membahayakan berfungsinya sistem. Semua node adalah sama, jadi kegagalan bersifat lokal dan jaringan merutekan sekitar kerusakan.
• Sulit untuk ditangkap, diatur, dikenakan pajak, atau diawasi karena tidak adanya titik kendali terpusat yang dapat ditumbangkan oleh pemerintah.

Kekuatan inilah yang menjadi alasan Satoshi memilih desain Bitcoin yang terdesentralisasi dan peer-to-peer:

“Pemerintah pandai memotong… jaringan yang dikendalikan secara terpusat seperti Napster, namun jaringan P2P murni seperti Gnutella dan Tor tampaknya masih mampu bertahan.” - Satoshi Nakamoto, 2008

Namun kekuatan ini juga disertai dengan kelemahan. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi bisa menjadi kurang efisien karena setiap titik harus memikul tanggung jawab tambahan untuk koordinasi yang sebelumnya diambil alih oleh otoritas pusat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi juga sering dilanda perilaku yang bersifat penipuan dan bertentangan. Terlepas dari persetujuan Satoshi terhadap Gnutella, siapa pun yang menggunakan program berbagi file P2P untuk mengunduh file yang ternyata kotor atau berbahaya memahami alasan mengapa berbagi file P2P tidak pernah menjadi model utama untuk transfer data online.

Satoshi tidak menyebutkannya secara eksplisit, namun email adalah sistem terdesentralisasi lainnya yang menghindari kendali pemerintah. Dan email juga terkenal sebagai spam.

Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif

Akar masalahnya, dalam semua kasus ini adalah, bahwa perilaku kejahatan (menyebarkan file buruk, mengirim email spam) tidak dihukum, dan perilaku kooperatif (menyebarkan file bagus, hanya mengirim email berguna) tidak dihargai. Sistem desentralisasi yang mengandalkan partisipannya untuk menjadi aktor yang baik gagal untuk berkembang karena sistem tersebut tidak dapat mencegah aktor jahat untuk ikut berpartisipasi.

Tanpa memaksakan otoritas pusat, satu-satunya cara untuk menyelesaikan masalah ini adalah dengan menggunakan insentif ekonomi. Aktor yang baik, menurut definisinya, bermain sesuai aturan karena mereka secara inheren termotivasi untuk melakukannya. Pelaku kejahatan, menurut definisinya, adalah orang yang egois dan licik, namun insentif ekonomi yang tepat dapat mengarahkan perilaku buruk mereka ke arah kebaikan bersama. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi melakukan hal ini dengan memastikan bahwa perilaku kooperatif menguntungkan dan perilaku kejahatan merugikan.

Cara terbaik untuk menerapkan layanan terdesentralisasi yang kuat adalah dengan menciptakan pasar di mana semua pelaku, baik dan buruk, dibayar untuk menyediakan layanan tersebut. Kurangnya hambatan masuk bagi pembeli dan penjual di pasar yang terdesentralisasi mendorong skala dan efisiensi. Jika protokol pasar dapat melindungi partisipan dari penipuan, pencurian, dan penyalahgunaan, maka pelaku kejahatan akan merasa lebih menguntungkan untuk mengikuti aturan atau menyerang sistem lain.

Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi

Namun pasar itu rumit. Mereka harus memberi pembeli dan penjual kemampuan untuk mengirimkan penawaran dan permintaan serta menemukan, mencocokkan, dan menyelesaikan pesanan. Kebijakan tersebut harus adil, memberikan konsistensi yang kuat, dan menjaga ketersediaan meskipun terjadi masa-masa yang tidak menentu.

Pasar global saat ini sangat mumpuni dan canggih, namun menggunakan barang-barang tradisional dan jaringan pembayaran untuk menerapkan insentif di pasar yang terdesentralisasi bukanlah hal yang baru. Setiap penggabungan antara sistem desentralisasi dan uang fiat, aset tradisional, atau komoditas fisik akan menimbulkan kembali ketergantungan pada otoritas pusat yang mengontrol pemroses pembayaran, bank, dan bursa.

Sistem terdesentralisasi tidak dapat mentransfer uang tunai, mencari saldo rekening perantara, atau menentukan kepemilikan properti. Barang-barang tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi. Hal sebaliknya tidak benar—sistem tradisional dapat berinteraksi dengan Bitcoin semudah aktor lainnya (begitu mereka memutuskan ingin melakukannya). Batasan antara sistem tradisional dan desentralisasi bukanlah sebuah tembok yang tidak dapat dilewati, melainkan sebuah membran semi-permeabel.

Ini berarti bahwa sistem yang terdesentralisasi tidak dapat melaksanakan pembayaran dalam mata uang barang tradisional apa pun. Mereka bahkan tidak dapat menentukan saldo rekening yang didominasi fiat atau kepemilikan real estat atau barang fisik. Seluruh perekonomian tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi.

Menciptakan pasar yang terdesentralisasi membutuhkan perdagangan barang-barang baru yang terdesentralisasi yang dapat dibaca dan ditransfer dalam sistem yang terdesentralisasi.

Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama

Contoh pertama dari “barang terdesentralisasi” adalah kelas komputasi khusus yang pertama kali diusulkan pada tahun 1993 oleh Cynthia Dwork dan Moni Naor.[^3]

Karena adanya hubungan mendalam antara matematika, fisika, dan ilmu komputer, komputasi ini memerlukan energi dan sumber daya perangkat keras di dunia nyata—hal ini tidak dapat dipalsukan. Karena sumber daya di dunia nyata langka, komputasi ini juga langka.

input untuk komputasi ini dapat berupa data apa pun. Keluaran yang dihasilkan adalah “bukti” digital bahwa pengkomputasian telah dilakukan pada data input yang diberikan. Pembuktian mengandung “kesulitan” tertentu yang merupakan bukti (statistik) dari sejumlah pekerjaan komputasi tertentu. Yang terpenting, hubungan antara data input, pembuktian, dan pekerjaan komputasi asli yang dilakukan dapat diverifikasi secara independen tanpa perlu mengajukan banding ke otoritas pusat mana pun.

Gagasan untuk menyebarkan beberapa data input bersama dengan bukti digital sebagai bukti kerja komputasi dunia nyata yang dilakukan pada input tersebut sekarang disebut “proof-of-work”.[^4] Proof-of-work adalah, jika menggunakan ungkapan Nick Szabo, “biaya yang tidak dapat ditiru”. Karena proof-of-work dapat diverifikasi oleh siapa pun, maka proof-of-work merupakan sumber daya ekonomi yang dapat dibaca oleh semua peserta dalam sistem desentralisasi. Proof-of-work mengubah penghitungan data menjadi barang yang terdesentralisasi. Dwork & Naor mengusulkan penggunaan komputasi untuk membatasi penyalahgunaan sumber daya bersama dengan memaksa peserta untuk memberikan proof-of-work dengan tingkat kesulitan minimum tertentu sebelum mereka dapat mengakses sumber daya:

“Dalam makalah ini kami menyarankan pendekatan komputasi untuk memerangi penyebaran surat elektronik. Secara umum, kami telah merancang mekanisme kontrol akses yang dapat digunakan kapan pun diinginkan untuk membatasi, namun tidak melarang, akses ke sumber daya.” - Dwoak & Naor, 1993

Dalam proposal Dwork & Naor, administrator sistem email akan menetapkan tingkat kesulitan bukti kerja minimum untuk mengirimkan email. Pengguna yang ingin mengirim email perlu melakukan sejumlah komputasi yang sesuai dengan email tersebut sebagai data input. Bukti yang dihasilkan akan dikirimkan ke server bersamaan dengan permintaan pengiriman email.

Dwork & Naor menyebut kesulitan proof-of-work sebagai “fungsi penetapan harga” karena, dengan menyesuaikan kesulitan tersebut, “otoritas penetapan harga” dapat memastikan bahwa sumber daya bersama tetap murah untuk digunakan bagi pengguna yang jujur dan rata-rata, namun mahal bagi pengguna yang mencari untuk mengeksploitasinya. Di pasar pengiriman email, administrator server adalah otoritas penetapan harga; mereka harus memilih “harga” untuk pengiriman email yang cukup rendah untuk penggunaan normal namun terlalu tinggi untuk spam.

Meskipun Dwork & Naor membingkai proof-of-work sebagai disinsentif ekonomi untuk memerangi penyalahgunaan sumber daya, nomenklatur “fungsi penetapan harga” dan “otoritas penetapan harga” mendukung interpretasi yang berbeda dan berbasis pasar: pengguna membeli akses ke sumber daya dengan imbalan komputasi pada tingkat yang sama. harga yang ditetapkan oleh pengontrol sumber daya.

Dalam interpretasi ini, jaringan pengiriman email sebenarnya adalah pengiriman email perdagangan pasar yang terdesentralisasi untuk komputasi. Kesulitan minimum dari proof-of-work adalah harga yang diminta untuk pengiriman email dalam mata uang komputasi.

Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua

Namun komputasi bukanlah mata uang yang baik.

Bukti yang digunakan untuk “memperdagangkan” komputasi hanya valid untuk input yang digunakan dalam komputasi tersebut. Hubungan yang tidak dapat dipecahkan antara bukti spesifik dan input tertentu berarti bahwa proof-of-work untuk satu input tidak dapat digunakan kembali untuk input yang berbeda.

Proof-of-work awalnya diusulkan sebagai mekanisme kontrol akses untuk membatasi email spam. Pengguna diharapkan memberikan bukti kerja bersama email apa pun yang ingin mereka kirim. Mekanisme ini juga dapat dianggap sebagai pasar di mana pengguna membeli pengiriman email dengan komputasi pada harga yang dipilih oleh penyedia layanan email.

Batasan ini berguna – dapat digunakan untuk mencegah pekerjaan yang dilakukan oleh satu pembeli di pasar kemudian dibelanjakan kembali oleh pembeli lain. Misalnya, HashCash, implementasi nyata pertama dari pasar pengiriman email, menyertakan metadata seperti stempel waktu saat ini dan alamat email pengirim dalam data masukan untuk penghitungan bukti kerja. Bukti yang dihasilkan oleh pengguna tertentu untuk email tertentu, tidak dapat digunakan untuk email yang berbeda.

Namun ini juga berarti bahwa komputasi bukti kerja adalah barang yang dipesan lebih dahulu. Dana tersebut tidak dapat dipertukarkan, tidak dapat dibelanjakan kembali,[^5] dan tidak memecahkan masalah kebutuhan yang terjadi secara kebetulan. Properti moneter yang hilang ini mencegah komputasi menjadi mata uang. Terlepas dari namanya, tidak ada insentif bagi penyedia pengiriman email untuk ingin mengakumulasikan HashCash, karena akan ada uang tunai sebenarnya.

Adam Back, penemu HashCash, memahami masalah berikut:

"Hashcash tidak dapat ditransfer secara langsung karena untuk membuatnya didistribusikan, setiap penyedia layanan hanya menerima pembayaran dalam bentuk tunai yang dibuat untuk mereka. Anda mungkin dapat menyiapkan pencetakan gaya digicash (dengan chaumian ecash) dan meminta bank hanya mencetak uang tunai pada penerimaan tabrakan hash yang ditangani. Namun ini berarti Anda harus mempercayai bank untuk tidak mencetak uang dalam jumlah tak terbatas untuk digunakan sendiri." - Adam Back, 1997

Kita tidak ingin menukar komputasi yang dibuat khusus untuk setiap barang atau jasa yang dijual dalam perekonomian yang terdesentralisasi. Kita menginginkan mata uang digital serba guna yang dapat langsung digunakan untuk mengoordinasikan pertukaran nilai di pasar mana pun.

Membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi namun tetap terdesentralisasi merupakan tantangan yang signifikan. Mata uang membutuhkan unit yang dapat dipertukarkan dengan nilai yang sama yang dapat ditransfer antar pengguna. Hal ini memerlukan model penerbitan, definisi kriptografi kepemilikan dan transfer, proses penemuan dan penyelesaian transaksi, dan buku besar historis. Infrastruktur ini tidak diperlukan ketika bukti kerja hanya dianggap sebagai “mekanisme kontrol akses”.

Terlebih lagi, sistem desentralisasi adalah pasar, jadi semua fungsi dasar mata uang ini harus disediakan melalui penyedia layanan berbayar… dalam satuan mata uang yang sedang dibuat!

Seperti mengkompilasi compiler pertama, permulaan jaringan listrik yang gelap, atau evolusi kehidupan itu sendiri, pencipta mata uang digital dihadapkan pada masalah bootstrapping: bagaimana mendefinisikan insentif ekonomi yang mendasari mata uang yang berfungsi tanpa memiliki mata uang yang berfungsi di dalamnya yang akan mendenominasikan atau membayar insentif tersebut.

Komputasi dan mata uang adalah barang pertama dan kedua di pasar yang terdesentralisasi. Proof-of-work sendiri memungkinkan pertukaran komputasi tetapi mata uang yang berfungsi memerlukan lebih banyak infrastruktur. Butuh waktu 15 tahun bagi komunitas cypherpunk untuk mengembangkan infrastruktur tersebut.

Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang

Kemajuan dalam masalah bootstrapping ini berasal dari penyusunan batasan yang tepat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi harus menjadi pasar. Pasar terdiri dari pembeli dan penjual yang saling bertukar barang. Pasar terdesentralisasi untuk mata uang digital hanya memiliki dua barang yang dapat dibaca di dalamnya:

1. Komputasi melalui proof-of-work
2. Unit mata uang yang kita coba bangun

Oleh karena itu, satu-satunya perdagangan pasar yang memungkinkan adalah antara kedua barang tersebut. Komputasi harus dijual untuk satuan mata uang atau setara dengan satuan mata uang harus dijual untuk komputasi. Menyatakan hal ini sangatlah mudah—bagian tersulitnya adalah menata pasar ini sehingga sekadar menukar mata uang untuk komputasi akan mem-bootstrap semua kemampuan mata uang itu sendiri!

Seluruh sejarah mata uang digital yang berpuncak pada white paper Satoshi tahun 2008 adalah serangkaian upaya yang semakin canggih dalam menata pasar ini. Bagian berikut mengulas proyek-proyek seperti bit gold milik Nick Szabo dan B-money milik Wei Dai. Memahami bagaimana proyek-proyek ini menyusun pasar mereka dan mengapa mereka gagal akan membantu kita memahami mengapa Satoshi dan Bitcoin berhasil.

Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi Dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?

Fungsi utama pasar adalah penemuan harga. Oleh karena itu, komputasi perdagangan pasar untuk mata uang harus menemukan harga komputasi itu sendiri, dalam satuan mata uang tersebut.

Kita biasanya tidak memberikan nilai moneter pada komputasi. Kita biasanya menghargai kapasitas untuk melakukan komputasi karena kita menghargai output dari komputasi, bukan komputasi itu sendiri. Jika keluaran yang sama dapat dilakukan dengan lebih efisien, dengan komputasi yang lebih sedikit, hal ini biasanya disebut “kemajuan”.

Proof-of-work mewakili komputasi spesifik yang keluarannya hanya berupa bukti bahwa komputasi tersebut telah dilakukan. Menghasilkan bukti yang sama dengan melakukan lebih sedikit komputasi dan lebih sedikit pekerjaan tidak akan menghasilkan kemajuan—hal ini akan menjadi bug. Oleh karena itu, komputasi yang terkait dengan Proof-of-work merupakan hal yang aneh dan baru untuk dicoba dihargai.

Ketika bukti kerja dianggap sebagai disinsentif terhadap penyalahgunaan sumber daya, maka bukti kerja tidak perlu dinilai secara tepat dan konsisten. Yang terpenting adalah penyedia layanan email menetapkan tingkat kesulitan yang cukup rendah sehingga tidak terlihat oleh pengguna yang sah, namun cukup tinggi sehingga menjadi penghalang bagi pelaku spam. Oleh karena itu, terdapat beragam “harga” yang dapat diterima dan setiap peserta bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga mereka sendiri, dengan menerapkan fungsi penetapan harga lokal.

Namun satuan mata uang dimaksudkan agar dapat dipertukarkan, masing-masing memiliki nilai yang sama. Karena perubahan teknologi dari waktu ke waktu, dua unit mata uang yang dibuat dengan tingkat kesulitan proof-of-work yang sama—yang diukur dengan jumlah komputasi yang sesuai—mungkin memiliki biaya produksi yang sangat berbeda di dunia nyata, yang diukur dengan waktu, energi, dan/atau modal untuk melakukan komputasi tersebut. Ketika komputasi dijual dengan menggunakan mata uang, dan biaya produksi yang mendasarinya bervariasi, bagaimana pasar dapat memastikan harga yang konsisten?

Nick Szabo dengan jelas mengidentifikasi masalah harga ini ketika menjelaskan bit gold:

"Masalah utamanya...adalah bahwa skema pembuktian kerja bergantung pada arsitektur komputer, bukan hanya matematika abstrak yang didasarkan pada "siklus komputasi" abstrak. ...Jadi, ada kemungkinan untuk menjadi produsen berbiaya sangat rendah (dengan beberapa kali lipat besarnya) dan membanjiri pasar dengan bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Mata uang terdesentralisasi yang diciptakan melalui proof-of-work akan mengalami kelebihan pasokan dan penurunan pasokan seiring dengan perubahan pasokan komputasi seiring waktu. Untuk mengakomodasi volatilitas ini, jaringan harus belajar menghitung harga secara dinamis.

Mata uang digital awal mencoba memberi harga pada komputasi dengan mencoba mengukur “biaya komputasi” secara kolektif. Wei Dai, misalnya, mengusulkan solusi praktis berikut dalam B-money:

"Jumlah unit moneter yang diciptakan sama dengan biaya upaya komputasi dalam sekeranjang komoditas standar. Sebagai contoh, jika sebuah masalah memerlukan waktu 100 jam untuk diselesaikan pada komputer yang dapat menyelesaikannya dengan cara yang paling ekonomis, dan diperlukan 3 keranjang standar untuk membeli 100 jam waktu komputasi pada komputer tersebut di pasar terbuka, maka setelah solusi terhadap masalah tersebut disiarkan, setiap orang mengkredit rekening penyiar sebanyak 3 unit." - Dai, 1998

Sayangnya, Dai tidak menjelaskan bagaimana pengguna dalam sistem yang seharusnya terdesentralisasi seharusnya menyetujui definisi “keranjang standar”, komputer mana yang memecahkan masalah tertentu “paling ekonomis”, atau biaya komputasi di “pasar terbuka”. Mencapai konsensus di antara semua pengguna mengenai kumpulan data bersama yang berubah-ubah terhadap waktu adalah masalah penting dalam sistem desentralisasi!

Agar adil bagi Dai, dia menyadari hal ini:

“Salah satu bagian yang lebih bermasalah dalam protokol B-money adalah penciptaan uang. Bagian dari protokol ini mengharuskan semua [pengguna] memutuskan dan menyetujui biaya perhitungan tertentu. Sayangnya karena teknologi komputasi cenderung berkembang pesat dan tidak selalu bersifat publik, informasi ini mungkin tidak tersedia, tidak akurat, atau ketinggalan jaman, yang semuanya akan menyebabkan masalah serius pada protokol." - Dai, 1998

Dai kemudian mengusulkan mekanisme penetapan harga berbasis lelang yang lebih canggih yang kemudian dikatakan Satoshi sebagai titik awal idenya. Kita akan kembali ke skema lelang di bawah ini, tapi pertama-tama mari kita beralih ke bit gold, dan pertimbangkan wawasan Szabo tentang masalahnya.

Gunakan Pasar Eksternal

Szabo mengklaim bahwa proof-of-work harus “diberi stempel waktu dengan aman”:

"Bukti kerja diberi stempel waktu yang aman. Ini harus bekerja secara terdistribusi, dengan beberapa layanan stempel waktu berbeda sehingga tidak ada layanan stempel waktu tertentu yang perlu diandalkan secara substansial." - Szabo, 2005

Szabo tertaut ke halaman sumber daya tentang protokol penandaan waktu yang aman tetapi tidak menjelaskan algoritme spesifik apa pun untuk penandaan waktu yang aman. Ungkapan “aman” dan “fesyen terdistribusi” mempunyai pengaruh yang besar di sini, sehingga dapat mengatasi kerumitan dalam mengandalkan satu (atau banyak) layanan “di luar sistem” untuk penandaan waktu.[^6]

Waktu pembuatan unit mata uang digital penting karena menghubungkan komputasi yang dilakukan dengan biaya produksi di dunia nyata.

Terlepas dari ketidakjelasan implementasi, Szabo benar—waktu pembuatan proof-of-work merupakan faktor penting dalam menentukan harga karena terkait dengan biaya komputasi:

"…Namun, karena bit gold diberi stempel waktu, waktu yang dibuat serta tingkat kesulitan matematis dari pekerjaan tersebut dapat dibuktikan secara otomatis. Dari sini, biasanya dapat disimpulkan berapa biaya produksi selama periode waktu tersebut..." - Szabo, 2005

"Menyimpulkan" biaya produksi adalah hal yang penting karena bit gold tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat bit gold dengan melakukan perhitungan yang sesuai. Tanpa kemampuan untuk mengatur penerbitan, bit gold sama dengan barang koleksi:

"…Tidak seperti atom emas yang dapat dipertukarkan, tetapi seperti halnya barang-barang kolektor, pasokan dalam jumlah besar selama jangka waktu tertentu akan menurunkan nilai barang-barang tersebut. Dalam hal ini, emas kecil bertindak lebih seperti barang-barang kolektor daripada seperti emas..." - Szabo, 2005

Bit gold memerlukan proses eksternal tambahan untuk menciptakan unit mata uang yang sepadan:

“…[B]it Gold tidak dapat dipertukarkan berdasarkan fungsi sederhana, misalnya, panjang tali. Sebaliknya, untuk membuat unit yang dapat dipertukarkan, dealer harus menggabungkan potongan-potongan bit gold dengan nilai berbeda ke dalam satuan yang lebih besar kira-kira dengan nilai yang sama. Hal ini serupa dengan apa yang dilakukan banyak pedagang komoditas saat ini untuk memungkinkan pasar komoditas bekerja. Kepercayaan masih terdistribusi karena perkiraan nilai dari kumpulan tersebut dapat diverifikasi secara independen oleh banyak pihak lain dengan cara yang sebagian besar atau seluruhnya otomatis." - Szabo, 2005

Mengutip Szabo, “untuk menguji nilai… bit gold, dealer memeriksa dan memverifikasi tingkat kesulitan, masukan, dan stempel waktu”. Dealer yang mendefinisikan “unit yang lebih besar dengan nilai yang kira-kira sama” menyediakan fungsi penetapan harga yang serupa dengan “keranjang komoditas standar” Dai. Unit yang dapat dipertukarkan tidak dibuat dalam bentuk bit gold ketika bukti kerja diproduksi, hanya kemudian ketika bukti tersebut digabungkan menjadi “unit yang kira-kira bernilai sama” oleh dealer di pasar di luar jaringan.

Yang patut disyukuri, Szabo mengakui kelemahan ini:

"…Potensi kelebihan pasokan yang awalnya tersembunyi karena inovasi tersembunyi dalam arsitektur mesin adalah potensi kelemahan dalam bit gold, atau setidaknya ketidaksempurnaan yang harus diatasi oleh lelang awal dan pertukaran ex post bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Sekali lagi, meskipun belum sampai pada (yang sekarang kita kenal sebagai) solusinya, Szabo menunjukkan solusinya: karena biaya komputasi berubah seiring waktu, jaringan harus merespons perubahan pasokan komputasi dengan menyesuaikan harga uang.

Gunakan Pasar Internal

Dealer Szabo akan menjadi pasar eksternal yang menentukan harga (bundel dari) bit gold setelah penciptaannya. Apakah mungkin menerapkan pasar ini di dalam sistem dan bukan di luar sistem?

Mari kita kembali ke Wei Dai dan B-money. Seperti disebutkan sebelumnya, Dai mengusulkan model alternatif berbasis lelang untuk pembuatan B-money. Desain Satoshi untuk Bitcoin meningkat secara langsung pada model lelang B-money[^7]:

“Jadi saya mengusulkan subprotokol penciptaan uang alternatif, di mana [pengguna]… memutuskan dan menyetujui jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat setiap periode, dengan biaya pembuatan uang tersebut ditentukan melalui lelang. Setiap periode pembuatan uang adalah dibagi menjadi empat tahap, sebagai berikut:

Planning. Para [pengguna] menghitung dan bernegosiasi satu sama lain untuk menentukan peningkatan jumlah uang beredar yang optimal untuk periode berikutnya. Apakah [jaringan] dapat mencapai konsensus atau tidak, mereka masing-masing menyiarkan kuota penciptaan uang mereka dan komputasi makroekonomi apa pun yang dilakukan untuk mendukung angka tersebut.

Bidding. Siapapun yang ingin membuat B-money menyiarkan tawaran dalam bentuk dimana x adalah banyaknya B-money yang ingin dibuatnya, dan y adalah soal yang belum terselesaikan dari kelas soal yang telah ditentukan. Setiap masalah di kelas ini harus memiliki biaya nominal (katakanlah dalam MIPS-years) yang disetujui secara publik.

Computation. Setelah melihat penawaran, pihak yang mengajukan penawaran pada tahap penawaran sekarang dapat menyelesaikan masalah dalam penawarannya dan menyiarkan solusinya. Penciptaan uang.

Money creation. Setiap [pengguna] menerima tawaran tertinggi (di antara mereka yang benar-benar menyiarkan solusi) dalam hal biaya nominal per unit B-money yang dibuat dan memberikan kredit kepada akun penawar sesuai dengan itu."
- Dai, 1998

B-money membuat kemajuan signifikan menuju struktur pasar yang tepat untuk mata uang digital. Ini berupaya untuk menghilangkan dealer eksternal Szabo dan memungkinkan pengguna untuk terlibat dalam penemuan harga dengan menawar satu sama lain secara langsung.

Namun menerapkan proposal Dai seperti yang tertulis akan menjadi sebuah tantangan:

• Dalam fase "Planning”, pengguna menanggung beban menegosiasikan “peningkatan optimal jumlah uang beredar untuk periode berikutnya”. Bagaimana “optimal” harus didefinisikan, bagaimana pengguna harus bernegosiasi satu sama lain, dan bagaimana hasil negosiasi tersebut dibagikan tidak dijelaskan.
• Terlepas dari apa yang direncanakan, fase “Bidding” memungkinkan siapa saja untuk mengajukan “tawaran” untuk membuat B-money. Tawaran mencakup jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat serta jumlah bukti kerja yang sesuai sehingga setiap penawaran adalah harga, jumlah perhitungan yang bersedia dilakukan oleh penawar tertentu untuk membeli sejumlah tertentu. dari B-money.
• Setelah penawaran diserahkan, fase “Computation” terdiri dari peserta lelang yang melakukan proof-of-work yang mereka tawarkan dan menyiarkan solusi. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencocokkan penawar dengan solusi yang disediakan. Yang lebih problematis adalah tidak jelasnya bagaimana pengguna dapat mengetahui bahwa semua penawaran telah diajukan – kapan fase “Bidding” berakhir dan fase “Computation” dimulai?
• Masalah-masalah ini berulang dalam fase “Money creation”. Karena sifat proof-of-work, pengguna dapat memverifikasi bahwa bukti yang mereka terima dalam solusi adalah asli. Namun bagaimana pengguna dapat secara kolektif menyepakati serangkaian “tawaran tertinggi”? Bagaimana jika pengguna yang berbeda memilih set yang berbeda, baik karena preferensi atau latensi jaringan?

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi kesulitan dalam melacak data dan membuat pilihan secara konsisten, namun B-money memerlukan pelacakan tawaran dari banyak pengguna dan membuat pilihan konsensus di antara mereka. Kompleksitas ini menghalangi penerapan B-money.

Akar dari kompleksitas ini adalah keyakinan Dai bahwa tingkat “optimal” penciptaan B-money harus berfluktuasi seiring waktu berdasarkan “perhitungan makroekonomi” penggunanya. Seperti bit gold, B-money tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat unit B-money dengan menyiarkan tawaran dan kemudian melakukan proof-of-work yang sesuai.

Baik Szabo maupun Dai mengusulkan penggunaan pasar pertukaran mata uang digital untuk komputasi, namun baik bit gold maupun B-money tidak menentukan kebijakan moneter untuk mengatur pasokan mata uang di pasar ini.

Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin

Sebaliknya, kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah salah satu tujuan utama Satoshi dalam proyek Bitcoin. Dalam postingan milis pertama tempat Bitcoin diumumkan, Satoshi menulis:

“Akar permasalahan mata uang konvensional adalah kepercayaan yang diperlukan agar mata uang tersebut dapat berfungsi. Bank sentral harus dipercaya untuk tidak merendahkan mata uang tersebut, namun sejarah mata uang fiat penuh dengan pelanggaran terhadap kepercayaan tersebut.” - Satoshi, 2009

Satoshi selanjutnya menjelaskan masalah lain dengan mata uang fiat seperti perbankan cadangan fraksional yang berisiko, kurangnya privasi, pencurian & penipuan yang merajalela, dan ketidakmampuan melakukan pembayaran mikro. Namun Satoshi memulai dengan isu penurunan nilai oleh bank sentral—dengan kekhawatiran mengenai kebijakan moneter.

Satoshi ingin Bitcoin pada akhirnya mencapai pasokan sirkulasi terbatas yang tidak dapat terdilusi seiring waktu. Tingkat penciptaan Bitcoin yang “optimal”, bagi Satoshi, pada akhirnya akan menjadi nol.

Tujuan kebijakan moneter ini, lebih dari karakteristik lain yang mereka miliki secara pribadi (atau kolektif!), adalah alasan Satoshi “menemukan” Bitcoin, blockchain, konsensus Nakamoto, dll. —dan bukan orang lain. Ini adalah jawaban singkat atas pertanyaan yang diajukan dalam judul artikel ini: Satoshi memikirkan Bitcoin karena mereka fokus pada penciptaan mata uang digital dengan persediaan terbatas.

Pasokan Bitcoin yang terbatas bukan hanya tujuan kebijakan moneter atau meme bagi para Bitcoiner untuk berkumpul. Penyederhanaan teknis penting inilah yang memungkinkan Satoshi membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi sementara B-money Dai tetap menjadi postingan web yang menarik.

Bitcoin adalah B-money dengan persyaratan tambahan berupa kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan. Seperti banyak penyederhanaan teknis lainnya, pembatasan kebijakan moneter memungkinkan kemajuan dengan mengurangi ruang lingkup. Mari kita lihat bagaimana masing-masing fase pembuatan B-money disederhanakan dengan menerapkan batasan ini.

Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin Sudah Ada

Dalam b-money, setiap “periode penciptaan uang” mencakup fase “Perencanaan”, di mana pengguna diharapkan untuk membagikan “perhitungan makroekonomi” mereka yang membenarkan jumlah b-money yang ingin mereka ciptakan pada saat itu. Tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi yaitu pasokan terbatas dan emisi nol tidak sesuai dengan kebebasan yang diberikan b-money kepada pengguna individu untuk menghasilkan uang. Oleh karena itu, langkah pertama dalam perjalanan dari bmoney ke bitcoin adalah menghilangkan kebebasan ini. Pengguna bitcoin perorangan tidak dapat membuat bitcoin. Hanya jaringan bitcoin yang dapat membuat bitcoin, dan hal ini terjadi tepat sekali, pada tahun 2009 ketika Satoshi meluncurkan proyek bitcoin.

Satoshi mampu menggantikan fase “Perencanaan” b-money yang berulang menjadi satu jadwal yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya di mana 21 juta bitcoin yang dibuat pada tahun 2009 akan dilepaskan ke peredaran. Pengguna secara sukarela mendukung kebijakan moneter Satoshi dengan mengunduh dan menjalankan perangkat lunak Bitcoin Core yang kebijakan moneternya dikodekan secara keras.

Hal ini mengubah semantik pasar bitcoin untuk komputasi. Bitcoin yang dibayarkan kepada penambang bukanlah hal baru yang diterbitkan; itu melainkan baru dirilis ke peredaran dari persediaan yang ada.

Pandangan ini sangat berbeda dari klaim naif bahwa “penambang bitcoin menciptakan bitcoin”. Penambang Bitcoin tidak menciptakan bitcoin, mereka membelinya. Bitcoin tidak berharga karena “bitcoin terbuat dari energi”—tetapi nilai bitcoin didemonstrasikan dengan dijual untuk mendapatkan energi.

Mari kita ulangi sekali lagi: bitcoin tidak dibuat melalui proof-of-work, bitcoin dibuat melalui konsensus.

Desain Satoshi menghilangkan persyaratan untuk fase “Perencanaan” yang berkelanjutan dari b-money dengan melakukan semua perencanaan terlebih dahulu. Hal ini memungkinkan Satoshi untuk membuat kebijakan moneter yang sehat namun juga menyederhanakan penerapan bitcoin.

Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus

Kebebasan yang diberikan kepada pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang menimbulkan beban yang sesuai bagi jaringan bmoney. Selama fase “Penawaran” jaringan b-money harus mengumpulkan dan membagikan “tawaran” pembuatan uang dari banyak pengguna yang berbeda.

Menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menghasilkan uang akan meringankan beban jaringan bitcoin. Karena seluruh 21 juta bitcoin sudah ada, jaringan tidak perlu mengumpulkan tawaran dari pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang, jaringan hanya perlu menjual bitcoin sesuai jadwal Satoshi yang telah ditentukan.

Jaringan bitcoin dengan demikian menawarkan konsensus harga permintaan untuk bitcoin yang dijualnya di setiap blok. Harga tunggal ini dihitung oleh setiap node secara independen menggunakan salinan blockchainnya. Jika node memiliki konsensus pada blockchain yang sama (poin yang akan kita bahas nanti) mereka semua akan menawarkan harga permintaan yang sama di setiap blok.[^8]

Bagian pertama kalkulasi harga konsensus menentukan berapa banyak bitcoin yang akan dijual. Hal ini diperbaiki oleh jadwal rilis Satoshi yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung jumlah yang sama untuk blok tertentu:

$ bitcoin-cli getblockstats <block\_height> {... "subsidy": 6250000000, ... } # 6.25 BTC

Bagian kedua dari harga yang diminta secara konsensus adalah jumlah komputasi yang akan menjual subsidi saat ini. Sekali lagi, semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung nilai yang sama (kita akan meninjau kembali kalkulasi tingkat kesulitan ini di bagian berikutnya):

$ bitcoin-cli getdifficulty {... "result": 55621444139429.57, ... }

Bersama-sama, subsidi dan kesulitan jaringan menentukan permintaan bitcoin saat ini sebagai mata uang komputasi. Karena blockchain berada dalam konsensus, harga ini adalah harga konsensus.

Pengguna b-money juga dianggap memiliki konsensus “blockchain” yang berisi riwayat semua transaksi. Namun Dai tidak pernah memikirkan solusi sederhana berupa konsensus tunggal yang meminta harga untuk pembuatan b-money baru, yang hanya ditentukan oleh data di blockchain tersebut.

Sebaliknya, Dai berasumsi bahwa penciptaan uang harus berlangsung selamanya. Oleh karena itu, pengguna individu perlu diberdayakan untuk mempengaruhi kebijakan moneter – seperti halnya mata uang fiat. Persyaratan yang dirasakan ini membuat Dai merancang sistem penawaran yang mencegah penerapan b-money.

Kompleksitas tambahan ini dihilangkan dengan persyaratan Satoshi mengenai kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya.

Waktu Menutup Semua Penyebaran

Dalam fase “Komputasi” b-money, pengguna individu akan melakukan komputasi yang telah mereka lakukan dalam penawaran sebelumnya. Dalam bitcoin, seluruh jaringan adalah penjual – tetapi siapa pembelinya?

Di pasar pengiriman email, pembelinya adalah individu yang ingin mengirim email. Otoritas penetapan harga, penyedia layanan email, akan menetapkan harga yang dianggap murah bagi individu namun mahal bagi pelaku spam. Namun jika jumlah pengguna yang sah bertambah, harganya masih bisa tetap sama karena kekuatan komputasi masing-masing pengguna akan tetap sama.

Di b-money, setiap pengguna yang menyumbangkan tawaran untuk pembuatan uang selanjutnya harus melakukan sendiri jumlah komputasi yang sesuai. Setiap pengguna bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga berdasarkan pengetahuan mereka tentang kemampuan komputasi mereka sendiri.

Jaringan bitcoin menawarkan satu harga yang diminta dalam komputasi subsidi bitcoin saat ini. Namun tidak ada penambang individu yang menemukan blok yang melakukan komputasi sebanyak ini.[^9] Blok pemenang penambang individu adalah bukti bahwa semua penambang secara kolektif melakukan jumlah komputasi yang diperlukan. Pembeli bitcoin dengan demikian adalah industri penambangan bitcoin global.

Setelah mencapai konsensus harga yang diminta, jaringan bitcoin tidak akan mengubah harga tersebut sampai lebih banyak blok diproduksi. Blok-blok ini harus berisi proof-of-work dengan harga yang diminta saat ini. Oleh karena itu, industri pertambangan tidak punya pilihan jika ingin “melakukan perdagangan” selain membayar harga yang diminta saat ini dalam komputasi.

Satu-satunya variabel yang dapat dikontrol oleh industri pertambangan adalah berapa lama waktu yang dibutuhkan untuk memproduksi blok berikutnya. Sama seperti jaringan bitcoin yang menawarkan satu harga yang diminta, industri pertambangan juga menawarkan satu penawaran—waktu yang diperlukan untuk menghasilkan blok berikutnya yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini.

Untuk mengimbangi peningkatan kecepatan perangkat keras dan minat yang berbeda-beda dalam menjalankan node dari waktu ke waktu, kesulitan proof-of-work ditentukan oleh rata-rata bergerak yang menargetkan jumlah rata-rata blok per jam. Jika dihasilkan terlalu cepat, kesulitannya akan meningkat. - Nakamoto, 2008

Satoshi dengan sederhana menjelaskan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan, yang sering disebut sebagai salah satu ide paling orisinal dalam implementasi bitcoin. Hal ini benar, namun alih-alih berfokus pada daya cipta solusi, mari kita fokus pada mengapa penyelesaian masalah sangat penting bagi Satoshi.

Proyek-proyek seperti bit gold dan b-money tidak perlu membatasi nilai tukar pada saat penciptaan uang karena mereka tidak memiliki pasokan tetap atau kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Periode penciptaan uang yang lebih cepat atau lebih lambat dapat dikompensasikan melalui cara lain, misalnya melalui pajak. Dealer eksternal memasukkan token bit gold ke dalam bundler yang lebih besar atau lebih kecil atau pengguna b-money mengubah tawaran mereka.

Namun tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi mengharuskan bitcoin memiliki tingkat pelepasan bitcoin yang telah ditentukan untuk diedarkan. Membatasi laju (statistik) produksi blok dari waktu ke waktu adalah hal yang wajar dalam bitcoin karena laju produksi blok adalah laju penjualan pasokan awal bitcoin. Menjual 21 juta bitcoin selama 140 tahun adalah proposisi yang berbeda dibandingkan membiarkannya dijual dalam 3 bulan.

Selain itu, bitcoin sebenarnya dapat menerapkan batasan ini karena blockchain adalah “protokol cap waktu aman” milik Szabo. Satoshi menggambarkan bitcoin sebagai yang pertama dan terutama sebagai “server stempel waktu terdistribusi secara peer-to-peer,” dan implementasi awal kode sumber bitcoin menggunakan “rantai waktu” dunia, bukan “blockchain” untuk menggambarkan struktur data bersama yang mengimplementasikan pasar proof-of-work bitcoin.[^10]

Tidak seperti bit gold atau b-money, token dalam bitcoin tidak mengalami kelebihan pasokan. Jaringan bitcoin menggunakan penyesuaian kesulitan untuk mengubah harga uang sebagai respons terhadap perubahan pasokan komputasi.

Algoritme penyesuaian ulang kesulitan Bitcoin memanfaatkan kemampuan ini. Blockchain konsensus digunakan oleh peserta untuk menghitung penawaran historis yang dibuat oleh industri pertambangan dan menyesuaikan kembali kesulitan agar bisa mendekati waktu blok target.

Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus

Rantai penyederhanaan yang disebabkan oleh tuntutan kebijakan moneter yang kuat meluas ke fase “penciptaan uang” dari b-money.

Tawaran yang diajukan pengguna di b-money mengalami masalah “tidak ada yang dipertaruhkan”. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencegah pengguna mengajukan tawaran dengan sejumlah besar b-money untuk pekerjaan yang sangat sedikit. Hal ini mengharuskan jaringan untuk melacak tawaran mana yang telah diselesaikan dan hanya menerima “tawaran tertinggi…dalam hal biaya nominal per unit b-money yang dibuat” untuk menghindari tawaran yang mengganggu tersebut. Setiap peserta b-money harus melacak seluruh tawaran senilai buku pesanan, mencocokkan tawaran dengan perhitungan selanjutnya, dan hanya menyelesaikan pesanan yang telah selesai dengan harga tertinggi.

Masalah ini merupakan contoh dari masalah konsensus yang lebih umum dalam sistem desentralisasi, yang juga dikenal sebagai “Byzantine generals” atau terkadang masalah “pembelanjaan ganda” dalam konteks mata uang digital. Berbagi urutan data yang identik di antara semua peserta merupakan suatu tantangan dalam jaringan yang saling bermusuhan dan terdesentralisasi. Solusi yang ada untuk masalah ini – yang disebut “algoritma konsensus Byzantine-fault tolerant (BFT)” – memerlukan koordinasi sebelumnya di antara peserta atau mayoritas (>67%) peserta agar tidak berperilaku bermusuhan.

Bitcoin tidak harus mengelola buku pesanan dalam jumlah besar karena jaringan bitcoin menawarkan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal. Ini berarti node bitcoin dapat menerima blok pertama (valid) yang mereka lihat yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini—tawaran gangguan dapat dengan mudah diabaikan dan merupakan pemborosan sumber daya penambang.

Komputasi harga berdasarkan konsensus memungkinkan pencocokan pesanan beli/jual dalam bitcoin dilakukan secara antusias, dengan sistem siapa cepat dia dapat. Berbeda dengan b-money, pencocokan pesanan yang cepat ini berarti bahwa pasar bitcoin tidak memiliki fase—pasar ini beroperasi terus-menerus, dengan harga konsensus baru dihitung setelah setiap pesanan dicocokkan (blok ditemukan). Untuk menghindari percabangan yang disebabkan oleh latensi jaringan atau perilaku bertentangan, node juga harus mengikuti aturan rantai terberat. Aturan penyelesaian pesanan yang serakah ini memastikan bahwa hanya tawaran tertinggi yang diterima oleh jaringan.

Kombinasi algoritma yang antusias dan serakah ini, dimana node menerima blok valid pertama yang mereka lihat dan juga mengikuti rantai terberat, adalah algoritma BFT baru yang dengan cepat menyatu pada konsensus tentang urutan blok. Satoshi menghabiskan 25% dari white paper bitcoin untuk mendemonstrasikan klaim ini.[^11]

Kita telah menetapkan di bagian sebelumnya bahwa harga permintaan konsensus bitcoin itu sendiri bergantung pada konsensus blockchain. Namun ternyata keberadaan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal inilah yang memungkinkan perhitungan pasar untuk mencocokkan pesanan dengan penuh semangat, dan itulah yang pertama-tama mengarah pada konsensus!

Terlebih lagi, “konsensus Nakamoto” yang baru ini hanya mengharuskan 50% peserta untuk tidak bertentangan, sebuah kemajuan yang signifikan dibandingkan dengan kondisi sebelumnya. Seorang cypherpunk seperti Satoshi membuat terobosan ilmu komputer teoretis ini, dibandingkan dengan akademisi tradisional atau peneliti industri, karena fokus mereka yang sempit pada penerapan uang yang sehat, dibandingkan algoritma konsensus umum untuk komputasi terdistribusi.

Kesimpulan

B-money adalah kerangka kerja yang kuat untuk membangun mata uang digital tetapi tidak lengkap karena tidak memiliki kebijakan moneter. Membatasi b-money dengan jadwal rilis yang telah ditentukan untuk bitcoin mengurangi cakupan dan menyederhanakan implementasi dengan menghilangkan persyaratan untuk melacak dan memilih di antara tawaran pembuatan uang yang diajukan pengguna. Mempertahankan kecepatan sementara dari jadwal rilis Satoshi menghasilkan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan dan memungkinkan konsensus Nakamoto, yang secara luas diakui sebagai salah satu aspek paling inovatif dalam implementasi bitcoin.

Ada lebih banyak hal dalam desain bitcoin daripada aspek yang dibahas sejauh ini. Kita memfokuskan artikel ini pada pasar “utama” dalam bitcoin, pasar yang mendistribusikan pasokan awal bitcoin ke dalam sirkulasi.

Artikel berikutnya dalam seri ini akan mengeksplorasi pasar penyelesaian transaksi bitcoin dan kaitannya dengan pasar pendistribusian pasokan bitcoin. Hubungan ini akan menyarankan metodologi bagaimana membangun pasar masa depan untuk layanan terdesentralisasi selain bitcoin.

Sumber artikel: HOW DID SATOSHI THINK OF BITCOIN? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-did-satoshi-think-of-bitcoin

Diterjemahkan oleh: Abengkris

[^1]: Judul seri ini diambil dari pesan telegraf pertama dalam sejarah, yang dikirimkan oleh Samuel Morse pada tahun 1844: “What hath God wrought?”.

[^2]: Bitcoin: Sistem Uang Elektronik Peer-to-Peer, tersedia di: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

[^3]: Pricing via Processing or Combatting Junk Mail oleh Dwork dan Naor. tersedia di:
https://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/../../pvp.pdf

[^4]: Meskipun merupakan pencetus ide tersebut, Dwork & Naor tidak menciptakan “proof-of-work”—julukan tersebut kemudian diberikan pada tahun 1999 oleh Markus Jakobsson dan Ari Juels.

[^5]: Proyek RPoW Hal Finney adalah upaya untuk menciptakan proof-of-work yang dapat ditransfer, tetapi bitcoin tidak menggunakan konsep ini karena tidak memperlakukan komputasi sebagai mata uang. Seperti yang akan kita lihat nanti ketika kita memeriksa bit gold dan b-money, komputasi tidak dapat berupa mata uang karena nilai komputasi berubah seiring waktu sementara unit mata uang harus memiliki nilai yang sama. Bitcoin bukanlah komputasi, bitcoin adalah mata uang yang dijual untuk komputasi.

[^6]: Pada saat ini, beberapa pembaca mungkin percaya bahwa saya meremehkan kontribusi Dai atau Szabo karena kontribusi mereka tidak jelas atau tidak jelas dalam beberapa hal. Perasaan saya justru sebaliknya: Dai dan Szabo pada dasarnya benar dan fakta bahwa mereka tidak mengartikulasikan setiap detail seperti yang dilakukan Satoshi tidak mengurangi kontribusi mereka. Sebaliknya, hal ini seharusnya meningkatkan apresiasi kita terhadap hal tersebut, karena hal ini menunjukkan betapa menantangnya munculnya mata uang digital, bahkan bagi para praktisi terbaiknya.

[^7]: Postingan b-money Dai adalah referensi pertama dalam white paper Satoshi, tersedia di: http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt

[^8]: Ada dua penyederhanaan yang dilakukan di sini: 1. Jumlah bitcoin yang dijual di setiap blok juga dipengaruhi oleh biaya transaksi pasar, yang berada di luar cakupan artikel ini, namun tetap menunggu pekerjaan selanjutnya. 2. Kesulitan yang dilaporkan oleh bitcoin bukanlah jumlah perhitungan yang diharapkan; seseorang harus mengalikannya dengan faktor proporsionalitas.

[^9]: Setidaknya sejak masa lalu yang buruk ketika Satoshi adalah satu-satunya penambang di jaringan.

[^10]: Bitcoin is Time klasik dari Gigi adalah pengenalan yang bagus tentang hubungan mendalam antara bitcoin dan waktu, tersedia di: https://dergigi.com/2021/01/14/bitcoin-is-time/

[^11]: Satoshi melakukan kesalahan baik dalam analisis mereka di buku putih maupun implementasi awal bitcoin berikutnya dengan menggunakan aturan “rantai terpanjang” dan bukan aturan “rantai terberat”.

@ 5a69e82d:aa41c382

Dhruv Bansal, CSO dan Co-Founder Unchained mengeksplorasi prinsip-prinsip dan sejarah yang mengarah pada penciptaan Bitcoin dan mengajukan pertanyaan: "Apa yang telah dilakukan Satoshi"?

Bitcoin sering dibandingkan dengan internet pada tahun 1990an, namun saya yakin analogi yang lebih baik adalah dengan telegraf pada tahun 1840an.[^1]

Telegraf adalah teknologi pertama yang mengirimkan data yang dikodekan dengan kecepatan mendekati cahaya dalam jarak jauh. Ini menandai lahirnya industri telekomunikasi. Internet, meskipun skalanya lebih besar, kontennya lebih kaya, dan many-to-many, bukan one-to-one, pada dasarnya masih merupakan teknologi telekomunikasi.

Baik telegraf maupun internet bergantung pada model bisnis di mana perusahaan mengerahkan modal untuk membangun jaringan fisik dan kemudian membebankan biaya kepada pengguna untuk mengirim pesan melalui jaringan ini. Jaringan AT&T secara historis mengirimkan telegram, panggilan telepon, paket TCP/IP, pesan teks, dan sekarang TikTok.

Transformasi masyarakat melalui telekomunikasi telah menghasilkan kebebasan yang lebih besar namun juga sentralisasi yang lebih besar. Internet telah meningkatkan jangkauan jutaan pembuat konten dan usaha kecil, namun juga memperkuat jangkauan perusahaan, otoritas pusat, dan lembaga lain yang memiliki posisi yang cukup baik untuk memantau dan memanipulasi aktivitas online.

Namun Bitcoin bukanlah akhir dari transformasi apa pun—ini adalah awal dari sebuah transformasi. Seperti halnya telekomunikasi, Bitcoin akan mengubah kebiasaan umat manusia dan kehidupan sehari-harinya. Memprediksi seluruh cakupan perubahan saat ini sama dengan membayangkan internet saat hidup di era telegraf.

Seri ini mencoba membayangkan masa depan dengan memulai dari masa lalu. Artikel awal ini menelusuri sejarah mata uang digital sebelum Bitcoin. Hanya dengan memahami kegagalan proyek-proyek sebelumnya, kita dapat memahami apa yang membuat Bitcoin berhasil—dan bagaimana hal itu menyarankan metodologi untuk membangun sistem desentralisasi di masa depan.

Daftar isi

1. Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar
   1. Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat
   2. Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat
   3. Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif
2. Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi
   1. Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama
   2. Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua
   3. Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang
3. Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?
   1. Gunakan Pasar Eksternal
   2. Gunakan Pasar Internal
4. Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin
   1. Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin sudah Ada
   2. Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus
   3. Waktu Menutup semua Penyebaran
   4. Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus
5. Kesimpulan

Klaim utama dari artikel ini adalah bahwa Bitcoin dapat dianggap sebagai adaptasi dari proyek B-money Dai yang menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menciptakan uang. Hanya beberapa minggu setelah artikel ini pertama kali diterbitkan, email baru muncul di mana Satoshi mengaku tidak terbiasa dengan B-money, namun mengakui bahwa Bitcoin dimulai “tepat dari titik itu.” Mengingat bukti baru ini, kami yakin klaim utama ini, meskipun tidak akurat secara historis, masih merupakan cara yang bermakna dan bermanfaat untuk memikirkan asal usul Bitcoin.

Bagaimana Satoshi Nakamoto Memikirkan Bitcoin?

Satoshi memang cerdas, tetapi Bitcoin tidak muncul begitu saja.

Bitcoin mengulangi pekerjaan yang ada di bidang kriptografi, sistem terdistribusi, ekonomi, dan filsafat politik. Konsep proof-of-work sudah ada jauh sebelum digunakan dalam uang dan cypherpunk sebelumnya seperti Nick Szabo, Wei Dai, & Hal Finney mengantisipasi dan memengaruhi desain Bitcoin dengan proyek-proyek seperti bit gold, B-money, dan RPoW. Pertimbangkan bahwa, pada tahun 2008, ketika Satoshi menulis white paper Bitcoin[^2], banyak ide penting Bitcoin telah diusulkan dan/atau diimplementasikan:

• Mata uang digital harus berupa jaringan P2P
• Proof-of-work adalah dasar penciptaan uang
• Uang diciptakan melalui lelang
• Kunci publik kriptografi digunakan untuk menentukan kepemilikan dan transfer koin
• Transaksi dikelompokkan menjadi beberapa blok
• Blok dirangkai bersama melalui proof-of-work
• Semua blok disimpan oleh semua peserta

Bitcoin memanfaatkan semua konsep ini, tetapi Satoshi tidak menciptakan satu pun konsep tersebut. Untuk lebih memahami kontribusi Satoshi, kita harus menentukan prinsip Bitcoin mana yang tidak ada dalam daftar.

Beberapa kandidat yang jelas adalah persediaan Bitcoin yang terbatas, konsensus Nakamoto, dan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan. Tapi apa yang mendorong Satoshi pada ide ini?

Artikel ini mengeksplorasi sejarah mata uang digital dan menyatakan bahwa fokus Satoshi pada kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah hal yang menyebabkan Bitcoin mengatasi tantangan yang mengalahkan proyek-proyek sebelumnya seperti bit gold dan B-money.

Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar

Bitcoin sering digambarkan sebagai sistem terdesentralisasi atau terdistribusi. Sayangnya, kata “desentralisasi” dan “terdistribusi” sering kali membingungkan. Ketika diterapkan pada sistem digital, kedua istilah tersebut mengacu pada cara aplikasi monolitik dapat didekomposisi menjadi jaringan bagian-bagian yang berkomunikasi.

Untuk tujuan kita, perbedaan utama antara sistem terdesentralisasi dan terdistribusi bukanlah topologi diagram jaringannya, namun cara mereka menegakkan aturan. Kami meluangkan waktu di bagian berikut untuk membandingkan sistem terdistribusi dan desentralisasi dan memotivasi gagasan bahwa sistem desentralisasi yang kuat adalah pasar.

Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat

Dalam hal ini, kami mengartikan “terdistribusi” sebagai sistem apa pun yang telah dipecah menjadi beberapa bagian (sering disebut sebagai "node") yang harus berkomunikasi, biasanya melalui jaringan.

Insinyur perangkat lunak semakin mahir dalam membangun sistem yang terdistribusi secara global. Internet terdiri dari sistem terdistribusi yang secara kolektif berisi miliaran node. Kita masing-masing memiliki simpul di saku kita yang berpartisipasi dan bergantung pada sistem ini.

Namun hampir semua sistem terdistribusi yang kita gunakan saat ini diatur oleh beberapa otoritas pusat, biasanya administrator sistem, perusahaan, atau pemerintah yang saling dipercaya oleh semua node dalam sistem.

Otoritas pusat memastikan semua node mematuhi aturan sistem dan menghapus, memperbaiki, atau menghukum node yang gagal mematuhinya. Mereka dipercaya untuk melakukan koordinasi, menyelesaikan konflik, dan mengalokasikan sumber daya bersama. Seiring waktu, otoritas pusat mengelola perubahan pada sistem, memperbarui atau menambahkan fitur, dan memastikan bahwa node yang berpartisipasi mematuhi perubahan tersebut.

Manfaat yang diperoleh sistem terdistribusi karena mengandalkan otoritas pusat juga disertai dengan biaya. Meskipun sistem ini kuat terhadap kegagalan node-nodenya, kegagalan otoritas pusat dapat menyebabkan sistem berhenti berfungsi secara keseluruhan. Kemampuan otoritas pusat untuk mengambil keputusan secara sepihak berarti menumbangkan atau menghilangkan otoritas pusat sudah cukup untuk mengendalikan atau menghancurkan keseluruhan sistem.

Terlepas dari adanya trade-off ini, jika ada persyaratan bahwa satu partai atau koalisi harus mempertahankan otoritas pusat, atau jika peserta dalam sistem tersebut puas dengan mengandalkan otoritas pusat, maka sistem terdistribusi tradisional adalah solusi terbaik. Tidak diperlukan blockchain, token, atau sistem desentralisasi serupa.

Secara khusus, kasus VC atau mata uang kripto yang didukung oleh pemerintah, dengan persyaratan bahwa satu pihak dapat memantau atau membatasi pembayaran dan membekukan akun, adalah kasus penggunaan yang sempurna untuk sistem terdistribusi tradisional.

Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat

Kami menganggap “desentralisasi” memiliki arti yang lebih kuat daripada “terdistribusi”: sistem desentralisasi adalah bagian dari sistem terdistribusi yang tidak memiliki otoritas pusat. Sinonim yang mirip dengan “desentralisasi” adalah “peer-to-peer” (P2P).

Menghapus otoritas pusat memberikan beberapa keuntungan. Sistem terdesentralisasi:

• Tumbuh dengan cepat karena tidak ada hambatan untuk masuk—siapa pun dapat mengembangkan sistem hanya dengan menjalankan node baru, dan tidak ada persyaratan untuk registrasi atau persetujuan dari otoritas pusat.
• Kuat karena tidak ada otoritas pusat yang kegagalannya dapat membahayakan berfungsinya sistem. Semua node adalah sama, jadi kegagalan bersifat lokal dan jaringan merutekan sekitar kerusakan.
• Sulit untuk ditangkap, diatur, dikenakan pajak, atau diawasi karena tidak adanya titik kendali terpusat yang dapat ditumbangkan oleh pemerintah.

Kekuatan inilah yang menjadi alasan Satoshi memilih desain Bitcoin yang terdesentralisasi dan peer-to-peer:

“Pemerintah pandai memotong… jaringan yang dikendalikan secara terpusat seperti Napster, namun jaringan P2P murni seperti Gnutella dan Tor tampaknya masih mampu bertahan.” - Satoshi Nakamoto, 2008

Namun kekuatan ini juga disertai dengan kelemahan. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi bisa menjadi kurang efisien karena setiap titik harus memikul tanggung jawab tambahan untuk koordinasi yang sebelumnya diambil alih oleh otoritas pusat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi juga sering dilanda perilaku yang bersifat penipuan dan bertentangan. Terlepas dari persetujuan Satoshi terhadap Gnutella, siapa pun yang menggunakan program berbagi file P2P untuk mengunduh file yang ternyata kotor atau berbahaya memahami alasan mengapa berbagi file P2P tidak pernah menjadi model utama untuk transfer data online.

Satoshi tidak menyebutkannya secara eksplisit, namun email adalah sistem terdesentralisasi lainnya yang menghindari kendali pemerintah. Dan email juga terkenal sebagai spam.

Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif

Akar masalahnya, dalam semua kasus ini adalah, bahwa perilaku kejahatan (menyebarkan file buruk, mengirim email spam) tidak dihukum, dan perilaku kooperatif (menyebarkan file bagus, hanya mengirim email berguna) tidak dihargai. Sistem desentralisasi yang mengandalkan partisipannya untuk menjadi aktor yang baik gagal untuk berkembang karena sistem tersebut tidak dapat mencegah aktor jahat untuk ikut berpartisipasi.

Tanpa memaksakan otoritas pusat, satu-satunya cara untuk menyelesaikan masalah ini adalah dengan menggunakan insentif ekonomi. Aktor yang baik, menurut definisinya, bermain sesuai aturan karena mereka secara inheren termotivasi untuk melakukannya. Pelaku kejahatan, menurut definisinya, adalah orang yang egois dan licik, namun insentif ekonomi yang tepat dapat mengarahkan perilaku buruk mereka ke arah kebaikan bersama. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi melakukan hal ini dengan memastikan bahwa perilaku kooperatif menguntungkan dan perilaku kejahatan merugikan.

Cara terbaik untuk menerapkan layanan terdesentralisasi yang kuat adalah dengan menciptakan pasar di mana semua pelaku, baik dan buruk, dibayar untuk menyediakan layanan tersebut. Kurangnya hambatan masuk bagi pembeli dan penjual di pasar yang terdesentralisasi mendorong skala dan efisiensi. Jika protokol pasar dapat melindungi partisipan dari penipuan, pencurian, dan penyalahgunaan, maka pelaku kejahatan akan merasa lebih menguntungkan untuk mengikuti aturan atau menyerang sistem lain.

Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi

Namun pasar itu rumit. Mereka harus memberi pembeli dan penjual kemampuan untuk mengirimkan penawaran dan permintaan serta menemukan, mencocokkan, dan menyelesaikan pesanan. Kebijakan tersebut harus adil, memberikan konsistensi yang kuat, dan menjaga ketersediaan meskipun terjadi masa-masa yang tidak menentu.

Pasar global saat ini sangat mumpuni dan canggih, namun menggunakan barang-barang tradisional dan jaringan pembayaran untuk menerapkan insentif di pasar yang terdesentralisasi bukanlah hal yang baru. Setiap penggabungan antara sistem desentralisasi dan uang fiat, aset tradisional, atau komoditas fisik akan menimbulkan kembali ketergantungan pada otoritas pusat yang mengontrol pemroses pembayaran, bank, dan bursa.

Sistem terdesentralisasi tidak dapat mentransfer uang tunai, mencari saldo rekening perantara, atau menentukan kepemilikan properti. Barang-barang tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi. Hal sebaliknya tidak benar—sistem tradisional dapat berinteraksi dengan Bitcoin semudah aktor lainnya (begitu mereka memutuskan ingin melakukannya). Batasan antara sistem tradisional dan desentralisasi bukanlah sebuah tembok yang tidak dapat dilewati, melainkan sebuah membran semi-permeabel.

Ini berarti bahwa sistem yang terdesentralisasi tidak dapat melaksanakan pembayaran dalam mata uang barang tradisional apa pun. Mereka bahkan tidak dapat menentukan saldo rekening yang didominasi fiat atau kepemilikan real estat atau barang fisik. Seluruh perekonomian tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi.

Menciptakan pasar yang terdesentralisasi membutuhkan perdagangan barang-barang baru yang terdesentralisasi yang dapat dibaca dan ditransfer dalam sistem yang terdesentralisasi.

Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama

Contoh pertama dari “barang terdesentralisasi” adalah kelas komputasi khusus yang pertama kali diusulkan pada tahun 1993 oleh Cynthia Dwork dan Moni Naor.[^3]

Karena adanya hubungan mendalam antara matematika, fisika, dan ilmu komputer, komputasi ini memerlukan energi dan sumber daya perangkat keras di dunia nyata—hal ini tidak dapat dipalsukan. Karena sumber daya di dunia nyata langka, komputasi ini juga langka.

input untuk komputasi ini dapat berupa data apa pun. Keluaran yang dihasilkan adalah “bukti” digital bahwa pengkomputasian telah dilakukan pada data input yang diberikan. Pembuktian mengandung “kesulitan” tertentu yang merupakan bukti (statistik) dari sejumlah pekerjaan komputasi tertentu. Yang terpenting, hubungan antara data input, pembuktian, dan pekerjaan komputasi asli yang dilakukan dapat diverifikasi secara independen tanpa perlu mengajukan banding ke otoritas pusat mana pun.

Gagasan untuk menyebarkan beberapa data input bersama dengan bukti digital sebagai bukti kerja komputasi dunia nyata yang dilakukan pada input tersebut sekarang disebut “proof-of-work”.[^4] Proof-of-work adalah, jika menggunakan ungkapan Nick Szabo, “biaya yang tidak dapat ditiru”. Karena proof-of-work dapat diverifikasi oleh siapa pun, maka proof-of-work merupakan sumber daya ekonomi yang dapat dibaca oleh semua peserta dalam sistem desentralisasi. Proof-of-work mengubah penghitungan data menjadi barang yang terdesentralisasi. Dwork & Naor mengusulkan penggunaan komputasi untuk membatasi penyalahgunaan sumber daya bersama dengan memaksa peserta untuk memberikan proof-of-work dengan tingkat kesulitan minimum tertentu sebelum mereka dapat mengakses sumber daya:

“Dalam makalah ini kami menyarankan pendekatan komputasi untuk memerangi penyebaran surat elektronik. Secara umum, kami telah merancang mekanisme kontrol akses yang dapat digunakan kapan pun diinginkan untuk membatasi, namun tidak melarang, akses ke sumber daya.” - Dwoak & Naor, 1993

Dalam proposal Dwork & Naor, administrator sistem email akan menetapkan tingkat kesulitan bukti kerja minimum untuk mengirimkan email. Pengguna yang ingin mengirim email perlu melakukan sejumlah komputasi yang sesuai dengan email tersebut sebagai data input. Bukti yang dihasilkan akan dikirimkan ke server bersamaan dengan permintaan pengiriman email.

Dwork & Naor menyebut kesulitan proof-of-work sebagai “fungsi penetapan harga” karena, dengan menyesuaikan kesulitan tersebut, “otoritas penetapan harga” dapat memastikan bahwa sumber daya bersama tetap murah untuk digunakan bagi pengguna yang jujur dan rata-rata, namun mahal bagi pengguna yang mencari untuk mengeksploitasinya. Di pasar pengiriman email, administrator server adalah otoritas penetapan harga; mereka harus memilih “harga” untuk pengiriman email yang cukup rendah untuk penggunaan normal namun terlalu tinggi untuk spam.

Meskipun Dwork & Naor membingkai proof-of-work sebagai disinsentif ekonomi untuk memerangi penyalahgunaan sumber daya, nomenklatur “fungsi penetapan harga” dan “otoritas penetapan harga” mendukung interpretasi yang berbeda dan berbasis pasar: pengguna membeli akses ke sumber daya dengan imbalan komputasi pada tingkat yang sama. harga yang ditetapkan oleh pengontrol sumber daya.

Dalam interpretasi ini, jaringan pengiriman email sebenarnya adalah pengiriman email perdagangan pasar yang terdesentralisasi untuk komputasi. Kesulitan minimum dari proof-of-work adalah harga yang diminta untuk pengiriman email dalam mata uang komputasi.

Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua

Namun komputasi bukanlah mata uang yang baik.

Bukti yang digunakan untuk “memperdagangkan” komputasi hanya valid untuk input yang digunakan dalam komputasi tersebut. Hubungan yang tidak dapat dipecahkan antara bukti spesifik dan input tertentu berarti bahwa proof-of-work untuk satu input tidak dapat digunakan kembali untuk input yang berbeda.

Proof-of-work awalnya diusulkan sebagai mekanisme kontrol akses untuk membatasi email spam. Pengguna diharapkan memberikan bukti kerja bersama email apa pun yang ingin mereka kirim. Mekanisme ini juga dapat dianggap sebagai pasar di mana pengguna membeli pengiriman email dengan komputasi pada harga yang dipilih oleh penyedia layanan email.

Batasan ini berguna – dapat digunakan untuk mencegah pekerjaan yang dilakukan oleh satu pembeli di pasar kemudian dibelanjakan kembali oleh pembeli lain. Misalnya, HashCash, implementasi nyata pertama dari pasar pengiriman email, menyertakan metadata seperti stempel waktu saat ini dan alamat email pengirim dalam data masukan untuk penghitungan bukti kerja. Bukti yang dihasilkan oleh pengguna tertentu untuk email tertentu, tidak dapat digunakan untuk email yang berbeda.

Namun ini juga berarti bahwa komputasi bukti kerja adalah barang yang dipesan lebih dahulu. Dana tersebut tidak dapat dipertukarkan, tidak dapat dibelanjakan kembali,[^5] dan tidak memecahkan masalah kebutuhan yang terjadi secara kebetulan. Properti moneter yang hilang ini mencegah komputasi menjadi mata uang. Terlepas dari namanya, tidak ada insentif bagi penyedia pengiriman email untuk ingin mengakumulasikan HashCash, karena akan ada uang tunai sebenarnya.

Adam Back, penemu HashCash, memahami masalah berikut:

"Hashcash tidak dapat ditransfer secara langsung karena untuk membuatnya didistribusikan, setiap penyedia layanan hanya menerima pembayaran dalam bentuk tunai yang dibuat untuk mereka. Anda mungkin dapat menyiapkan pencetakan gaya digicash (dengan chaumian ecash) dan meminta bank hanya mencetak uang tunai pada penerimaan tabrakan hash yang ditangani. Namun ini berarti Anda harus mempercayai bank untuk tidak mencetak uang dalam jumlah tak terbatas untuk digunakan sendiri." - Adam Back, 1997

Kita tidak ingin menukar komputasi yang dibuat khusus untuk setiap barang atau jasa yang dijual dalam perekonomian yang terdesentralisasi. Kita menginginkan mata uang digital serba guna yang dapat langsung digunakan untuk mengoordinasikan pertukaran nilai di pasar mana pun.

Membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi namun tetap terdesentralisasi merupakan tantangan yang signifikan. Mata uang membutuhkan unit yang dapat dipertukarkan dengan nilai yang sama yang dapat ditransfer antar pengguna. Hal ini memerlukan model penerbitan, definisi kriptografi kepemilikan dan transfer, proses penemuan dan penyelesaian transaksi, dan buku besar historis. Infrastruktur ini tidak diperlukan ketika bukti kerja hanya dianggap sebagai “mekanisme kontrol akses”.

Terlebih lagi, sistem desentralisasi adalah pasar, jadi semua fungsi dasar mata uang ini harus disediakan melalui penyedia layanan berbayar… dalam satuan mata uang yang sedang dibuat!

Seperti mengkompilasi compiler pertama, permulaan jaringan listrik yang gelap, atau evolusi kehidupan itu sendiri, pencipta mata uang digital dihadapkan pada masalah bootstrapping: bagaimana mendefinisikan insentif ekonomi yang mendasari mata uang yang berfungsi tanpa memiliki mata uang yang berfungsi di dalamnya yang akan mendenominasikan atau membayar insentif tersebut.

Komputasi dan mata uang adalah barang pertama dan kedua di pasar yang terdesentralisasi. Proof-of-work sendiri memungkinkan pertukaran komputasi tetapi mata uang yang berfungsi memerlukan lebih banyak infrastruktur. Butuh waktu 15 tahun bagi komunitas cypherpunk untuk mengembangkan infrastruktur tersebut.

Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang

Kemajuan dalam masalah bootstrapping ini berasal dari penyusunan batasan yang tepat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi harus menjadi pasar. Pasar terdiri dari pembeli dan penjual yang saling bertukar barang. Pasar terdesentralisasi untuk mata uang digital hanya memiliki dua barang yang dapat dibaca di dalamnya:

1. Komputasi melalui proof-of-work
2. Unit mata uang yang kita coba bangun

Oleh karena itu, satu-satunya perdagangan pasar yang memungkinkan adalah antara kedua barang tersebut. Komputasi harus dijual untuk satuan mata uang atau setara dengan satuan mata uang harus dijual untuk komputasi. Menyatakan hal ini sangatlah mudah—bagian tersulitnya adalah menata pasar ini sehingga sekadar menukar mata uang untuk komputasi akan mem-bootstrap semua kemampuan mata uang itu sendiri!

Seluruh sejarah mata uang digital yang berpuncak pada white paper Satoshi tahun 2008 adalah serangkaian upaya yang semakin canggih dalam menata pasar ini. Bagian berikut mengulas proyek-proyek seperti bit gold milik Nick Szabo dan B-money milik Wei Dai. Memahami bagaimana proyek-proyek ini menyusun pasar mereka dan mengapa mereka gagal akan membantu kita memahami mengapa Satoshi dan Bitcoin berhasil.

Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi Dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?

Fungsi utama pasar adalah penemuan harga. Oleh karena itu, komputasi perdagangan pasar untuk mata uang harus menemukan harga komputasi itu sendiri, dalam satuan mata uang tersebut.

Kita biasanya tidak memberikan nilai moneter pada komputasi. Kita biasanya menghargai kapasitas untuk melakukan komputasi karena kita menghargai output dari komputasi, bukan komputasi itu sendiri. Jika keluaran yang sama dapat dilakukan dengan lebih efisien, dengan komputasi yang lebih sedikit, hal ini biasanya disebut “kemajuan”.

Proof-of-work mewakili komputasi spesifik yang keluarannya hanya berupa bukti bahwa komputasi tersebut telah dilakukan. Menghasilkan bukti yang sama dengan melakukan lebih sedikit komputasi dan lebih sedikit pekerjaan tidak akan menghasilkan kemajuan—hal ini akan menjadi bug. Oleh karena itu, komputasi yang terkait dengan Proof-of-work merupakan hal yang aneh dan baru untuk dicoba dihargai.

Ketika bukti kerja dianggap sebagai disinsentif terhadap penyalahgunaan sumber daya, maka bukti kerja tidak perlu dinilai secara tepat dan konsisten. Yang terpenting adalah penyedia layanan email menetapkan tingkat kesulitan yang cukup rendah sehingga tidak terlihat oleh pengguna yang sah, namun cukup tinggi sehingga menjadi penghalang bagi pelaku spam. Oleh karena itu, terdapat beragam “harga” yang dapat diterima dan setiap peserta bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga mereka sendiri, dengan menerapkan fungsi penetapan harga lokal.

Namun satuan mata uang dimaksudkan agar dapat dipertukarkan, masing-masing memiliki nilai yang sama. Karena perubahan teknologi dari waktu ke waktu, dua unit mata uang yang dibuat dengan tingkat kesulitan proof-of-work yang sama—yang diukur dengan jumlah komputasi yang sesuai—mungkin memiliki biaya produksi yang sangat berbeda di dunia nyata, yang diukur dengan waktu, energi, dan/atau modal untuk melakukan komputasi tersebut. Ketika komputasi dijual dengan menggunakan mata uang, dan biaya produksi yang mendasarinya bervariasi, bagaimana pasar dapat memastikan harga yang konsisten?

Nick Szabo dengan jelas mengidentifikasi masalah harga ini ketika menjelaskan bit gold:

"Masalah utamanya...adalah bahwa skema pembuktian kerja bergantung pada arsitektur komputer, bukan hanya matematika abstrak yang didasarkan pada "siklus komputasi" abstrak. ...Jadi, ada kemungkinan untuk menjadi produsen berbiaya sangat rendah (dengan beberapa kali lipat besarnya) dan membanjiri pasar dengan bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Mata uang terdesentralisasi yang diciptakan melalui proof-of-work akan mengalami kelebihan pasokan dan penurunan pasokan seiring dengan perubahan pasokan komputasi seiring waktu. Untuk mengakomodasi volatilitas ini, jaringan harus belajar menghitung harga secara dinamis.

Mata uang digital awal mencoba memberi harga pada komputasi dengan mencoba mengukur “biaya komputasi” secara kolektif. Wei Dai, misalnya, mengusulkan solusi praktis berikut dalam B-money:

"Jumlah unit moneter yang diciptakan sama dengan biaya upaya komputasi dalam sekeranjang komoditas standar. Sebagai contoh, jika sebuah masalah memerlukan waktu 100 jam untuk diselesaikan pada komputer yang dapat menyelesaikannya dengan cara yang paling ekonomis, dan diperlukan 3 keranjang standar untuk membeli 100 jam waktu komputasi pada komputer tersebut di pasar terbuka, maka setelah solusi terhadap masalah tersebut disiarkan, setiap orang mengkredit rekening penyiar sebanyak 3 unit." - Dai, 1998

Sayangnya, Dai tidak menjelaskan bagaimana pengguna dalam sistem yang seharusnya terdesentralisasi seharusnya menyetujui definisi “keranjang standar”, komputer mana yang memecahkan masalah tertentu “paling ekonomis”, atau biaya komputasi di “pasar terbuka”. Mencapai konsensus di antara semua pengguna mengenai kumpulan data bersama yang berubah-ubah terhadap waktu adalah masalah penting dalam sistem desentralisasi!

Agar adil bagi Dai, dia menyadari hal ini:

“Salah satu bagian yang lebih bermasalah dalam protokol B-money adalah penciptaan uang. Bagian dari protokol ini mengharuskan semua [pengguna] memutuskan dan menyetujui biaya perhitungan tertentu. Sayangnya karena teknologi komputasi cenderung berkembang pesat dan tidak selalu bersifat publik, informasi ini mungkin tidak tersedia, tidak akurat, atau ketinggalan jaman, yang semuanya akan menyebabkan masalah serius pada protokol." - Dai, 1998

Dai kemudian mengusulkan mekanisme penetapan harga berbasis lelang yang lebih canggih yang kemudian dikatakan Satoshi sebagai titik awal idenya. Kita akan kembali ke skema lelang di bawah ini, tapi pertama-tama mari kita beralih ke bit gold, dan pertimbangkan wawasan Szabo tentang masalahnya.

Gunakan Pasar Eksternal

Szabo mengklaim bahwa proof-of-work harus “diberi stempel waktu dengan aman”:

"Bukti kerja diberi stempel waktu yang aman. Ini harus bekerja secara terdistribusi, dengan beberapa layanan stempel waktu berbeda sehingga tidak ada layanan stempel waktu tertentu yang perlu diandalkan secara substansial." - Szabo, 2005

Szabo tertaut ke halaman sumber daya tentang protokol penandaan waktu yang aman tetapi tidak menjelaskan algoritme spesifik apa pun untuk penandaan waktu yang aman. Ungkapan “aman” dan “fesyen terdistribusi” mempunyai pengaruh yang besar di sini, sehingga dapat mengatasi kerumitan dalam mengandalkan satu (atau banyak) layanan “di luar sistem” untuk penandaan waktu.[^6]

Waktu pembuatan unit mata uang digital penting karena menghubungkan komputasi yang dilakukan dengan biaya produksi di dunia nyata.

Terlepas dari ketidakjelasan implementasi, Szabo benar—waktu pembuatan proof-of-work merupakan faktor penting dalam menentukan harga karena terkait dengan biaya komputasi:

"…Namun, karena bit gold diberi stempel waktu, waktu yang dibuat serta tingkat kesulitan matematis dari pekerjaan tersebut dapat dibuktikan secara otomatis. Dari sini, biasanya dapat disimpulkan berapa biaya produksi selama periode waktu tersebut..." - Szabo, 2005

"Menyimpulkan" biaya produksi adalah hal yang penting karena bit gold tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat bit gold dengan melakukan perhitungan yang sesuai. Tanpa kemampuan untuk mengatur penerbitan, bit gold sama dengan barang koleksi:

"…Tidak seperti atom emas yang dapat dipertukarkan, tetapi seperti halnya barang-barang kolektor, pasokan dalam jumlah besar selama jangka waktu tertentu akan menurunkan nilai barang-barang tersebut. Dalam hal ini, emas kecil bertindak lebih seperti barang-barang kolektor daripada seperti emas..." - Szabo, 2005

Bit gold memerlukan proses eksternal tambahan untuk menciptakan unit mata uang yang sepadan:

“…[B]it Gold tidak dapat dipertukarkan berdasarkan fungsi sederhana, misalnya, panjang tali. Sebaliknya, untuk membuat unit yang dapat dipertukarkan, dealer harus menggabungkan potongan-potongan bit gold dengan nilai berbeda ke dalam satuan yang lebih besar kira-kira dengan nilai yang sama. Hal ini serupa dengan apa yang dilakukan banyak pedagang komoditas saat ini untuk memungkinkan pasar komoditas bekerja. Kepercayaan masih terdistribusi karena perkiraan nilai dari kumpulan tersebut dapat diverifikasi secara independen oleh banyak pihak lain dengan cara yang sebagian besar atau seluruhnya otomatis." - Szabo, 2005

Mengutip Szabo, “untuk menguji nilai… bit gold, dealer memeriksa dan memverifikasi tingkat kesulitan, masukan, dan stempel waktu”. Dealer yang mendefinisikan “unit yang lebih besar dengan nilai yang kira-kira sama” menyediakan fungsi penetapan harga yang serupa dengan “keranjang komoditas standar” Dai. Unit yang dapat dipertukarkan tidak dibuat dalam bentuk bit gold ketika bukti kerja diproduksi, hanya kemudian ketika bukti tersebut digabungkan menjadi “unit yang kira-kira bernilai sama” oleh dealer di pasar di luar jaringan.

Yang patut disyukuri, Szabo mengakui kelemahan ini:

"…Potensi kelebihan pasokan yang awalnya tersembunyi karena inovasi tersembunyi dalam arsitektur mesin adalah potensi kelemahan dalam bit gold, atau setidaknya ketidaksempurnaan yang harus diatasi oleh lelang awal dan pertukaran ex post bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Sekali lagi, meskipun belum sampai pada (yang sekarang kita kenal sebagai) solusinya, Szabo menunjukkan solusinya: karena biaya komputasi berubah seiring waktu, jaringan harus merespons perubahan pasokan komputasi dengan menyesuaikan harga uang.

Gunakan Pasar Internal

Dealer Szabo akan menjadi pasar eksternal yang menentukan harga (bundel dari) bit gold setelah penciptaannya. Apakah mungkin menerapkan pasar ini di dalam sistem dan bukan di luar sistem?

Mari kita kembali ke Wei Dai dan B-money. Seperti disebutkan sebelumnya, Dai mengusulkan model alternatif berbasis lelang untuk pembuatan B-money. Desain Satoshi untuk Bitcoin meningkat secara langsung pada model lelang B-money[^7]:

“Jadi saya mengusulkan subprotokol penciptaan uang alternatif, di mana [pengguna]… memutuskan dan menyetujui jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat setiap periode, dengan biaya pembuatan uang tersebut ditentukan melalui lelang. Setiap periode pembuatan uang adalah dibagi menjadi empat tahap, sebagai berikut:

Planning. Para [pengguna] menghitung dan bernegosiasi satu sama lain untuk menentukan peningkatan jumlah uang beredar yang optimal untuk periode berikutnya. Apakah [jaringan] dapat mencapai konsensus atau tidak, mereka masing-masing menyiarkan kuota penciptaan uang mereka dan komputasi makroekonomi apa pun yang dilakukan untuk mendukung angka tersebut.

Bidding. Siapapun yang ingin membuat B-money menyiarkan tawaran dalam bentuk dimana x adalah banyaknya B-money yang ingin dibuatnya, dan y adalah soal yang belum terselesaikan dari kelas soal yang telah ditentukan. Setiap masalah di kelas ini harus memiliki biaya nominal (katakanlah dalam MIPS-years) yang disetujui secara publik.

Computation. Setelah melihat penawaran, pihak yang mengajukan penawaran pada tahap penawaran sekarang dapat menyelesaikan masalah dalam penawarannya dan menyiarkan solusinya. Penciptaan uang.

Money creation. Setiap [pengguna] menerima tawaran tertinggi (di antara mereka yang benar-benar menyiarkan solusi) dalam hal biaya nominal per unit B-money yang dibuat dan memberikan kredit kepada akun penawar sesuai dengan itu."
- Dai, 1998

B-money membuat kemajuan signifikan menuju struktur pasar yang tepat untuk mata uang digital. Ini berupaya untuk menghilangkan dealer eksternal Szabo dan memungkinkan pengguna untuk terlibat dalam penemuan harga dengan menawar satu sama lain secara langsung.

Namun menerapkan proposal Dai seperti yang tertulis akan menjadi sebuah tantangan:

• Dalam fase "Planning”, pengguna menanggung beban menegosiasikan “peningkatan optimal jumlah uang beredar untuk periode berikutnya”. Bagaimana “optimal” harus didefinisikan, bagaimana pengguna harus bernegosiasi satu sama lain, dan bagaimana hasil negosiasi tersebut dibagikan tidak dijelaskan.
• Terlepas dari apa yang direncanakan, fase “Bidding” memungkinkan siapa saja untuk mengajukan “tawaran” untuk membuat B-money. Tawaran mencakup jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat serta jumlah bukti kerja yang sesuai sehingga setiap penawaran adalah harga, jumlah perhitungan yang bersedia dilakukan oleh penawar tertentu untuk membeli sejumlah tertentu. dari B-money.
• Setelah penawaran diserahkan, fase “Computation” terdiri dari peserta lelang yang melakukan proof-of-work yang mereka tawarkan dan menyiarkan solusi. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencocokkan penawar dengan solusi yang disediakan. Yang lebih problematis adalah tidak jelasnya bagaimana pengguna dapat mengetahui bahwa semua penawaran telah diajukan – kapan fase “Bidding” berakhir dan fase “Computation” dimulai?
• Masalah-masalah ini berulang dalam fase “Money creation”. Karena sifat proof-of-work, pengguna dapat memverifikasi bahwa bukti yang mereka terima dalam solusi adalah asli. Namun bagaimana pengguna dapat secara kolektif menyepakati serangkaian “tawaran tertinggi”? Bagaimana jika pengguna yang berbeda memilih set yang berbeda, baik karena preferensi atau latensi jaringan?

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi kesulitan dalam melacak data dan membuat pilihan secara konsisten, namun B-money memerlukan pelacakan tawaran dari banyak pengguna dan membuat pilihan konsensus di antara mereka. Kompleksitas ini menghalangi penerapan B-money.

Akar dari kompleksitas ini adalah keyakinan Dai bahwa tingkat “optimal” penciptaan B-money harus berfluktuasi seiring waktu berdasarkan “perhitungan makroekonomi” penggunanya. Seperti bit gold, B-money tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat unit B-money dengan menyiarkan tawaran dan kemudian melakukan proof-of-work yang sesuai.

Baik Szabo maupun Dai mengusulkan penggunaan pasar pertukaran mata uang digital untuk komputasi, namun baik bit gold maupun B-money tidak menentukan kebijakan moneter untuk mengatur pasokan mata uang di pasar ini.

Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin

Sebaliknya, kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah salah satu tujuan utama Satoshi dalam proyek Bitcoin. Dalam postingan milis pertama tempat Bitcoin diumumkan, Satoshi menulis:

“Akar permasalahan mata uang konvensional adalah kepercayaan yang diperlukan agar mata uang tersebut dapat berfungsi. Bank sentral harus dipercaya untuk tidak merendahkan mata uang tersebut, namun sejarah mata uang fiat penuh dengan pelanggaran terhadap kepercayaan tersebut.” - Satoshi, 2009

Satoshi selanjutnya menjelaskan masalah lain dengan mata uang fiat seperti perbankan cadangan fraksional yang berisiko, kurangnya privasi, pencurian & penipuan yang merajalela, dan ketidakmampuan melakukan pembayaran mikro. Namun Satoshi memulai dengan isu penurunan nilai oleh bank sentral—dengan kekhawatiran mengenai kebijakan moneter.

Satoshi ingin Bitcoin pada akhirnya mencapai pasokan sirkulasi terbatas yang tidak dapat terdilusi seiring waktu. Tingkat penciptaan Bitcoin yang “optimal”, bagi Satoshi, pada akhirnya akan menjadi nol.

Tujuan kebijakan moneter ini, lebih dari karakteristik lain yang mereka miliki secara pribadi (atau kolektif!), adalah alasan Satoshi “menemukan” Bitcoin, blockchain, konsensus Nakamoto, dll. —dan bukan orang lain. Ini adalah jawaban singkat atas pertanyaan yang diajukan dalam judul artikel ini: Satoshi memikirkan Bitcoin karena mereka fokus pada penciptaan mata uang digital dengan persediaan terbatas.

Pasokan Bitcoin yang terbatas bukan hanya tujuan kebijakan moneter atau meme bagi para Bitcoiner untuk berkumpul. Penyederhanaan teknis penting inilah yang memungkinkan Satoshi membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi sementara B-money Dai tetap menjadi postingan web yang menarik.

Bitcoin adalah B-money dengan persyaratan tambahan berupa kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan. Seperti banyak penyederhanaan teknis lainnya, pembatasan kebijakan moneter memungkinkan kemajuan dengan mengurangi ruang lingkup. Mari kita lihat bagaimana masing-masing fase pembuatan B-money disederhanakan dengan menerapkan batasan ini.

Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin Sudah Ada

Dalam b-money, setiap “periode penciptaan uang” mencakup fase “Perencanaan”, di mana pengguna diharapkan untuk membagikan “perhitungan makroekonomi” mereka yang membenarkan jumlah b-money yang ingin mereka ciptakan pada saat itu. Tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi yaitu pasokan terbatas dan emisi nol tidak sesuai dengan kebebasan yang diberikan b-money kepada pengguna individu untuk menghasilkan uang. Oleh karena itu, langkah pertama dalam perjalanan dari bmoney ke bitcoin adalah menghilangkan kebebasan ini. Pengguna bitcoin perorangan tidak dapat membuat bitcoin. Hanya jaringan bitcoin yang dapat membuat bitcoin, dan hal ini terjadi tepat sekali, pada tahun 2009 ketika Satoshi meluncurkan proyek bitcoin.

Satoshi mampu menggantikan fase “Perencanaan” b-money yang berulang menjadi satu jadwal yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya di mana 21 juta bitcoin yang dibuat pada tahun 2009 akan dilepaskan ke peredaran. Pengguna secara sukarela mendukung kebijakan moneter Satoshi dengan mengunduh dan menjalankan perangkat lunak Bitcoin Core yang kebijakan moneternya dikodekan secara keras.

Hal ini mengubah semantik pasar bitcoin untuk komputasi. Bitcoin yang dibayarkan kepada penambang bukanlah hal baru yang diterbitkan; itu melainkan baru dirilis ke peredaran dari persediaan yang ada.

Pandangan ini sangat berbeda dari klaim naif bahwa “penambang bitcoin menciptakan bitcoin”. Penambang Bitcoin tidak menciptakan bitcoin, mereka membelinya. Bitcoin tidak berharga karena “bitcoin terbuat dari energi”—tetapi nilai bitcoin didemonstrasikan dengan dijual untuk mendapatkan energi.

Mari kita ulangi sekali lagi: bitcoin tidak dibuat melalui proof-of-work, bitcoin dibuat melalui konsensus.

Desain Satoshi menghilangkan persyaratan untuk fase “Perencanaan” yang berkelanjutan dari b-money dengan melakukan semua perencanaan terlebih dahulu. Hal ini memungkinkan Satoshi untuk membuat kebijakan moneter yang sehat namun juga menyederhanakan penerapan bitcoin.

Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus

Kebebasan yang diberikan kepada pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang menimbulkan beban yang sesuai bagi jaringan bmoney. Selama fase “Penawaran” jaringan b-money harus mengumpulkan dan membagikan “tawaran” pembuatan uang dari banyak pengguna yang berbeda.

Menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menghasilkan uang akan meringankan beban jaringan bitcoin. Karena seluruh 21 juta bitcoin sudah ada, jaringan tidak perlu mengumpulkan tawaran dari pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang, jaringan hanya perlu menjual bitcoin sesuai jadwal Satoshi yang telah ditentukan.

Jaringan bitcoin dengan demikian menawarkan konsensus harga permintaan untuk bitcoin yang dijualnya di setiap blok. Harga tunggal ini dihitung oleh setiap node secara independen menggunakan salinan blockchainnya. Jika node memiliki konsensus pada blockchain yang sama (poin yang akan kita bahas nanti) mereka semua akan menawarkan harga permintaan yang sama di setiap blok.[^8]

Bagian pertama kalkulasi harga konsensus menentukan berapa banyak bitcoin yang akan dijual. Hal ini diperbaiki oleh jadwal rilis Satoshi yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung jumlah yang sama untuk blok tertentu:

$ bitcoin-cli getblockstats <block\_height> {... "subsidy": 6250000000, ... } # 6.25 BTC

Bagian kedua dari harga yang diminta secara konsensus adalah jumlah komputasi yang akan menjual subsidi saat ini. Sekali lagi, semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung nilai yang sama (kita akan meninjau kembali kalkulasi tingkat kesulitan ini di bagian berikutnya):

$ bitcoin-cli getdifficulty {... "result": 55621444139429.57, ... }

Bersama-sama, subsidi dan kesulitan jaringan menentukan permintaan bitcoin saat ini sebagai mata uang komputasi. Karena blockchain berada dalam konsensus, harga ini adalah harga konsensus.

Pengguna b-money juga dianggap memiliki konsensus “blockchain” yang berisi riwayat semua transaksi. Namun Dai tidak pernah memikirkan solusi sederhana berupa konsensus tunggal yang meminta harga untuk pembuatan b-money baru, yang hanya ditentukan oleh data di blockchain tersebut.

Sebaliknya, Dai berasumsi bahwa penciptaan uang harus berlangsung selamanya. Oleh karena itu, pengguna individu perlu diberdayakan untuk mempengaruhi kebijakan moneter – seperti halnya mata uang fiat. Persyaratan yang dirasakan ini membuat Dai merancang sistem penawaran yang mencegah penerapan b-money.

Kompleksitas tambahan ini dihilangkan dengan persyaratan Satoshi mengenai kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya.

Waktu Menutup Semua Penyebaran

Dalam fase “Komputasi” b-money, pengguna individu akan melakukan komputasi yang telah mereka lakukan dalam penawaran sebelumnya. Dalam bitcoin, seluruh jaringan adalah penjual – tetapi siapa pembelinya?

Di pasar pengiriman email, pembelinya adalah individu yang ingin mengirim email. Otoritas penetapan harga, penyedia layanan email, akan menetapkan harga yang dianggap murah bagi individu namun mahal bagi pelaku spam. Namun jika jumlah pengguna yang sah bertambah, harganya masih bisa tetap sama karena kekuatan komputasi masing-masing pengguna akan tetap sama.

Di b-money, setiap pengguna yang menyumbangkan tawaran untuk pembuatan uang selanjutnya harus melakukan sendiri jumlah komputasi yang sesuai. Setiap pengguna bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga berdasarkan pengetahuan mereka tentang kemampuan komputasi mereka sendiri.

Jaringan bitcoin menawarkan satu harga yang diminta dalam komputasi subsidi bitcoin saat ini. Namun tidak ada penambang individu yang menemukan blok yang melakukan komputasi sebanyak ini.[9] Blok pemenang penambang individu adalah bukti bahwa semua penambang secara kolektif melakukan jumlah komputasi yang diperlukan. Pembeli bitcoin dengan demikian adalah industri penambangan bitcoin global.

Setelah mencapai konsensus harga yang diminta, jaringan bitcoin tidak akan mengubah harga tersebut sampai lebih banyak blok diproduksi. Blok-blok ini harus berisi proof-of-work dengan harga yang diminta saat ini. Oleh karena itu, industri pertambangan tidak punya pilihan jika ingin “melakukan perdagangan” selain membayar harga yang diminta saat ini dalam komputasi.

Satu-satunya variabel yang dapat dikontrol oleh industri pertambangan adalah berapa lama waktu yang dibutuhkan untuk memproduksi blok berikutnya. Sama seperti jaringan bitcoin yang menawarkan satu harga yang diminta, industri pertambangan juga menawarkan satu penawaran—waktu yang diperlukan untuk menghasilkan blok berikutnya yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini.

Untuk mengimbangi peningkatan kecepatan perangkat keras dan minat yang berbeda-beda dalam menjalankan node dari waktu ke waktu, kesulitan proof-of-work ditentukan oleh rata-rata bergerak yang menargetkan jumlah rata-rata blok per jam. Jika dihasilkan terlalu cepat, kesulitannya akan meningkat. - Nakamoto, 2008

Satoshi dengan sederhana menjelaskan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan, yang sering disebut sebagai salah satu ide paling orisinal dalam implementasi bitcoin. Hal ini benar, namun alih-alih berfokus pada daya cipta solusi, mari kita fokus pada mengapa penyelesaian masalah sangat penting bagi Satoshi.

Proyek-proyek seperti bit gold dan b-money tidak perlu membatasi nilai tukar pada saat penciptaan uang karena mereka tidak memiliki pasokan tetap atau kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Periode penciptaan uang yang lebih cepat atau lebih lambat dapat dikompensasikan melalui cara lain, misalnya melalui pajak. Dealer eksternal memasukkan token bit gold ke dalam bundler yang lebih besar atau lebih kecil atau pengguna b-money mengubah tawaran mereka.

Namun tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi mengharuskan bitcoin memiliki tingkat pelepasan bitcoin yang telah ditentukan untuk diedarkan. Membatasi laju (statistik) produksi blok dari waktu ke waktu adalah hal yang wajar dalam bitcoin karena laju produksi blok adalah laju penjualan pasokan awal bitcoin. Menjual 21 juta bitcoin selama 140 tahun adalah proposisi yang berbeda dibandingkan membiarkannya dijual dalam 3 bulan.

Selain itu, bitcoin sebenarnya dapat menerapkan batasan ini karena blockchain adalah “protokol cap waktu aman” milik Szabo. Satoshi menggambarkan bitcoin sebagai yang pertama dan terutama sebagai “server stempel waktu terdistribusi secara peer-to-peer,” dan implementasi awal kode sumber bitcoin menggunakan “rantai waktu” dunia, bukan “blockchain” untuk menggambarkan struktur data bersama yang mengimplementasikan pasar proof-of-work bitcoin.[^10]

Tidak seperti bit gold atau b-money, token dalam bitcoin tidak mengalami kelebihan pasokan. Jaringan bitcoin menggunakan penyesuaian kesulitan untuk mengubah harga uang sebagai respons terhadap perubahan pasokan komputasi.

Algoritme penyesuaian ulang kesulitan Bitcoin memanfaatkan kemampuan ini. Blockchain konsensus digunakan oleh peserta untuk menghitung penawaran historis yang dibuat oleh industri pertambangan dan menyesuaikan kembali kesulitan agar bisa mendekati waktu blok target.

Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus

Rantai penyederhanaan yang disebabkan oleh tuntutan kebijakan moneter yang kuat meluas ke fase “penciptaan uang” dari b-money.

Tawaran yang diajukan pengguna di b-money mengalami masalah “tidak ada yang dipertaruhkan”. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencegah pengguna mengajukan tawaran dengan sejumlah besar b-money untuk pekerjaan yang sangat sedikit. Hal ini mengharuskan jaringan untuk melacak tawaran mana yang telah diselesaikan dan hanya menerima “tawaran tertinggi…dalam hal biaya nominal per unit b-money yang dibuat” untuk menghindari tawaran yang mengganggu tersebut. Setiap peserta b-money harus melacak seluruh tawaran senilai buku pesanan, mencocokkan tawaran dengan perhitungan selanjutnya, dan hanya menyelesaikan pesanan yang telah selesai dengan harga tertinggi.

Masalah ini merupakan contoh dari masalah konsensus yang lebih umum dalam sistem desentralisasi, yang juga dikenal sebagai “Byzantine generals” atau terkadang masalah “pembelanjaan ganda” dalam konteks mata uang digital. Berbagi urutan data yang identik di antara semua peserta merupakan suatu tantangan dalam jaringan yang saling bermusuhan dan terdesentralisasi. Solusi yang ada untuk masalah ini – yang disebut “algoritma konsensus Byzantine-fault tolerant (BFT)” – memerlukan koordinasi sebelumnya di antara peserta atau mayoritas (>67%) peserta agar tidak berperilaku bermusuhan.

Bitcoin tidak harus mengelola buku pesanan dalam jumlah besar karena jaringan bitcoin menawarkan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal. Ini berarti node bitcoin dapat menerima blok pertama (valid) yang mereka lihat yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini—tawaran gangguan dapat dengan mudah diabaikan dan merupakan pemborosan sumber daya penambang.

Komputasi harga berdasarkan konsensus memungkinkan pencocokan pesanan beli/jual dalam bitcoin dilakukan secara antusias, dengan sistem siapa cepat dia dapat. Berbeda dengan b-money, pencocokan pesanan yang cepat ini berarti bahwa pasar bitcoin tidak memiliki fase—pasar ini beroperasi terus-menerus, dengan harga konsensus baru dihitung setelah setiap pesanan dicocokkan (blok ditemukan). Untuk menghindari percabangan yang disebabkan oleh latensi jaringan atau perilaku bertentangan, node juga harus mengikuti aturan rantai terberat. Aturan penyelesaian pesanan yang serakah ini memastikan bahwa hanya tawaran tertinggi yang diterima oleh jaringan.

Kombinasi algoritma yang antusias dan serakah ini, dimana node menerima blok valid pertama yang mereka lihat dan juga mengikuti rantai terberat, adalah algoritma BFT baru yang dengan cepat menyatu pada konsensus tentang urutan blok. Satoshi menghabiskan 25% dari white paper bitcoin untuk mendemonstrasikan klaim ini.[^11]

Kita telah menetapkan di bagian sebelumnya bahwa harga permintaan konsensus bitcoin itu sendiri bergantung pada konsensus blockchain. Namun ternyata keberadaan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal inilah yang memungkinkan perhitungan pasar untuk mencocokkan pesanan dengan penuh semangat, dan itulah yang pertama-tama mengarah pada konsensus!

Terlebih lagi, “konsensus Nakamoto” yang baru ini hanya mengharuskan 50% peserta untuk tidak bertentangan, sebuah kemajuan yang signifikan dibandingkan dengan kondisi sebelumnya. Seorang cypherpunk seperti Satoshi membuat terobosan ilmu komputer teoretis ini, dibandingkan dengan akademisi tradisional atau peneliti industri, karena fokus mereka yang sempit pada penerapan uang yang sehat, dibandingkan algoritma konsensus umum untuk komputasi terdistribusi.

Kesimpulan

B-money adalah kerangka kerja yang kuat untuk membangun mata uang digital tetapi tidak lengkap karena tidak memiliki kebijakan moneter. Membatasi b-money dengan jadwal rilis yang telah ditentukan untuk bitcoin mengurangi cakupan dan menyederhanakan implementasi dengan menghilangkan persyaratan untuk melacak dan memilih di antara tawaran pembuatan uang yang diajukan pengguna. Mempertahankan kecepatan sementara dari jadwal rilis Satoshi menghasilkan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan dan memungkinkan konsensus Nakamoto, yang secara luas diakui sebagai salah satu aspek paling inovatif dalam implementasi bitcoin.

Ada lebih banyak hal dalam desain bitcoin daripada aspek yang dibahas sejauh ini. Kita memfokuskan artikel ini pada pasar “utama” dalam bitcoin, pasar yang mendistribusikan pasokan awal bitcoin ke dalam sirkulasi.

Artikel berikutnya dalam seri ini akan mengeksplorasi pasar penyelesaian transaksi bitcoin dan kaitannya dengan pasar pendistribusian pasokan bitcoin. Hubungan ini akan menyarankan metodologi bagaimana membangun pasar masa depan untuk layanan terdesentralisasi selain bitcoin.

Catatan kaki

[^1]: Judul seri ini diambil dari pesan telegraf pertama dalam sejarah, yang dikirimkan oleh Samuel Morse pada tahun 1844: “What hath God wrought?”.

[^2]: Bitcoin: Sistem Uang Elektronik Peer-to-Peer, tersedia di: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

[^3]: Pricing via Processing or Combatting Junk Mail oleh Dwork dan Naor. tersedia di:
https://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/../../pvp.pdf

[^4]: Meskipun merupakan pencetus ide tersebut, Dwork & Naor tidak menciptakan “proof-of-work”—julukan tersebut kemudian diberikan pada tahun 1999 oleh Markus Jakobsson dan Ari Juels.

[^5]: Proyek RPoW Hal Finney adalah upaya untuk menciptakan proof-of-work yang dapat ditransfer, tetapi bitcoin tidak menggunakan konsep ini karena tidak memperlakukan komputasi sebagai mata uang. Seperti yang akan kita lihat nanti ketika kita memeriksa bit gold dan b-money, komputasi tidak dapat berupa mata uang karena nilai komputasi berubah seiring waktu sementara unit mata uang harus memiliki nilai yang sama. Bitcoin bukanlah komputasi, bitcoin adalah mata uang yang dijual untuk komputasi.

[^6]: Pada saat ini, beberapa pembaca mungkin percaya bahwa saya meremehkan kontribusi Dai atau Szabo karena kontribusi mereka tidak jelas atau tidak jelas dalam beberapa hal. Perasaan saya justru sebaliknya: Dai dan Szabo pada dasarnya benar dan fakta bahwa mereka tidak mengartikulasikan setiap detail seperti yang dilakukan Satoshi tidak mengurangi kontribusi mereka. Sebaliknya, hal ini seharusnya meningkatkan apresiasi kita terhadap hal tersebut, karena hal ini menunjukkan betapa menantangnya munculnya mata uang digital, bahkan bagi para praktisi terbaiknya.

[^7]: Postingan b-money Dai adalah referensi pertama dalam white paper Satoshi, tersedia di: http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt

[^8]: Ada dua penyederhanaan yang dilakukan di sini:

1. Jumlah bitcoin yang dijual di setiap blok juga dipengaruhi oleh biaya transaksi pasar, yang berada di luar cakupan artikel ini, namun tetap menunggu pekerjaan selanjutnya.
2. Kesulitan yang dilaporkan oleh bitcoin bukanlah jumlah perhitungan yang diharapkan; seseorang harus mengalikannya dengan faktor proporsionalitas.

[^9]: Setidaknya sejak masa lalu yang buruk ketika Satoshi adalah satu-satunya penambang di jaringan.

[^10]: Bitcoin is Time klasik dari Gigi adalah pengenalan yang bagus tentang hubungan mendalam antara bitcoin dan waktu, tersedia di: https://dergigi.com/2021/01/14/bitcoin-is-time/

[^11]: Satoshi melakukan kesalahan baik dalam analisis mereka di buku putih maupun implementasi awal bitcoin berikutnya dengan menggunakan aturan “rantai terpanjang” dan bukan aturan “rantai terberat”.

Sumber artikel: HOW DID SATOSHI THINK OF BITCOIN? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-did-satoshi-think-of-bitcoin

Diterjemahkan oleh: Abengkris

@ c2827524:5f45b2f7

Remember, remember! The fifth of November, The Gunpowder treason and plot; I know of no reason Why the Gunpowder treason Should ever be forgot! Guy Fawkes and his companions Did the scheme contrive, To blow the King and Parliament All up alive. Threescore barrels, laid below, To prove old England's overthrow. But, by God's providence, him they catch, With a dark lantern, lighting a match!

È tanto semplice e molto più pacifico oggi.

• [ ] non serve polvere da sparo
• [ ] niente violenza (lasciamola a chi ne ha il monopolio, lo shdadoh)
• [ ] ci hanno dichiarato guerra e la guerra è economica

Rispondiamo semplicemente studiando #Bitcoin

https://t.me/bitcoincampus https://t.me/BitcoinSecPriv https://t.me/bitcoinita https://satoshispritz.it/

@ 13e63e99:25525c6a

The recent movement of Bitcoin's price can be closely correlated with movements in the S&P 500 index, indicating that both markets are responding to similar macroeconomic factors. This relationship underscores the interconnectedness of Bitcoin and traditional equity markets, particularly during periods of heightened economic uncertainty.

Correlation with the S&P 500

The chart illustrating S&P 500 futures alongside Bitcoin/USD from TradingView highlights this correlation. As market conditions fluctuate, traders often pivot their strategies based on broader economic signals that impact both asset classes.

Shift to Cash and Safe Havens

In the short term, as recession risks loom, traders frequently gravitate towards cash positions and Treasury bills, perceived as safer investments. This shift in sentiment has been reflected in the recent declines seen in both the stock market and Bitcoin prices, particularly following Intel's report of a 6% drop in quarterly revenue compared to the previous year. Such news tends to trigger caution among investors, leading to reduced appetite for riskier assets like cryptocurrencies.

Recent Corporate Disclosures

Recent financial disclosures from major tech companies, such as Microsoft and Meta, indicating an uptick in AI investments, have tempered expectations for earnings growth. This news was compounded by a dramatic 44% drop in Super Micro Computer (SMCI) shares within just three days, following an unexpected resignation of their auditor, EY. These events have contributed to a bearish market sentiment, further influencing Bitcoin's performance.

Labor Market Data and Inflation Concerns

On November 1, the mood shifted somewhat with the release of labor market data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, revealing a modest payroll growth of only 12,000 in October, significantly below the anticipated 100,000. Additionally, the 0.4% increase in US wages from the previous month has reignited inflation fears among investors. Despite these concerns, market analysts, as indicated by the CME FedWatch tool, are anticipating a 0.25% interest rate cut by the US Federal Reserve on November 7, which could have implications for both Bitcoin and equity markets.

Upcoming Political Events

With significant events on the horizon, including the US presidential elections on November 5 and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting, market participants should remain vigilant. Political efforts to stimulate the economy often lead to a depreciation of the US dollar, which can create upward pressure on Bitcoin prices in the medium term. As the landscape evolves, monitoring these developments will be crucial for traders and investors looking to navigate the volatile intersection of Bitcoin and traditional finance.

In summary, Bitcoin's price movements are intricately linked to broader economic indicators and investor sentiment. As macroeconomic conditions shift, so too will the strategies employed by both the Bitcoin and stock markets.

Reference: Google Finance, TradingView

Bitcoin mining in Africa is gaining traction as the continent seeks to leverage its vast natural resources and increasing access to renewable energy. With a growing interest in Bitcoin and the potential for economic diversification, Africa presents both opportunities and challenges for Bitcoin miners.

Key Factors Driving Bitcoin Mining Growth in Africa

1. Renewable Energy Potential: The continent has significant potential for renewable energy sources, such as solar, hydro, and wind. Countries like Ethiopia, South Africa, and Kenya are investing in renewable energy projects, making them attractive locations for Bitcoin mining operations.

2. Low Electricity Costs: In some regions, particularly those with abundant natural resources and renewable energy, electricity costs are significantly lower than in developed countries. This cost advantage can enhance the profitability of Bitcoin mining operations.

3. Growing Bitcoin Adoption: As interest in Bitcoin increases across Africa, there is a growing pool of local and international miners and investors. Initiatives to promote financial inclusion and digital assets are further driving this trend.

Challenges Facing Bitcoin Mining in Africa

1. Infrastructure Limitations: While some countries have made progress, many regions still face inadequate infrastructure, including unreliable power supply and poor internet connectivity, which can hinder mining operations.

2. Regulatory Uncertainty: The regulatory environment for Bitcoin varies widely across Africa. Some countries have embraced Bitcoin, while others have imposed restrictions or outright bans, creating uncertainty for miners.

3. Political Instability: Political instability and governance issues in certain countries can pose risks to mining operations. Countries facing conflict or significant corruption may deter investment in the sector.

Future Outlook

The future of Bitcoin mining in Africa holds considerable promise. As the global demand for Bitcoin continues to rise, the continent's potential for low-cost energy and resource availability can attract both local and foreign investments. Additionally, the push for financial inclusion through Bitcoin aligns with the continent’s broader economic goals.

Bitcoin mining in Africa is positioned for growth, driven by the continent's rich resources and increasing interest in Bitcoin. However, for the sector to realize its potential, stakeholders must address infrastructure challenges, navigate regulatory landscapes, and prioritize sustainability. By leveraging its unique advantages and addressing these challenges, Africa can become a significant player in the global Bitcoin mining industry.

MicroStrategy Announces $21 Billion Stock Offering to Boost Bitcoin Holdings

MicroStrategy has announced a potential sales agreement to issue up to $21 billion in Class A common stock, marking a significant move in its strategy to bolster its Bitcoin portfolio. While such a large stock offering typically raises concerns about shareholder dilution, MicroStrategy's stock has seen remarkable growth this year, reflecting strong investor confidence in Saylor's approach to leveraging capital markets for Bitcoin acquisition, despite fluctuations in Bitcoin prices.

This "at-the-market offering," facilitated by a consortium of sales agents, enables MicroStrategy to sell shares directly at current market prices, thereby minimizing the impact on existing shareholders. This strategy, known as "accretive dilution," allows the company to enhance its Bitcoin holdings while simultaneously improving overall shareholder value. With MicroStrategy's market capitalization surpassing that of other stocks, this approach reinforces its distinctive position within the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Reference: CoinDesk

Russia Lifts Bitcoin Mining Ban, Plans Expansion into BRICS Countries

On November 1st, Russia officially lifted its ban on Bitcoin mining and announced plans to establish mining and artificial intelligence facilities across BRICS countries.

Nico Smid, founder of Digital Mining Solutions, revealed that Russia aims to leverage underutilized energy sources in partnership with BitRiver, the Russian sovereign wealth fund. This initiative could facilitate BRICS nations in settling global trade transactions in Bitcoin, providing an alternative to local currencies backed by gold.

Originally comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, BRICS will expand in 2024 to include Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Ethiopia, and the UAE. Notably, Argentina, Ethiopia, and the UAE are already engaged in Bitcoin mining using state-owned resources. Alen Makhmetov of Hashlabs Mining pointed out that Russia's initiatives could provide geopolitical advantages, especially in regions with limited IT infrastructure.

While the ban has been lifted, miners in Russia must now register with the Federal Tax Service and disclose details about their equipment. Makhmetov cautioned that challenges persist, such as rising electricity costs and the devaluation of the ruble, which could make mining increasingly expensive.

Reference: Cointelegraph

Freed from Prison, Binance Founder CZ Receives Welcome in Dubai, Predicts 2024 as a Recovery Year

Freed from prison, Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) received an enthusiastic ovation during his appearance in Dubai, where he expressed optimism about the future of cryptocurrency. He suggested that 2024 could mark a recovery year for the market, potentially paving the way for a bull run in 2025.

CZ pointed to historical market cycles as indicators of a forthcoming rebound, emphasizing the need to support industry builders. He showed particular interest in projects that combine AI with blockchain technology, believing they hold significant potential for growth and utility as cryptocurrency adoption increases.

Discussing the regulatory landscape, CZ highlighted a positive shift in legislative support for cryptocurrency, spurred by public demand. He stressed the importance of clearly defining cryptocurrencies within U.S. law, noting the ongoing debates about their classification.

In addition, CZ unveiled his vision for Giggle Academy, a digital platform aimed at providing educational resources to those without access, particularly in impoverished regions. By leveraging AI to create interactive tools and fostering peer mentorship, the initiative seeks to empower up to 100 million people with education while prioritizing social impact over profit.

Reference: CoinDesk, TheBlockBeast

Empowering El Salvador: HCM Capital Supports Bitcoin Education with Mi Primer Bitcoin

HCM Capital is proud to support this dedicated non-profit organization focused on Bitcoin education-Mi Primer Bitcoin. Monthly meetups like these are crucial for fostering local engagement and strengthening the Bitcoin ecosystem. Together, let’s continue to empower communities worldwide!

Reference: X.com

Lifpay Bolt Card Feature released!

Reference: X.com

@ 5a69e82d:aa41c382

Dhruv Bansal, CSO dan Co-Founder Unchained mengeksplorasi prinsip-prinsip dan sejarah yang mengarah pada penciptaan Bitcoin dan mengajukan pertanyaan: "Apa yang telah dilakukan Satoshi"?

Bitcoin sering dibandingkan dengan internet pada tahun 1990an, namun saya yakin analogi yang lebih baik adalah dengan telegraf pada tahun 1840an.[1]

Telegraf adalah teknologi pertama yang mengirimkan data yang dikodekan dengan kecepatan mendekati cahaya dalam jarak jauh. Ini menandai lahirnya industri telekomunikasi. Internet, meskipun skalanya lebih besar, kontennya lebih kaya, dan many-to-many, bukan one-to-one, pada dasarnya masih merupakan teknologi telekomunikasi.

Baik telegraf maupun internet bergantung pada model bisnis di mana perusahaan mengerahkan modal untuk membangun jaringan fisik dan kemudian membebankan biaya kepada pengguna untuk mengirim pesan melalui jaringan ini. Jaringan AT&T secara historis mengirimkan telegram, panggilan telepon, paket TCP/IP, pesan teks, dan sekarang TikTok.

Transformasi masyarakat melalui telekomunikasi telah menghasilkan kebebasan yang lebih besar namun juga sentralisasi yang lebih besar. Internet telah meningkatkan jangkauan jutaan pembuat konten dan usaha kecil, namun juga memperkuat jangkauan perusahaan, otoritas pusat, dan lembaga lain yang memiliki posisi yang cukup baik untuk memantau dan memanipulasi aktivitas online.

Namun Bitcoin bukanlah akhir dari transformasi apa pun—ini adalah awal dari sebuah transformasi. Seperti halnya telekomunikasi, Bitcoin akan mengubah kebiasaan umat manusia dan kehidupan sehari-harinya. Memprediksi seluruh cakupan perubahan saat ini sama dengan membayangkan internet saat hidup di era telegraf.

Seri ini mencoba membayangkan masa depan dengan memulai dari masa lalu. Artikel awal ini menelusuri sejarah mata uang digital sebelum Bitcoin. Hanya dengan memahami kegagalan proyek-proyek sebelumnya, kita dapat memahami apa yang membuat Bitcoin berhasil—dan bagaimana hal itu menyarankan metodologi untuk membangun sistem desentralisasi di masa depan.

Daftar isi

1. Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar
   1. Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat
   2. Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat
   3. Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif
2. Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi
   1. Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama
   2. Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua
   3. Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang
3. Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?
   1. Gunakan Pasar Eksternal
   2. Gunakan Pasar Internal
4. Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin
   1. Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin sudah Ada
   2. Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus
   3. Waktu Menutup semua Penyebaran
   4. Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus
5. Kesimpulan

Klaim utama dari artikel ini adalah bahwa Bitcoin dapat dianggap sebagai adaptasi dari proyek B-money Dai yang menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menciptakan uang. Hanya beberapa minggu setelah artikel ini pertama kali diterbitkan, email baru muncul di mana Satoshi mengaku tidak terbiasa dengan B-money, namun mengakui bahwa Bitcoin dimulai “tepat dari titik itu.” Mengingat bukti baru ini, kami yakin klaim utama ini, meskipun tidak akurat secara historis, masih merupakan cara yang bermakna dan bermanfaat untuk memikirkan asal usul Bitcoin.

Bagaimana Satoshi Nakamoto Memikirkan Bitcoin?

Satoshi memang cerdas, tetapi Bitcoin tidak muncul begitu saja.

Bitcoin mengulangi pekerjaan yang ada di bidang kriptografi, sistem terdistribusi, ekonomi, dan filsafat politik. Konsep proof-of-work sudah ada jauh sebelum digunakan dalam uang dan cypherpunk sebelumnya seperti Nick Szabo, Wei Dai, & Hal Finney mengantisipasi dan memengaruhi desain Bitcoin dengan proyek-proyek seperti bit gold, B-money, dan RPoW. Pertimbangkan bahwa, pada tahun 2008, ketika Satoshi menulis white paper Bitcoin[2], banyak ide penting Bitcoin telah diusulkan dan/atau diimplementasikan:

• Mata uang digital harus berupa jaringan P2P
• Proof-of-work adalah dasar penciptaan uang
• Uang diciptakan melalui lelang
• Kunci publik kriptografi digunakan untuk menentukan kepemilikan dan transfer koin
• Transaksi dikelompokkan menjadi beberapa blok
• Blok dirangkai bersama melalui proof-of-work
• Semua blok disimpan oleh semua peserta

Bitcoin memanfaatkan semua konsep ini, tetapi Satoshi tidak menciptakan satu pun konsep tersebut. Untuk lebih memahami kontribusi Satoshi, kita harus menentukan prinsip Bitcoin mana yang tidak ada dalam daftar.

Beberapa kandidat yang jelas adalah persediaan Bitcoin yang terbatas, konsensus Nakamoto, dan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan. Tapi apa yang mendorong Satoshi pada ide ini?

Artikel ini mengeksplorasi sejarah mata uang digital dan menyatakan bahwa fokus Satoshi pada kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah hal yang menyebabkan Bitcoin mengatasi tantangan yang mengalahkan proyek-proyek sebelumnya seperti bit gold dan B-money.

Sistem yang Terdesentralisasi Adalah Pasar

Bitcoin sering digambarkan sebagai sistem terdesentralisasi atau terdistribusi. Sayangnya, kata “desentralisasi” dan “terdistribusi” sering kali membingungkan. Ketika diterapkan pada sistem digital, kedua istilah tersebut mengacu pada cara aplikasi monolitik dapat didekomposisi menjadi jaringan bagian-bagian yang berkomunikasi.

Untuk tujuan kita, perbedaan utama antara sistem terdesentralisasi dan terdistribusi bukanlah topologi diagram jaringannya, namun cara mereka menegakkan aturan. Kami meluangkan waktu di bagian berikut untuk membandingkan sistem terdistribusi dan desentralisasi dan memotivasi gagasan bahwa sistem desentralisasi yang kuat adalah pasar.

Sistem Terdistribusikan Bergantung pada Otoritas Pusat

Dalam hal ini, kami mengartikan “terdistribusi” sebagai sistem apa pun yang telah dipecah menjadi beberapa bagian (sering disebut sebagai "node") yang harus berkomunikasi, biasanya melalui jaringan.

Insinyur perangkat lunak semakin mahir dalam membangun sistem yang terdistribusi secara global. Internet terdiri dari sistem terdistribusi yang secara kolektif berisi miliaran node. Kita masing-masing memiliki simpul di saku kita yang berpartisipasi dan bergantung pada sistem ini.

Namun hampir semua sistem terdistribusi yang kita gunakan saat ini diatur oleh beberapa otoritas pusat, biasanya administrator sistem, perusahaan, atau pemerintah yang saling dipercaya oleh semua node dalam sistem.

Otoritas pusat memastikan semua node mematuhi aturan sistem dan menghapus, memperbaiki, atau menghukum node yang gagal mematuhinya. Mereka dipercaya untuk melakukan koordinasi, menyelesaikan konflik, dan mengalokasikan sumber daya bersama. Seiring waktu, otoritas pusat mengelola perubahan pada sistem, memperbarui atau menambahkan fitur, dan memastikan bahwa node yang berpartisipasi mematuhi perubahan tersebut.

Manfaat yang diperoleh sistem terdistribusi karena mengandalkan otoritas pusat juga disertai dengan biaya. Meskipun sistem ini kuat terhadap kegagalan node-nodenya, kegagalan otoritas pusat dapat menyebabkan sistem berhenti berfungsi secara keseluruhan. Kemampuan otoritas pusat untuk mengambil keputusan secara sepihak berarti menumbangkan atau menghilangkan otoritas pusat sudah cukup untuk mengendalikan atau menghancurkan keseluruhan sistem.

Terlepas dari adanya trade-off ini, jika ada persyaratan bahwa satu partai atau koalisi harus mempertahankan otoritas pusat, atau jika peserta dalam sistem tersebut puas dengan mengandalkan otoritas pusat, maka sistem terdistribusi tradisional adalah solusi terbaik. Tidak diperlukan blockchain, token, atau sistem desentralisasi serupa.

Secara khusus, kasus VC atau mata uang kripto yang didukung oleh pemerintah, dengan persyaratan bahwa satu pihak dapat memantau atau membatasi pembayaran dan membekukan akun, adalah kasus penggunaan yang sempurna untuk sistem terdistribusi tradisional.

Sistem Desentralisasi Tidak Memiliki Otoritas Pusat

Kami menganggap “desentralisasi” memiliki arti yang lebih kuat daripada “terdistribusi”: sistem desentralisasi adalah bagian dari sistem terdistribusi yang tidak memiliki otoritas pusat. Sinonim yang mirip dengan “desentralisasi” adalah “peer-to-peer” (P2P).

Menghapus otoritas pusat memberikan beberapa keuntungan. Sistem terdesentralisasi:

• Tumbuh dengan cepat karena tidak ada hambatan untuk masuk—siapa pun dapat mengembangkan sistem hanya dengan menjalankan node baru, dan tidak ada persyaratan untuk registrasi atau persetujuan dari otoritas pusat.
• Kuat karena tidak ada otoritas pusat yang kegagalannya dapat membahayakan berfungsinya sistem. Semua node adalah sama, jadi kegagalan bersifat lokal dan jaringan merutekan sekitar kerusakan.
• Sulit untuk ditangkap, diatur, dikenakan pajak, atau diawasi karena tidak adanya titik kendali terpusat yang dapat ditumbangkan oleh pemerintah.

Kekuatan inilah yang menjadi alasan Satoshi memilih desain Bitcoin yang terdesentralisasi dan peer-to-peer:

“Pemerintah pandai memotong… jaringan yang dikendalikan secara terpusat seperti Napster, namun jaringan P2P murni seperti Gnutella dan Tor tampaknya masih mampu bertahan.” - Satoshi Nakamoto, 2008

Namun kekuatan ini juga disertai dengan kelemahan. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi bisa menjadi kurang efisien karena setiap titik harus memikul tanggung jawab tambahan untuk koordinasi yang sebelumnya diambil alih oleh otoritas pusat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi juga sering dilanda perilaku yang bersifat penipuan dan bertentangan. Terlepas dari persetujuan Satoshi terhadap Gnutella, siapa pun yang menggunakan program berbagi file P2P untuk mengunduh file yang ternyata kotor atau berbahaya memahami alasan mengapa berbagi file P2P tidak pernah menjadi model utama untuk transfer data online.

Satoshi tidak menyebutkannya secara eksplisit, namun email adalah sistem terdesentralisasi lainnya yang menghindari kendali pemerintah. Dan email juga terkenal sebagai spam.

Sistem Desentralisasi diatur Melalui Insentif

Akar masalahnya, dalam semua kasus ini adalah, bahwa perilaku kejahatan (menyebarkan file buruk, mengirim email spam) tidak dihukum, dan perilaku kooperatif (menyebarkan file bagus, hanya mengirim email berguna) tidak dihargai. Sistem desentralisasi yang mengandalkan partisipannya untuk menjadi aktor yang baik gagal untuk berkembang karena sistem tersebut tidak dapat mencegah aktor jahat untuk ikut berpartisipasi.

Tanpa memaksakan otoritas pusat, satu-satunya cara untuk menyelesaikan masalah ini adalah dengan menggunakan insentif ekonomi. Aktor yang baik, menurut definisinya, bermain sesuai aturan karena mereka secara inheren termotivasi untuk melakukannya. Pelaku kejahatan, menurut definisinya, adalah orang yang egois dan licik, namun insentif ekonomi yang tepat dapat mengarahkan perilaku buruk mereka ke arah kebaikan bersama. Sistem yang terdesentralisasi melakukan hal ini dengan memastikan bahwa perilaku kooperatif menguntungkan dan perilaku kejahatan merugikan.

Cara terbaik untuk menerapkan layanan terdesentralisasi yang kuat adalah dengan menciptakan pasar di mana semua pelaku, baik dan buruk, dibayar untuk menyediakan layanan tersebut. Kurangnya hambatan masuk bagi pembeli dan penjual di pasar yang terdesentralisasi mendorong skala dan efisiensi. Jika protokol pasar dapat melindungi partisipan dari penipuan, pencurian, dan penyalahgunaan, maka pelaku kejahatan akan merasa lebih menguntungkan untuk mengikuti aturan atau menyerang sistem lain.

Pasar yang Terdesentralisasi Membutuhkan Barang yang Terdesentralisasi

Namun pasar itu rumit. Mereka harus memberi pembeli dan penjual kemampuan untuk mengirimkan penawaran dan permintaan serta menemukan, mencocokkan, dan menyelesaikan pesanan. Kebijakan tersebut harus adil, memberikan konsistensi yang kuat, dan menjaga ketersediaan meskipun terjadi masa-masa yang tidak menentu.

Pasar global saat ini sangat mumpuni dan canggih, namun menggunakan barang-barang tradisional dan jaringan pembayaran untuk menerapkan insentif di pasar yang terdesentralisasi bukanlah hal yang baru. Setiap penggabungan antara sistem desentralisasi dan uang fiat, aset tradisional, atau komoditas fisik akan menimbulkan kembali ketergantungan pada otoritas pusat yang mengontrol pemroses pembayaran, bank, dan bursa.

Sistem terdesentralisasi tidak dapat mentransfer uang tunai, mencari saldo rekening perantara, atau menentukan kepemilikan properti. Barang-barang tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi. Hal sebaliknya tidak benar—sistem tradisional dapat berinteraksi dengan Bitcoin semudah aktor lainnya (begitu mereka memutuskan ingin melakukannya). Batasan antara sistem tradisional dan desentralisasi bukanlah sebuah tembok yang tidak dapat dilewati, melainkan sebuah membran semi-permeabel.

Ini berarti bahwa sistem yang terdesentralisasi tidak dapat melaksanakan pembayaran dalam mata uang barang tradisional apa pun. Mereka bahkan tidak dapat menentukan saldo rekening yang didominasi fiat atau kepemilikan real estat atau barang fisik. Seluruh perekonomian tradisional sama sekali tidak terbaca dalam sistem desentralisasi.

Menciptakan pasar yang terdesentralisasi membutuhkan perdagangan barang-barang baru yang terdesentralisasi yang dapat dibaca dan ditransfer dalam sistem yang terdesentralisasi.

Komputasi Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang Pertama

Contoh pertama dari “barang terdesentralisasi” adalah kelas komputasi khusus yang pertama kali diusulkan pada tahun 1993 oleh Cynthia Dwork dan Moni Naor.[3]

Karena adanya hubungan mendalam antara matematika, fisika, dan ilmu komputer, komputasi ini memerlukan energi dan sumber daya perangkat keras di dunia nyata—hal ini tidak dapat dipalsukan. Karena sumber daya di dunia nyata langka, komputasi ini juga langka.

input untuk komputasi ini dapat berupa data apa pun. Keluaran yang dihasilkan adalah “bukti” digital bahwa pengkomputasian telah dilakukan pada data input yang diberikan. Pembuktian mengandung “kesulitan” tertentu yang merupakan bukti (statistik) dari sejumlah pekerjaan komputasi tertentu. Yang terpenting, hubungan antara data input, pembuktian, dan pekerjaan komputasi asli yang dilakukan dapat diverifikasi secara independen tanpa perlu mengajukan banding ke otoritas pusat mana pun.

Gagasan untuk menyebarkan beberapa data input bersama dengan bukti digital sebagai bukti kerja komputasi dunia nyata yang dilakukan pada input tersebut sekarang disebut “proof-of-work”.[4] Proof-of-work adalah, jika menggunakan ungkapan Nick Szabo, “biaya yang tidak dapat ditiru”. Karena proof-of-work dapat diverifikasi oleh siapa pun, maka proof-of-work merupakan sumber daya ekonomi yang dapat dibaca oleh semua peserta dalam sistem desentralisasi. Proof-of-work mengubah penghitungan data menjadi barang yang terdesentralisasi. Dwork & Naor mengusulkan penggunaan komputasi untuk membatasi penyalahgunaan sumber daya bersama dengan memaksa peserta untuk memberikan proof-of-work dengan tingkat kesulitan minimum tertentu sebelum mereka dapat mengakses sumber daya:

“Dalam makalah ini kami menyarankan pendekatan komputasi untuk memerangi penyebaran surat elektronik. Secara umum, kami telah merancang mekanisme kontrol akses yang dapat digunakan kapan pun diinginkan untuk membatasi, namun tidak melarang, akses ke sumber daya.” - Dwoak & Naor, 1993

Dalam proposal Dwork & Naor, administrator sistem email akan menetapkan tingkat kesulitan bukti kerja minimum untuk mengirimkan email. Pengguna yang ingin mengirim email perlu melakukan sejumlah komputasi yang sesuai dengan email tersebut sebagai data input. Bukti yang dihasilkan akan dikirimkan ke server bersamaan dengan permintaan pengiriman email.

Dwork & Naor menyebut kesulitan proof-of-work sebagai “fungsi penetapan harga” karena, dengan menyesuaikan kesulitan tersebut, “otoritas penetapan harga” dapat memastikan bahwa sumber daya bersama tetap murah untuk digunakan bagi pengguna yang jujur dan rata-rata, namun mahal bagi pengguna yang mencari untuk mengeksploitasinya. Di pasar pengiriman email, administrator server adalah otoritas penetapan harga; mereka harus memilih “harga” untuk pengiriman email yang cukup rendah untuk penggunaan normal namun terlalu tinggi untuk spam.

Meskipun Dwork & Naor membingkai proof-of-work sebagai disinsentif ekonomi untuk memerangi penyalahgunaan sumber daya, nomenklatur “fungsi penetapan harga” dan “otoritas penetapan harga” mendukung interpretasi yang berbeda dan berbasis pasar: pengguna membeli akses ke sumber daya dengan imbalan komputasi pada tingkat yang sama. harga yang ditetapkan oleh pengontrol sumber daya.

Dalam interpretasi ini, jaringan pengiriman email sebenarnya adalah pengiriman email perdagangan pasar yang terdesentralisasi untuk komputasi. Kesulitan minimum dari proof-of-work adalah harga yang diminta untuk pengiriman email dalam mata uang komputasi.

Mata Uang Adalah Barang Terdesentralisasi yang kedua

Namun komputasi bukanlah mata uang yang baik.

Bukti yang digunakan untuk “memperdagangkan” komputasi hanya valid untuk input yang digunakan dalam komputasi tersebut. Hubungan yang tidak dapat dipecahkan antara bukti spesifik dan input tertentu berarti bahwa proof-of-work untuk satu input tidak dapat digunakan kembali untuk input yang berbeda.

Proof-of-work awalnya diusulkan sebagai mekanisme kontrol akses untuk membatasi email spam. Pengguna diharapkan memberikan bukti kerja bersama email apa pun yang ingin mereka kirim. Mekanisme ini juga dapat dianggap sebagai pasar di mana pengguna membeli pengiriman email dengan komputasi pada harga yang dipilih oleh penyedia layanan email.

Batasan ini berguna – dapat digunakan untuk mencegah pekerjaan yang dilakukan oleh satu pembeli di pasar kemudian dibelanjakan kembali oleh pembeli lain. Misalnya, HashCash, implementasi nyata pertama dari pasar pengiriman email, menyertakan metadata seperti stempel waktu saat ini dan alamat email pengirim dalam data masukan untuk penghitungan bukti kerja. Bukti yang dihasilkan oleh pengguna tertentu untuk email tertentu, tidak dapat digunakan untuk email yang berbeda.

Namun ini juga berarti bahwa komputasi bukti kerja adalah barang yang dipesan lebih dahulu. Dana tersebut tidak dapat dipertukarkan, tidak dapat dibelanjakan kembali,[5] dan tidak memecahkan masalah kebutuhan yang terjadi secara kebetulan. Properti moneter yang hilang ini mencegah komputasi menjadi mata uang. Terlepas dari namanya, tidak ada insentif bagi penyedia pengiriman email untuk ingin mengakumulasikan HashCash, karena akan ada uang tunai sebenarnya.

Adam Back, penemu HashCash, memahami masalah berikut:

"Hashcash tidak dapat ditransfer secara langsung karena untuk membuatnya didistribusikan, setiap penyedia layanan hanya menerima pembayaran dalam bentuk tunai yang dibuat untuk mereka. Anda mungkin dapat menyiapkan pencetakan gaya digicash (dengan chaumian ecash) dan meminta bank hanya mencetak uang tunai pada penerimaan tabrakan hash yang ditangani. Namun ini berarti Anda harus mempercayai bank untuk tidak mencetak uang dalam jumlah tak terbatas untuk digunakan sendiri." - Adam Back, 1997

Kita tidak ingin menukar komputasi yang dibuat khusus untuk setiap barang atau jasa yang dijual dalam perekonomian yang terdesentralisasi. Kita menginginkan mata uang digital serba guna yang dapat langsung digunakan untuk mengoordinasikan pertukaran nilai di pasar mana pun.

Membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi namun tetap terdesentralisasi merupakan tantangan yang signifikan. Mata uang membutuhkan unit yang dapat dipertukarkan dengan nilai yang sama yang dapat ditransfer antar pengguna. Hal ini memerlukan model penerbitan, definisi kriptografi kepemilikan dan transfer, proses penemuan dan penyelesaian transaksi, dan buku besar historis. Infrastruktur ini tidak diperlukan ketika bukti kerja hanya dianggap sebagai “mekanisme kontrol akses”.

Terlebih lagi, sistem desentralisasi adalah pasar, jadi semua fungsi dasar mata uang ini harus disediakan melalui penyedia layanan berbayar… dalam satuan mata uang yang sedang dibuat!

Seperti mengkompilasi compiler pertama, permulaan jaringan listrik yang gelap, atau evolusi kehidupan itu sendiri, pencipta mata uang digital dihadapkan pada masalah bootstrapping: bagaimana mendefinisikan insentif ekonomi yang mendasari mata uang yang berfungsi tanpa memiliki mata uang yang berfungsi di dalamnya yang akan mendenominasikan atau membayar insentif tersebut.

Komputasi dan mata uang adalah barang pertama dan kedua di pasar yang terdesentralisasi. Proof-of-work sendiri memungkinkan pertukaran komputasi tetapi mata uang yang berfungsi memerlukan lebih banyak infrastruktur. Butuh waktu 15 tahun bagi komunitas cypherpunk untuk mengembangkan infrastruktur tersebut.

Pasar Terdesentralisasi Pertama harus Memperdagangkan Komputasi untuk Mata Uang

Kemajuan dalam masalah bootstrapping ini berasal dari penyusunan batasan yang tepat.

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi harus menjadi pasar. Pasar terdiri dari pembeli dan penjual yang saling bertukar barang. Pasar terdesentralisasi untuk mata uang digital hanya memiliki dua barang yang dapat dibaca di dalamnya:

1. Komputasi melalui proof-of-work
2. Unit mata uang yang kita coba bangun

Oleh karena itu, satu-satunya perdagangan pasar yang memungkinkan adalah antara kedua barang tersebut. Komputasi harus dijual untuk satuan mata uang atau setara dengan satuan mata uang harus dijual untuk komputasi. Menyatakan hal ini sangatlah mudah—bagian tersulitnya adalah menata pasar ini sehingga sekadar menukar mata uang untuk komputasi akan mem-bootstrap semua kemampuan mata uang itu sendiri!

Seluruh sejarah mata uang digital yang berpuncak pada white paper Satoshi tahun 2008 adalah serangkaian upaya yang semakin canggih dalam menata pasar ini. Bagian berikut mengulas proyek-proyek seperti bit gold milik Nick Szabo dan B-money milik Wei Dai. Memahami bagaimana proyek-proyek ini menyusun pasar mereka dan mengapa mereka gagal akan membantu kita memahami mengapa Satoshi dan Bitcoin berhasil.

Bagaimana Sistem Desentralisasi Dapat Menentukan Harga Komputasi?

Fungsi utama pasar adalah penemuan harga. Oleh karena itu, komputasi perdagangan pasar untuk mata uang harus menemukan harga komputasi itu sendiri, dalam satuan mata uang tersebut.

Kita biasanya tidak memberikan nilai moneter pada komputasi. Kita biasanya menghargai kapasitas untuk melakukan komputasi karena kita menghargai output dari komputasi, bukan komputasi itu sendiri. Jika keluaran yang sama dapat dilakukan dengan lebih efisien, dengan komputasi yang lebih sedikit, hal ini biasanya disebut “kemajuan”.

Proof-of-work mewakili komputasi spesifik yang keluarannya hanya berupa bukti bahwa komputasi tersebut telah dilakukan. Menghasilkan bukti yang sama dengan melakukan lebih sedikit komputasi dan lebih sedikit pekerjaan tidak akan menghasilkan kemajuan—hal ini akan menjadi bug. Oleh karena itu, komputasi yang terkait dengan Proof-of-work merupakan hal yang aneh dan baru untuk dicoba dihargai.

Ketika bukti kerja dianggap sebagai disinsentif terhadap penyalahgunaan sumber daya, maka bukti kerja tidak perlu dinilai secara tepat dan konsisten. Yang terpenting adalah penyedia layanan email menetapkan tingkat kesulitan yang cukup rendah sehingga tidak terlihat oleh pengguna yang sah, namun cukup tinggi sehingga menjadi penghalang bagi pelaku spam. Oleh karena itu, terdapat beragam “harga” yang dapat diterima dan setiap peserta bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga mereka sendiri, dengan menerapkan fungsi penetapan harga lokal.

Namun satuan mata uang dimaksudkan agar dapat dipertukarkan, masing-masing memiliki nilai yang sama. Karena perubahan teknologi dari waktu ke waktu, dua unit mata uang yang dibuat dengan tingkat kesulitan proof-of-work yang sama—yang diukur dengan jumlah komputasi yang sesuai—mungkin memiliki biaya produksi yang sangat berbeda di dunia nyata, yang diukur dengan waktu, energi, dan/atau modal untuk melakukan komputasi tersebut. Ketika komputasi dijual dengan menggunakan mata uang, dan biaya produksi yang mendasarinya bervariasi, bagaimana pasar dapat memastikan harga yang konsisten?

Nick Szabo dengan jelas mengidentifikasi masalah harga ini ketika menjelaskan bit gold:

"Masalah utamanya...adalah bahwa skema pembuktian kerja bergantung pada arsitektur komputer, bukan hanya matematika abstrak yang didasarkan pada "siklus komputasi" abstrak. ...Jadi, ada kemungkinan untuk menjadi produsen berbiaya sangat rendah (dengan beberapa kali lipat besarnya) dan membanjiri pasar dengan bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Mata uang terdesentralisasi yang diciptakan melalui proof-of-work akan mengalami kelebihan pasokan dan penurunan pasokan seiring dengan perubahan pasokan komputasi seiring waktu. Untuk mengakomodasi volatilitas ini, jaringan harus belajar menghitung harga secara dinamis.

Mata uang digital awal mencoba memberi harga pada komputasi dengan mencoba mengukur “biaya komputasi” secara kolektif. Wei Dai, misalnya, mengusulkan solusi praktis berikut dalam B-money:

"Jumlah unit moneter yang diciptakan sama dengan biaya upaya komputasi dalam sekeranjang komoditas standar. Sebagai contoh, jika sebuah masalah memerlukan waktu 100 jam untuk diselesaikan pada komputer yang dapat menyelesaikannya dengan cara yang paling ekonomis, dan diperlukan 3 keranjang standar untuk membeli 100 jam waktu komputasi pada komputer tersebut di pasar terbuka, maka setelah solusi terhadap masalah tersebut disiarkan, setiap orang mengkredit rekening penyiar sebanyak 3 unit." - Dai, 1998

Sayangnya, Dai tidak menjelaskan bagaimana pengguna dalam sistem yang seharusnya terdesentralisasi seharusnya menyetujui definisi “keranjang standar”, komputer mana yang memecahkan masalah tertentu “paling ekonomis”, atau biaya komputasi di “pasar terbuka”. Mencapai konsensus di antara semua pengguna mengenai kumpulan data bersama yang berubah-ubah terhadap waktu adalah masalah penting dalam sistem desentralisasi!

Agar adil bagi Dai, dia menyadari hal ini:

“Salah satu bagian yang lebih bermasalah dalam protokol B-money adalah penciptaan uang. Bagian dari protokol ini mengharuskan semua [pengguna] memutuskan dan menyetujui biaya perhitungan tertentu. Sayangnya karena teknologi komputasi cenderung berkembang pesat dan tidak selalu bersifat publik, informasi ini mungkin tidak tersedia, tidak akurat, atau ketinggalan jaman, yang semuanya akan menyebabkan masalah serius pada protokol." - Dai, 1998

Dai kemudian mengusulkan mekanisme penetapan harga berbasis lelang yang lebih canggih yang kemudian dikatakan Satoshi sebagai titik awal idenya. Kita akan kembali ke skema lelang di bawah ini, tapi pertama-tama mari kita beralih ke bit gold, dan pertimbangkan wawasan Szabo tentang masalahnya.

Gunakan Pasar Eksternal

Szabo mengklaim bahwa proof-of-work harus “diberi stempel waktu dengan aman”:

"Bukti kerja diberi stempel waktu yang aman. Ini harus bekerja secara terdistribusi, dengan beberapa layanan stempel waktu berbeda sehingga tidak ada layanan stempel waktu tertentu yang perlu diandalkan secara substansial." - Szabo, 2005

Szabo tertaut ke halaman sumber daya tentang protokol penandaan waktu yang aman tetapi tidak menjelaskan algoritme spesifik apa pun untuk penandaan waktu yang aman. Ungkapan “aman” dan “fesyen terdistribusi” mempunyai pengaruh yang besar di sini, sehingga dapat mengatasi kerumitan dalam mengandalkan satu (atau banyak) layanan “di luar sistem” untuk penandaan waktu.[6]

Waktu pembuatan unit mata uang digital penting karena menghubungkan komputasi yang dilakukan dengan biaya produksi di dunia nyata.

Terlepas dari ketidakjelasan implementasi, Szabo benar—waktu pembuatan proof-of-work merupakan faktor penting dalam menentukan harga karena terkait dengan biaya komputasi:

"…Namun, karena bit gold diberi stempel waktu, waktu yang dibuat serta tingkat kesulitan matematis dari pekerjaan tersebut dapat dibuktikan secara otomatis. Dari sini, biasanya dapat disimpulkan berapa biaya produksi selama periode waktu tersebut..." - Szabo, 2005

"Menyimpulkan" biaya produksi adalah hal yang penting karena bit gold tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat bit gold dengan melakukan perhitungan yang sesuai. Tanpa kemampuan untuk mengatur penerbitan, bit gold sama dengan barang koleksi:

"…Tidak seperti atom emas yang dapat dipertukarkan, tetapi seperti halnya barang-barang kolektor, pasokan dalam jumlah besar selama jangka waktu tertentu akan menurunkan nilai barang-barang tersebut. Dalam hal ini, emas kecil bertindak lebih seperti barang-barang kolektor daripada seperti emas..." - Szabo, 2005

Bit gold memerlukan proses eksternal tambahan untuk menciptakan unit mata uang yang sepadan:

“…[B]it Gold tidak dapat dipertukarkan berdasarkan fungsi sederhana, misalnya, panjang tali. Sebaliknya, untuk membuat unit yang dapat dipertukarkan, dealer harus menggabungkan potongan-potongan bit gold dengan nilai berbeda ke dalam satuan yang lebih besar kira-kira dengan nilai yang sama. Hal ini serupa dengan apa yang dilakukan banyak pedagang komoditas saat ini untuk memungkinkan pasar komoditas bekerja. Kepercayaan masih terdistribusi karena perkiraan nilai dari kumpulan tersebut dapat diverifikasi secara independen oleh banyak pihak lain dengan cara yang sebagian besar atau seluruhnya otomatis." - Szabo, 2005

Mengutip Szabo, “untuk menguji nilai… bit gold, dealer memeriksa dan memverifikasi tingkat kesulitan, masukan, dan stempel waktu”. Dealer yang mendefinisikan “unit yang lebih besar dengan nilai yang kira-kira sama” menyediakan fungsi penetapan harga yang serupa dengan “keranjang komoditas standar” Dai. Unit yang dapat dipertukarkan tidak dibuat dalam bentuk bit gold ketika bukti kerja diproduksi, hanya kemudian ketika bukti tersebut digabungkan menjadi “unit yang kira-kira bernilai sama” oleh dealer di pasar di luar jaringan.

Yang patut disyukuri, Szabo mengakui kelemahan ini:

"…Potensi kelebihan pasokan yang awalnya tersembunyi karena inovasi tersembunyi dalam arsitektur mesin adalah potensi kelemahan dalam bit gold, atau setidaknya ketidaksempurnaan yang harus diatasi oleh lelang awal dan pertukaran ex post bit gold." - Szabo, 2005

Sekali lagi, meskipun belum sampai pada (yang sekarang kita kenal sebagai) solusinya, Szabo menunjukkan solusinya: karena biaya komputasi berubah seiring waktu, jaringan harus merespons perubahan pasokan komputasi dengan menyesuaikan harga uang.

Gunakan Pasar Internal

Dealer Szabo akan menjadi pasar eksternal yang menentukan harga (bundel dari) bit gold setelah penciptaannya. Apakah mungkin menerapkan pasar ini di dalam sistem dan bukan di luar sistem?

Mari kita kembali ke Wei Dai dan B-money. Seperti disebutkan sebelumnya, Dai mengusulkan model alternatif berbasis lelang untuk pembuatan B-money. Desain Satoshi untuk Bitcoin meningkat secara langsung pada model lelang B-money[7]:

“Jadi saya mengusulkan subprotokol penciptaan uang alternatif, di mana [pengguna]… memutuskan dan menyetujui jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat setiap periode, dengan biaya pembuatan uang tersebut ditentukan melalui lelang. Setiap periode pembuatan uang adalah dibagi menjadi empat tahap, sebagai berikut:

Planning. Para [pengguna] menghitung dan bernegosiasi satu sama lain untuk menentukan peningkatan jumlah uang beredar yang optimal untuk periode berikutnya. Apakah [jaringan] dapat mencapai konsensus atau tidak, mereka masing-masing menyiarkan kuota penciptaan uang mereka dan komputasi makroekonomi apa pun yang dilakukan untuk mendukung angka tersebut.

Bidding. Siapapun yang ingin membuat B-money menyiarkan tawaran dalam bentuk dimana x adalah banyaknya B-money yang ingin dibuatnya, dan y adalah soal yang belum terselesaikan dari kelas soal yang telah ditentukan. Setiap masalah di kelas ini harus memiliki biaya nominal (katakanlah dalam MIPS-years) yang disetujui secara publik.

Computation. Setelah melihat penawaran, pihak yang mengajukan penawaran pada tahap penawaran sekarang dapat menyelesaikan masalah dalam penawarannya dan menyiarkan solusinya. Penciptaan uang.

Money creation. Setiap [pengguna] menerima tawaran tertinggi (di antara mereka yang benar-benar menyiarkan solusi) dalam hal biaya nominal per unit B-money yang dibuat dan memberikan kredit kepada akun penawar sesuai dengan itu."
- Dai, 1998

B-money membuat kemajuan signifikan menuju struktur pasar yang tepat untuk mata uang digital. Ini berupaya untuk menghilangkan dealer eksternal Szabo dan memungkinkan pengguna untuk terlibat dalam penemuan harga dengan menawar satu sama lain secara langsung.

Namun menerapkan proposal Dai seperti yang tertulis akan menjadi sebuah tantangan:

• Dalam fase "Planning”, pengguna menanggung beban menegosiasikan “peningkatan optimal jumlah uang beredar untuk periode berikutnya”. Bagaimana “optimal” harus didefinisikan, bagaimana pengguna harus bernegosiasi satu sama lain, dan bagaimana hasil negosiasi tersebut dibagikan tidak dijelaskan.
• Terlepas dari apa yang direncanakan, fase “Bidding” memungkinkan siapa saja untuk mengajukan “tawaran” untuk membuat B-money. Tawaran mencakup jumlah B-money yang akan dibuat serta jumlah bukti kerja yang sesuai sehingga setiap penawaran adalah harga, jumlah perhitungan yang bersedia dilakukan oleh penawar tertentu untuk membeli sejumlah tertentu. dari B-money.
• Setelah penawaran diserahkan, fase “Computation” terdiri dari peserta lelang yang melakukan proof-of-work yang mereka tawarkan dan menyiarkan solusi. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencocokkan penawar dengan solusi yang disediakan. Yang lebih problematis adalah tidak jelasnya bagaimana pengguna dapat mengetahui bahwa semua penawaran telah diajukan – kapan fase “Bidding” berakhir dan fase “Computation” dimulai?
• Masalah-masalah ini berulang dalam fase “Money creation”. Karena sifat proof-of-work, pengguna dapat memverifikasi bahwa bukti yang mereka terima dalam solusi adalah asli. Namun bagaimana pengguna dapat secara kolektif menyepakati serangkaian “tawaran tertinggi”? Bagaimana jika pengguna yang berbeda memilih set yang berbeda, baik karena preferensi atau latensi jaringan?

Sistem yang terdesentralisasi kesulitan dalam melacak data dan membuat pilihan secara konsisten, namun B-money memerlukan pelacakan tawaran dari banyak pengguna dan membuat pilihan konsensus di antara mereka. Kompleksitas ini menghalangi penerapan B-money.

Akar dari kompleksitas ini adalah keyakinan Dai bahwa tingkat “optimal” penciptaan B-money harus berfluktuasi seiring waktu berdasarkan “perhitungan makroekonomi” penggunanya. Seperti bit gold, B-money tidak memiliki mekanisme untuk membatasi penciptaan uang. Siapapun dapat membuat unit B-money dengan menyiarkan tawaran dan kemudian melakukan proof-of-work yang sesuai.

Baik Szabo maupun Dai mengusulkan penggunaan pasar pertukaran mata uang digital untuk komputasi, namun baik bit gold maupun B-money tidak menentukan kebijakan moneter untuk mengatur pasokan mata uang di pasar ini.

Tujuan Kebijakan Moneter Satoshi Menghasilkan Bitcoin

Sebaliknya, kebijakan moneter yang sehat adalah salah satu tujuan utama Satoshi dalam proyek Bitcoin. Dalam postingan milis pertama tempat Bitcoin diumumkan, Satoshi menulis:

“Akar permasalahan mata uang konvensional adalah kepercayaan yang diperlukan agar mata uang tersebut dapat berfungsi. Bank sentral harus dipercaya untuk tidak merendahkan mata uang tersebut, namun sejarah mata uang fiat penuh dengan pelanggaran terhadap kepercayaan tersebut.” - Satoshi, 2009

Satoshi selanjutnya menjelaskan masalah lain dengan mata uang fiat seperti perbankan cadangan fraksional yang berisiko, kurangnya privasi, pencurian & penipuan yang merajalela, dan ketidakmampuan melakukan pembayaran mikro. Namun Satoshi memulai dengan isu penurunan nilai oleh bank sentral—dengan kekhawatiran mengenai kebijakan moneter.

Satoshi ingin Bitcoin pada akhirnya mencapai pasokan sirkulasi terbatas yang tidak dapat terdilusi seiring waktu. Tingkat penciptaan Bitcoin yang “optimal”, bagi Satoshi, pada akhirnya akan menjadi nol.

Tujuan kebijakan moneter ini, lebih dari karakteristik lain yang mereka miliki secara pribadi (atau kolektif!), adalah alasan Satoshi “menemukan” Bitcoin, blockchain, konsensus Nakamoto, dll. —dan bukan orang lain. Ini adalah jawaban singkat atas pertanyaan yang diajukan dalam judul artikel ini: Satoshi memikirkan Bitcoin karena mereka fokus pada penciptaan mata uang digital dengan persediaan terbatas.

Pasokan Bitcoin yang terbatas bukan hanya tujuan kebijakan moneter atau meme bagi para Bitcoiner untuk berkumpul. Penyederhanaan teknis penting inilah yang memungkinkan Satoshi membangun mata uang digital yang berfungsi sementara B-money Dai tetap menjadi postingan web yang menarik.

Bitcoin adalah B-money dengan persyaratan tambahan berupa kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan. Seperti banyak penyederhanaan teknis lainnya, pembatasan kebijakan moneter memungkinkan kemajuan dengan mengurangi ruang lingkup. Mari kita lihat bagaimana masing-masing fase pembuatan B-money disederhanakan dengan menerapkan batasan ini.

Semua Pasokan 21 Juta Bitcoin Sudah Ada

Dalam b-money, setiap “periode penciptaan uang” mencakup fase “Perencanaan”, di mana pengguna diharapkan untuk membagikan “perhitungan makroekonomi” mereka yang membenarkan jumlah b-money yang ingin mereka ciptakan pada saat itu. Tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi yaitu pasokan terbatas dan emisi nol tidak sesuai dengan kebebasan yang diberikan b-money kepada pengguna individu untuk menghasilkan uang. Oleh karena itu, langkah pertama dalam perjalanan dari bmoney ke bitcoin adalah menghilangkan kebebasan ini. Pengguna bitcoin perorangan tidak dapat membuat bitcoin. Hanya jaringan bitcoin yang dapat membuat bitcoin, dan hal ini terjadi tepat sekali, pada tahun 2009 ketika Satoshi meluncurkan proyek bitcoin.

Satoshi mampu menggantikan fase “Perencanaan” b-money yang berulang menjadi satu jadwal yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya di mana 21 juta bitcoin yang dibuat pada tahun 2009 akan dilepaskan ke peredaran. Pengguna secara sukarela mendukung kebijakan moneter Satoshi dengan mengunduh dan menjalankan perangkat lunak Bitcoin Core yang kebijakan moneternya dikodekan secara keras.

Hal ini mengubah semantik pasar bitcoin untuk komputasi. Bitcoin yang dibayarkan kepada penambang bukanlah hal baru yang diterbitkan; itu melainkan baru dirilis ke peredaran dari persediaan yang ada.

Pandangan ini sangat berbeda dari klaim naif bahwa “penambang bitcoin menciptakan bitcoin”. Penambang Bitcoin tidak menciptakan bitcoin, mereka membelinya. Bitcoin tidak berharga karena “bitcoin terbuat dari energi”—tetapi nilai bitcoin didemonstrasikan dengan dijual untuk mendapatkan energi.

Mari kita ulangi sekali lagi: bitcoin tidak dibuat melalui proof-of-work, bitcoin dibuat melalui konsensus.

Desain Satoshi menghilangkan persyaratan untuk fase “Perencanaan” yang berkelanjutan dari b-money dengan melakukan semua perencanaan terlebih dahulu. Hal ini memungkinkan Satoshi untuk membuat kebijakan moneter yang sehat namun juga menyederhanakan penerapan bitcoin.

Bitcoin dihargai Melalui Konsensus

Kebebasan yang diberikan kepada pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang menimbulkan beban yang sesuai bagi jaringan bmoney. Selama fase “Penawaran” jaringan b-money harus mengumpulkan dan membagikan “tawaran” pembuatan uang dari banyak pengguna yang berbeda.

Menghilangkan kebebasan untuk menghasilkan uang akan meringankan beban jaringan bitcoin. Karena seluruh 21 juta bitcoin sudah ada, jaringan tidak perlu mengumpulkan tawaran dari pengguna untuk menghasilkan uang, jaringan hanya perlu menjual bitcoin sesuai jadwal Satoshi yang telah ditentukan.

Jaringan bitcoin dengan demikian menawarkan konsensus harga permintaan untuk bitcoin yang dijualnya di setiap blok. Harga tunggal ini dihitung oleh setiap node secara independen menggunakan salinan blockchainnya. Jika node memiliki konsensus pada blockchain yang sama (poin yang akan kita bahas nanti) mereka semua akan menawarkan harga permintaan yang sama di setiap blok.[8]

Bagian pertama kalkulasi harga konsensus menentukan berapa banyak bitcoin yang akan dijual. Hal ini diperbaiki oleh jadwal rilis Satoshi yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung jumlah yang sama untuk blok tertentu:

$ bitcoin-cli getblockstats {... "subsidy": 6250000000, ... } # 6.25 BTC

Bagian kedua dari harga yang diminta secara konsensus adalah jumlah komputasi yang akan menjual subsidi saat ini. Sekali lagi, semua node bitcoin di jaringan menghitung nilai yang sama (kita akan meninjau kembali kalkulasi tingkat kesulitan ini di bagian berikutnya):

$ bitcoin-cli getdifficulty {... "result": 55621444139429.57, ... }

Bersama-sama, subsidi dan kesulitan jaringan menentukan permintaan bitcoin saat ini sebagai mata uang komputasi. Karena blockchain berada dalam konsensus, harga ini adalah harga konsensus.

Pengguna b-money juga dianggap memiliki konsensus “blockchain” yang berisi riwayat semua transaksi. Namun Dai tidak pernah memikirkan solusi sederhana berupa konsensus tunggal yang meminta harga untuk pembuatan b-money baru, yang hanya ditentukan oleh data di blockchain tersebut.

Sebaliknya, Dai berasumsi bahwa penciptaan uang harus berlangsung selamanya. Oleh karena itu, pengguna individu perlu diberdayakan untuk mempengaruhi kebijakan moneter – seperti halnya mata uang fiat. Persyaratan yang dirasakan ini membuat Dai merancang sistem penawaran yang mencegah penerapan b-money.

Kompleksitas tambahan ini dihilangkan dengan persyaratan Satoshi mengenai kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya.

Waktu Menutup Semua Penyebaran

Dalam fase “Komputasi” b-money, pengguna individu akan melakukan komputasi yang telah mereka lakukan dalam penawaran sebelumnya. Dalam bitcoin, seluruh jaringan adalah penjual – tetapi siapa pembelinya?

Di pasar pengiriman email, pembelinya adalah individu yang ingin mengirim email. Otoritas penetapan harga, penyedia layanan email, akan menetapkan harga yang dianggap murah bagi individu namun mahal bagi pelaku spam. Namun jika jumlah pengguna yang sah bertambah, harganya masih bisa tetap sama karena kekuatan komputasi masing-masing pengguna akan tetap sama.

Di b-money, setiap pengguna yang menyumbangkan tawaran untuk pembuatan uang selanjutnya harus melakukan sendiri jumlah komputasi yang sesuai. Setiap pengguna bertindak sebagai otoritas penetapan harga berdasarkan pengetahuan mereka tentang kemampuan komputasi mereka sendiri.

Jaringan bitcoin menawarkan satu harga yang diminta dalam komputasi subsidi bitcoin saat ini. Namun tidak ada penambang individu yang menemukan blok yang melakukan komputasi sebanyak ini.[9] Blok pemenang penambang individu adalah bukti bahwa semua penambang secara kolektif melakukan jumlah komputasi yang diperlukan. Pembeli bitcoin dengan demikian adalah industri penambangan bitcoin global.

Setelah mencapai konsensus harga yang diminta, jaringan bitcoin tidak akan mengubah harga tersebut sampai lebih banyak blok diproduksi. Blok-blok ini harus berisi proof-of-work dengan harga yang diminta saat ini. Oleh karena itu, industri pertambangan tidak punya pilihan jika ingin “melakukan perdagangan” selain membayar harga yang diminta saat ini dalam komputasi.

Satu-satunya variabel yang dapat dikontrol oleh industri pertambangan adalah berapa lama waktu yang dibutuhkan untuk memproduksi blok berikutnya. Sama seperti jaringan bitcoin yang menawarkan satu harga yang diminta, industri pertambangan juga menawarkan satu penawaran—waktu yang diperlukan untuk menghasilkan blok berikutnya yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini.

Untuk mengimbangi peningkatan kecepatan perangkat keras dan minat yang berbeda-beda dalam menjalankan node dari waktu ke waktu, kesulitan proof-of-work ditentukan oleh rata-rata bergerak yang menargetkan jumlah rata-rata blok per jam. Jika dihasilkan terlalu cepat, kesulitannya akan meningkat. - Nakamoto, 2008

Satoshi dengan sederhana menjelaskan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan, yang sering disebut sebagai salah satu ide paling orisinal dalam implementasi bitcoin. Hal ini benar, namun alih-alih berfokus pada daya cipta solusi, mari kita fokus pada mengapa penyelesaian masalah sangat penting bagi Satoshi.

Proyek-proyek seperti bit gold dan b-money tidak perlu membatasi nilai tukar pada saat penciptaan uang karena mereka tidak memiliki pasokan tetap atau kebijakan moneter yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Periode penciptaan uang yang lebih cepat atau lebih lambat dapat dikompensasikan melalui cara lain, misalnya melalui pajak. Dealer eksternal memasukkan token bit gold ke dalam bundler yang lebih besar atau lebih kecil atau pengguna b-money mengubah tawaran mereka.

Namun tujuan kebijakan moneter Satoshi mengharuskan bitcoin memiliki tingkat pelepasan bitcoin yang telah ditentukan untuk diedarkan. Membatasi laju (statistik) produksi blok dari waktu ke waktu adalah hal yang wajar dalam bitcoin karena laju produksi blok adalah laju penjualan pasokan awal bitcoin. Menjual 21 juta bitcoin selama 140 tahun adalah proposisi yang berbeda dibandingkan membiarkannya dijual dalam 3 bulan.

Selain itu, bitcoin sebenarnya dapat menerapkan batasan ini karena blockchain adalah “protokol cap waktu aman” milik Szabo. Satoshi menggambarkan bitcoin sebagai yang pertama dan terutama sebagai “server stempel waktu terdistribusi secara peer-to-peer,” dan implementasi awal kode sumber bitcoin menggunakan “rantai waktu” dunia, bukan “blockchain” untuk menggambarkan struktur data bersama yang mengimplementasikan pasar proof-of-work bitcoin.[10]

Tidak seperti bit gold atau b-money, token dalam bitcoin tidak mengalami kelebihan pasokan. Jaringan bitcoin menggunakan penyesuaian kesulitan untuk mengubah harga uang sebagai respons terhadap perubahan pasokan komputasi.

Algoritme penyesuaian ulang kesulitan Bitcoin memanfaatkan kemampuan ini. Blockchain konsensus digunakan oleh peserta untuk menghitung penawaran historis yang dibuat oleh industri pertambangan dan menyesuaikan kembali kesulitan agar bisa mendekati waktu blok target.

Pesanan Terunggul Menciptakan Konsensus

Rantai penyederhanaan yang disebabkan oleh tuntutan kebijakan moneter yang kuat meluas ke fase “penciptaan uang” dari b-money.

Tawaran yang diajukan pengguna di b-money mengalami masalah “tidak ada yang dipertaruhkan”. Tidak ada mekanisme untuk mencegah pengguna mengajukan tawaran dengan sejumlah besar b-money untuk pekerjaan yang sangat sedikit. Hal ini mengharuskan jaringan untuk melacak tawaran mana yang telah diselesaikan dan hanya menerima “tawaran tertinggi…dalam hal biaya nominal per unit b-money yang dibuat” untuk menghindari tawaran yang mengganggu tersebut. Setiap peserta b-money harus melacak seluruh tawaran senilai buku pesanan, mencocokkan tawaran dengan perhitungan selanjutnya, dan hanya menyelesaikan pesanan yang telah selesai dengan harga tertinggi.

Masalah ini merupakan contoh dari masalah konsensus yang lebih umum dalam sistem desentralisasi, yang juga dikenal sebagai “Byzantine generals” atau terkadang masalah “pembelanjaan ganda” dalam konteks mata uang digital. Berbagi urutan data yang identik di antara semua peserta merupakan suatu tantangan dalam jaringan yang saling bermusuhan dan terdesentralisasi. Solusi yang ada untuk masalah ini – yang disebut “algoritma konsensus Byzantine-fault tolerant (BFT)” – memerlukan koordinasi sebelumnya di antara peserta atau mayoritas (>67%) peserta agar tidak berperilaku bermusuhan.

Bitcoin tidak harus mengelola buku pesanan dalam jumlah besar karena jaringan bitcoin menawarkan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal. Ini berarti node bitcoin dapat menerima blok pertama (valid) yang mereka lihat yang memenuhi harga yang diminta jaringan saat ini—tawaran gangguan dapat dengan mudah diabaikan dan merupakan pemborosan sumber daya penambang.

Komputasi harga berdasarkan konsensus memungkinkan pencocokan pesanan beli/jual dalam bitcoin dilakukan secara antusias, dengan sistem siapa cepat dia dapat. Berbeda dengan b-money, pencocokan pesanan yang cepat ini berarti bahwa pasar bitcoin tidak memiliki fase—pasar ini beroperasi terus-menerus, dengan harga konsensus baru dihitung setelah setiap pesanan dicocokkan (blok ditemukan). Untuk menghindari percabangan yang disebabkan oleh latensi jaringan atau perilaku bertentangan, node juga harus mengikuti aturan rantai terberat. Aturan penyelesaian pesanan yang serakah ini memastikan bahwa hanya tawaran tertinggi yang diterima oleh jaringan.

Kombinasi algoritma yang antusias dan serakah ini, dimana node menerima blok valid pertama yang mereka lihat dan juga mengikuti rantai terberat, adalah algoritma BFT baru yang dengan cepat menyatu pada konsensus tentang urutan blok. Satoshi menghabiskan 25% dari white paper bitcoin untuk mendemonstrasikan klaim ini.[11]

Kita telah menetapkan di bagian sebelumnya bahwa harga permintaan konsensus bitcoin itu sendiri bergantung pada konsensus blockchain. Namun ternyata keberadaan harga permintaan konsensus tunggal inilah yang memungkinkan perhitungan pasar untuk mencocokkan pesanan dengan penuh semangat, dan itulah yang pertama-tama mengarah pada konsensus!

Terlebih lagi, “konsensus Nakamoto” yang baru ini hanya mengharuskan 50% peserta untuk tidak bertentangan, sebuah kemajuan yang signifikan dibandingkan dengan kondisi sebelumnya. Seorang cypherpunk seperti Satoshi membuat terobosan ilmu komputer teoretis ini, dibandingkan dengan akademisi tradisional atau peneliti industri, karena fokus mereka yang sempit pada penerapan uang yang sehat, dibandingkan algoritma konsensus umum untuk komputasi terdistribusi.

Kesimpulan

B-money adalah kerangka kerja yang kuat untuk membangun mata uang digital tetapi tidak lengkap karena tidak memiliki kebijakan moneter. Membatasi b-money dengan jadwal rilis yang telah ditentukan untuk bitcoin mengurangi cakupan dan menyederhanakan implementasi dengan menghilangkan persyaratan untuk melacak dan memilih di antara tawaran pembuatan uang yang diajukan pengguna. Mempertahankan kecepatan sementara dari jadwal rilis Satoshi menghasilkan algoritma penyesuaian kesulitan dan memungkinkan konsensus Nakamoto, yang secara luas diakui sebagai salah satu aspek paling inovatif dalam implementasi bitcoin.

Ada lebih banyak hal dalam desain bitcoin daripada aspek yang dibahas sejauh ini. Kita memfokuskan artikel ini pada pasar “utama” dalam bitcoin, pasar yang mendistribusikan pasokan awal bitcoin ke dalam sirkulasi.

Artikel berikutnya dalam seri ini akan mengeksplorasi pasar penyelesaian transaksi bitcoin dan kaitannya dengan pasar pendistribusian pasokan bitcoin. Hubungan ini akan menyarankan metodologi bagaimana membangun pasar masa depan untuk layanan terdesentralisasi selain bitcoin.

Catatan kaki

[1] Judul seri ini diambil dari pesan telegraf pertama dalam sejarah, yang dikirimkan oleh Samuel Morse pada tahun 1844: “What hath God wrought?”.

[2] Bitcoin: Sistem Uang Elektronik Peer-to-Peer, tersedia di: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

[3] Pricing via Processing or Combatting Junk Mail oleh Dwork dan Naor. tersedia di:
https://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/../../pvp.pdf

[4] Meskipun merupakan pencetus ide tersebut, Dwork & Naor tidak menciptakan “proof-of-work”—julukan tersebut kemudian diberikan pada tahun 1999 oleh Markus Jakobsson dan Ari Juels.

[5] Proyek RPoW Hal Finney adalah upaya untuk menciptakan proof-of-work yang dapat ditransfer, tetapi bitcoin tidak menggunakan konsep ini karena tidak memperlakukan komputasi sebagai mata uang. Seperti yang akan kita lihat nanti ketika kita memeriksa bit gold dan b-money, komputasi tidak dapat berupa mata uang karena nilai komputasi berubah seiring waktu sementara unit mata uang harus memiliki nilai yang sama. Bitcoin bukanlah komputasi, bitcoin adalah mata uang yang dijual untuk komputasi.

[6] Pada saat ini, beberapa pembaca mungkin percaya bahwa saya meremehkan kontribusi Dai atau Szabo karena kontribusi mereka tidak jelas atau tidak jelas dalam beberapa hal. Perasaan saya justru sebaliknya: Dai dan Szabo pada dasarnya benar dan fakta bahwa mereka tidak mengartikulasikan setiap detail seperti yang dilakukan Satoshi tidak mengurangi kontribusi mereka. Sebaliknya, hal ini seharusnya meningkatkan apresiasi kita terhadap hal tersebut, karena hal ini menunjukkan betapa menantangnya munculnya mata uang digital, bahkan bagi para praktisi terbaiknya.

[7] Postingan b-money Dai adalah referensi pertama dalam white paper Satoshi, tersedia di: http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt

[8] Ada dua penyederhanaan yang dilakukan di sini:

1. Jumlah bitcoin yang dijual di setiap blok juga dipengaruhi oleh biaya transaksi pasar, yang berada di luar cakupan artikel ini, namun tetap menunggu pekerjaan selanjutnya.
2. Kesulitan yang dilaporkan oleh bitcoin bukanlah jumlah perhitungan yang diharapkan; seseorang harus mengalikannya dengan faktor proporsionalitas.

[9] Setidaknya sejak masa lalu yang buruk ketika Satoshi adalah satu-satunya penambang di jaringan.

[10] Bitcoin is Time klasik dari Gigi adalah pengenalan yang bagus tentang hubungan mendalam antara bitcoin dan waktu, tersedia di: https://dergigi.com/2021/01/14/bitcoin-is-time/

[11] Satoshi melakukan kesalahan baik dalam analisis mereka di buku putih maupun implementasi awal bitcoin berikutnya dengan menggunakan aturan “rantai terpanjang” dan bukan aturan “rantai terberat”.

Sumber artikel: HOW DID SATOSHI THINK OF BITCOIN? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-did-satoshi-think-of-bitcoin
Diterjemahkan oleh: Abengkris