@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

Um dos padrões mais bem estabelecidos ao medir a opinião pública é que cada geração tende a seguir um caminho semelhante em termos de política e ideologia geral. Seus membros compartilham das mesmas experiências formativas, atingem os marcos importantes da vida ao mesmo tempo e convivem nos mesmos espaços. Então, como devemos entender os relatórios que mostram que a Geração Z é hiperprogressista em certos assuntos, mas surpreendentemente conservadora em outros?

A resposta, nas palavras de Alice Evans, pesquisadora visitante na Universidade de Stanford e uma das principais estudiosas do tema, é que os jovens de hoje estão passando por um grande divergência de gênero, com as jovens mulheres do primeiro grupo e os jovens homens do segundo. A Geração Z representa duas gerações, e não apenas uma.

Em países de todos os continentes, surgiu um distanciamento ideológico entre jovens homens e mulheres. Milhões de pessoas que compartilham das mesmas cidades, locais de trabalho, salas de aula e até casas, não veem mais as coisas da mesma maneira.

Nos Estados Unidos, os dados da Gallup mostram que, após décadas em que os sexos estavam distribuídos de forma relativamente equilibrada entre visões políticas liberais e conservadoras, as mulheres entre 18 e 30 anos são agora 30 pontos percentuais mais liberais do que os homens dessa faixa etária. Essa diferença surgiu em apenas seis anos.

A Alemanha também apresenta um distanciamento de 30 pontos entre homens jovens conservadores e mulheres jovens progressistas, e no Reino Unido, a diferença é de 25 pontos. Na Polônia, no ano passado, quase metade dos homens entre 18 e 21 anos apoiou o partido de extrema direita Confederation, em contraste com apenas um sexto das jovens mulheres dessa mesma idade.

Fora do Ocidente, há divisões ainda mais acentuadas. Na Coreia do Sul, há um enorme abismo entre homens e mulheres jovens, e a situação é semelhante na China. Na África, a Tunísia apresenta o mesmo padrão. Vale notar que em todos os países essa divisão drástica ocorre principalmente entre a geração mais jovem, sendo muito menos pronunciada entre homens e mulheres na faixa dos 30 anos ou mais velhos.

O movimento # MeToo foi o principal estopim, trazendo à tona valores feministas intensos entre jovens mulheres que se sentiram empoderadas para denunciar injustiças de longa data. Esse estopim encontrou especialmente terreno fértil na Coreia do Sul, onde a desigualdade de gênero é bastante visível e a misoginia explícita é comum. (palavras da Financial Times, eu só traduzi)

Na eleição presidencial da Coreia do Sul em 2022, enquanto homens e mulheres mais velhos votaram de forma unificada, os jovens homens apoiaram fortemente o partido de direita People Power, enquanto as jovens mulheres apoiaram o partido liberal Democratic em números quase iguais e opostos.

A situação na Coreia é extrema, mas serve como um alerta para outros países sobre o que pode acontecer quando jovens homens e mulheres se distanciam. A sociedade está dividida, a taxa de casamento despencou e a taxa de natalidade caiu drasticamente, chegando a 0,78 filhos por mulher em 2022, o menor número no mundo todo.

Sete anos após a explosão inicial do movimento # MeToo, a divergência de gênero em atitudes tornou-se autossustentável.

Dados das pesquisas mostram que em muitos países, as diferenças ideológicas vão além dessa questão específica. A divisão progressista-conservadora sobre assédio sexual parece ter causado ou pelo menos faz parte de um alinhamento mais amplo, em que jovens homens e mulheres estão se organizando em grupos conservadores e liberais em outros assuntos.

Nos EUA, Reino Unido e Alemanha, as jovens mulheres agora adotam posturas mais liberais sobre temas como imigração e justiça racial, enquanto grupos etários mais velhos permanecem equilibrados. A tendência na maioria dos países tem sido de mulheres se inclinando mais para a esquerda, enquanto os homens permanecem estáveis. No entanto, há sinais de que os jovens homens estão se movendo para a direita na Alemanha, tornando-se mais críticos em relação à imigração e se aproximando do partido de extrema direita AfD nos últimos anos.

Seria fácil dizer que tudo isso é apenas uma fase passageira, mas os abismos ideológicos apenas crescem, e os dados mostram que as experiências políticas formativas das pessoas são difíceis de mudar. Tudo isso é agravado pelo fato de que o aumento dos smartphones e das redes sociais faz com que os jovens homens e mulheres agora vivam em espaços separados e tenham culturas distintas.

As opiniões dos jovens frequentemente são ignoradas devido à baixa participação política, mas essa mudança pode deixar consequências duradouras, impactando muito mais do que apenas os resultados das eleições.

Retirado de: https://www.ft.com/content/29fd9b5c-2f35-41bf-9d4c-994db4e12998

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Based on a recent paper that included collaboration from renowned experts such as Lynn Alden, Steve Lee, and Ren Crypto Fish, we discuss in depth how Bitcoin's consensus is built, the main risks, and the complex dynamics of protocol upgrades.

PT-BR version

Podcast https://www.fountain.fm/episode/wbjD6ntQuvX5u2G5BccC

Presentation https://gamma.app/docs/Analyzing-Bitcoin-Consensus-Risks-in-Protocol-Upgrades-p66axxjwaa37ksn

1. Introduction to Consensus in Bitcoin

Consensus in Bitcoin is the foundation that keeps the network secure and functional, allowing users worldwide to perform transactions in a decentralized manner without the need for intermediaries. Since its launch in 2009, Bitcoin is often described as an "immutable" system designed to resist changes, and it is precisely this resistance that ensures its security and stability.

The central idea behind consensus in Bitcoin is to create a set of acceptance rules for blocks and transactions, ensuring that all network participants agree on the transaction history. This prevents "double-spending," where the same bitcoin could be used in two simultaneous transactions, something that would compromise trust in the network.

Evolution of Consensus in Bitcoin

Over the years, consensus in Bitcoin has undergone several adaptations, and the way participants agree on changes remains a delicate process. Unlike traditional systems, where changes can be imposed from the top down, Bitcoin operates in a decentralized model where any significant change needs the support of various groups of stakeholders, including miners, developers, users, and large node operators.

Moreover, the update process is extremely cautious, as hasty changes can compromise the network's security. As a result, the philosophy of "don't fix what isn't broken" prevails, with improvements happening incrementally and only after broad consensus among those involved. This model can make progress seem slow but ensures that Bitcoin remains faithful to the principles of security and decentralization.

---

2. Technical Components of Consensus

Bitcoin's consensus is supported by a set of technical rules that determine what is considered a valid transaction and a valid block on the network. These technical aspects ensure that all nodes—the computers that participate in the Bitcoin network—agree on the current state of the blockchain. Below are the main technical components that form the basis of the consensus.

Validation of Blocks and Transactions

The validation of blocks and transactions is the central point of consensus in Bitcoin. A block is only considered valid if it meets certain criteria, such as maximum size, transaction structure, and the solving of the "Proof of Work" problem. The proof of work, required for a block to be included in the blockchain, is a computational process that ensures the block contains significant computational effort—protecting the network against manipulation attempts.

Transactions, in turn, need to follow specific input and output rules. Each transaction includes cryptographic signatures that prove the ownership of the bitcoins sent, as well as validation scripts that verify if the transaction conditions are met. This validation system is essential for network nodes to autonomously confirm that each transaction follows the rules.

Chain Selection

Another fundamental technical issue for Bitcoin's consensus is chain selection, which becomes especially important in cases where multiple versions of the blockchain coexist, such as after a network split (fork). To decide which chain is the "true" one and should be followed, the network adopts the criterion of the highest accumulated proof of work. In other words, the chain with the highest number of valid blocks, built with the greatest computational effort, is chosen by the network as the official one.

This criterion avoids permanent splits because it encourages all nodes to follow the same main chain, reinforcing consensus.

Soft Forks vs. Hard Forks

In the consensus process, protocol changes can happen in two ways: through soft forks or hard forks. These variations affect not only the protocol update but also the implications for network users:

• Soft Forks: These are changes that are backward compatible. Only nodes that adopt the new update will follow the new rules, but old nodes will still recognize the blocks produced with these rules as valid. This compatibility makes soft forks a safer option for updates, as it minimizes the risk of network division.

• Hard Forks: These are updates that are not backward compatible, requiring all nodes to update to the new version or risk being separated from the main chain. Hard forks can result in the creation of a new coin, as occurred with the split between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash in 2017. While hard forks allow for deeper changes, they also bring significant risks of network fragmentation.

These technical components form the base of Bitcoin's security and resilience, allowing the system to remain functional and immutable without losing the necessary flexibility to evolve over time.

---

3. Stakeholders in Bitcoin's Consensus

Consensus in Bitcoin is not decided centrally. On the contrary, it depends on the interaction between different groups of stakeholders, each with their motivations, interests, and levels of influence. These groups play fundamental roles in how changes are implemented or rejected on the network. Below, we explore the six main stakeholders in Bitcoin's consensus.

1. Economic Nodes

Economic nodes, usually operated by exchanges, custody providers, and large companies that accept Bitcoin, exert significant influence over consensus. Because they handle large volumes of transactions and act as a connection point between the Bitcoin ecosystem and the traditional financial system, these nodes have the power to validate or reject blocks and to define which version of the software to follow in case of a fork.

Their influence is proportional to the volume of transactions they handle, and they can directly affect which chain will be seen as the main one. Their incentive is to maintain the network's stability and security to preserve its functionality and meet regulatory requirements.

2. Investors

Investors, including large institutional funds and individual Bitcoin holders, influence consensus indirectly through their impact on the asset's price. Their buying and selling actions can affect Bitcoin's value, which in turn influences the motivation of miners and other stakeholders to continue investing in the network's security and development.

Some institutional investors have agreements with custodians that may limit their ability to act in network split situations. Thus, the impact of each investor on consensus can vary based on their ownership structure and how quickly they can react to a network change.

3. Media Influencers

Media influencers, including journalists, analysts, and popular personalities on social media, have a powerful role in shaping public opinion about Bitcoin and possible updates. These influencers can help educate the public, promote debates, and bring transparency to the consensus process.

On the other hand, the impact of influencers can be double-edged: while they can clarify complex topics, they can also distort perceptions by amplifying or minimizing change proposals. This makes them a force both of support and resistance to consensus.

4. Miners

Miners are responsible for validating transactions and including blocks in the blockchain. Through computational power (hashrate), they also exert significant influence over consensus decisions. In update processes, miners often signal their support for a proposal, indicating that the new version is safe to use. However, this signaling is not always definitive, and miners can change their position if they deem it necessary.

Their incentive is to maximize returns from block rewards and transaction fees, as well as to maintain the value of investments in their specialized equipment, which are only profitable if the network remains stable.

5. Protocol Developers

Protocol developers, often called "Core Developers," are responsible for writing and maintaining Bitcoin's code. Although they do not have direct power over consensus, they possess an informal veto power since they decide which changes are included in the main client (Bitcoin Core). This group also serves as an important source of technical knowledge, helping guide decisions and inform other stakeholders.

Their incentive lies in the continuous improvement of the network, ensuring security and decentralization. Many developers are funded by grants and sponsorships, but their motivations generally include a strong ideological commitment to Bitcoin's principles.

6. Users and Application Developers

This group includes people who use Bitcoin in their daily transactions and developers who build solutions based on the network, such as wallets, exchanges, and payment platforms. Although their power in consensus is less than that of miners or economic nodes, they play an important role because they are responsible for popularizing Bitcoin's use and expanding the ecosystem.

If application developers decide not to adopt an update, this can affect compatibility and widespread acceptance. Thus, they indirectly influence consensus by deciding which version of the protocol to follow in their applications.

These stakeholders are vital to the consensus process, and each group exerts influence according to their involvement, incentives, and ability to act in situations of change. Understanding the role of each makes it clearer how consensus is formed and why it is so difficult to make significant changes to Bitcoin.

---

4. Mechanisms for Activating Updates in Bitcoin

For Bitcoin to evolve without compromising security and consensus, different mechanisms for activating updates have been developed over the years. These mechanisms help coordinate changes among network nodes to minimize the risk of fragmentation and ensure that updates are implemented in an orderly manner. Here, we explore some of the main methods used in Bitcoin, their advantages and disadvantages, as well as historical examples of significant updates.

Flag Day

The Flag Day mechanism is one of the simplest forms of activating changes. In it, a specific date or block is determined as the activation moment, and all nodes must be updated by that point. This method does not involve prior signaling; participants simply need to update to the new software version by the established day or block.

• Advantages: Simplicity and predictability are the main benefits of Flag Day, as everyone knows the exact activation date.

• Disadvantages: Inflexibility can be a problem because there is no way to adjust the schedule if a significant part of the network has not updated. This can result in network splits if a significant number of nodes are not ready for the update.

An example of Flag Day was the Pay to Script Hash (P2SH) update in 2012, which required all nodes to adopt the change to avoid compatibility issues.

BIP34 and BIP9

BIP34 introduced a more dynamic process, in which miners increase the version number in block headers to signal the update. When a predetermined percentage of the last blocks is mined with this new version, the update is automatically activated. This model later evolved with BIP9, which allowed multiple updates to be signaled simultaneously through "version bits," each corresponding to a specific change.

• Advantages: Allows the network to activate updates gradually, giving more time for participants to adapt.

• Disadvantages: These methods rely heavily on miner support, which means that if a sufficient number of miners do not signal the update, it can be delayed or not implemented.

BIP9 was used in the activation of SegWit (BIP141) but faced challenges because some miners did not signal their intent to activate, leading to the development of new mechanisms.

User Activated Soft Forks (UASF) and User Resisted Soft Forks (URSF)

To increase the decision-making power of ordinary users, the concept of User Activated Soft Fork (UASF) was introduced, allowing node operators, not just miners, to determine consensus for a change. In this model, nodes set a date to start rejecting blocks that are not in compliance with the new update, forcing miners to adapt or risk having their blocks rejected by the network.

URSF, in turn, is a model where nodes reject blocks that attempt to adopt a specific update, functioning as resistance against proposed changes.

• Advantages: UASF returns decision-making power to node operators, ensuring that changes do not depend solely on miners.

• Disadvantages: Both UASF and URSF can generate network splits, especially in cases of strong opposition among different stakeholders.

An example of UASF was the activation of SegWit in 2017, where users supported activation independently of miner signaling, which ended up forcing its adoption.

BIP8 (LOT=True)

BIP8 is an evolution of BIP9, designed to prevent miners from indefinitely blocking a change desired by the majority of users and developers. BIP8 allows setting a parameter called "lockinontimeout" (LOT) as true, which means that if the update has not been fully signaled by a certain point, it is automatically activated.

• Advantages: Ensures that changes with broad support among users are not blocked by miners who wish to maintain the status quo.

• Disadvantages: Can lead to network splits if miners or other important stakeholders do not support the update.

Although BIP8 with LOT=True has not yet been used in Bitcoin, it is a proposal that can be applied in future updates if necessary.

These activation mechanisms have been essential for Bitcoin's development, allowing updates that keep the network secure and functional. Each method brings its own advantages and challenges, but all share the goal of preserving consensus and network cohesion.

---

5. Risks and Considerations in Consensus Updates

Consensus updates in Bitcoin are complex processes that involve not only technical aspects but also political, economic, and social considerations. Due to the network's decentralized nature, each change brings with it a set of risks that need to be carefully assessed. Below, we explore some of the main challenges and future scenarios, as well as the possible impacts on stakeholders.

Network Fragility with Alternative Implementations

One of the main risks associated with consensus updates is the possibility of network fragmentation when there are alternative software implementations. If an update is implemented by a significant group of nodes but rejected by others, a network split (fork) can occur. This creates two competing chains, each with a different version of the transaction history, leading to unpredictable consequences for users and investors.

Such fragmentation weakens Bitcoin because, by dividing hashing power (computing) and coin value, it reduces network security and investor confidence. A notable example of this risk was the fork that gave rise to Bitcoin Cash in 2017 when disagreements over block size resulted in a new chain and a new asset.

Chain Splits and Impact on Stakeholders

Chain splits are a significant risk in update processes, especially in hard forks. During a hard fork, the network is split into two separate chains, each with its own set of rules. This results in the creation of a new coin and leaves users with duplicated assets on both chains. While this may seem advantageous, in the long run, these splits weaken the network and create uncertainties for investors.

Each group of stakeholders reacts differently to a chain split:

• Institutional Investors and ETFs: Face regulatory and compliance challenges because many of these assets are managed under strict regulations. The creation of a new coin requires decisions to be made quickly to avoid potential losses, which may be hampered by regulatory constraints.

• Miners: May be incentivized to shift their computing power to the chain that offers higher profitability, which can weaken one of the networks.

• Economic Nodes: Such as major exchanges and custody providers, have to quickly choose which chain to support, influencing the perceived value of each network.

Such divisions can generate uncertainties and loss of value, especially for institutional investors and those who use Bitcoin as a store of value.

Regulatory Impacts and Institutional Investors

With the growing presence of institutional investors in Bitcoin, consensus changes face new compliance challenges. Bitcoin ETFs, for example, are required to follow strict rules about which assets they can include and how chain split events should be handled. The creation of a new asset or migration to a new chain can complicate these processes, creating pressure for large financial players to quickly choose a chain, affecting the stability of consensus.

Moreover, decisions regarding forks can influence the Bitcoin futures and derivatives market, affecting perception and adoption by new investors. Therefore, the need to avoid splits and maintain cohesion is crucial to attract and preserve the confidence of these investors.

Security Considerations in Soft Forks and Hard Forks

While soft forks are generally preferred in Bitcoin for their backward compatibility, they are not without risks. Soft forks can create different classes of nodes on the network (updated and non-updated), which increases operational complexity and can ultimately weaken consensus cohesion. In a network scenario with fragmentation of node classes, Bitcoin's security can be affected, as some nodes may lose part of the visibility over updated transactions or rules.

In hard forks, the security risk is even more evident because all nodes need to adopt the new update to avoid network division. Experience shows that abrupt changes can create temporary vulnerabilities, in which malicious agents try to exploit the transition to attack the network.

Bounty Claim Risks and Attack Scenarios

Another risk in consensus updates are so-called "bounty claims"—accumulated rewards that can be obtained if an attacker manages to split or deceive a part of the network. In a conflict scenario, a group of miners or nodes could be incentivized to support a new update or create an alternative version of the software to benefit from these rewards.

These risks require stakeholders to carefully assess each update and the potential vulnerabilities it may introduce. The possibility of "bounty claims" adds a layer of complexity to consensus because each interest group may see a financial opportunity in a change that, in the long term, may harm network stability.

The risks discussed above show the complexity of consensus in Bitcoin and the importance of approaching it gradually and deliberately. Updates need to consider not only technical aspects but also economic and social implications, in order to preserve Bitcoin's integrity and maintain trust among stakeholders.

---

6. Recommendations for the Consensus Process in Bitcoin

To ensure that protocol changes in Bitcoin are implemented safely and with broad support, it is essential that all stakeholders adopt a careful and coordinated approach. Here are strategic recommendations for evaluating, supporting, or rejecting consensus updates, considering the risks and challenges discussed earlier, along with best practices for successful implementation.

1. Careful Evaluation of Proposal Maturity

Stakeholders should rigorously assess the maturity level of a proposal before supporting its implementation. Updates that are still experimental or lack a robust technical foundation can expose the network to unnecessary risks. Ideally, change proposals should go through an extensive testing phase, have security audits, and receive review and feedback from various developers and experts.

2. Extensive Testing in Secure and Compatible Networks

Before an update is activated on the mainnet, it is essential to test it on networks like testnet and signet, and whenever possible, on other compatible networks that offer a safe and controlled environment to identify potential issues. Testing on networks like Litecoin was fundamental for the safe launch of innovations like SegWit and the Lightning Network, allowing functionalities to be validated on a lower-impact network before being implemented on Bitcoin.

The Liquid Network, developed by Blockstream, also plays an important role as an experimental network for new proposals, such as OP_CAT. By adopting these testing environments, stakeholders can mitigate risks and ensure that the update is reliable and secure before being adopted by the main network.

3. Importance of Stakeholder Engagement

The success of a consensus update strongly depends on the active participation of all stakeholders. This includes economic nodes, miners, protocol developers, investors, and end users. Lack of participation can lead to inadequate decisions or even future network splits, which would compromise Bitcoin's security and stability.

4. Key Questions for Evaluating Consensus Proposals

To assist in decision-making, each group of stakeholders should consider some key questions before supporting a consensus change:

• Does the proposal offer tangible benefits for Bitcoin's security, scalability, or usability?
• Does it maintain backward compatibility or introduce the risk of network split?
• Are the implementation requirements clear and feasible for each group involved?
• Are there clear and aligned incentives for all stakeholder groups to accept the change?

5. Coordination and Timing in Implementations

Timing is crucial. Updates with short activation windows can force a split because not all nodes and miners can update simultaneously. Changes should be planned with ample deadlines to allow all stakeholders to adjust their systems, avoiding surprises that could lead to fragmentation.

Mechanisms like soft forks are generally preferable to hard forks because they allow a smoother transition. Opting for backward-compatible updates when possible facilitates the process and ensures that nodes and miners can adapt without pressure.

6. Continuous Monitoring and Re-evaluation

After an update, it's essential to monitor the network to identify problems or side effects. This continuous process helps ensure cohesion and trust among all participants, keeping Bitcoin as a secure and robust network.

These recommendations, including the use of secure networks for extensive testing, promote a collaborative and secure environment for Bitcoin's consensus process. By adopting a deliberate and strategic approach, stakeholders can preserve Bitcoin's value as a decentralized and censorship-resistant network.

---

7. Conclusion

Consensus in Bitcoin is more than a set of rules; it's the foundation that sustains the network as a decentralized, secure, and reliable system. Unlike centralized systems, where decisions can be made quickly, Bitcoin requires a much more deliberate and cooperative approach, where the interests of miners, economic nodes, developers, investors, and users must be considered and harmonized. This governance model may seem slow, but it is fundamental to preserving the resilience and trust that make Bitcoin a global store of value and censorship-resistant.

Consensus updates in Bitcoin must balance the need for innovation with the preservation of the network's core principles. The development process of a proposal needs to be detailed and rigorous, going through several testing stages, such as in testnet, signet, and compatible networks like Litecoin and Liquid Network. These networks offer safe environments for proposals to be analyzed and improved before being launched on the main network.

Each proposed change must be carefully evaluated regarding its maturity, impact, backward compatibility, and support among stakeholders. The recommended key questions and appropriate timing are critical to ensure that an update is adopted without compromising network cohesion. It's also essential that the implementation process is continuously monitored and re-evaluated, allowing adjustments as necessary and minimizing the risk of instability.

By following these guidelines, Bitcoin's stakeholders can ensure that the network continues to evolve safely and robustly, maintaining user trust and further solidifying its role as one of the most resilient and innovative digital assets in the world. Ultimately, consensus in Bitcoin is not just a technical issue but a reflection of its community and the values it represents: security, decentralization, and resilience.

---

8. Links

Whitepaper: https://github.com/bitcoin-cap/bcap

Youtube (pt-br): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rARycAibl9o&list=PL-qnhF0qlSPkfhorqsREuIu4UTbF0h4zb

@ eac63075:b4988b48

The future of physical money is at stake, and the discussion about DREX, the new digital currency planned by the Central Bank of Brazil, is gaining momentum. In a candid and intense conversation, Federal Deputy Julia Zanatta (PL/SC) discussed the challenges and risks of this digital transition, also addressing her Bill No. 3,341/2024, which aims to prevent the extinction of physical currency. This bill emerges as a direct response to legislative initiatives seeking to replace physical money with digital alternatives, limiting citizens' options and potentially compromising individual freedom. Let's delve into the main points of this conversation.

https://www.fountain.fm/episode/i5YGJ9Ors3PkqAIMvNQ0

(PT-BR version here)

What is a CBDC?

Before discussing the specifics of DREX, it’s important to understand what a CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) is. CBDCs are digital currencies issued by central banks, similar to a digital version of physical money. Unlike cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, which operate in a decentralized manner, CBDCs are centralized and regulated by the government. In other words, they are digital currencies created and controlled by the Central Bank, intended to replace physical currency.

A prominent feature of CBDCs is their programmability. This means that the government can theoretically set rules about how, where, and for what this currency can be used. This aspect enables a level of control over citizens' finances that is impossible with physical money. By programming the currency, the government could limit transactions by setting geographical or usage restrictions. In practice, money within a CBDC could be restricted to specific spending or authorized for use in a defined geographical area.

In countries like China, where citizen actions and attitudes are also monitored, a person considered to have a "low score" due to a moral or ideological violation may have their transactions limited to essential purchases, restricting their digital currency use to non-essential activities. This financial control is strengthened because, unlike physical money, digital currency cannot be exchanged anonymously.

Practical Example: The Case of DREX During the Pandemic

To illustrate how DREX could be used, an example was given by Eric Altafim, director of Banco Itaú. He suggested that, if DREX had existed during the COVID-19 pandemic, the government could have restricted the currency’s use to a 5-kilometer radius around a person’s residence, limiting their economic mobility. Another proposed use by the executive related to the Bolsa Família welfare program: the government could set up programming that only allows this benefit to be used exclusively for food purchases. Although these examples are presented as control measures for safety or organization, they demonstrate how much a CBDC could restrict citizens' freedom of choice.

To illustrate the potential for state control through a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), such as DREX, it is helpful to look at the example of China. In China, the implementation of a CBDC coincides with the country’s Social Credit System, a governmental surveillance tool that assesses citizens' and companies' behavior. Together, these technologies allow the Chinese government to monitor, reward, and, above all, punish behavior deemed inappropriate or threatening to the government.

How Does China's Social Credit System Work?

Implemented in 2014, China's Social Credit System assigns every citizen and company a "score" based on various factors, including financial behavior, criminal record, social interactions, and even online activities. This score determines the benefits or penalties each individual receives and can affect everything from public transport access to obtaining loans and enrolling in elite schools for their children. Citizens with low scores may face various sanctions, including travel restrictions, fines, and difficulty in securing loans.

With the adoption of the CBDC — or “digital yuan” — the Chinese government now has a new tool to closely monitor citizens' financial transactions, facilitating the application of Social Credit System penalties. China’s CBDC is a programmable digital currency, which means that the government can restrict how, when, and where the money can be spent. Through this level of control, digital currency becomes a powerful mechanism for influencing citizens' behavior.

Imagine, for instance, a citizen who repeatedly posts critical remarks about the government on social media or participates in protests. If the Social Credit System assigns this citizen a low score, the Chinese government could, through the CBDC, restrict their money usage in certain areas or sectors. For example, they could be prevented from buying tickets to travel to other regions, prohibited from purchasing certain consumer goods, or even restricted to making transactions only at stores near their home.

Another example of how the government can use the CBDC to enforce the Social Credit System is by monitoring purchases of products such as alcohol or luxury items. If a citizen uses the CBDC to spend more than the government deems reasonable on such products, this could negatively impact their social score, resulting in additional penalties such as future purchase restrictions or a lowered rating that impacts their personal and professional lives.

In China, this kind of control has already been demonstrated in several cases. Citizens added to Social Credit System “blacklists” have seen their spending and investment capacity severely limited. The combination of digital currency and social scores thus creates a sophisticated and invasive surveillance system, through which the Chinese government controls important aspects of citizens’ financial lives and individual freedoms.

Deputy Julia Zanatta views these examples with great concern. She argues that if the state has full control over digital money, citizens will be exposed to a level of economic control and surveillance never seen before. In a democracy, this control poses a risk, but in an authoritarian regime, it could be used as a powerful tool of repression.

DREX and Bill No. 3,341/2024

Julia Zanatta became aware of a bill by a Workers' Party (PT) deputy (Bill 4068/2020 by Deputy Reginaldo Lopes - PT/MG) that proposes the extinction of physical money within five years, aiming for a complete transition to DREX, the digital currency developed by the Central Bank of Brazil. Concerned about the impact of this measure, Julia drafted her bill, PL No. 3,341/2024, which prohibits the elimination of physical money, ensuring citizens the right to choose physical currency.

“The more I read about DREX, the less I want its implementation,” says the deputy. DREX is a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), similar to other state digital currencies worldwide, but which, according to Julia, carries extreme control risks. She points out that with DREX, the State could closely monitor each citizen’s transactions, eliminating anonymity and potentially restricting freedom of choice. This control would lie in the hands of the Central Bank, which could, in a crisis or government change, “freeze balances or even delete funds directly from user accounts.”

Risks and Individual Freedom

Julia raises concerns about potential abuses of power that complete digitalization could allow. In a democracy, state control over personal finances raises serious questions, and EddieOz warns of an even more problematic future. “Today we are in a democracy, but tomorrow, with a government transition, we don't know if this kind of power will be used properly or abused,” he states. In other words, DREX gives the State the ability to restrict or condition the use of money, opening the door to unprecedented financial surveillance.

EddieOz cites Nigeria as an example, where a CBDC was implemented, and the government imposed severe restrictions on the use of physical money to encourage the use of digital currency, leading to protests and clashes in the country. In practice, the poorest and unbanked — those without regular access to banking services — were harshly affected, as without physical money, many cannot conduct basic transactions. Julia highlights that in Brazil, this situation would be even more severe, given the large number of unbanked individuals and the extent of rural areas where access to technology is limited.

The Relationship Between DREX and Pix

The digital transition has already begun with Pix, which revolutionized instant transfers and payments in Brazil. However, Julia points out that Pix, though popular, is a citizen’s choice, while DREX tends to eliminate that choice. The deputy expresses concern about new rules suggested for Pix, such as daily transaction limits of a thousand reais, justified as anti-fraud measures but which, in her view, represent additional control and a profit opportunity for banks. “How many more rules will banks create to profit from us?” asks Julia, noting that DREX could further enhance control over personal finances.

International Precedents and Resistance to CBDC

The deputy also cites examples from other countries resisting the idea of a centralized digital currency. In the United States, states like New Hampshire have passed laws to prevent the advance of CBDCs, and leaders such as Donald Trump have opposed creating a national digital currency. Trump, addressing the topic, uses a justification similar to Julia’s: in a digitalized system, “with one click, your money could disappear.” She agrees with the warning, emphasizing the control risk that a CBDC represents, especially for countries with disadvantaged populations.

Besides the United States, Canada, Colombia, and Australia have also suspended studies on digital currencies, citing the need for further discussions on population impacts. However, in Brazil, the debate on DREX is still limited, with few parliamentarians and political leaders openly discussing the topic. According to Julia, only she and one or two deputies are truly trying to bring this discussion to the Chamber, making DREX’s advance even more concerning.

Bill No. 3,341/2024 and Popular Pressure

For Julia, her bill is a first step. Although she acknowledges that ideally, it would prevent DREX's implementation entirely, PL 3341/2024 is a measure to ensure citizens' choice to use physical money, preserving a form of individual freedom. “If the future means control, I prefer to live in the past,” Julia asserts, reinforcing that the fight for freedom is at the heart of her bill.

However, the deputy emphasizes that none of this will be possible without popular mobilization. According to her, popular pressure is crucial for other deputies to take notice and support PL 3341. “I am only one deputy, and we need the public’s support to raise the project’s visibility,” she explains, encouraging the public to press other parliamentarians and ask them to “pay attention to PL 3341 and the project that prohibits the end of physical money.” The deputy believes that with a strong awareness and pressure movement, it is possible to advance the debate and ensure Brazilians’ financial freedom.

What’s at Stake?

Julia Zanatta leaves no doubt: DREX represents a profound shift in how money will be used and controlled in Brazil. More than a simple modernization of the financial system, the Central Bank’s CBDC sets precedents for an unprecedented level of citizen surveillance and control in the country. For the deputy, this transition needs to be debated broadly and transparently, and it’s up to the Brazilian people to defend their rights and demand that the National Congress discuss these changes responsibly.

The deputy also emphasizes that, regardless of political or partisan views, this issue affects all Brazilians. “This agenda is something that will affect everyone. We need to be united to ensure people understand the gravity of what could happen.” Julia believes that by sharing information and generating open debate, it is possible to prevent Brazil from following the path of countries that have already implemented a digital currency in an authoritarian way.

A Call to Action

The future of physical money in Brazil is at risk. For those who share Deputy Julia Zanatta’s concerns, the time to act is now. Mobilize, get informed, and press your representatives. PL 3341/2024 is an opportunity to ensure that Brazilian citizens have a choice in how to use their money, without excessive state interference or surveillance.

In the end, as the deputy puts it, the central issue is freedom. “My fear is that this project will pass, and people won’t even understand what is happening.” Therefore, may every citizen at least have the chance to understand what’s at stake and make their voice heard in defense of a Brazil where individual freedom and privacy are respected values.

@ 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

@ acbcec47:dd305bec

Prepare starter

• 1 part starter (~30g)
• 2 parts wholemeal rye flour (~60g)
• 2 parts warm water (~60g)

Stir well, then leave to stand warm and covered until the volume has almost doubled.

Once the starter has doubled in volume and a light cap has formed, it can be used for the dough.

Ingredients

• Flour (2/3 550/1100 wheat flour, 1/3 997 rye flour) = 600g
• Water: 60% of the flour quantity = 360g warm water
• Starter: 20% of the flour quantity = 120g starter
• Salt: 3% of the flour = 18g

Put the rest of the starter (about 30g) back in the fridge for the next batch. Knead everything well for 5 minutes, then leave to stand warm and covered.

Fermenting

First fermenting phase in one piece until the volume has almost doubled.

Then divide into portions ...

Shape and leave to rise on the baking tray for 1-2 hours.

Baking

• Preheat oven to 230°C (450°F)
• Just before baking, cut in the top of the rolls with a razor blade, so that they can extend

• Bake for 20 min with steam/cover at 210°C (410°F)
• Then remove the steam/cover and bake another 15-20 min at 180°C (360°F)

Enjoy ...

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Heute möchte ich ein Gedicht mit euch teilen. Es handelt sich um eine Ballade des österreichischen Lyrikers Johann Gabriel Seidl aus dem 19. Jahrhundert. Mir sind diese Worte fest in Erinnerung, da meine Mutter sie perfekt rezitieren konnte, auch als die Kräfte schon langsam schwanden.

Dem originalen Titel «Die Uhr» habe ich für mich immer das Wort «innere» hinzugefügt. Denn der Zeitmesser – hier vermutliche eine Taschenuhr – symbolisiert zwar in dem Kontext das damalige Zeitempfinden und die Umbrüche durch die industrielle Revolution, sozusagen den Zeitgeist und das moderne Leben. Aber der Autor setzt sich philosophisch mit der Zeit auseinander und gibt seinem Werk auch eine klar spirituelle Dimension.

Das Ticken der Uhr und die Momente des Glücks und der Trauer stehen sinnbildlich für das unaufhaltsame Fortschreiten und die Vergänglichkeit des Lebens. Insofern könnte man bei der Uhr auch an eine Sonnenuhr denken. Der Rhythmus der Ereignisse passt uns vielleicht nicht immer in den Kram.

Was den Takt pocht, ist durchaus auch das Herz, unser «inneres Uhrwerk». Wenn dieses Meisterwerk einmal stillsteht, ist es unweigerlich um uns geschehen. Hoffentlich können wir dann dankbar sagen: «Ich habe mein Bestes gegeben.»

Ich trage, wo ich gehe, stets eine Uhr bei mir; \ Wieviel es geschlagen habe, genau seh ich an ihr. \ Es ist ein großer Meister, der künstlich ihr Werk gefügt, \ Wenngleich ihr Gang nicht immer dem törichten Wunsche genügt.

Ich wollte, sie wäre rascher gegangen an manchem Tag; \ Ich wollte, sie hätte manchmal verzögert den raschen Schlag. \ In meinen Leiden und Freuden, in Sturm und in der Ruh, \ Was immer geschah im Leben, sie pochte den Takt dazu.

Sie schlug am Sarge des Vaters, sie schlug an des Freundes Bahr, \ Sie schlug am Morgen der Liebe, sie schlug am Traualtar. \ Sie schlug an der Wiege des Kindes, sie schlägt, will's Gott, noch oft, \ Wenn bessere Tage kommen, wie meine Seele es hofft.

Und ward sie auch einmal träger, und drohte zu stocken ihr Lauf, \ So zog der Meister immer großmütig sie wieder auf. \ Doch stände sie einmal stille, dann wär's um sie geschehn, \ Kein andrer, als der sie fügte, bringt die Zerstörte zum Gehn.

Dann müßt ich zum Meister wandern, der wohnt am Ende wohl weit, \ Wohl draußen, jenseits der Erde, wohl dort in der Ewigkeit! \ Dann gäb ich sie ihm zurücke mit dankbar kindlichem Flehn: \ Sieh, Herr, ich hab nichts verdorben, sie blieb von selber stehn.

Johann Gabriel Seidl (1804-1875)

@ 6ad3e2a3:c90b7740

I’ve occasionally been called cynical because some of the sentiments I express strike people as negative. But cynical, to me, does not strictly mean negative. It means something more along the lines of “faithless” — as in lacking the basic faith humans thrive when believing what they take to be true, rather than expedient, and doing what they think is right rather than narrowly advantageous.

In other words, my primary negative sentiment — that the cynical utilitarian ethos among our educated classes has caused and is likely to cause catastrophic outcomes — stems from a sort of disappointed idealism, not cynicism.

On human nature itself I am anything but cynical. I am convinced the strongest, long-term incentives are always to believe what is true, no matter the cost, and to do what is right. And by “right,” I don’t mean do-gooding bullshit, but things like taking care of one’s health, immediate family and personal responsibilities while pursuing the things one finds most compelling and important.

That aside, I want to touch on two real-world examples of what I take to be actual cynicism. The first is the tendency to invoke principles only when they suit one’s agenda or desired outcome, but not to apply them when they do not. This kind of hypocrisy implies principles are just tools you invoke to gain emotional support for your side and that anyone actually applying them evenhandedly is a naive simpleton who doesn’t know how the game is played.

Twitter threads don’t show up on substack anymore, but I’d encourage you to read this one with respect to objecting to election outcomes. I could have used many others, but this one (probably not even most egregious) illustrates how empty words like “democracy” or “election integrity” are when thrown around by devoted partisans. They don’t actually believe in democracy, only in using the word to evoke the desired emotional response. People who wanted to coerce people to take a Pfizer shot don’t believe in “bodily autonomy.” It’s similarly just a phrase that’s invoked to achieve an end.

The other flavor of cynicism I’ve noticed is less about hypocrisy and more about nihilism:

I’d encourage people to read the entire thread, but if you’re not on Twitter, it’s essentially about whether money (and apparently anything else) has essential qualities, or whether it is whatever peoples’ narratives tell them it is.

In other words, is money whatever your grocer takes for the groceries, or do particular forms of money have qualities wherein they are more likely to be accepted over the long haul? The argument is yes, gold, for example had qualities that made it a better money (scarcity, durability, e.g.) than say seashells which are reasonably durable but not scarce. You could sell the story of seashells as a money (and some societies not close to the sea used them as such), but ultimately such a society would be vulnerable to massive inflation should one of its inhabitants ever stroll along a shore.

The thread morphed into whether everything is just narrative, or there is an underlying reality to which a narrative must correspond in order for it to be useful and true.

The notion that anything could be money if attached to the right story, or any music is good if it’s marketed properly is deeply cynical. I am not arguing people can’t be convinced to buy bad records — clearly they can — but that no matter how much you market it, it will not stand the test of time unless it is in fact good.

In order to sell something that does not add value, meaning or utility to someone’s life, something you suspect they are likely to regret buying in short order, it’s awfully useful to convince yourself that nothing has inherent meaning or value, that “storytelling is all that matters.”

I am not against marketing per se, and effective storytelling might in fact point someone in the right direction — a good story can help someone discover a truth. But that storytelling is everything, and by implication the extent to which a story has correlates in reality nothing, is the ethos of scammers, the refuge of nihilists who left someone else holding the bag and prefer not to think about it.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Falls du beim Lesen des Titels dieses Newsletters unwillkürlich an positive Neuigkeiten aus dem globalen polit-medialen Irrenhaus oder gar aus dem wirtschaftlichen Umfeld gedacht hast, darf ich dich beglückwünschen. Diese Assoziation ist sehr löblich, denn sie weist dich als unverbesserlichen Optimisten aus. Leider muss ich dich diesbezüglich aber enttäuschen. Es geht hier um ein anderes Thema, allerdings sehr wohl ein positives, wie ich finde.

Heute ist ein ganz besonderer Tag: die Wintersonnenwende. Genau gesagt hat heute morgen um 10:20 Uhr Mitteleuropäischer Zeit (MEZ) auf der Nordhalbkugel unseres Planeten der astronomische Winter begonnen. Was daran so außergewöhnlich ist? Der kürzeste Tag des Jahres war gestern, seit heute werden die Tage bereits wieder länger! Wir werden also jetzt jeden Tag ein wenig mehr Licht haben.

Für mich ist dieses Ereignis immer wieder etwas kurios: Es beginnt der Winter, aber die Tage werden länger. Das erscheint mir zunächst wie ein Widerspruch, denn meine spontanen Assoziationen zum Winter sind doch eher Kälte und Dunkelheit, relativ zumindest. Umso erfreulicher ist der emotionale Effekt, wenn dann langsam die Erkenntnis durchsickert: Ab jetzt wird es schon wieder heller!

Natürlich ist es kalt im Winter, mancherorts mehr als anderswo. Vielleicht jedoch nicht mehr lange, wenn man den Klimahysterikern glauben wollte. Mindestens letztes Jahr hat Väterchen Frost allerdings gleich zu Beginn seiner Saison – und passenderweise während des globalen Überhitzungsgipfels in Dubai – nochmal richtig mit der Faust auf den Tisch gehauen. Schnee- und Eischaos sind ja eigentlich in der Agenda bereits nicht mehr vorgesehen. Deswegen war man in Deutschland vermutlich in vorauseilendem Gehorsam schon nicht mehr darauf vorbereitet und wurde glatt lahmgelegt.

Aber ich schweife ab. Die Aussicht auf nach und nach mehr Licht und damit auch Wärme stimmt mich froh. Den Zusammenhang zwischen beidem merkt man in Andalusien sehr deutlich. Hier, wo die Häuser im Winter arg auskühlen, geht man zum Aufwärmen raus auf die Straße oder auf den Balkon. Die Sonne hat auch im Winter eine erfreuliche Kraft. Und da ist jede Minute Gold wert.

Außerdem ist mir vor Jahren so richtig klar geworden, warum mir das südliche Klima so sehr gefällt. Das liegt nämlich nicht nur an der Sonne als solcher, oder der Wärme – das liegt vor allem am Licht. Ohne Licht keine Farben, das ist der ebenso simple wie gewaltige Unterschied zwischen einem deprimierenden matschgraubraunen Winter und einem fröhlichen bunten. Ein großes Stück Lebensqualität.

Mir gefällt aber auch die Symbolik dieses Tages: Licht aus der Dunkelheit, ein Wendepunkt, ein Neuanfang, neue Möglichkeiten, Übergang zu neuer Aktivität. In der winterlichen Stille keimt bereits neue Lebendigkeit. Und zwar in einem Zyklus, das wird immer wieder so geschehen. Ich nehme das gern als ein Stück Motivation, es macht mir Hoffnung und gibt mir Energie.

Übrigens ist parallel am heutigen Tag auf der südlichen Halbkugel Sommeranfang. Genau im entgegengesetzten Rhythmus, sich ergänzend, wie Yin und Yang. Das alles liegt an der Schrägstellung der Erdachse, die ist nämlich um 23,4º zur Umlaufbahn um die Sonne geneigt. Wir erinnern uns, gell?

Insofern bleibt eindeutig festzuhalten, dass “schräg sein” ein willkommener, wichtiger und positiver Wert ist. Mit anderen Worten: auch ungewöhnlich, eigenartig, untypisch, wunderlich, kauzig, … ja sogar irre, spinnert oder gar “quer” ist in Ordnung. Das schließt das Denken mit ein.

In diesem Sinne wünsche ich euch allen urige Weihnachtstage!

---

Dieser Beitrag ist letztes Jahr in meiner Denkbar erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Das Betriebsklima ist das einzige Klima, \ das du selbst bestimmen kannst. \ Anonym

Eine Strategie zur Anpassung an den Klimawandel hat das deutsche Bundeskabinett diese Woche beschlossen. Da «Wetterextreme wie die immer häufiger auftretenden Hitzewellen und Starkregenereignisse» oft desaströse Auswirkungen auf Mensch und Umwelt hätten, werde eine Anpassung an die Folgen des Klimawandels immer wichtiger. «Klimaanpassungsstrategie» nennt die Regierung das.

Für die «Vorsorge vor Klimafolgen» habe man nun erstmals klare Ziele und messbare Kennzahlen festgelegt. So sei der Erfolg überprüfbar, und das solle zu einer schnelleren Bewältigung der Folgen führen. Dass sich hinter dem Begriff Klimafolgen nicht Folgen des Klimas, sondern wohl «Folgen der globalen Erwärmung» verbergen, erklärt den Interessierten die Wikipedia. Dabei ist das mit der Erwärmung ja bekanntermaßen so eine Sache.

Die Zunahme schwerer Unwetterereignisse habe gezeigt, so das Ministerium, wie wichtig eine frühzeitige und effektive Warnung der Bevölkerung sei. Daher solle es eine deutliche Anhebung der Nutzerzahlen der sogenannten Nina-Warn-App geben.

Die ARD spurt wie gewohnt und setzt die Botschaft zielsicher um. Der Artikel beginnt folgendermaßen:

«Die Flut im Ahrtal war ein Schock für das ganze Land. Um künftig besser gegen Extremwetter gewappnet zu sein, hat die Bundesregierung eine neue Strategie zur Klimaanpassung beschlossen. Die Warn-App Nina spielt eine zentrale Rolle. Der Bund will die Menschen in Deutschland besser vor Extremwetter-Ereignissen warnen und dafür die Reichweite der Warn-App Nina deutlich erhöhen.»

Die Kommunen würden bei ihren «Klimaanpassungsmaßnahmen» vom Zentrum KlimaAnpassung unterstützt, schreibt das Umweltministerium. Mit dessen Aufbau wurden das Deutsche Institut für Urbanistik gGmbH, welches sich stark für Smart City-Projekte engagiert, und die Adelphi Consult GmbH beauftragt.

Adelphi beschreibt sich selbst als «Europas führender Think-and-Do-Tank und eine unabhängige Beratung für Klima, Umwelt und Entwicklung». Sie seien «global vernetzte Strateg*innen und weltverbessernde Berater*innen» und als «Vorreiter der sozial-ökologischen Transformation» sei man mit dem Deutschen Nachhaltigkeitspreis ausgezeichnet worden, welcher sich an den Zielen der Agenda 2030 orientiere.

Über die Warn-App mit dem niedlichen Namen Nina, die möglichst jeder auf seinem Smartphone installieren soll, informiert das Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz und Katastrophenhilfe (BBK). Gewarnt wird nicht nur vor Extrem-Wetterereignissen, sondern zum Beispiel auch vor Waffengewalt und Angriffen, Strom- und anderen Versorgungsausfällen oder Krankheitserregern. Wenn man die Kategorie Gefahreninformation wählt, erhält man eine Dosis von ungefähr zwei Benachrichtigungen pro Woche.

Beim BBK erfahren wir auch einiges über die empfohlenen Systemeinstellungen für Nina. Der Benutzer möge zum Beispiel den Zugriff auf die Standortdaten «immer zulassen», und zwar mit aktivierter Funktion «genauen Standort verwenden». Die Datennutzung solle unbeschränkt sein, auch im Hintergrund. Außerdem sei die uneingeschränkte Akkunutzung zu aktivieren, der Energiesparmodus auszuschalten und das Stoppen der App-Aktivität bei Nichtnutzung zu unterbinden.

Dass man so dramatische Ereignisse wie damals im Ahrtal auch anders bewerten kann als Regierungen und Systemmedien, hat meine Kollegin Wiltrud Schwetje anhand der Tragödie im spanischen Valencia gezeigt. Das Stichwort «Agenda 2030» taucht dabei in einem Kontext auf, der wenig mit Nachhaltigkeitspreisen zu tun hat.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Die Ungerechtigkeit ist uns nur in dem Falle angenehm,\ dass wir Vorteile aus ihr ziehen;\ in jedem andern hegt man den Wunsch,\ dass der Unschuldige in Schutz genommen werde.\ Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Politiker beteuern jederzeit, nur das Beste für die Bevölkerung zu wollen – nicht von ihr. Auch die zahlreichen unsäglichen «Corona-Maßnahmen» waren angeblich zu unserem Schutz notwendig, vor allem wegen der «besonders vulnerablen Personen». Daher mussten alle möglichen Restriktionen zwangsweise und unter Umgehung der Parlamente verordnet werden.

Inzwischen hat sich immer deutlicher herausgestellt, dass viele jener «Schutzmaßnahmen» den gegenteiligen Effekt hatten, sie haben den Menschen und den Gesellschaften enorm geschadet. Nicht nur haben die experimentellen Geninjektionen – wie erwartet – massive Nebenwirkungen, sondern Maskentragen schadet der Psyche und der Entwicklung (nicht nur unserer Kinder) und «Lockdowns und Zensur haben Menschen getötet».

Eine der wichtigsten Waffen unserer «Beschützer» ist die Spaltung der Gesellschaft. Die tiefen Gräben, die Politiker, Lobbyisten und Leitmedien praktisch weltweit ausgehoben haben, funktionieren leider nahezu in Perfektion. Von ihren persönlichen Erfahrungen als Kritikerin der Maßnahmen berichtete kürzlich eine Schweizerin im Interview mit Transition News. Sie sei schwer enttäuscht und verspüre bis heute eine Hemmschwelle und ein seltsames Unwohlsein im Umgang mit «Geimpften».

Menschen, die aufrichtig andere schützen wollten, werden von einer eindeutig politischen Justiz verfolgt, verhaftet und angeklagt. Dazu zählen viele Ärzte, darunter Heinrich Habig, Bianca Witzschel und Walter Weber. Über den aktuell laufenden Prozess gegen Dr. Weber hat Transition News mehrfach berichtet (z.B. hier und hier). Auch der Selbstschutz durch Verweigerung der Zwangs-Covid-«Impfung» bewahrt nicht vor dem Knast, wie Bundeswehrsoldaten wie Alexander Bittner erfahren mussten.

Die eigentlich Kriminellen schützen sich derweil erfolgreich selber, nämlich vor der Verantwortung. Die «Impf»-Kampagne war «das größte Verbrechen gegen die Menschheit». Trotzdem stellt man sich in den USA gerade die Frage, ob der scheidende Präsident Joe Biden nach seinem Sohn Hunter möglicherweise auch Anthony Fauci begnadigen wird – in diesem Fall sogar präventiv. Gibt es überhaupt noch einen Rest Glaubwürdigkeit, den Biden verspielen könnte?

Der Gedanke, den ehemaligen wissenschaftlichen Chefberater des US-Präsidenten und Direktor des National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) vorsorglich mit einem Schutzschild zu versehen, dürfte mit der vergangenen Präsidentschaftswahl zu tun haben. Gleich mehrere Personalentscheidungen des designierten Präsidenten Donald Trump lassen Leute wie Fauci erneut in den Fokus rücken.

Das Buch «The Real Anthony Fauci» des nominierten US-Gesundheitsministers Robert F. Kennedy Jr. erschien 2021 und dreht sich um die Machenschaften der Pharma-Lobby in der öffentlichen Gesundheit. Das Vorwort zur rumänischen Ausgabe des Buches schrieb übrigens Călin Georgescu, der Überraschungssieger der ersten Wahlrunde der aktuellen Präsidentschaftswahlen in Rumänien. Vielleicht erklärt diese Verbindung einen Teil der Panik im Wertewesten.

In Rumänien selber gab es gerade einen Paukenschlag: Das bisherige Ergebnis wurde heute durch das Verfassungsgericht annuliert und die für Sonntag angesetzte Stichwahl kurzfristig abgesagt – wegen angeblicher «aggressiver russischer Einmischung». Thomas Oysmüller merkt dazu an, damit sei jetzt in der EU das Tabu gebrochen, Wahlen zu verbieten, bevor sie etwas ändern können.

Unsere Empörung angesichts der Historie von Maßnahmen, die die Falschen beschützen und für die meisten von Nachteil sind, müsste enorm sein. Die Frage ist, was wir damit machen. Wir sollten nach vorne schauen und unsere Energie clever einsetzen. Abgesehen von der Umgehung von jeglichem «Schutz vor Desinformation und Hassrede» (sprich: Zensur) wird es unsere wichtigste Aufgabe sein, Gräben zu überwinden.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Konsum ist Therapie.
Wolfgang Joop

Umweltbewusstes Verhalten und verantwortungsvoller Konsum zeugen durchaus von einer wünschenswerten Einstellung. Ob man deswegen allerdings einen grünen statt eines schwarzen Freitags braucht, darf getrost bezweifelt werden – zumal es sich um manipulatorische Konzepte handelt. Wie in der politischen Landschaft sind auch hier die Etiketten irgendwas zwischen nichtssagend und trügerisch.

Heute ist also wieder mal «Black Friday», falls Sie es noch nicht mitbekommen haben sollten. Eigentlich haben wir ja eher schon eine ganze «Black Week», der dann oft auch noch ein «Cyber Monday» folgt. Die Werbebranche wird nicht müde, immer neue Anlässe zu erfinden oder zu importieren, um uns zum Konsumieren zu bewegen. Und sie ist damit sehr erfolgreich.

Warum fallen wir auf derartige Werbetricks herein und kaufen im Zweifelsfall Dinge oder Mengen, die wir sicher nicht brauchen? Pure Psychologie, würde ich sagen. Rabattschilder triggern etwas in uns, was den Verstand in Stand-by versetzt. Zusätzlich beeinflussen uns alle möglichen emotionalen Reize und animieren uns zum Schnäppchenkauf.

Gedankenlosigkeit und Maßlosigkeit können besonders bei der Ernährung zu ernsten Problemen führen. Erst kürzlich hat mir ein Bekannter nach einer USA-Reise erzählt, dass es dort offenbar nicht unüblich ist, schon zum ausgiebigen Frühstück in einem Restaurant wenigstens einen Liter Cola zu trinken. Gerne auch mehr, um das Gratis-Nachfüllen des Bechers auszunutzen.

Kritik am schwarzen Freitag und dem unnötigen Konsum kommt oft von Umweltschützern. Neben Ressourcenverschwendung, hohem Energieverbrauch und wachsenden Müllbergen durch eine zunehmende Wegwerfmentalität kommt dabei in der Regel auch die «Klimakrise» auf den Tisch.

Die EU-Kommission lancierte 2015 den Begriff «Green Friday» im Kontext der überarbeiteten Rechtsvorschriften zur Kennzeichnung der Energieeffizienz von Elektrogeräten. Sie nutzte die Gelegenheit kurz vor dem damaligen schwarzen Freitag und vor der UN-Klimakonferenz COP21, bei der das Pariser Abkommen unterzeichnet werden sollte.

Heute wird ein grüner Freitag oft im Zusammenhang mit der Forderung nach «nachhaltigem Konsum» benutzt. Derweil ist die Europäische Union schon weit in ihr Geschäftsmodell des «Green New Deal» verstrickt. In ihrer Propaganda zum Klimawandel verspricht sie tatsächlich «Unterstützung der Menschen und Regionen, die von immer häufigeren Extremwetter-Ereignissen betroffen sind». Was wohl die Menschen in der Region um Valencia dazu sagen?

Ganz im Sinne des Great Reset propagierten die Vereinten Nationen seit Ende 2020 eine «grüne Erholung von Covid-19, um den Klimawandel zu verlangsamen». Der UN-Umweltbericht sah in dem Jahr einen Schwerpunkt auf dem Verbraucherverhalten. Änderungen des Konsumverhaltens des Einzelnen könnten dazu beitragen, den Klimaschutz zu stärken, hieß es dort.

Der Begriff «Schwarzer Freitag» wurde in den USA nicht erstmals für Einkäufe nach Thanksgiving verwendet – wie oft angenommen –, sondern für eine Finanzkrise. Jedoch nicht für den Börsencrash von 1929, sondern bereits für den Zusammenbruch des US-Goldmarktes im September 1869. Seitdem mussten die Menschen weltweit so einige schwarze Tage erleben.

Kürzlich sind die britischen Aufsichtsbehörden weiter von ihrer Zurückhaltung nach dem letzten großen Finanzcrash von 2008 abgerückt. Sie haben Regeln für den Bankensektor gelockert, womit sie «verantwortungsvolle Risikobereitschaft» unterstützen wollen. Man würde sicher zu schwarz sehen, wenn man hier ein grünes Wunder befürchten würde.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

O que é Cwtch? Cwtch (/kʊtʃ/ - uma palavra galesa que pode ser traduzida aproximadamente como “um abraço que cria um lugar seguro”) é um protocolo de mensagens multipartidário descentralizado, que preserva a privacidade, que pode ser usado para construir aplicativos resistentes a metadados.

Como posso pronunciar Cwtch? Como "kutch", para rimar com "butch".

Descentralizado e Aberto : Não existe “serviço Cwtch” ou “rede Cwtch”. Os participantes do Cwtch podem hospedar seus próprios espaços seguros ou emprestar sua infraestrutura para outras pessoas que buscam um espaço seguro. O protocolo Cwtch é aberto e qualquer pessoa é livre para criar bots, serviços e interfaces de usuário e integrar e interagir com o Cwtch.

Preservação de privacidade : toda a comunicação no Cwtch é criptografada de ponta a ponta e ocorre nos serviços cebola Tor v3.

Resistente a metadados : O Cwtch foi projetado de forma que nenhuma informação seja trocada ou disponibilizada a ninguém sem seu consentimento explícito, incluindo mensagens durante a transmissão e metadados de protocolo

Uma breve história do bate-papo resistente a metadados Nos últimos anos, a conscientização pública sobre a necessidade e os benefícios das soluções criptografadas de ponta a ponta aumentou com aplicativos como Signal , Whatsapp e Wire. que agora fornecem aos usuários comunicações seguras.

No entanto, essas ferramentas exigem vários níveis de exposição de metadados para funcionar, e muitos desses metadados podem ser usados ​​para obter detalhes sobre como e por que uma pessoa está usando uma ferramenta para se comunicar.

Uma ferramenta que buscou reduzir metadados é o Ricochet lançado pela primeira vez em 2014. Ricochet usou os serviços cebola Tor v2 para fornecer comunicação criptografada segura de ponta a ponta e para proteger os metadados das comunicações.

Não havia servidores centralizados que auxiliassem no roteamento das conversas do Ricochet. Ninguém além das partes envolvidas em uma conversa poderia saber que tal conversa está ocorrendo.

Ricochet tinha limitações; não havia suporte para vários dispositivos, nem existe um mecanismo para suportar a comunicação em grupo ou para um usuário enviar mensagens enquanto um contato está offline.

Isto tornou a adoção do Ricochet uma proposta difícil; mesmo aqueles em ambientes que seriam melhor atendidos pela resistência aos metadados, sem saber que ela existe.

Além disso, qualquer solução para comunicação descentralizada e resistente a metadados enfrenta problemas fundamentais quando se trata de eficiência, privacidade e segurança de grupo conforme definido pelo consenso e consistência da transcrição.

Alternativas modernas ao Ricochet incluem Briar , Zbay e Ricochet Refresh - cada ferramenta procura otimizar para um conjunto diferente de compensações, por exemplo, Briar procura permitir que as pessoas se comuniquem mesmo quando a infraestrutura de rede subjacente está inoperante, ao mesmo tempo que fornece resistência à vigilância de metadados.

O projeto Cwtch começou em 2017 como um protocolo de extensão para Ricochet, fornecendo conversas em grupo por meio de servidores não confiáveis, com o objetivo de permitir aplicativos descentralizados e resistentes a metadados como listas compartilhadas e quadros de avisos.

Uma versão alfa do Cwtch foi lançada em fevereiro de 2019 e, desde então, a equipe do Cwtch dirigida pela OPEN PRIVACY RESEARCH SOCIETY conduziu pesquisa e desenvolvimento em cwtch e nos protocolos, bibliotecas e espaços de problemas subjacentes.

Modelo de Risco.

Sabe-se que os metadados de comunicações são explorados por vários adversários para minar a segurança dos sistemas, para rastrear vítimas e para realizar análises de redes sociais em grande escala para alimentar a vigilância em massa. As ferramentas resistentes a metadados estão em sua infância e faltam pesquisas sobre a construção e a experiência do usuário de tais ferramentas.

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_9475702740746681051707662826.webp

O Cwtch foi originalmente concebido como uma extensão do protocolo Ricochet resistente a metadados para suportar comunicações assíncronas de grupos multiponto por meio do uso de infraestrutura anônima, descartável e não confiável.

Desde então, o Cwtch evoluiu para um protocolo próprio. Esta seção descreverá os vários riscos conhecidos que o Cwtch tenta mitigar e será fortemente referenciado no restante do documento ao discutir os vários subcomponentes da Arquitetura Cwtch.

Modelo de ameaça.

É importante identificar e compreender que os metadados são omnipresentes nos protocolos de comunicação; é de facto necessário que tais protocolos funcionem de forma eficiente e em escala. No entanto, as informações que são úteis para facilitar peers e servidores também são altamente relevantes para adversários que desejam explorar tais informações.

Para a definição do nosso problema, assumiremos que o conteúdo de uma comunicação é criptografado de tal forma que um adversário é praticamente incapaz de quebrá-lo veja tapir e cwtch para detalhes sobre a criptografia que usamos, e como tal nos concentraremos em o contexto para os metadados de comunicação.

Procuramos proteger os seguintes contextos de comunicação:

• Quem está envolvido em uma comunicação? Pode ser possível identificar pessoas ou simplesmente identificadores de dispositivos ou redes. Por exemplo, “esta comunicação envolve Alice, uma jornalista, e Bob, um funcionário público”.

• Onde estão os participantes da conversa? Por exemplo, “durante esta comunicação, Alice estava na França e Bob estava no Canadá”.

• Quando ocorreu uma conversa? O momento e a duração da comunicação podem revelar muito sobre a natureza de uma chamada, por exemplo, “Bob, um funcionário público, conversou com Alice ao telefone por uma hora ontem à noite. Esta é a primeira vez que eles se comunicam.” *Como a conversa foi mediada? O fato de uma conversa ter ocorrido por meio de um e-mail criptografado ou não criptografado pode fornecer informações úteis. Por exemplo, “Alice enviou um e-mail criptografado para Bob ontem, enquanto eles normalmente enviam apenas e-mails de texto simples um para o outro”.

• Sobre o que é a conversa? Mesmo que o conteúdo da comunicação seja criptografado, às vezes é possível derivar um contexto provável de uma conversa sem saber exatamente o que é dito, por exemplo, “uma pessoa ligou para uma pizzaria na hora do jantar” ou “alguém ligou para um número conhecido de linha direta de suicídio na hora do jantar”. 3 horas da manhã."

Além das conversas individuais, também procuramos defender-nos contra ataques de correlação de contexto, através dos quais múltiplas conversas são analisadas para obter informações de nível superior:

• Relacionamentos: Descobrir relações sociais entre um par de entidades analisando a frequência e a duração de suas comunicações durante um período de tempo. Por exemplo, Carol e Eve ligam uma para a outra todos os dias durante várias horas seguidas.

• Cliques: Descobrir relações sociais entre um grupo de entidades que interagem entre si. Por exemplo, Alice, Bob e Eva se comunicam entre si.

• Grupos vagamente conectados e indivíduos-ponte: descobrir grupos que se comunicam entre si através de intermediários, analisando cadeias de comunicação (por exemplo, toda vez que Alice fala com Bob, ela fala com Carol quase imediatamente depois; Bob e Carol nunca se comunicam).

• Padrão de Vida: Descobrir quais comunicações são cíclicas e previsíveis. Por exemplo, Alice liga para Eve toda segunda-feira à noite por cerca de uma hora. Ataques Ativos

Ataques de deturpação.

O Cwtch não fornece registro global de nomes de exibição e, como tal, as pessoas que usam o Cwtch são mais vulneráveis ​​a ataques baseados em declarações falsas, ou seja, pessoas que fingem ser outras pessoas:

O fluxo básico de um desses ataques é o seguinte, embora também existam outros fluxos:

•Alice tem um amigo chamado Bob e outro chamado Eve

• Eve descobre que Alice tem um amigo chamado Bob

• Eve cria milhares de novas contas para encontrar uma que tenha uma imagem/chave pública semelhante à de Bob (não será idêntica, mas pode enganar alguém por alguns minutos)

• Eve chama essa nova conta de "Eve New Account" e adiciona Alice como amiga.

• Eve então muda seu nome em "Eve New Account" para "Bob"

• Alice envia mensagens destinadas a "Bob" para a conta falsa de Bob de Eve Como os ataques de declarações falsas são inerentemente uma questão de confiança e verificação, a única maneira absoluta de evitá-los é os usuários validarem absolutamente a chave pública. Obviamente, isso não é o ideal e, em muitos casos, simplesmente não acontecerá .

Como tal, pretendemos fornecer algumas dicas de experiência do usuário na interface do usuário para orientar as pessoas na tomada de decisões sobre confiar em contas e/ou distinguir contas que possam estar tentando se representar como outros usuários.

Uma nota sobre ataques físicos A Cwtch não considera ataques que exijam acesso físico (ou equivalente) à máquina do usuário como praticamente defensáveis. No entanto, no interesse de uma boa engenharia de segurança, ao longo deste documento ainda nos referiremos a ataques ou condições que exigem tal privilégio e indicaremos onde quaisquer mitigações que implementámos falharão.

Um perfil Cwtch.

Os usuários podem criar um ou mais perfis Cwtch. Cada perfil gera um par de chaves ed25519 aleatório compatível com Tor.

Além do material criptográfico, um perfil também contém uma lista de Contatos (outras chaves públicas do perfil Cwtch + dados associados sobre esse perfil, como apelido e (opcionalmente) mensagens históricas), uma lista de Grupos (contendo o material criptográfico do grupo, além de outros dados associados, como apelido do grupo e mensagens históricas).

Conversões entre duas partes: ponto a ponto

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_2186338207587396891707662879.webp

Para que duas partes participem de uma conversa ponto a ponto, ambas devem estar on-line, mas apenas uma precisa estar acessível por meio do serviço Onion. Por uma questão de clareza, muitas vezes rotulamos uma parte como “ponto de entrada” (aquele que hospeda o serviço cebola) e a outra parte como “ponto de saída” (aquele que se conecta ao serviço cebola).

Após a conexão, ambas as partes adotam um protocolo de autenticação que:

• Afirma que cada parte tem acesso à chave privada associada à sua identidade pública.

• Gera uma chave de sessão efêmera usada para criptografar todas as comunicações futuras durante a sessão.

Esta troca (documentada com mais detalhes no protocolo de autenticação ) é negável offline , ou seja, é possível para qualquer parte falsificar transcrições desta troca de protocolo após o fato e, como tal - após o fato - é impossível provar definitivamente que a troca aconteceu de forma alguma.

Após o protocolo de autenticação, as duas partes podem trocar mensagens livremente.

Conversas em Grupo e Comunicação Ponto a Servidor

Ao iniciar uma conversa em grupo, é gerada uma chave aleatória para o grupo, conhecida como Group Key. Todas as comunicações do grupo são criptografadas usando esta chave. Além disso, o criador do grupo escolhe um servidor Cwtch para hospedar o grupo. Um convite é gerado, incluindo o Group Key, o servidor do grupo e a chave do grupo, para ser enviado aos potenciais membros.

Para enviar uma mensagem ao grupo, um perfil se conecta ao servidor do grupo e criptografa a mensagem usando a Group Key, gerando também uma assinatura sobre o Group ID, o servidor do grupo e a mensagem. Para receber mensagens do grupo, um perfil se conecta ao servidor e baixa as mensagens, tentando descriptografá-las usando a Group Key e verificando a assinatura.

Detalhamento do Ecossistema de Componentes

O Cwtch é composto por várias bibliotecas de componentes menores, cada uma desempenhando um papel específico. Algumas dessas bibliotecas incluem:

• abertoprivacidade/conectividade: Abstração de rede ACN, atualmente suportando apenas Tor.
• cwtch.im/tapir: Biblioteca para construção de aplicativos p2p em sistemas de comunicação anônimos.
• cwtch.im/cwtch: Biblioteca principal para implementação do protocolo/sistema Cwtch.
• cwtch.im/libcwtch-go: Fornece ligações C para Cwtch para uso em implementações de UI.

TAPIR: Uma Visão Detalhada

Projetado para substituir os antigos canais de ricochete baseados em protobuf, o Tapir fornece uma estrutura para a construção de aplicativos anônimos.

Está dividido em várias camadas:

• Identidade - Um par de chaves ed25519, necessário para estabelecer um serviço cebola Tor v3 e usado para manter uma identidade criptográfica consistente para um par.

• Conexões – O protocolo de rede bruto que conecta dois pares. Até agora, as conexões são definidas apenas através do Tor v3 Onion Services.

• Aplicativos - As diversas lógicas que permitem um determinado fluxo de informações em uma conexão. Os exemplos incluem transcrições criptográficas compartilhadas, autenticação, proteção contra spam e serviços baseados em tokens. Os aplicativos fornecem recursos que podem ser referenciados por outros aplicativos para determinar se um determinado peer tem a capacidade de usar um determinado aplicativo hospedado.

• Pilhas de aplicativos - Um mecanismo para conectar mais de um aplicativo, por exemplo, a autenticação depende de uma transcrição criptográfica compartilhada e o aplicativo peer cwtch principal é baseado no aplicativo de autenticação.

Identidade.

Um par de chaves ed25519, necessário para estabelecer um serviço cebola Tor v3 e usado para manter uma identidade criptográfica consistente para um peer.

InitializeIdentity - de um par de chaves conhecido e persistente:i,I

InitializeEphemeralIdentity - de um par de chaves aleatório: ie,Ie

Aplicativos de transcrição.

Inicializa uma transcrição criptográfica baseada em Merlin que pode ser usada como base de protocolos baseados em compromisso de nível superior

O aplicativo de transcrição entrará em pânico se um aplicativo tentar substituir uma transcrição existente por uma nova (aplicando a regra de que uma sessão é baseada em uma e apenas uma transcrição).

Merlin é uma construção de transcrição baseada em STROBE para provas de conhecimento zero. Ele automatiza a transformação Fiat-Shamir, para que, usando Merlin, protocolos não interativos possam ser implementados como se fossem interativos.

Isto é significativamente mais fácil e menos sujeito a erros do que realizar a transformação manualmente e, além disso, também fornece suporte natural para:

• protocolos multi-round com fases alternadas de commit e desafio;

• separação natural de domínios, garantindo que os desafios estejam vinculados às afirmações a serem provadas;

• enquadramento automático de mensagens, evitando codificação ambígua de dados de compromisso;

• e composição do protocolo, usando uma transcrição comum para vários protocolos.

Finalmente, o Merlin também fornece um gerador de números aleatórios baseado em transcrição como defesa profunda contra ataques de entropia ruim (como reutilização de nonce ou preconceito em muitas provas). Este RNG fornece aleatoriedade sintética derivada de toda a transcrição pública, bem como dos dados da testemunha do provador e uma entrada auxiliar de um RNG externo.

Conectividade Cwtch faz uso do Tor Onion Services (v3) para todas as comunicações entre nós.

Fornecemos o pacote openprivacy/connectivity para gerenciar o daemon Tor e configurar e desmontar serviços cebola através do Tor.

Criptografia e armazenamento de perfil.

Os perfis são armazenados localmente no disco e criptografados usando uma chave derivada de uma senha conhecida pelo usuário (via pbkdf2).

Observe que, uma vez criptografado e armazenado em disco, a única maneira de recuperar um perfil é recuperando a senha - como tal, não é possível fornecer uma lista completa de perfis aos quais um usuário pode ter acesso até inserir uma senha.

Perfis não criptografados e a senha padrão Para lidar com perfis "não criptografados" (ou seja, que não exigem senha para serem abertos), atualmente criamos um perfil com uma senha codificada de fato .

Isso não é o ideal, preferiríamos confiar no material de chave fornecido pelo sistema operacional, de modo que o perfil fosse vinculado a um dispositivo específico, mas esses recursos são atualmente uma colcha de retalhos - também notamos, ao criar um perfil não criptografado, pessoas que usam Cwtch estão explicitamente optando pelo risco de que alguém com acesso ao sistema de arquivos possa descriptografar seu perfil.

Vulnerabilidades Relacionadas a Imagens e Entrada de Dados

Imagens Maliciosas

O Cwtch enfrenta desafios na renderização de imagens, com o Flutter utilizando Skia, embora o código subjacente não seja totalmente seguro para a memória.

Realizamos testes de fuzzing nos componentes Cwtch e encontramos um bug de travamento causado por um arquivo GIF malformado, levando a falhas no kernel. Para mitigar isso, adotamos a política de sempre habilitar cacheWidth e/ou cacheHeight máximo para widgets de imagem.

Identificamos o risco de imagens maliciosas serem renderizadas de forma diferente em diferentes plataformas, como evidenciado por um bug no analisador PNG da Apple.

Riscos de Entrada de Dados

Um risco significativo é a interceptação de conteúdo ou metadados por meio de um Input Method Editor (IME) em dispositivos móveis. Mesmo aplicativos IME padrão podem expor dados por meio de sincronização na nuvem, tradução online ou dicionários pessoais.

Implementamos medidas de mitigação, como enableIMEPersonalizedLearning: false no Cwtch 1.2, mas a solução completa requer ações em nível de sistema operacional e é um desafio contínuo para a segurança móvel.

Servidor Cwtch.

O objetivo do protocolo Cwtch é permitir a comunicação em grupo através de infraestrutura não confiável .

Ao contrário dos esquemas baseados em retransmissão, onde os grupos atribuem um líder, um conjunto de líderes ou um servidor confiável de terceiros para garantir que cada membro do grupo possa enviar e receber mensagens em tempo hábil (mesmo que os membros estejam offline) - infraestrutura não confiável tem o objetivo de realizar essas propriedades sem a suposição de confiança.

O artigo original do Cwtch definia um conjunto de propriedades que se esperava que os servidores Cwtch fornecessem:

• O Cwtch Server pode ser usado por vários grupos ou apenas um.

• Um servidor Cwtch, sem a colaboração de um membro do grupo, nunca deve aprender a identidade dos participantes de um grupo.

• Um servidor Cwtch nunca deve aprender o conteúdo de qualquer comunicação.

• Um servidor Cwtch nunca deve ser capaz de distinguir mensagens como pertencentes a um grupo específico. Observamos aqui que essas propriedades são um superconjunto dos objetivos de design das estruturas de Recuperação de Informações Privadas.

Melhorias na Eficiência e Segurança

Eficiência do Protocolo

Atualmente, apenas um protocolo conhecido, o PIR ingênuo, atende às propriedades desejadas para garantir a privacidade na comunicação do grupo Cwtch. Este método tem um impacto direto na eficiência da largura de banda, especialmente para usuários em dispositivos móveis. Em resposta a isso, estamos ativamente desenvolvendo novos protocolos que permitem negociar garantias de privacidade e eficiência de maneiras diversas.

Os servidores, no momento desta escrita, permitem o download completo de todas as mensagens armazenadas, bem como uma solicitação para baixar mensagens específicas a partir de uma determinada mensagem. Quando os pares ingressam em um grupo em um novo servidor, eles baixam todas as mensagens do servidor inicialmente e, posteriormente, apenas as mensagens novas.

Mitigação de Análise de Metadados

Essa abordagem permite uma análise moderada de metadados, pois o servidor pode enviar novas mensagens para cada perfil suspeito exclusivo e usar essas assinaturas de mensagens exclusivas para rastrear sessões ao longo do tempo. Essa preocupação é mitigada por dois fatores:

1. Os perfis podem atualizar suas conexões a qualquer momento, resultando em uma nova sessão do servidor.
2. Os perfis podem ser "ressincronizados" de um servidor a qualquer momento, resultando em uma nova chamada para baixar todas as mensagens. Isso é comumente usado para buscar mensagens antigas de um grupo.

Embora essas medidas imponham limites ao que o servidor pode inferir, ainda não podemos garantir resistência total aos metadados. Para soluções futuras para esse problema, consulte Niwl.

Proteção contra Pares Maliciosos

Os servidores enfrentam o risco de spam gerado por pares, representando uma ameaça significativa à eficácia do sistema Cwtch. Embora tenhamos implementado um mecanismo de proteção contra spam no protótipo do Cwtch, exigindo que os pares realizem alguma prova de trabalho especificada pelo servidor, reconhecemos que essa não é uma solução robusta na presença de um adversário determinado com recursos significativos.

Pacotes de Chaves

Os servidores Cwtch se identificam por meio de pacotes de chaves assinados, contendo uma lista de chaves necessárias para garantir a segurança e resistência aos metadados na comunicação do grupo Cwtch. Esses pacotes de chaves geralmente incluem três chaves: uma chave pública do serviço Tor v3 Onion para o Token Board, uma chave pública do Tor v3 Onion Service para o Token Service e uma chave pública do Privacy Pass.

Para verificar os pacotes de chaves, os perfis que os importam do servidor utilizam o algoritmo trust-on-first-use (TOFU), verificando a assinatura anexada e a existência de todos os tipos de chave. Se o perfil já tiver importado o pacote de chaves do servidor anteriormente, todas as chaves são consideradas iguais.

Configuração prévia do aplicativo para ativar o Relé do Cwtch.

No Android, a hospedagem de servidor não está habilitada, pois essa opção não está disponível devido às limitações dos dispositivos Android. Essa funcionalidade está reservada apenas para servidores hospedados em desktops.

No Android, a única forma direta de importar uma chave de servidor é através do grupo de teste Cwtch, garantindo assim acesso ao servidor Cwtch.

Primeiro passo é Habilitar a opção de grupo no Cwtch que está em fase de testes. Clique na opção no canto superior direito da tela de configuração e pressione o botão para acessar as configurações do Cwtch.

Você pode alterar o idioma para Português do Brasil.Depois, role para baixo e selecione a opção para ativar os experimentos. Em seguida, ative a opção para habilitar o chat em grupo e a pré-visualização de imagens e fotos de perfil, permitindo que você troque sua foto de perfil.

https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jvss6zxle26jdguwaegtjdixhfka/production/f0ca039733d48895001261ab25c5d2efbaf3bf26e55aad3cce406646f9af9d15.MP4

Próximo passo é Criar um perfil.

Pressione o + botão de ação no canto inferior direito e selecione "Novo perfil" ou aberta no botão + adicionar novo perfil.

• Selecione um nome de exibição

• Selecione se deseja proteger

este perfil e salvo localmente com criptografia forte: Senha: sua conta está protegida de outras pessoas que possam usar este dispositivo

Sem senha: qualquer pessoa que tenha acesso a este dispositivo poderá acessar este perfil.

Preencha sua senha e digite-a novamente

Os perfis são armazenados localmente no disco e criptografados usando uma chave derivada de uma senha conhecida pelo usuário (via pbkdf2).

Observe que, uma vez criptografado e armazenado em disco, a única maneira de recuperar um perfil é recuperando a chave da senha - como tal, não é possível fornecer uma lista completa de perfis aos quais um usuário pode ter acesso até inserir um senha.

https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jxqbqmur2lcqe2eym5thgz4so2ya/production/8f9df1372ec7e659180609afa48be22b12109ae5e1eda9ef1dc05c1325652507.MP4

O próximo passo é adicionar o FuzzBot, que é um bot de testes e de desenvolvimento.

Contato do FuzzBot: 4y2hxlxqzautabituedksnh2ulcgm2coqbure6wvfpg4gi2ci25ta5ad.

Ao enviar o comando "testgroup-invite" para o FuzzBot, você receberá um convite para entrar no Grupo Cwtch Test. Ao ingressar no grupo, você será automaticamente conectado ao servidor Cwtch. Você pode optar por sair do grupo a qualquer momento ou ficar para conversar e tirar dúvidas sobre o aplicativo e outros assuntos. Depois, você pode configurar seu próprio servidor Cwtch, o que é altamente recomendável.

https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jvji25zclkoqcouni5decle7if7a/production/ee3de3540a3e3dca6e6e26d303e12c2ef892a5d7769029275b8b95ffc7468780.MP4

Agora você pode utilizar o aplicativo normalmente. Algumas observações que notei: se houver demora na conexão com outra pessoa, ambas devem estar online. Se ainda assim a conexão não for estabelecida, basta clicar no ícone de reset do Tor para restabelecer a conexão com a outra pessoa.

Uma introdução aos perfis Cwtch.

Com Cwtch você pode criar um ou mais perfis . Cada perfil gera um par de chaves ed25519 aleatório compatível com a Rede Tor.

Este é o identificador que você pode fornecer às pessoas e que elas podem usar para entrar em contato com você via Cwtch.

Cwtch permite criar e gerenciar vários perfis separados. Cada perfil está associado a um par de chaves diferente que inicia um serviço cebola diferente.

Gerenciar Na inicialização, o Cwtch abrirá a tela Gerenciar Perfis. Nessa tela você pode:

• Crie um novo perfil.
• Desbloquear perfis.
• Criptografados existentes.
• Gerenciar perfis carregados.
• Alterando o nome de exibição de um perfil.
• Alterando a senha de um perfil Excluindo um perfil.
• Alterando uma imagem de perfil.

Backup ou exportação de um perfil.

Na tela de gerenciamento de perfil:

1. Selecione o lápis ao lado do perfil que você deseja editar

2. Role para baixo até a parte inferior da tela.

3. Selecione "Exportar perfil"

4. Escolha um local e um nome de arquivo.

5.confirme.

Uma vez confirmado, o Cwtch colocará uma cópia do perfil no local indicado. Este arquivo é criptografado no mesmo nível do perfil.

Este arquivo pode ser importado para outra instância do Cwtch em qualquer dispositivo.

Importando um perfil.

1. Pressione o +botão de ação no canto inferior direito e selecione "Importar perfil"

2. Selecione um arquivo de perfil Cwtch exportado para importar

3. Digite a senha associada ao perfil e confirme.

Uma vez confirmado, o Cwtch tentará descriptografar o arquivo fornecido usando uma chave derivada da senha fornecida. Se for bem-sucedido, o perfil aparecerá na tela Gerenciamento de perfil e estará pronto para uso.

OBSERVAÇÃO Embora um perfil possa ser importado para vários dispositivos, atualmente apenas uma versão de um perfil pode ser usada em todos os dispositivos ao mesmo tempo. As tentativas de usar o mesmo perfil em vários dispositivos podem resultar em problemas de disponibilidade e falhas de mensagens.

Qual é a diferença entre uma conexão ponto a ponto e um grupo cwtch?

As conexões ponto a ponto Cwtch permitem que 2 pessoas troquem mensagens diretamente. As conexões ponto a ponto nos bastidores usam serviços cebola Tor v3 para fornecer uma conexão criptografada e resistente a metadados. Devido a esta conexão direta, ambas as partes precisam estar online ao mesmo tempo para trocar mensagens.

Os Grupos Cwtch permitem que várias partes participem de uma única conversa usando um servidor não confiável (que pode ser fornecido por terceiros ou auto-hospedado). Os operadores de servidores não conseguem saber quantas pessoas estão em um grupo ou o que está sendo discutido. Se vários grupos estiverem hospedados em um único servidor, o servidor não conseguirá saber quais mensagens pertencem a qual grupo sem a conivência de um membro do grupo. Ao contrário das conversas entre pares, as conversas em grupo podem ser conduzidas de forma assíncrona, para que todos num grupo não precisem estar online ao mesmo tempo.

Por que os grupos cwtch são experimentais? Mensagens em grupo resistentes a metadados ainda são um problema em aberto . Embora a versão que fornecemos no Cwtch Beta seja projetada para ser segura e com metadados privados, ela é bastante ineficiente e pode ser mal utilizada. Como tal, aconselhamos cautela ao usá-lo e apenas o fornecemos como um recurso opcional.

Como posso executar meu próprio servidor Cwtch? A implementação de referência para um servidor Cwtch é de código aberto . Qualquer pessoa pode executar um servidor Cwtch, e qualquer pessoa com uma cópia do pacote de chaves públicas do servidor pode hospedar grupos nesse servidor sem que o operador tenha acesso aos metadados relacionados ao grupo .

https://git.openprivacy.ca/cwtch.im/server

https://docs.openprivacy.ca/cwtch-security-handbook/server.html

Como posso desligar o Cwtch? O painel frontal do aplicativo possui um ícone do botão "Shutdown Cwtch" (com um 'X'). Pressionar este botão irá acionar uma caixa de diálogo e, na confirmação, o Cwtch será desligado e todos os perfis serão descarregados.

Suas doações podem fazer a diferença no projeto Cwtch? O Cwtch é um projeto dedicado a construir aplicativos que preservam a privacidade, oferecendo comunicação de grupo resistente a metadados. Além disso, o projeto também desenvolve o Cofre, formulários da web criptografados para ajudar mútua segura. Suas contribuições apoiam iniciativas importantes, como a divulgação de violações de dados médicos em Vancouver e pesquisas sobre a segurança do voto eletrônico na Suíça. Ao doar, você está ajudando a fechar o ciclo, trabalhando com comunidades marginalizadas para identificar e corrigir lacunas de privacidade. Além disso, o projeto trabalha em soluções inovadoras, como a quebra de segredos através da criptografia de limite para proteger sua privacidade durante passagens de fronteira. E também tem a infraestrutura: toda nossa infraestrutura é open source e sem fins lucrativos. Conheça também o Fuzzytags, uma estrutura criptográfica probabilística para marcação resistente a metadados. Sua doação é crucial para continuar o trabalho em prol da privacidade e segurança online. Contribua agora com sua doação

https://openprivacy.ca/donate/

onde você pode fazer sua doação em bitcoin e outras moedas, e saiba mais sobre os projetos. https://openprivacy.ca/work/

Link sobre Cwtch

https://cwtch.im/

https://git.openprivacy.ca/cwtch.im/cwtch

https://docs.cwtch.im/docs/intro

https://docs.openprivacy.ca/cwtch-security-handbook/

Baixar #CwtchDev

cwtch.im/download/

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=im.cwtch.flwtch

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Und plötzlich weißt du:
Es ist Zeit, etwas Neues zu beginnen
und dem Zauber des Anfangs zu vertrauen.
Meister Eckhart

Schwarz, rot, gold leuchtet es im Kopf des Newsletters der deutschen Bundesregierung, der mir freitags ins Postfach flattert. Rot, gelb und grün werden daneben sicher noch lange vielzitierte Farben sein, auch wenn diese nie geleuchtet haben. Die Ampel hat sich gerade selber den Stecker gezogen – und hinterlässt einen wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Trümmerhaufen.

Mit einem bemerkenswerten Timing hat die deutsche Regierungskoalition am Tag des «Comebacks» von Donald Trump in den USA endlich ihr Scheitern besiegelt. Während der eine seinen Sieg bei den Präsidentschaftswahlen feierte, erwachten die anderen jäh aus ihrer Selbsthypnose rund um Harris-Hype und Trump-Panik – mit teils erschreckenden Auswüchsen. Seit Mittwoch werden die Geschicke Deutschlands nun von einer rot-grünen Minderheitsregierung «geleitet» und man steuert auf Neuwahlen zu.

Das Kindergarten-Gehabe um zwei konkurrierende Wirtschaftsgipfel letzte Woche war bereits bezeichnend. In einem Strategiepapier gestand Finanzminister Lindner außerdem den «Absturz Deutschlands» ein und offenbarte, dass die wirtschaftlichen Probleme teilweise von der Ampel-Politik «vorsätzlich herbeigeführt» worden seien.

Lindner und weitere FDP-Minister wurden also vom Bundeskanzler entlassen. Verkehrs- und Digitalminister Wissing trat flugs aus der FDP aus; deshalb darf er nicht nur im Amt bleiben, sondern hat zusätzlich noch das Justizministerium übernommen. Und mit Jörg Kukies habe Scholz «seinen Lieblingsbock zum Obergärtner», sprich: Finanzminister befördert, meint Norbert Häring.

Es gebe keine Vertrauensbasis für die weitere Zusammenarbeit mit der FDP, hatte der Kanzler erklärt, Lindner habe zu oft sein Vertrauen gebrochen. Am 15. Januar 2025 werde er daher im Bundestag die Vertrauensfrage stellen, was ggf. den Weg für vorgezogene Neuwahlen freimachen würde.

Apropos Vertrauen: Über die Hälfte der Bundesbürger glauben, dass sie ihre Meinung nicht frei sagen können. Das ging erst kürzlich aus dem diesjährigen «Freiheitsindex» hervor, einer Studie, die die Wechselwirkung zwischen Berichterstattung der Medien und subjektivem Freiheitsempfinden der Bürger misst. «Beim Vertrauen in Staat und Medien zerreißt es uns gerade», kommentierte dies der Leiter des Schweizer Unternehmens Media Tenor, das die Untersuchung zusammen mit dem Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach durchführt.

«Die absolute Mehrheit hat absolut die Nase voll», titelte die Bild angesichts des «Ampel-Showdowns». Die Mehrheit wolle Neuwahlen und die Grünen sollten zuerst gehen, lasen wir dort.

Dass «Insolvenzminister» Robert Habeck heute seine Kandidatur für das Kanzleramt verkündet hat, kann nur als Teil der politmedialen Realitätsverweigerung verstanden werden. Wer allerdings denke, schlimmer als in Zeiten der Ampel könne es nicht mehr werden, sei reichlich optimistisch, schrieb Uwe Froschauer bei Manova. Und er kenne Friedrich Merz schlecht, der sich schon jetzt rhetorisch auf seine Rolle als oberster Feldherr Deutschlands vorbereite.

Was also tun? Der Schweizer Verein «Losdemokratie» will eine Volksinitiative lancieren, um die Bestimmung von Parlamentsmitgliedern per Los einzuführen. Das Losverfahren sorge für mehr Demokratie, denn als Alternative zum Wahlverfahren garantiere es eine breitere Beteiligung und repräsentativere Parlamente. Ob das ein Weg ist, sei dahingestellt.

In jedem Fall wird es notwendig sein, unsere Bemühungen um Freiheit und Selbstbestimmung zu verstärken. Mehr Unabhängigkeit von staatlichen und zentralen Institutionen – also die Suche nach dezentralen Lösungsansätzen – gehört dabei sicher zu den Möglichkeiten. Das gilt sowohl für jede/n Einzelne/n als auch für Entitäten wie die alternativen Medien.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Es ist besser, ein Licht zu entzünden, als auf die Dunkelheit zu schimpfen. Konfuzius

Die Bemühungen um Aufarbeitung der sogenannten Corona-Pandemie, um Aufklärung der Hintergründe, Benennung von Verantwortlichkeiten und das Ziehen von Konsequenzen sind durchaus nicht eingeschlafen. Das Interesse daran ist unter den gegebenen Umständen vielleicht nicht sonderlich groß, aber es ist vorhanden.

Der sächsische Landtag hat gestern die Einsetzung eines Untersuchungsausschusses zur Corona-Politik beschlossen. In einer Sondersitzung erhielt ein entsprechender Antrag der AfD-Fraktion die ausreichende Zustimmung, auch von einigen Abgeordneten des BSW.

In den Niederlanden wird Bill Gates vor Gericht erscheinen müssen. Sieben durch die Covid-«Impfstoffe» geschädigte Personen hatten Klage eingereicht. Sie werfen unter anderem Gates, Pfizer-Chef Bourla und dem niederländischen Staat vor, sie hätten gewusst, dass diese Präparate weder sicher noch wirksam sind.

Mit den mRNA-«Impfstoffen» von Pfizer/BioNTech befasst sich auch ein neues Buch. Darin werden die Erkenntnisse von Ärzten und Wissenschaftlern aus der Analyse interner Dokumente über die klinischen Studien der Covid-Injektion präsentiert. Es handelt sich um jene in den USA freigeklagten Papiere, die die Arzneimittelbehörde (Food and Drug Administration, FDA) 75 Jahre unter Verschluss halten wollte.

Ebenfalls Wissenschaftler und Ärzte, aber auch andere Experten organisieren als Verbundnetzwerk Corona-Solution kostenfreie Online-Konferenzen. Ihr Ziel ist es, «wissenschaftlich, demokratisch und friedlich» über Impfstoffe und Behandlungsprotokolle gegen SARS-CoV-2 aufzuklären und die Diskriminierung von Ungeimpften zu stoppen. Gestern fand eine weitere Konferenz statt. Ihr Thema: «Corona und modRNA: Von Toten, Lebenden und Physik lernen».

Aufgrund des Digital Services Acts (DSA) der Europäischen Union sei das Risiko groß, dass ihre Arbeit als «Fake-News» bezeichnet würde, so das Netzwerk. Staatlich unerwünschte wissenschaftliche Aufklärung müsse sich passende Kanäle zur Veröffentlichung suchen. Ihre Live-Streams seien deshalb zum Beispiel nicht auf YouTube zu finden.

Der vielfältige Einsatz für Aufklärung und Aufarbeitung wird sich nicht stummschalten lassen. Nicht einmal der Zensurmeister der EU, Deutschland, wird so etwas erreichen. Die frisch aktivierten «Trusted Flagger» dürften allerdings künftige Siege beim «Denunzianten-Wettbewerb» im Kontext des DSA zusätzlich absichern.

Wo sind die Grenzen der Meinungsfreiheit? Sicher gibt es sie. Aber die ideologische Gleichstellung von illegalen mit unerwünschten Äußerungen verfolgt offensichtlich eher das Ziel, ein derart elementares demokratisches Grundrecht möglichst weitgehend auszuhebeln. Vorwürfe wie «Hassrede», «Delegitimierung des Staates» oder «Volksverhetzung» werden heute inflationär verwendet, um Systemkritik zu unterbinden. Gegen solche Bestrebungen gilt es, sich zu wehren.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

Chain Duel, a fast paced PvP game that takes inspiration from the classic snake game and supercharges it with Bitcoin’s Lightning Network. Imagine battling another player for dominance in a race to collect blocks, where the length of your chain isn’t just a visual cue. It represents real, staked satoshis. The player with the most Proof of Work wins, but it’s not just about gameplay; it’s about the seamless integration of the Lightning Network and real-time payments.

But how does Chain Duel manage these instant transactions with such efficiency? That’s where LNbits comes in. LNbits, an open-source wallet and payment infrastructure, handles all in-game payments making it easy for developers to focus on gameplay while LNbits takes care of everything from microtransactions to automated splits for developers and designers. In this article, we’ll dive deep into how Chain Duel leverages LNbits to streamline in-game payments and how other developers can take advantage of this powerful toolset to build the future of Lightning-powered gaming.

Let’s explore how LNbits transforms payment processing and why it’s quickly becoming a must-have for game developers working in the Bitcoin space.

Overview of Chain Duel

Chain Duel is a unique Lightning Network-inspired game that reimagines the classic snake game with a competitive twist, integrating real-time payments. Two players face off in real-time, racing to "catch" blocks and extend their chains. Each block added to the chain represents Proof of Work, and the player with the most Proof of Work wins the duel. The stakes are high, as the game represents satoshis (small units of Bitcoin) as points, with the winner taking home the prize.

The game is designed to be Lightning-native, meaning all payments within Chain Duel are processed through the Lightning Network. This ensures fast payments, reducing latency and making gameplay smooth. With additional features like practice mode, tournaments and highscores, Chain Duel creates an engaging and competitive environment for Bitcoin enthusiasts and gamers alike.

One of the standout aspects of Chain Duel is its deeper integration with the Lightning Network even at a design level. For example, actual Bitcoin blocks can appear on screen during matches, offering bonus points when mined in sync with the game. The game’s current version, still in beta, has already drawn attention within the Bitcoin community, gaining momentum at conferences and with a growing user base through its social networks. With its innovative combination of gaming, the Lightning Network, and competitive play, Chain Duel offers a glimpse into the future of Lightning-based gaming.

How LNbits is Used in Chain Duel

Seamless Integration with LNbits

At the core of Chain Duel’s efficient payment processing is LNbits, which handles in-game transactions smoothly and reliably. Chain Duel uses the LNbits LNURL-pay and LNURL-withdraw extensions to manage payments and rewards between players. Before each match, players send satoshis using LNURL-pay, which generates a static QR code or link for making the payment. LNURL-pay allows users to attach a note to the payment, which Chain Duel creatively uses as a way to insert the player name in-game. The simplicity of LNURL-pay ensures that users can quickly and easily initiate games, with fresh invoices being issued for every game. When players win, LNURL-withdraw enables them to seamlessly pull their earnings from the game, providing a quick payout system.

These extensions make it easy for players to send and receive Bitcoin with minimal latency, fully leveraging the power of the Lightning Network for fast and low-cost payments. The flexibility of LNbits’ tools means that game developers don’t need to worry about building custom payment systems from scratch—they can rely on LNbits to handle all financial transactions with precision.

Lightning Tournaments

Chain Duel tournaments leverage LNbits and its LNURL extensions to create a seamless and efficient experience for players. In Chain Duel tournaments, LNbits plays a crucial role in managing the overall economics. LNbits facilitates the generation of LNURL QR codes that participants can scan to register quickly or withdraw their winnings. LNbits allows Chain Duel to automatically handle multiple registrations through LNURL-pay, enabling players to participate in the tournament without additional steps. The Lightning Network's speed ensures that these payments occur in real-time, reducing wait times and allowing for a smoother flow in-game.

Splitting Payments

LNbits further simplifies revenue-sharing within Chain Duel. This feature allows the game to automatically split the satoshis sent by players into different shares for the game’s developer, designer, and host. Each time a payment is made to join a match, LNbits is used to automattically pay each of the contributors, according to pre-defined rules. This automated process ensures that everyone involved in the development and running of the game gets their fair share without manual intervention or complex bookkeeping.

Nostr Integration

Chain Duel also integrates with Nostr, a decentralized protocol for social interactions. Players can join games using "Zaps", small tips or micropayments sent over the Lightning Network within the Nostr ecosystem. Through NIP-57, which enables Nostr clients to request Zap invoices, players can use LNURL-pay enabled Zaps to register in P2P matches, further enhancing the Chain Duel experience. By using Zaps as a way to register in-game, Chain Duel automates the process of fetching players' identity, creating a more competitive and social experience. Zaps are public on the Nostr network, further expanding Chain Duel's games social reach and community engagement.

Game and Payment Synchronization

One of the key reasons Chain Duel developers chose LNbits is its powerful API that connects directly with the game’s logic. LNbits allows the game to synchronize payments with gameplay in real-time, providing a seamless experience where payments are an integrated part of the gaming mechanics.

With LNbits managing both the payment process and the Lightning Network’s complex infrastructure, Chain Duel developers are free to concentrate on enhancing the competitive and Lightning Network-related aspects of the game. This division of tasks is essential for streamlining development while still providing an innovative in-game payment experience that is deeply integrated with the Bitcoin network.

LNbits proves to be an indispensable tool for Chain Duel, enabling smooth in-game transactions, real-time revenue sharing, and seamless integration with Nostr. For developers looking to build Lightning-powered games, LNbits offers a powerful suite of tools that handle everything from micropayments to payment distribution—ensuring that the game's focus remains on fun and competition rather than complex payment systems.

LNBits facilitating Education and Adoption

This system contributes to educating users on the power of the Lightning Network. Since Chain Duel directly involve real satoshis and LNURL for registration and rewards, players actively experience how Lightning can facilitate fast, cheap, and permissionless payments. By incorporating LNbits into Chain Duel, the game serves as an educational tool that introduces users to the benefits of the Lightning Network. Players gain direct experience using Lightning wallets and LNURL, helping them understand how these tools work in real-world scenarios. The near-instant nature of these payments showcases the power of Lightning in a practical context, highlighting its potential beyond just gaming. Players are encouraged to set up wallets, explore the Lightning ecosystem, and eventually become familiar with Bitcoin and Lightning technology. By integrating LNbits, Chain Duel transforms in-game payments into a learning opportunity, making Bitcoin and Lightning more approachable for users worldwide.

Tools for Developers

LNbits is a versatile, open-source platform designed to simplify and enhance Bitcoin Lightning Network wallet management. For developers, particularly those working on Lightning-native games like Chain Duel, LNbits offers an invaluable set of tools that allow for seamless integration of Lightning payments without the need to build complex custom solutions from scratch. LNbits is built on a modular and extensible architecture, enabling developers to easily add or create functionality suited to their project’s needs.

Extensible Architecture for Customization

At the core of LNbits is a simple yet powerful wallet system that developers can access across multiple devices. What makes LNbits stand out is its extensible nature—everything beyond the core functionality is implemented as an extension. This modular approach allows users to customize their LNbits installation by enabling or building extensions to suit specific use cases. This flexibility is perfect for developers who want to add Lightning-based services to their games or apps without modifying the core codebase.

• Extensions for Every Use Case
  LNbits comes with a wide array of built-in extensions created by contributors, offering various services that can be plugged into your application. Some popular extensions include:
• Faucets: Distribute small amounts of Bitcoin to users for testing or promotional purposes.
• Paylinks: Create shareable links for instant payments.
• Points-of-sale (PoS): Allow users to set up shareable payment terminals.
• Paywalls: Charge users to access content or services.
• Event tickets: Sell tickets for events directly via Lightning payments.
• Games and services: From dice games to jukeboxes, LNbits offers entertaining and functional tools.

These ready-made solutions can be adapted and used in different gaming scenarios, for example in Chain Duel, where LNURL extensions are used for in game payments. The extensibility ensures developers can focus on building engaging gameplay while LNbits handles payment flows.

Developer-Friendly Customization

LNbits isn't just a plug-and-play platform. Developers can extend its functionality even further by creating their own extensions, giving full control over how the wallet system is integrated into their games or apps. The architecture is designed to make it easy for developers to build on top of the platform, adding custom features for specific requirements.

Flexible Funding Source Management

LNbits also offers flexibility in terms of managing funding sources. Developers can easily connect LNbits to various Lightning Network node implementations, enabling seamless transitions between nodes or even different payment systems. This allows developers to switch underlying funding sources with minimal effort, making LNbits adaptable for games that may need to scale quickly or rely on different payment infrastructures over time.

A Lean Core System for Maximum Efficiency

Thanks to its modular architecture, LNbits maintains a lean core system. This reduces complexity and overhead, allowing developers to implement only the features they need. By avoiding bloated software, LNbits ensures faster transactions and less resource consumption, which is crucial in fast-paced environments like Chain Duel where speed and efficiency are paramount.

LNbits is designed with developers in mind, offering a suite of tools and a flexible infrastructure that makes integrating Bitcoin payments easy. Whether you’re developing games, apps, or any service that requires Lightning Network transactions, LNbits is a powerful, open-source solution that can be adapted to fit your project.

Conclusion

Chain Duel stands at the forefront of Lightning-powered gaming, combining the excitement of competitive PvP with the speed and efficiency of the Lightning Network. With LNbits handling all in-game payments, from microtransactions to automated revenue splits, developers can focus entirely on crafting an engaging gaming experience. LNbits’ powerful API and extensions make it easy to manage real-time payments, removing the complexity of building payment infrastructure from scratch.

LNbits isn’t just a payment tool — it’s a flexible, developer-friendly platform that can be adapted to any gaming model. Whether you're developing a fast-paced PvP game like Chain Duel or any project requiring seamless Lightning Network integration, LNbits provides the ideal solution for handling instant payments with minimal overhead.

For developers interested in pushing the boundaries of Lightning-powered gaming, Chain Duel is a great example of how LNbits can enhance your game, letting you focus on the fun while LNbits manages real-time transactions.

Find out more

Curious about how Lightning Network payments can power your next game? Explore the following:

• Learn more about Chain Duel: Chain Duel
• Learn how LNbits can simplify payment handling in your project: LNbits
• Dive into decentralized communication with Nostr: Nostr

@ c4f5e7a7:8856cac7

TL;DR

Best viewed on either YakiHonne or Highlighter.

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.".

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.

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.

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 or exposed 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:

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.’.

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?

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 coved 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 mail a physical letter - a shared secret to the physical 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.

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."

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:

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 middleground 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.

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 commons, 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!

@ 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!

@ ee11a5df:b76c4e49

Bye-Bye Reply Guy

There is a camp of nostr developers that believe spam filtering needs to be done by relays. Or at the very least by DVMs. I concur. In this way, once you configure what you want to see, it applies to all nostr clients.

But we are not there yet.

In the mean time we have ReplyGuy, and gossip needed some changes to deal with it.

Strategies in Short

1. WEB OF TRUST: Only accept events from people you follow, or people they follow - this avoids new people entirely until somebody else that you follow friends them first, which is too restrictive for some people.
2. TRUSTED RELAYS: Allow every post from relays that you trust to do good spam filtering.
3. REJECT FRESH PUBKEYS: Only accept events from people you have seen before - this allows you to find new people, but you will miss their very first post (their second post must count as someone you have seen before, even if you discarded the first post)
4. PATTERN MATCHING: Scan for known spam phrases and words and block those events, either on content or metadata or both or more.
5. TIE-IN TO EXTERNAL SYSTEMS: Require a valid NIP-05, or other nostr event binding their identity to some external identity
6. PROOF OF WORK: Require a minimum proof-of-work

All of these strategies are useful, but they have to be combined properly.

filter.rhai

Gossip loads a file called "filter.rhai" in your gossip directory if it exists. It must be a Rhai language script that meets certain requirements (see the example in the gossip source code directory). Then it applies it to filter spam.

This spam filtering code is being updated currently. It is not even on unstable yet, but it will be there probably tomorrow sometime. Then to master. Eventually to a release.

Here is an example using all of the techniques listed above:

```rhai // This is a sample spam filtering script for the gossip nostr // client. The language is called Rhai, details are at: // https://rhai.rs/book/ // // For gossip to find your spam filtering script, put it in // your gossip profile directory. See // https://docs.rs/dirs/latest/dirs/fn.data_dir.html // to find the base directory. A subdirectory "gossip" is your // gossip data directory which for most people is their profile // directory too. (Note: if you use a GOSSIP_PROFILE, you'll // need to put it one directory deeper into that profile // directory). // // This filter is used to filter out and refuse to process // incoming events as they flow in from relays, and also to // filter which events get/ displayed in certain circumstances. // It is only run on feed-displayable event kinds, and only by // authors you are not following. In case of error, nothing is // filtered. // // You must define a function called 'filter' which returns one // of these constant values: // DENY (the event is filtered out) // ALLOW (the event is allowed through) // MUTE (the event is filtered out, and the author is // automatically muted) // // Your script will be provided the following global variables: // 'caller' - a string that is one of "Process", // "Thread", "Inbox" or "Global" indicating // which part of the code is running your // script // 'content' - the event content as a string // 'id' - the event ID, as a hex string // 'kind' - the event kind as an integer // 'muted' - if the author is in your mute list // 'name' - if we have it, the name of the author // (or your petname), else an empty string // 'nip05valid' - whether nip05 is valid for the author, // as a boolean // 'pow' - the Proof of Work on the event // 'pubkey' - the event author public key, as a hex // string // 'seconds_known' - the number of seconds that the author // of the event has been known to gossip // 'spamsafe' - true only if the event came in from a // relay marked as SpamSafe during Process // (even if the global setting for SpamSafe // is off)

fn filter() {

// Show spam on global
// (global events are ephemeral; these won't grow the
// database)
if caller=="Global" {
    return ALLOW;
}

// Block ReplyGuy
if name.contains("ReplyGuy") || name.contains("ReplyGal") {
    return DENY;
}

// Block known DM spam
// (giftwraps are unwrapped before the content is passed to
//  this script)
if content.to_lower().contains(
  "Mr. Gift and Mrs. Wrap under the tree, KISSING!"
) {
    return DENY;
}

// Reject events from new pubkeys, unless they have a high
// PoW or we somehow already have a nip05valid for them
//
// If this turns out to be a legit person, we will start
// hearing their events 2 seconds from now, so we will
// only miss their very first event.
if seconds_known <= 2 && pow < 25 && !nip05valid {
    return DENY;
}

// Mute offensive people
if content.to_lower().contains(" kike") ||
    content.to_lower().contains("kike ") ||
    content.to_lower().contains(" nigger") ||
    content.to_lower().contains("nigger ")
{
    return MUTE;
}

// Reject events from muted people
//
// Gossip already does this internally, and since we are
// not Process, this is rather redundant. But this works
// as an example.
if muted {
    return DENY;
}

// Accept if the PoW is large enough
if pow >= 25 {
    return ALLOW;
}

// Accept if their NIP-05 is valid
if nip05valid {
    return ALLOW;
}

// Accept if the event came through a spamsafe relay
if spamsafe {
    return ALLOW;
}

// Reject the rest
DENY

} ```

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zum dritten Geburtstag, liebe Denk Bar! Wieso zum dritten? Das war doch 2022 und jetzt sind wir im Jahr 2024, oder? Ja, das ist schon richtig, aber bei Geburtstagen erinnere ich mich immer auch an meinen Vater, und der behauptete oft, der erste sei ja schließlich der Tag der Geburt selber und den müsse man natürlich mitzählen. Wo er recht hat, hat er nunmal recht. Konsequenterweise wird also heute dieser Blog an seinem dritten Geburtstag zwei Jahre alt.

Das ist ein Grund zum Feiern, wie ich finde. Einerseits ganz einfach, weil es dafür gar nicht genug Gründe geben kann. «Das Leben sind zwei Tage», lautet ein gängiger Ausdruck hier in Andalusien. In der Tat könnte es so sein, auch wenn wir uns im Alltag oft genug von der Routine vereinnahmen lassen.

Seit dem Start der Denk Bar vor zwei Jahren ist unglaublich viel passiert. Ebenso wie die zweieinhalb Jahre davor, und all jenes war letztlich auch der Auslöser dafür, dass ich begann, öffentlich zu schreiben. Damals notierte ich:

«Seit einigen Jahren erscheint unser öffentliches Umfeld immer fragwürdiger, widersprüchlicher und manchmal schier unglaublich - jede Menge Anlass für eigene Recherchen und Gedanken, ganz einfach mit einer Portion gesundem Menschenverstand.»

Wir erleben den sogenannten «großen Umbruch», einen globalen Coup, den skrupellose Egoisten clever eingefädelt haben und seit ein paar Jahren knallhart – aber nett verpackt – durchziehen, um buchstäblich alles nach ihrem Gusto umzukrempeln. Die Gelegenheit ist ja angeblich günstig und muss genutzt werden.

Nie hätte ich mir träumen lassen, dass ich so etwas jemals miterleben müsste. Die Bosheit, mit der ganz offensichtlich gegen die eigene Bevölkerung gearbeitet wird, war früher für mich unvorstellbar. Mein (Rest-) Vertrauen in alle möglichen Bereiche wie Politik, Wissenschaft, Justiz, Medien oder Kirche ist praktisch komplett zerstört. Einen «inneren Totalschaden» hatte ich mal für unsere Gesellschaften diagnostiziert.

Was mich vielleicht am meisten erschreckt, ist zum einen das Niveau der Gleichschaltung, das weltweit erreicht werden konnte, und zum anderen die praktisch totale Spaltung der Gesellschaft. Haben wir das tatsächlich mit uns machen lassen?? Unfassbar! Aber das Werkzeug «Angst» ist sehr mächtig und funktioniert bis heute.

Zum Glück passieren auch positive Dinge und neue Perspektiven öffnen sich. Für viele Menschen waren und sind die Entwicklungen der letzten Jahre ein Augenöffner. Sie sehen «Querdenken» als das, was es ist: eine Tugend.

Auch die immer ernsteren Zensurbemühungen sind letztlich nur ein Zeichen der Schwäche, wo Argumente fehlen. Sie werden nicht verhindern, dass wir unsere Meinung äußern, unbequeme Fragen stellen und dass die Wahrheit peu à peu ans Licht kommt. Es gibt immer Mittel und Wege, auch für uns.

---

Danke, dass du diesen Weg mit mir weitergehst!

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Ein Lämmchen löschte an einem Bache seinen Durst. Fern von ihm, aber näher der Quelle, tat ein Wolf das gleiche. Kaum erblickte er das Lämmchen, so schrie er:

"Warum trübst du mir das Wasser, das ich trinken will?"

"Wie wäre das möglich", erwiderte schüchtern das Lämmchen, "ich stehe hier unten und du so weit oben; das Wasser fließt ja von dir zu mir; glaube mir, es kam mir nie in den Sinn, dir etwas Böses zu tun!"

"Ei, sieh doch! Du machst es gerade, wie dein Vater vor sechs Monaten; ich erinnere mich noch sehr wohl, daß auch du dabei warst, aber glücklich entkamst, als ich ihm für sein Schmähen das Fell abzog!"

"Ach, Herr!" flehte das zitternde Lämmchen, "ich bin ja erst vier Wochen alt und kannte meinen Vater gar nicht, so lange ist er schon tot; wie soll ich denn für ihn büßen."

"Du Unverschämter!" so endigt der Wolf mit erheuchelter Wut, indem er die Zähne fletschte. "Tot oder nicht tot, weiß ich doch, daß euer ganzes Geschlecht mich hasset, und dafür muß ich mich rächen."

Ohne weitere Umstände zu machen, zerriß er das Lämmchen und verschlang es.

Das Gewissen regt sich selbst bei dem größten Bösewichte; er sucht doch nach Vorwand, um dasselbe damit bei Begehung seiner Schlechtigkeiten zu beschwichtigen.

Quelle: https://eden.one/fabeln-aesop-das-lamm-und-der-wolf

@ 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

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ bf95e1a4:ebdcc848

This is the lightly-edited AI generated transcript of Bitcoin Infinity Show #125. The transcription isn't perfect, but it's usually pretty good!

If you'd like to support us, send us a zap or check out the Bitcoin Infinity Store for our books and other merchandise! https://bitcoininfinitystore.com/

Intro

Luke: Paolo, Mathias, welcome to the Bitcoin Infinity Show. Thank you for joining us.

Paolo: Thank you for having us.

Knut: Yeah, good to have you here, guys. We're going to talk a bit about Keet and Holepunch and a little bit about Tether today, aren't we?

Luke: Sounds like that's the plan. So thank you again, both for joining us.

Introducing Paolo and Mathias

Luke: would you both mind giving a quick introduction on yourselves just so our listeners have the background on you

Paolo: Sure, I'm Paolo Arduino, I'm the CEO at Tether. I started my career as a developer, I pivoted towards more, strategy and execution for, Tether and Bitfinex. And, co founded with Matthias, Holepunch, that is, building very, crazy and awesome technology, that is gonna be disrupting the way people communicate.

Luke: And, Mathias, over to you.

Mathias: Yeah, thank you. Yeah, I've been, so I come from a peer-to-peer background. I've been working with peer-to-peer technology. The last, I always say five, but it's probably more like 10 years. I did a lot of work on BitTorrent and I did a lot of work on JavaScript. and a little bit later to, Bitcoin and I saw a lot of potential on how we can use Bitcoin with pureology and like how we can use.

P2P technology to bring the same mission that Bitcoin has, but to all kinds of data, setting all data free and, making everything private per default and self sovereignty and that kind of thing. I'm very into that. and I've been lucky to work with, like I said, with Paolo for, many years now and, Get a lot of, valuable, feedback and, idea sharing out of that.

And we're on a mission to, build some, really cool things. In addition to all the things we've already been building. So it's super exciting and glad to be here.

Luke: Oh, fantastic.

Introduction to Holepunch

Luke: Matthias, that was a perfect segue into basically, an introduction to, can you tell us about, Holepunch.

What is Holepunch and what are you doing?

Mathias: Yeah, sure. like I said, we co founded the company a couple of years ago. Now, we've been building up a team of really talented peer to peer engineers. we're always hiring also. So if anybody's listening and want to join our mission, please, apply. we have some really smart people working with us.

but we teamed up to basically. like I said in my introduction, I've been working on peer to peer technology for many years now and thinking ahead how we can, stop using all that technology when I started it was only used for basically piracy. I'm from the Nordics, and I think Knut is from the Nordics also, so he knows all about, the Nordics know about piracy.

It wasn't back in the day. A lot of very interesting technologies came out of that. But basically, how can we use those ideas that were proven by piracy back then to be really unstoppable, because a lot of people wanted to stop it, but apply that same kind of mindset to the general data, so we can build actual applications that has that kind of quality, that can withstand the wrath of God.

that can work without any centralization. Actually, nobody can shut down, not even the authorities if they wanted to. Basically unkillable and make that general enough that it can basically run any kind of application, solve a lot of really hot problems. it works on your own computers, your own networks.

Mobile phones, and tie that up. I'm a developer by heart, into a software stack that people can just build on. So not everybody has to go in and tackle all these problems individually, but just give them some software to solve all this so they can, as much as possible, just worry about making really cool applications that we use,

Yeah, like I said, we've been working really intensely on this, for a long time and in Holepunch, we made this our co mission to scale this up and, deliver a software stack on that. it's been really exciting and it's been really fun and it's been very, challenging, but if it's not challenging, then why, do it?

and, especially, with the backing of, Tether, through Paolo and also just expertise from there, we have a good hand built to deliver this to the world. And, the first thing we did was, like, think about what's, a good first application that we can build that can showcase this, but also something we really want to use ourself and see scale have also have on the world.

And obviously that was a communications app, keyed, which we was our first project. And, we're still in beta and we're still lots of work to do. And we're still iterating that really heavily, but I like to show that you can build these kind of apps without any kind of. central points. and we released that also, like the first thing we released when we launched the company.

And like I said, we're still, building and still iterating it. A lot of fun. and then take the software stack from that, which we call the pair runtime and then split that out. So anybody else can build similar apps on top. With that same technology stack, and, yeah, that's, we launched that earlier this year also, and, it's been really exciting so far, and it's, I love going to work every day and solve, even though, you can see on my hair that it's not really good for, the head scratching, but, but, it's really fun, and it's really challenging, and it's interesting thing. goal as a company, basically to have that if we go out of business tomorrow, our technology continues to exist because we're not in the loop of anything. It's also sometimes really hard to explain that we don't have any, chip coins involved or any kind of limitations on the stack because we're basically engineering it not to be part of it, because that's the only way you can actually engineer these things that they can understand.

anything, super exciting and, encourage everybody to try to check it out.

Luke: we've both used Keet and I've certainly enjoyed the experience. I, think, the, basics of this, as I understand it, is that it's, entirely on both sides. The communicators end, or a group of communicators, it's all on their end, and the communication is entirely peer to peer, what is Keet really, what is the basics of Keet as, say, a product?

What is the easiest way that you would explain what it is?

The Vision Behind Keet

Mathias: But We're basically trying to just build a world class communications app that works to a large degree, like normal communication apps that you know, like Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp. Just with all the centralization tucked away, with all the costs of running it tucked away, and then adding all the features that also we can, because we're peer to peer

People don't care about technology. We loved it, but don't have that surface off too much to the user.

Just have the user use it as any other app, but then just have it be 100 percent private per default, 100 percent like no strings attached. It just works. if we get caught off by a. From the internet tomorrow, it will still work, that kind of thing, but deliver that in a way, and this is always our mission where users don't really need to worry about it.

It just works. And, it works the same way to a large degree as their other apps work, except obviously, there's no phone numbers and things like that. Very cryptographically sound and, but trying always not to bubble it up. And I think that's, so it's actually a really simple mission, but it's obviously really hard.

And that requires a lot of smart people, but luckily our users in a good way, don't need to be very smart about that.

Keet vs Nostr

Knut: Yeah, a quick one there. No strings attached starts with the letters Nostr, so is, Keet and Nostr, do they go mix well together or, is there an integration there between the two? I see a lot of similarities here.

Paolo: I tried to explain the differences between Kit and Nostr. I think Nostr is a very interesting protocol, but also is very, simple. the way I like to describe it is that, if you are familiar with the history of filesharing, Starting from the first one, super centralized, and then eventually every single step, you get to a decentralized platform.

And the last one, the most decentralized one, that is BitTorrent. the history of file sharing proved that every time you try to centralize something, it ends up badly, right? if you have any special node in the system that does a little bit more than others and requires more resources than others to run, that will end up badly.

You might end up in a small room with a lamp in your room. Point it to your face, and then everyone suddenly will stop running an indexer. That reminds me about Nostr structure. if you are building a peer to peer system, or if you are building a very resilient communication system, if you think about Nostr, you would imagine that if you have, 10 million or 100 million users, the number of relays would be probably less than the square root of the number of users.

So that surface, although a hundred million users is very, they're not attackable, right? But the surface of, the relays is much more attackable. look at what is happening with, the coin joinin platforms, right? very similar. the beauty of KIT versus Nostr is that in KIT you have number of relays is actually equal to the number of users because the users are their own relays.

and they can act as relays for others to, further their connectivity. That is how we think a technology that, has to be ready for the apocalypse and resilient to the wrath of God should, work. if you have, a log number of users or square root of number of users as relates, I don't think it's cool technology.

It will work better than centralized, Technologies like WhatsApp and so on, or Twitter, but eventually will not work when you will need it the most. Because the point is that we will not know what will happen when we will need this technology the most. Today, not for everyone, but the world is still almost at peace.

Things might unfold, in the future, maybe sooner rather than later. But when things unfold, you will need the best technology, the one that is truly independent, the one that is truly peer to peer. it's not really peer to peer if you have specialized relays, but where you have super peers randomly.

Luke: Yeah, the difference here, between the Realize and not having any other centralized infrastructure in the picture is certainly an interesting distinction. I hadn't heard anything about that you can act as a next connector or something like that.

Pear Runtime

Luke: So there's a couple of related things. I know there was an announcement about the, pair runtime, is that right? can you talk a little bit about that or any other, ways that this is growing in your whole, platform,

Mathias: Yeah, sure. so basically when we talk about ideas, internally, also from our software background, We want to solve a small problem that then can solve it for everybody. So

We want to build technology that can just send data around efficiently, so you can build any kind of app on top. We're all about modularity and taking these things to the extreme so we can repurpose it into any kind of application and other people can, get value out of it.

And, that's been our mission from the get go. So basically, like Paolo said, when we built Keed. We took all of these primitives we have, it's all open source on our GitHub, that can do various things, relay encrypted data in a way that's completely private, nobody can read it, and in a generalizable way, so it can run on any applications.

We have databases that can interpret, work with this data on device, but still in a way where nobody else knows what's going on, fully private, and we spent many years perfecting this, and it's still ongoing. And we, similar to like connectivity, it might seem really easy if you don't know what's going on that, connecting this computer to another computer and another place, but it's really hard because ISPs and, your internet providers, et cetera, they don't really want you to do that.

So there's a lot of firewalls involved that you have to work around to get around This is all really, hard problems that took a long time to solve.

But luckily, all of these are like generalizable problems where you just solve them once to a large degree, and then it's solved for everybody. If you put them in a modular framework where anybody can put the Legos together on top. And that's what we've been heavily invested in. And then as we were building Keed, we realized that Keete is just like 95 percent of these Lego blocks that are applicable for anything.

So why not take all this stuff, pack it up for free, we don't make any money on it. and an open source runtime that we're just giving away so other people can contribute to it, but also build their own apps. the more peer to peer apps the world has, the better from my point of view.

and document it and make it really easy to install. And I think actually Paolo said something interesting because as soon as you have, one point of centralization, you can always unravel it. coming from the Bitcoin days, I remember how quickly things can unravel. people went to jail for linking to things because authorities, when they crack down, really hard.

so if you have one weak spot, it will be taken advantage of at some point by somebody. And so even things like distributing updates to your software can be really hard because this often requires a central point, like you go to a website and you don't download it. And so all apps built on our runtime, for example.

It's distributed through the runtime, which is a little bit mind bending. So all apps are peer to peer data applications themselves, and the network doesn't care, which means that we can continue to distribute updates even, if everything gets shut down, you only need like a bootstrap for the first install when you get the app.

So we're thinking that in. At every level, because it's really, important to us to, basically learn from everything that happened in the past and then actually build things that are resilient. And we take this to a degree where I'm sure we could move 10 times faster if we just let go a little bit of that idea, because it is easier to just put all the data in one place or put all the updates in one place.

But then it's then we're just building the same old thing that's going to die eventually anyway. So we're very, uncompromising in that mission of actually decentralizing everything from updates to data, and then also always solving in a way where everybody can take advantage of that.

And then the final thing I'll say about that is that, every time we update. That runtime, those building blocks of that runtime, every time we fix a bug, every time we make it faster, every app becomes faster. That's also very exciting. It's because you're building the whole infrastructure into this layer that runs on your phone.

And it's all somewhat generalizable. Every time we fix something, it's just better for the entire ecosystem. And that's obviously really, exciting. And like I said, actually, no strings attached.

Yeah, so I think you were referring to the trial of the Pirate Bay people there In Sweden, right? lucky enough to meet a couple of them in Denmark and it's been very fun to hear about their journey and, yeah, like

Knut: and there, there's, there was a great documentary made about it called TPBAFK. So the Pirate Bay Away From Keyboard, about that whole trial and how, corrupt the system was even back then. And, throwing people in jail for providing links. they didn't do any more wrong than Google did, from a certain perspective.

And, I remember even, before BitTorrents, there was a program called. DC or Direct Connect Do you remember that?

Mathias: I used to, it was one of my first introductions to decentralization. it as you just shared your, like a Google Drive for everyone or something. Like you just shared parts of your file tree to everyone who wanted to peek into it, Yeah, anyway. Oh, that's good that you didn't know you were going with that. it interesting what you said, because I think it's interesting to think that I think to a large degree, the whole decentralization movement that was happening with BitTorrent back in the day got shut down because At some point, authorities figured out that they could just block DNS requests to shut it down for normal people, and as soon as they did that, it was actually effective.

And to Paolo's point, no matter how weak it is, they're done. and they tried to kill the technology elsewhere, but that's actually what killed them. Then, obviously, alternatives came that people could pay for, and it also shows that people actually want, to stay on the right side of things.

I think, now it's going very much in the wrong direction again, because now we're back at abusing that centralization again. the cycle will repeat. But, yeah, like any point of weakness will be attacked at any point.

Decentralization vs. Centralization

Luke: So what are the drawbacks to decentralization? I think we and our audience certainly understand the benefit of decentralization, what you gain by decentralizing, but what do you naturally give up in terms of the user experience and the convenience factor?

Mathias: yeah, I'm sure Paola has stuff to say here, but I'm just, I love talking about this stuff, so I'll go first. Mattias.

I think it's a really interesting question, first of all, because it's one of those questions where You know, obviously I want to say there's no drawbacks, but like anything, it's a balance, right?

Because it's not that there's drawbacks and advantages, there obviously is, but it's also just a different paradigm. first of all, with sensitization, I think one of the biggest thing I noticed also with developers is that we all come out of systems, education systems. That teaches how to think centralized, which makes us biased towards centralized solutions.

and that's, I remember my whole curriculum was about servers and clients and stuff like that. it's actually really hard to think about decentralization as a developer. And I think that's actually part of why a lot of people think it's hard. It's complex because it is complex, but also because we're just like, we've been trained massively in the other direction, and it's really hard to go back because decentralization can be as simple as what Knut said about DC Connect, DC where it's just, oh, I'm just browsing other people's computers.

That's amazing. That's a really, simple experience, and it's like something you can never do But like in today's world, people, the first thing I always get asked is like, how do I get a username? And I'm like, usernames have an inherent centralization and there's trade offs there.

And we need to think that through and stuff. and most applications don't necessarily require usernames. I'm not saying that's a bad feature, but it's that's where you need to think more about the trade offs because there's governance involved to some degree. But for the core experience, and I think that's what we've shown in Keith so far.

Then, there's obviously tons of upsides also, it's much easier to do big data transfers. Money is less of a concern, which actually changes the thinking, how you think about features.

And that, again, is something we've been trained in a lot as developers, because we think centralized. When we talk about features at Holepunch, hey, we should add podcast recording to Keed. Normally somebody would say, that's going to cost a lot of money to host that data. And we just always we don't even have that discussion because it doesn't matter because it's just between the users.

And then it's more about like the UX. But then other simple, like I said, other simple discussions, let's add a username index. That's where we're like, okay, let's think that through because there's like various things to think about there because there's no centric governance, and we don't want to introduce that because again, one point is.

It's bad. so it's, more like you really need to think differently and it's really hard to wire your brain to think differently. but once you get past that point, I think it's, super interesting. And I, think actually developers care way more than normal people because, developers care a lot about how links look and links and structure and that.

And normal people are just used to just clicking buttons and apps and going with the flow on that. And that's also what we're seeing, I think, with, a lot of key

Paolo: I think the hiring has proven a little bit more challenging, as Matthias was saying, when you are told that the cloud is your friend, hosting, on, Google Cloud or AWS is the right thing to do. And, of course, it got cheaper and cheaper, so now everyone can host their websites.

But the reality is that 70 percent of, the entire internet knowledge is hosted in the data centers of three companies. developers should think about that, should think about the fact that internet was born to be point to point and peer to peer. And, we are very far away from that initial concept.

over the years, especially with the boom in, in the year 2000 for the internet boom, and bubble, then, realized that, holding people's data is the way to go, with social media and social network. That is even worse. And so you have these friendly advertisements that are telling you, That, with a smiley face that, you know, yeah, you should, upload all your data on, Apple cloud or Google cloud.

And in general, cloud backups are great, right? You want to have some sort of redundancy in your life, but the reality is that you should be able to upload those. In an encrypted way, and yet most of this data sits unencrypted because, the big tech companies have to decrypt it and use it for, to milk the information to pay for, for, another month of their new data centers.

the, issue is, we have so much power in our hands through our phones. the phones that we have today are much more powerful than the phones that we, or even the computers that we have 10 years ago or 5 years ago. And so We should, we are at a stage where we can use this hardware, not only for communicating, but also for in the future for AI processing and inference and so on.

is, we need to, understand that the word cannot be connected to Google. I mean we cannot be a function of Google. We cannot be a function of AWS. And so I think that, there is, escalating pace of, towards centralization and it's almost a black hole.

And eventually, the, we'll attract all the lights and if we are too close to it, no lights will come out anymore. And, that's why we want to really to double down on this technology, because it's not going to be easy, right? It's going to be very challenging, and most of the people don't care, as Maite has said before.

Most of the people will think, everything works with WhatsApp and, Signal, but Signal announced that their 2023 costs for data centers and data center costs are around 50 million, and they, apart from the mobile coin that was not The best thing that they could do, there is, it's not easy for them to monetize.

And the problem is that if you are, you're basically almost the only way to monetize it is to sell your customer's data. So if you don't want to sell your customer data, eventually your service will not be sustainable. So the only way to make it sustainable is actually going back to peer, where you can leverage people, infrastructure, people, connectivity, people, phones, people, processing power, Deliver very high quality communication system.

And when they will care, it will be probably usually too late if nothing exists yet. when people will care is because shit is hitting the fan. And, you really want to have a solution that is not, that will survive if, the countries around you or around the country where you live are not going to be nice to your own country.

So that's the view to peer-to-peer. The peer-to-peer wheel system will keep working if your neighbor countries are not going to be nice towards you. That's independence, that's resiliency, those are terms that, we need to take very seriously, especially seeing where the, world is going to.

Knut: Yeah, I think we're all primed for, centralized solutions, from a very young age. this is the state, this is what it is like, state funded schooling. state funders or state subsidized media. We are, like brainwashed into, trusting, institutions all our lives.

So I think that is somewhat connected to why people are so reluctant to be vigilant about this on the internet. I think the two go hand in hand that we, take the comfortable way, or most people take the comfortable route of, not taking responsibility for their own stuff. not only on the internet, but outsourcing responsibility to the government is basically the, another side of the same coin, right?

Mathias: I also find it very interesting, especially being from a small country like Denmark that doesn't have a lot of homegrown infrastructure. And I'm just seeing how much communication with some of the public entities is happening through centralized platforms like Facebook and things like that, where even though we centralize it, we also centralize it in companies that we don't even have any control over in different countries where we probably have, no rights at all.

So it's like hyper centralization, especially from the weakest point of view. And I think that's super problematic. And I'm always. Thinking it's, weird that we're not talking about that more especially when you look at the things that they're trying to do in the EU, they're almost trying to just push more in that direction, which I find even more interesting.

yeah, definitely. it's, a huge problem and it's only getting bigger. And that's, why

Challenges and Future of Decentralization

Luke: So to what level can decentralization actually get there? What is the limit to decentralization? And I'll calibrate this with an example. The internet itself, you said it was built to essentially originally be decentralized, but we don't have it. For physical links, like individual physical links between each other, the fiber or whatever the wire is goes together into another group of wires, which eventually go into some backbone, which is operated by a company.

And then that goes into the global Internet. And so somewhere it centralizes into telecom companies and other services. It might be decentralized on one level, but there is a layer of centralized services that make the internet work that isn't necessarily the so called cloud providers and that sort of thing.

So is there a limitation to how far this can go?

Paolo: I think the, in general, sure, there are the ISPs and, their physical infrastructure is in part centralized, but also you start having redundancy, right? So for example, the backbones are redundant. There are multiple companies running, cross connects across different areas of the world.

Now you have Starlink if you want. that is a great way to start decentralizing connectivity because Starlink will not be the only one that will run satellites, so there will be multiple companies that will allow you to connect through satellites, plus you have normal cabling.

So you will have, it will become a huge mesh network, it's already in part, but it will become more and more a huge mesh network. in general, you will always find a way, even with a pigeon, to start sending bits out of your house.

I think the most important part is, you have to be in control of your own data, and then, you need to send this data with the shortest path to the people that you want to talk to. Right now, I usually make this example, because I think it's When we do this presentation, we try to make people think about how much waste also centralized systems have created.

imagine you live in Rome, you live in Rome and you have your family. Most people live nearby their families. That is a classic thing among humans. 90 percent of the people live nearby their families. Maybe nearby, like 10km, 50km nearby. If you talk to your family, every single message, every single photo that you will send to your family, that message will travel, instead of going 50 kilometers in a nearby town where your mother lives or your father lives, it will travel every single message, every single bit of every single video call or every single bit of every photo will travel 5, 000 miles to Frankfurt just to go back 50 kilometers from you.

Imagine how much government spent in order to create these internet lines and to empower them to make it bigger, more, with more capacity Peer to peer allows with a lower latency, allows to save on bandwidth, allows to save on cost of global infrastructure.

So that's how, actually, We can create better mesh networks, more resilient mesh networks, just because data will always find the shortest path from one point to another.

And still all roads lead to Rome. I'm Italian, so I need to use Rome as an example.

Knut: Yeah.

Mathias: I think the discussion here is really interesting compared to Bitcoin, because it's actually the scaling longer term. Sovereignty, like how, Bitcoin kind of told us very direct terms that if you have a key pair, you have your money.

And it doesn't matter where you are in the world. If you have that key pair, you have a way to get to that money. the means of transportation, it's actually very uninteresting in that sense, because you have it with you. The Internet today, the centralized Internet is designed in a way where, what does it mean to go to Facebook?

it's really hard to explain because it's like some certificate that issued by somebody, and there's. Some, cabal of companies that manages them, there's some regulations around it, but we don't really actually understand it that well as normal people. Technically, we can understand it, but it's very, centralized and it's very, opaque and it's built into the infrastructure in that way, in a bad way.

And, with Pure Technology, we're taking the same approach as Bitcoin here and saying, You're just a key pair, and the other person is just a key pair, and there's a bunch of protocols around that, but the transportation is actually not that interesting. Right now, we use the internet to do it.

We'll probably do that for a long time, but there's no reason why we can take the same technology we have right now and in 50 years run it on, laser beams or something else, because we're taking the software and feedback.

Bitcoin and Holepunch: Drawing Parallels

Mathias: I think, that's the main thing to think about in that. Discussion.

Luke: when, Paolo, when you were talking about that people don't care, when you were saying that people don't care because WhatsApp just works, I was at the same time thinking that's the parallel of people saying that, I don't care because Visa just works, right? And so the parallel between Bitcoin and what you're doing at Holepunch, Keet, everything else here, really seems to be tracking along the same line.

And I guess there's the connection that, I won't say all, but a lot of the people involved are already in the Bitcoin ecosystem. But can you comment on is there a little more of a connection there between Holepunch and Keet and Bitcoin?

Paolo: Yeah, Bitcoin definitely is working and servicing, I think, in a good way, many, people in communities. The users of Bitcoin today are, unfortunately, and also that relates to Tether, mostly, in the Western world, in the richer countries, as a way to save wealth and, as a store of value, more than a means of exchange.

For different reasons, right? We'd like a network that would improve, of course, over time, and there will be different approaches, but, still, the world is not yet using Bitcoin, but the world will use Bitcoin when shit will hit the fan. but the beauty of Bitcoin is that an option is already there, is available, and when something bad will happen, people immediately, with a snap of a finger, will turn to Bitcoin, and will have it and can use it. don't have that in communications. What is our communica our parallel with communications, if we don't have it? I don't know, because if, if suddenly centralized communications will, be blocked, then, or privacy in communications will be blocked, and you cannot, you cannot use Whatsapp, or Whatsapp has to start giving all the information to every single government.

and the government will become more evil than what they are today, also western governments then. don't, we wanted to build the exact parallel as we said it, we just tried to describe it, that with Bitcoin, for communications. We need to have something that, since there are so many alternatives that are working as with your, you can make the parallel with Visa, right?

Visa is working today, so people are still using a lot of Visa, but if something will happen, they will use Bitcoin from one day to another. Whatsapp is working, and Zoom is working, and Google Meet is working, so people don't feel the urge, but there will be a trigger point when people will feel the urge at some point in their lives, because something happened around them, and we need to make sure that kit will be available to them.

and will be an option, will be stable, will be well designed so that when they will need it the most that option will be available to them.

Luke: Yeah, fantastic.

The Future of Decentralized Communication

Luke: And so I think the follow up I have, and just to get back to the earlier discussion a little bit with Nostr, the communication in terms of messaging, I absolutely see that and directly in what Keet is, I already absolutely see that. Is there a goal to get somewhere towards more like Social media, social networking, things like that in a, in certainly a decentralized way, but right now there isn't something like that as I understand it, coming from, Keet.

So is, that a goal? Is that on the roadmap?

Paolo: Yeah, it is on the roadmap, it's something that, so we had to start with the thing that we thought was more urgent and also the thing that could have been, would have been a game changer. social media is very important, especially In difficult situation, you want to get news, and you want to get unbiased news, so you want to use, social networks to see what's happening in the world.

But we, think that the most sacrosanct thing that you need in your life is to be able to talk to your family and friends in any situation with the highest privacy possible. that's the first thing that we tackled, and also was a way to battle test the technology with, KIT you can do high quality video calls as well, so if we are able to tackle in the best way possible privacy and extreme scalability of peer to peer communications, then on top of that foundation we can build also social media and every single other application that we have in mind.

Mathias: But first, we wanted to tackle the hardest problem. No, I think it makes a lot of sense. And I also just want to say, as a, probably like one of the most prolific KEET users, I use KEET right now also as a very, like a social media, we have big public rooms where we talk about KEET and talk about technology. I get a lot of the value I would get otherwise on Twitter X from that because I, it's like a public platform for me to, get ideas out there, but also interact with users directly.

And I think, there's many ways to take them as a young app. And we're talking about this a lot, obviously it has to be simple, has to be parent approved. My parents can figure it out, but I think, to a large degree, all really healthy social networks that are actually, to some degree, a communication app.

And it's also just a really good way to get local news and to get this locality that Peter is good at. That doesn't mean that we might not also make other things, but I think it's a hard line to set the difference between a social network and a communications app when it's structured correctly,

Interoperability and User Experience

Luke: Yeah, and this, another thing that came to mind just as, you were talking about these parallels, as, I understand it, the account system with Keet is, essentially still just a, Key pair. Correct me if I'm, wrong,

Mathias: Very, true.

Luke: you backups with the same 1224 words.

Is, that fully interoperable as well? Is that, could be your Bitcoin key. That could be

Mathias: We use the, same, I can't remember the date, the BIP, but there's a BIP for like during key generation. So we can use it also in the future for other things. and you have those words, you have your account, and that's, we never store that. And that's like your sovereignty and, no, I was just going to say that lets you use it seamlessly on different devices also. It's one of those things that I love because I know what's going on when you use keyed Insanely hard problem, but it's solved by the runtime, and it just works seamlessly and I think that's, the beauty of it.

Paolo: I think there's some UX stuff to figure out about onboarding that stuff a little bit easier for normal people. That's probably to a large degree the same for Bitcoin. The other part that I would do with Bitcoin is that, with Bitcoin, with your 12, 24 words, you can access your private wealth. the beauty of Bitcoin is that you can remember 12 24 words, you cross borders, and you carry with you your wealth. You can do the same thing with your digital private life.

You remember 12 24 words, they could be the same by the way. whatever happens, you can spawn back your digital private life fully encrypted from, one of your other devices that you connected that is somewhere else in the world. So when you start seeing and understanding the unlock in terms of also human resilience that this creates is very, insane and can create a very powerful, that can be used for, to create a very, powerful applications, not just communications, but you can build.

Really any sort of interaction, even mapping. Imagine peer to peer mapping, where basically data is not stored in one single location. You can access, tiles of the maps, from, local people that curate them in a better way. So the, level of applications that you can build, All unlocked by the same technology that is being used by Bitcoin is very, incredible.

Luke: Yes, absolutely it is. And what do you think of the idea that all of this stuff is just interoperable now based on essentially you have your private key and there you go. It doesn't matter the technology stack. Is that sort of an agnostic thing where you can take your data to any one of these systems?

What you're building with Keith being one, Nostr being another, Bitcoin being a third, what do you think of that?

Paolo: Yeah, the fact that, data is yours, right? So you should do whatever you want with your data. That is, I think, an axiom that we should assume. And, it shouldn't even, we shouldn't even discuss about this, right? We are discussing about it because people are trying to take away this axiom from us.

The, you are a key pair, and you're basically, unique, and uniqueness is expressed by the cryptography around those 24 words, and that's, that also is a way to prove your identity, it's a mathematical way to prove your identity.

No one can steal that from you, of course, but no one can track it as no one can impersonate, should not be able to impersonate you. So it's truly powerful.

Mathias: also think it's like worth remembering here also in this discussion that a lot of very high valuable data for yourself is actually not that big, but centralized platforms take it hostage anyway. if you take all my chat history and, I have pictures, but like a couple of the pictures would probably be bigger than all my chat history ever.

but a lot of that, those messages have a lot of value for me, especially personally and also being able to search through it and have infinite history, it's very valuable for me personally. But it's very scary for me if that's on some other platform where it gets leaked at some point, et cetera, et cetera.

But we already have the devices, just normal consumer devices that we buy, that we all have, phones, computers, whatever, that have more than enough capacity to store multiple copies of this. In terms of like per user, data production, it's a manageable problem.

And I think it's interesting how, providers force us to think in terms of giving that data away, even though we could easily store it.

Paolo: And this is even more important when we think about potential, AI applications, right? So imagine your best assistant. Paolo's assistant should go through all my emails, my kids chats, my old social stuff, and be able to be my best assistant. But in order to do that, I have two options.

Either, I imagine that OpenAI would come with an assistant. They would upload, All the information on their servers, crunch that information, and then, use it to serve, me, but also service their own needs. And that can become very scary, also because they wear a hat. It's public, right?

you don't want your most intimate codes that your best personal assistant could know, to be on somewhere else, rather than your devices. And so people were, people never uploaded, at least most of the people would never upload medical, information on Facebook, right? But they are uploading it on ChatGPT to get a second opinion.

so things can be, get even scarier than what we described today because, we, discussed about social media, that is basically, the fun part where we upload photos, But, things can become scarier when it comes to privacy and data control with ai.

So I want to see a future where I have a local AI that can read all key messages that I have from my local phone on my local device, and can become the best powers assistant possible without renouncing to my privacy, and also still governed by the same 24 words. the fine tuning that is applied on that LLM should stay local to my own device, and it should be in control of that.

And still, the current power of the devices that we have makes it possible. We should not fall for the same lie. We don't need, of course, big data centers with GPUs are important for training a huge LLM, but that is a generic LLM. You can take that one and then fine tune it with your own data and run it by yourself.

And for most of it, unless you want to do crazy things, that is more than enough and can run on modern GPUs or local GPUs or your phones. We should start thinking that we can build local experiences without having an API all the time connected to someone else's data center.

Knut: Yeah.

The Role of Tether in the Crypto Ecosystem

Knut: It's super interesting. you briefly just briefly mentioned tether before and I think we need to get into this. what is it and how much of a maxi are you, Paolo?

And, what, made this thing happen? Can you give us the story here about Tether?

Tether's Origin and Evolution

Paolo: Tether started in 2014. I consider myself a maxi, but running Tether, you could say that, I'm a shit coiner. I don't mind, right? I like what I do, and I think I'm net positive, so it's okay. Tera was born in 2014 with a very simple idea. there were a few crypto exchanges in, 2014.

it was Bitfinex, Coinbase, Kraken, Bitstamp. OKCoin, there was BTCChina, and just a few others, right? Around 10 that were meaningful. The problem back then was to do, trading arbitrage, you sell Bitcoin on the exchange where the price is higher, you take the dollars. From that sale, you move the dollars on the exchange where the price is lower and rinse and repeat.

That is called arbitrage. It is a property of every single efficient financial system. And that also helps to keep the price of Bitcoin in line across different exchanges. But, that was very, hard in 2014. If you remember in 2013 was the first year that Bitcoin broke the 1, 000.

But on some exchanges the price was 1. 2, on others was 900. in order to arbitrage that price difference, you have to move dollars from one exchange to another and Bitcoin from one exchange to another. You can move Bitcoin from one exchange to another. 10 minutes, but dollars would take days, right?

International wires. And so of course the opportunity arbitrage was, fully gone by, the, time the wire was hitting the, receiving exchange. the reason why we created that was, USDT was simply to put the dollar on a blockchain so that we could have the same user experience that we had with bitcoin.

For the first two years, almost no exchange apart Bitfinex understood USDT. Then Poloniex in 2016 started to add the USDT across for against every single trading pair. There was the start of the ICO boom. 2017 was the peak of the ICO boom and, USDT reached 1 billion in market cap. Fast forward in 2020, we had around 10 billion in market cap, and then the bull run started, but also another important thing started, that was the pandemic.

USDT's Impact on Emerging Markets

Paolo: So the pandemic had a huge effect on many economies around the world, in all the economies around the world, but especially in emerging markets, developing countries.

Basically pandemic also killed entire economies. And so as a Bitcoin you would think, oh, all these people that are in countries like Argentina and Venezuela and Turkey and so on, they should use Bitcoin and they should, they should, only use Bitcoin because everything else is cheap.

So that is pretty much, the approach that we have as Bitcoiners that, I believe in. But the problem is that. Not everyone is ready, so not everyone has our time to understand Bitcoin. Not everyone has yet the full skill set to understand Bitcoin at this stage, at this moment in time.

we as Bitcoiners didn't build the best user experience in the world, right? So one of the best wallets for Bitcoin is still Electrum. That, is not necessarily nice and well done for and simple to be used for, a 70 year old lady. so we need to do a better job as Bitcoiners to build better user experiences we want Bitcoin to be more used around the world.

At the same time, 99 percent of the population knows, especially the ones that are living in high inflation areas, knows that there is the dollar that is usually Much better currency than what they hold in their hands. the US dollar is not, definitely not perfect. It's not the perfect fiat currency. but it's like the tale of the two friends running away from the lion, right?

you have, one friend tells to the other, Oh, the lion is gonna kill us. We have to run really fast. And one of the two friends says to the other, I just have to run faster than you, right? So the US dollar is the friend that is running faster, in a sense that is the one that is likely better than the others.

And so being better than the others is creating a sort of safety feeling among 5 billion people in the world that live in high inflation countries. And for those people that, they don't have yet the time, they didn't have the luck also, maybe, to understand Bitcoin, they are, in fact, using USDT.

If you live in Argentina, peso lost 98% against the US dollar in the last five years. The Turkish L lost 80% against the US dollar in, the last five years. So of course, Bitcoin would be better than the US dollar, but even already, if you hold the dollar, you are the king of the hill there, right?

So because it's, you are able to preserve your wealth much, better than almost anyone else in the region. I think, USDT is offering a temporary solution and is providing a service, a very good service to people that don't have alternatives and good alternatives and they are very, familiar with the U.

S. dollar already. so eventually, the hyperbitcoinization, I think it will happen. there is no way it won't happen. It's hard to pinpoint on a time when, that will happen. But it's all about the turning point. What the economy will look like in the next, 10, 20 years and what trigger point there will be for fiat currencies to blow up and become irrelevant.

Bitcoin as a Savings Account

Paolo: the way I see it is that it's likely that the U. S. dollar will stay around for a while, and people might still want to use, the U. S. dollar as a checking account, but they, should start to use, Bitcoin as their savings account, in the checking account, you, are happy to not make interest, It's something that you use for payments, it's something that you are okay to detach from because it's the money that you are ready to spend.

The savings account is the thing that we should fight for. This thing is the thing that matter the most, and, it's the thing that will is protecting people wealth. And so in the long term. And in the medium term, we should push for this savings account to be Bitcoin. also with Tether, we are heavily investing in companies, in Bitcoin companies.

we support the Blockstream. We supported so many in the space that are, we, are supporting RGB. That is a protocol that is building, assets on top of, like network, style channels. Thank you for listening. and we buy Bitcoin ourselves. We do a lot of Bitcoin mining.

We develop, I think, the best and most sophisticated Bitcoin mining software, by the way, based on hole punch technology. It's like IoT for Bitcoiners and Bitcoin mining. It's very cool. we are relying on the dollar and, you could say that USDT is helping the dollar, expansion, but the same way I don't think Dollar and Bitcoin aren't necessarily opposed to one or the other.

I think that Bitcoin has its own path. And no matter what happens, there is no way to slow it down. I think, it's going to be inevitable success. It's going to be inevitable that it will become global internet money and global words money. No country will trust to each other with, with each other currencies for, for a longer time, and so the only viable solution is a currency that is governed by math.

That is the only objective way, objective thing that we have in the universe. that's my train of thoughts on, Tether and Bitcoin.

Knut: Oh, thank you. Thank you for that explanation. It explains a lot of things. To me, it sounds a bit like you're a lubrication company, like selling lubrication for the transition between the rape of the dollar to the love fest of the hyperbitcoinized world, to make the transition a little smoother.

Paolo: we are more than, at Tether we have also this educational arm and, believe it or not, the majority of the creation we do is actually on Bitcoin, right? So we are supporting the Plan B network led by the great Giacomo Zucco. The unfortunate thing is that USDT, didn't have a marketing team up to, 2022 with Tether.

So basically, I wish I could say that success of Tether is because we were super intelligent and great. but actually the success of Tether, unfortunately is a symptom of the success of, of, national economies. And it's sad if you think about it, right? So the success of your main product U as it is, They're actually proportional to the FACAP of many central banks. And, but it is what it is, right? So we need to do what we do at, really, at DataRace, creating all these educational contents to try to explain that, sure, we are providing a tool for today, but, For tomorrow you probably need, you need to understand that you have other options, you need to understand Bitcoin, because as we said for, Keith, right?

So the moment when you will need the most Bitcoin, it has to be available, you need to understand it, so that is a true option for you. The way we, see bitcoin education.

Knut: No, and, something like Tether would have, emerged, either way, and it's very comforting to know that it's run by Bitcoiners and not by a central bank itself or something. yeah, and the Plan B Network, I was a guest lecturer there in Logano and it was fantastic.

I love what you're doing there with the educational hub. And we even got Giacomo to write the foreword to our new book here that you can see here behind Luke.

Luke: Always say the title, Knut. Always say the title.

Knut: Bitcoin, the inverse of Clown World. It's, you, if, you're good at maths and emojis, you might be able to figure out the title from the cover, but it's one divided by Clown World anyway, which is on the opposite side of the everything divided by 21 million equation, So anyway, looking forward to seeing you in Lugano and giving you both a copy of the book, of course.

Paolo: Oh, with pleasure, with great pleasure, with a nice, education.

Luke: Absolutely. Yep.

Plan B Forum and Future Events

Luke: 100%. And we have to wind things down, but I'll just say as well, yeah, absolutely looking forward to Lugano Plan B Forum. Always a highlight of the year. It was my first time last year. I absolutely loved it. can't wait to attend this year.

so it's the 25th, 2020 6th of October, 2024. this year, it's a Bitcoin event that is not made to make money. So the problem with events is that. You have to find sponsors, and usually, sponsor might not be well aligned with the message you want to give, right? I think Tether is lucky enough, to not have to make money on the event.

Paolo: I want to have, good, guests. I want to have great speakers. I want to have the messaging. That is not only about Bitcoin, it's about, freedom of speech as well. We had the family of Assange for the last few years, and I think that they will come also this year.

I'm going to be probably killed by the By our marketing team, I'm not sure if they announced it, but we are going to have another Plan B event also in El Salvador next year, so we're trying to create this network of cities and countries that have things in common and, invite people that want to share knowledge around the world.

And, yeah, and of course we, are very proud of the good food that we, serve in Lugano. So that is another thing that, not all the bands can say the same thing.

Knut: No, it's fantastic. And we happened to bump into the Assange family at the cocktail bar in a fancy hotel and, had a very interesting conversation with them there. So if you're listening. Anyone from the Assange family is welcome on the show any time. So yeah, no looking forward to that event for sure, we had a great time.

And I think we're even playing this year, aren't we, Luke?

Paolo: You're

Luke: yeah, the Satoshi Rakamoto is in the event there, we, played, back in Prague, it was my first, time, but Knut is a regular at the Rakamotos.

Yeah, we played at Lugano last year Oh, anything and everything, what did we do in Prague?

Knut: paranoid and,

Paolo: Can I commission a

Knut: What song would you like to hear?

Paolo: I have two that I would suggest. One is Nothing Else Matters.

Knut: Alright.

Paolo: So I think that, is very inspiring, right?

Knut: Bitcoin, for sure.

Nothing Else Matters. it's perfectly aligned with Bitcoin. And, the other one is Sad But True. Oh, that would be fun. We'll squeeze in some Metallica there, won't we, Luke?

Mathias: we'll 100% have those songs ready to go. We also have, a big peer to peer track at the conference,

Knut: Yeah.

Mathias: not so much music, but yeah, that's peer to

Knut: Nothing else matters.

Luke: looking forward to that.

Knut: Sorry, brain fart. Sad but true is about the dollar still being around,

Paolo: Yeah, you can say that.

Luke: Okay.

Final Thoughts and Closing Remarks

Luke: Hey, we have to wind things down here because, we're, almost, out of time. So I'll just hand this, back to you both. Is there anything else you'd like to, mention about, your plans in the upcoming couple of years, in, key, toll, punch, anything like that?

Mathias: only that we're, like I said, we're integrating really hard right now, and it's a really fun time to, join the company because, we're small and efficient We get to work with Tether, which has a lot of benefits and it's getting really fast, so definitely check that out. And it's also a really fun time to join Keith in our public rooms.

There's a lot of very personal, in a good way, intense chats where you get to be part of the loop. I love to be part of those early communities and I would suggest everybody to check that out and go to the website and try it out.

Paolo: we will certainly do that. Yeah, I couldn't agree more. So go check out Keith and Holepunch and the Plan B forum in Lugano, You could visit tether. io, that is, the website where we are trying to explain what we have in our minds between, finance, bitcoin mining, energy production, AI, communications, brain chips and stuff, right? I think it's more exciting.

Mathias: Just those things, that's all.

Paolo: Yeah, we can piss off more than this. Thanks.

Mathias: a

Luke: No, It's just perfect. and is on that note, is there anywhere else specific you'd like to direct our listeners?

Paolo: just follow the social channels and give us feedback on kit all the time because these technologies, needs everyone's help to be nailed them.

Mathias: We love technical feedback. We love UX feedback. We're trying to make something that works for the masses, so anything is good.

Luke: So that's, all at Keet. Is that correct? For Keet?

Mathias: Key. io and pairs. com for our runtime. It's all peer to peer.

Knut: Alright,

Mathias: Wonderful. And you're also still on the legacy social media platforms, right? Yeah.

Knut: we'll make sure to include links to your handles so people can find you there if they would like. forward to seeing you in Lugano.

Paolo: Likewise, I

Knut: But yeah, worth saying again.

Paolo: Thank you for having an invitation.

Luke: Yes, we'll wrap things up here. This has been the Bitcoin Infinity Show.

@ 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. 🐶🐾🫡🚀🚀🚀

@ 8cb60e21:5f2deaea

@ 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.

@ 5d4b6c8d:8a1c1ee3

It was great having football back. The 49ers and Chiefs continue to dominate, the Raiders, Jets, and Donkeys continue to disappoint.

I only made two picks last week. The Raiders money line was a dud, but my parlay of the Steelers money line with the under was a big hit. Unfortunately, freebitcoin hasn't put any NFL games up, yet. Hopefully they get around to it at some point.

I really like this type of parlay. The house treats outcomes as though they're independent, but I don't think that makes sense. In the event of a Steelers' win, the under was far more likely than the over, because their offense stinks and the game was likely a defensive slog.

In line with that thinking, I made two parlays this week: 1. Raiders money line with the under (7:1): yes, I'm going back to the Raiders. They're probably going to lose, but if they win, it will be because of awesome defense. 2. Bengals money line with the over (4.5:1): Maybe Joe Burrow stinks this season, but maybe the Bengals had been looking ahead to KC. The Chiefs offense is phenomenal again, so the Bengals are only likely to win if this turns into a shootout.

Are there any odds you're excited about (doesn't have to be football)?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/679894

@ 655a7cf1:d0510794

Currently have kyc BTC, huge fan of lightning Network. Because I am a constant user of lightning. Plan on doing my business with lightning as well , peer-to-peer I'm not sure if I'm so worried about kyc I might be misguided in this situation.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/679520

@ 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!

🐶🐾🤯🤯🤯🫂💜

@ 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：

@ 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. 🐶🐾🫡

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Test Bounty Note

@ 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

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So here’s my recommendation.

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

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

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

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

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

Represented as Hash rates of different miners:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000119426751592357%

Over a year, your chances increase to: 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000627707006369428%

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

0.000005%

Over a year, your chances increase to: 0.00026%

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

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

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

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

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

@ 6ad3e2a3:c90b7740

While I love traveling and usually feel enriched by the experience, I dread and detest the process of going to the airport and getting on a plane. It’s not that I’m afraid of flying — though a plane crash would be one of the worst ways to die — but that the airlines and airports have made the experience as inefficient, dehumanizing and cumbersome as possible. While in the short-term these measures might have generated some extra revenue, cut costs or staved off encroachment from competitors, long-term it cannot be good for the service you offer to be so universally reviled. In the interest of improving their product — and the experience of millions of future passengers including me — here are some practical suggestions:

1. Separate passengers from their bags as early as possible.

The single stupidest airline policy is that checking a bag costs extra while carry-ons are free. What that does is incentivize everyone to drag their luggage through the airport and onto the plane. This has several negative consequences:

a) Even though most airlines have assigned seats, everyone lines up 10 or 20 minutes before the start of the already too long boarding process, frantically hoping to secure some scarce overhead space rather than relaxing in the terminal and boarding at their leisure before the door closes.

b) The process of people filing into the narrow plane aisle(s) with their bags and taking time to load them into the overheads stalls the entire boarding process. Not only do people stand in line at the boarding gate, but they stand in line in the jet bridge and again in the aisle(s). Whereas boarding with purses, laptops and other small, under-the-seat items might take 10 minutes or so, getting all the luggage in takes half an hour. If there are 150 people aboard, that’s 3,000 minutes (50 hours) of human life squandered on a useless and stressful activity. Multiply that by thousands of flights per day.

c) The process of deplaning is also slow because everyone has to get their bags out of the overhead. That’s another 15-minute process that should take five.

d) Everyone going through security with all their carry-ons slows down the security line significantly and makes people have to arrive at the airport earlier.

e) Because everyone has their bags, they have to lug them around the terminal while using the restroom, eating or shopping for something to read. Having a 20-pound weight on your shoulder only makes the experience that much more miserable.

The solution to this is for airlines to allow free checked bags and charge for carry-ons with the exception of parents traveling with young children.

To make the process of checking bags more efficient and less cumbersome there should be an immediate drop-off outside the airport. Like curb-side check-in, but automated, a giant conveyor belt of sorts where everyone drops their bag that will be sorted appropriately inside. This drop off area would have security keeping an eye on it, but it would be self-serve and connect at all entry points including curb-side, the parking garage, from the train, etc.

There would be no need for bag tags because people could have an airport-certified chip inserted into their luggage that syncs with the traveler’s boarding pass, i.e., the system reads the chip and directs the bag to the proper gate underground. (Maybe there would be a plastic bin at all the drop-off points you into which you put your bag so luggage of different shapes, sizes and materials could move smoothly and reliably on the conveyor belt to its destination.)

Security details would have to be worked out (maybe you’d have to scan your boarding pass or passport at the bag drop to open it), but as it stands, once you drop your bag off at the curb or the check-in area, it’s essentially the same process now, i.e, it has to be scanned internally before being placed on the plane.

2. Eliminate Security Lines

Going through security would be far easier without all the bags, but to expedite and improve it further, we should make two key changes, neither of which should be beyond our capacity to implement.

a) Instead of a single-file conveyor belt scanned by humans, make the conveyor belt wide enough for everyone to put their laptops, belts, etc. on simultaneously. This could easily be done by providing plastic bins (as they do now), but with individual numbers and keys on them, like you’d find in most locker rooms. You’d grab bin 45, for example, pull the key out, put your things in it, lock it, walk through the metal detector, retrieve your bin on the other side, unlock it, get your things, put the key back in it, and it gets returned for re-use.

Instead of a bored-out-of-his-mind human looking at each bag individually, there would be a large scanner that would look at all the bags simultaneously and flag anything suspicious.

b) Just as there’s no reason to send the bags through the scanner single-file, there’s no reason to send the people through that way, either. Instead, install room-wide metal detectors through which dozens of people could walk simultaneously. Any passengers that set it off would be digitally marked by the detector, directed back out, shed the offending item into a numbered bin and collect it on the other side.

Basically, you’d drop anything big off before you even set foot in the building, and you’d drop everything else into a security bin, walk through without waiting and collect it on the other side.

3. Make sure the gates are clean, have enough seats to accommodate the passengers of even the largest planes that come through, ample charging stations and reliable and free wi-fi.

Because you’re no longer forced to line up and hustle for overhead space, you’ll be spending more time sitting comfortably in the terminal.

4. Have clean, efficient public transportation from the center of each city directly to the airport. (Some cities already have this.) Not a train, a bus and a one-mile walk.

There are smaller things airports could do to make the process even better — and I’ll suggest some below — but these three would at least make it tolerable and humane. It would shave off roughly an hour per trip, spare people the burden of schlepping around with heavy bags, wading through slow-moving security lines (which add stress if you’re in danger of missing your flight), standing in the terminal, waiting in line after line to sit in a cramped and uncomfortable seat for 20-30 minutes before the plane even takes off and remaining stuck in that seat 15 minutes after the plane has made it to the gate while people one by one painstakingly get their bags out of the overhead bins. Moreover, people could get to the airport later without rushing, and if they were early, they could relax in the terminal or get work done.

Here are some other suggestions:

1. With fewer people using the overhead bins, rip them out. There would be a few bins at designated spots (just like there are a few emergency exits), but the interior of the plane would feel more spacious and less claustrophobic. You also wouldn’t risk hitting your head when you stood up.
2. Airplanes should have reasonably priced (ideally free) wi-fi and outlets in each row. There’s no way it costs anywhere near the $35 per flight, per person GoGo Inflight absurdly charges.
3. Treat airports as public squares — invest in their design as well as their functionality. Incorporate outdoor spaces, green spaces. Attract decent restaurants, bars, cafes. People unencumbered by bags and not rushing to wait in line to board 40 minutes early will be more able to enjoy the environment and arriving travelers will immediately get a good impression and be put at ease.
4. Do not advertise mileage rewards from credit cards or other sources unless those miles are actually redeemable at a reasonable rate and on routes and times someone would actually fly. As it stands those programs are borderline fraud — you can fly a middle seat one way from NY to LA for 30,000 miles at 6 am, but that’s not why I signed up for the credit card. If mileage plans are too costly, scrap them.

I can anticipate some objections to these ideas, and I’ll address each one in turn.

1. This would cost too much money.

My suggestions would require a significant initial investment, but it would be but a small piece of the infrastructure outlay that’s sorely needed — and on which our current president campaigned — and it would create jobs. Moreover, it would save travelers tens of millions of hours per year. At $15 per hour — it would pay for itself in short order. (And taxpayers’ squandered time and awful experiences are exactly what their tax dollars should go toward remediating.)

2. It’s too much of a security risk.

Airport security is incredibly flawed right now, as tests repeatedly show. You can get prohibited items through security easily already, and it’s likely the screening process is mostly “security theater,” i.e., just for show. But to the extent this is a serious concern, the newer system might actually improve security due to improved technology spurred by the infrastructure investment. Better detection could be designed into the new system, rather than relying on bored-out-of-their-mind humans to scan endlessly through people’s toiletries expecting to find nothing for hours and days on end.

Moreover, airport security has never actually been an issue in the US. Even on 9/11, the flimsy security worked well — the hijackers managed only boxcutters on the tragically ill-fated flights, not guns or bombs. In other words, that was a failure of government intelligence, not one of airline security even when no one took his shoes off or had to worry about how many ounces of liquid was in his shampoo bottle.

3. I like free carry-ons because it saves me from waiting at the baggage claim.

Great, then pay extra for that. When something you like individually causes collective harm, there needs to be a cost for it. That we have the opposite system where people doing what would make everyone else’s experience easier and better have to pay is perverse.

The bottom line — the current state of air travel both in the US and Europe is unacceptable*. We cannot have a system in which everyone participating despises it and simply pretend it’s an inevitable hassle about which we’re powerless to do anything. The central issue is the dehumanizing** lack of respect for travelers’ time and experience. It’s time to change our priorities and take care of the human beings for whom airports and air travel exist.

*I haven’t even touched on the awful state of flights themselves with cramped seats, small, dirty rest rooms, bad food and exorbitant fees to change your itinerary. That’s because I wanted to focus mostly on the airport/government side over which the public has ownership, and fixing the overall economics of air travel is probably more difficult than getting airlines to reverse their checked-bag fee policies.

** This article was written in March of 2017, and little did I know how much more dehumanizing things would get during covid.

@ 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.

@ 6ad3e2a3:c90b7740

I’ll write a separate Week 1 Observations later, but I wanted to dedicate this space solely to mourning my Circa Survivor entry.

Circa Survivor costs $1000 to enter and has a $10M prize for the winner, usually split by several as things get down to the wire. Three years ago, when the prize was $6M Dalton Del Don and I — the first time we ever entered — made it to the final 23 in Week 12. The value of our share was something like $260K at that point, but we got bounced by the Lions who beat the 12-point favored Cardinals and took home nothing.

When you enter a large survivor pool, the overwhelming likelihood is you’ll meet this fate at some point, whether in Week 1 or 12. So it’s not really the loss that’s painful, so much as not getting to live and die each week with a chosen team. You lose your status as “the man in the arena whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood” and become just an observer watching and commentating on the games without the overarching purpose of surviving each week.

This year was also different due to the lengths to which I went to sign up. It’s not just the $1000 fee, it’s getting to Vegas in person, the $400 in proxy fees (you need locals to input your picks for you if you don’t live there), the $60 credit card fee, the $200 crappy hotel I booked at the last minute, the flights (one of which was cancelled due to heat), the rental car that necessitated, the gas, getting lost in the desert, the entire odyssey while sick and still jet-lagged in 122-degree heat.

But it’s not about the money, and it’s not even about the herculean effort per se, but the feeling and narrative I crafted around it. I was the guy who got this done. I flew from Portugal to San Francisco for 12 hours, two days later from SF to Palm Springs to help my 87-YO uncle with his affairs, improvised to get from Palm Springs to Vegas, which took six hours due to road closures, signed up for the contests, made the flight back to San Francisco, flew to Denver at 7 am the next day, took my daughter the Rockies game in the afternoon and then on to Boulder the following day. Maybe that’s not so impressive to some of you, but for me, an idle ideas person, a thinker, observer, someone who likes to express himself via a keyboard, it was like Alexander the Great conquering Persia.

And it’s not only about that smaller mission, or the narrative I crafted around it, but a larger one which was to bring sports content to nostr which I vowed to do before the summer which is why I felt I had to make the effort to get to Vegas to sign up for the contests, to have sufficient skin in the game, to have something real about which to write.

And I got the idea to do this seriously because Heather wrote a guide to Lisbon which I posted on nostr, and a few prominent developers there were surprisingly excited about getting that kind of quality content on the protocol. And I thought — if they’re this excited about a (very in-depth) guide to one particular city in Europe, how much more value could I create posting about a hobby shared by 50-odd million Americans? And that thought (and the fact I had to go to Palm Springs anyway) is what set me off on the mission in the first place and got me thinking this would be Team of Destiny, Part 2, only to discover, disappointingly, it’s real destiny was not to make it out of the first week.

. . .

While my overwhelming emotion is one of disappointment, there’s a small element of relief. Survivor is a form of self-inflicted torture that probably subtracts years from one’s life. Every time Rhamondre Stevenson broke the initial tackle yesterday was like someone tightening a vice around my internal organs. There was nothing I could do but watch, and I even thought about turning it off. At one point, I was so enraged, I had to calm down consciously and refuse to get further embittered by events going against me. Mike Gesicki had a TD catch overturned because he didn’t hold the ball to the ground, The next play Tanner Hudson fumbled while running unimpeded to the end zone. I kept posting, “Don’t tilt” after every negative play.

There’s a perverse enjoyment to getting enraged about what’s going on, out of your control, on a TV screen, but when you examine the experience, it really isn’t good or wholesome. I become like a spoiled child, ungrateful for everything, miserable and indignant at myriad injustices and wrongs I’m powerless to prevent.

At one point Sasha came in to tell me she had downloaded some random game from the app store on her Raspberry Pi computer. I had no interest in this as I was living and dying with every play, but I had forced myself to calm down so much already, I actually went into her room to check it out, not a trace of annoyance in my voice or demeanor.

I don’t think she cared about the game, or about showing it to me, but had stayed with her friends most of the weekend and was just using it as an excuse to spend a moment together with her dad. I scratched her back for a couple seconds while standing behind her desk chair. The game was still going on, and even though I was probably going to lose, and I was still sick about it, I was glad to have diverted a moment’s attention from it to Sasha.

. . .

In last week’s Survivor post, I wrote:

What method do I propose to see into the future? Only my imagination. I’m going to spend a lot of time imagining what might happen, turn my brain into a quantum device, break space-time and come to the right answers. Easier said than done, but I’m committed.

It’s possible I did this, but simply retrieved my information from the wrong branch of the multiverse. It happens.

. . .

I picked the Bengals knowing full well the Bills were the correct “pot odds” play which is my usual method. Maybe when the pot-odds are close, I might go with my gut, but they were not especially close this week, and yet I still stuck with Cincinnati because they were the team I trusted more.

And despite it being a bad pick — there are no excuses in Survivor, no matter what happens in the game, if you win it’s good, and lose it’s bad — I don’t feel that badly about it.

I regret it only because I wish I were still alive, but it was my error. I went with what I believed, and it was wrong. That I can live with 100 times better than swapping out my belief for someone else’s and losing. Had I done that I’d be inconsolable.

. . .

I won’t let the Survivor debacle undermine my real mission to bring sports to nostr. Team of Destiny 2 would have been a compelling story, but it was never essential. After all, my flight was cancelled and I had to improvise, so now my Survivor entry is cancelled, and I’ll have to improvise again. The branch of the multiverse where the Bengals won didn’t give me the information I wanted, but maybe it was what I really needed to know. That I am the man in the arena yet, the battle was ever against myself, and for a brief moment, while my team was losing, I prevailed.

@ 129f5189:3a441803

Project 2025, outlined in the Heritage Foundation's "Mandate for Leadership" document, serves as a fundamental guide for the next Republican administration. Despite Trump's extensive denial, in today's material, we will explore the deepening and continuation of many policies already employed during his first term. The idea is that this material will serve as a reference document to consult and verify what was actually implemented and/or followed. https://image.nostr.build/e3b89d71ff929258e5d9cb0b5ca8709a381598f43d8be4b17df3c69c0bc74d4a.jpg This document presents proposals for the foreign policy and the State Department of the United States of America, as well as the strategy with its political partners and adversaries. We will also address the U.S. government's communication strategy abroad. https://image.nostr.build/a4250b786f611b478aaf0be559427ad7d4296fbcacb2acc692c7f0d7eb06b0dd.jpg Reorienting U.S. Foreign Policy: Proposals for a Conservative Future In the chapter "The Department of State" from the "Mandate for Leadership," also known as "Project 2025," Kiron K. Skinner presents a comprehensive plan to reform U.S. foreign policy under a conservative administration. Skinner, a renowned foreign policy expert and former Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. State Department, outlines global threats and offers specific recommendations to strengthen the U.S. position on the international stage. Below, we present a detailed analysis of the proposals, emphasizing direct quotes and explanations of the key points discussed. https://image.nostr.build/278dcd7ef0439813ea35d0598319ee347f7a8cd7dfecac93be24ffdd0f6ecd04.jpg History and Structure of the State Department Since its founding in 1789, the State Department has been the primary diplomatic channel of the U.S. With nearly 80,000 employees and 275 posts around the world, it faces significant structural challenges. Skinner highlights that "the biggest problem of the State Department is not a lack of resources," but the belief that it is "an independent institution that knows what is best for the U.S." (Skinner). The scholar and former Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. State Department during the Trump administration emphasizes these points, considering the difficulty in accepting a conservative international approach by State Department employees (the equivalent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in other countries). https://image.nostr.build/049939926793e86000b300b9a962dc0ae7e271d9a607ae36d8cb08642adf4174.jpg Political Leadership and Bureaucratic Support To align the State Department with presidential priorities, Kiron suggests appointing political leaders who are committed to the president's vision. "Leadership should include political appointees in positions that do not require Senate confirmation, including senior advisors and deputy secretaries" (Skinner). Furthermore, she emphasizes the importance of training and supporting these appointees to ensure effective coordination between agencies. https://image.nostr.build/6ed704cc9612aa6489e048b143f1e489c1f8807fdf2ab011b4ba88e4a1e3619a.jpg Global Threats to the U.S. The document identifies five countries that pose significant threats to the security and prosperity of the U.S.: China, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and North Korea. 🇨🇳 China: Skinner argues that China represents an existential threat. "The U.S. needs a strategic cost-imposing response to make Beijing's aggression economically unviable" (Skinner). Additionally, she emphasizes that the issue is not with the Chinese people, but with the communist dictatorship that oppresses them: "As with all global struggles against communist and other tyrannical regimes, the issue should never be with the Chinese people, but with the communist dictatorship that oppresses them" (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/e707273f1d08bdc4187123a312bd116695b5f603066e11ad30fcef4466730b6b.jpg 🇮🇷 Iran: The Obama administration, through the 2015 nuclear deal, provided the Iranian regime with a "crucial cash bailout" (Skinner). Kiron criticizes this approach, asserting that the U.S. should support the Iranian people in their demands for a democratic government. "The correct policy for Iran is one that recognizes that it is in the U.S. national security interests and the human rights of Iranians that they have the democratic government they demand" (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/cda7d29a62981f59ad8d77362b3867b552f190c8d7e0e8d9233cb7c1d1d0309e.jpg 🇻🇪 Venezuela: Under the regimes of Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela has transitioned from a prosperous country to one of the poorest in South America. Skinner suggests that the U.S. should work to contain Venezuelan communism and support its people. "The next administration should take steps to put Venezuela's communist abusers on notice and make progress in helping the Venezuelan people" (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/f53e12564cae74d4b50c24b0f3752dd2c53b70bd1c00a16df20736fb8588417d.jpg 🇷🇺 Russia: The war between Russia and Ukraine divides opinions among conservatives, and the document considers three lines of action. Some advocate continuing support for Ukraine, while others believe that such support does not serve U.S. security interests. "The conservative approach rejects both isolationism and interventionism, first asking: What is in the interest of the American people?" https://image.nostr.build/8fedaf77129f4801f4edb8b169b2ac93a3e518b8bf3642b3abc62575b5435fa3.jpg One conservative school of thought believes that "Moscow's illegal war of aggression against Ukraine represents major challenges to U.S. interests, as well as to peace, stability, and the post-Cold War security order in Europe" (Skinner). This view advocates for continued U.S. involvement, including military and economic aid, to defeat Russian President Vladimir Putin and return to pre-invasion border lines. Another conservative school of thought argues that U.S. support for Ukraine is not in the interest of U.S. national security. According to this view, "Ukraine is not a member of the NATO alliance and is one of the most corrupt countries in the region" (Skinner). It is argued that the European nations directly affected by the conflict should help defend Ukraine, but the U.S. should seek a swift end to the conflict through a negotiated settlement. https://image.nostr.build/22db3d0e79340c1d62344a2b8a3bfddbe4d5bd923cf77d70cfbf5ebf73e4db3e.jpg A third conservative viewpoint avoids both isolationism and interventionism, proposing that "each foreign policy decision should first ask: What is in the interest of the American people?" (Skinner). From this perspective, continued U.S. involvement should be fully funded, limited to military aid while European allies address Ukraine's economic needs, and must have a clear national security strategy that does not endanger American lives. https://image.nostr.build/939fea0bb5c69f171a3da1073e197edcff23a600430b3bc455f6d41bc8a0319f.jpg Although not stated explicitly, I believe this third viewpoint is the one Kiron Skinner desires, as she considers American intervention important but advocates for balancing the costs of the war with its partners in the European Union and NATO. https://image.nostr.build/d1d0c7fb27bfc5dd14b8dde459b98ed6b7ca2706473b2580e0fbf5383f5a9c10.jpg 🇰🇵 North Korea: North Korea must be deterred from any military conflict and cannot be allowed to remain a de facto nuclear power. "The U.S. cannot allow North Korea to remain a de facto nuclear power with the capability to threaten the U.S. or its allies" (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/95febb04f6d2e0575974a5e645fc7b5ec3b826b8828237ccc1f49b11d11d6bce.jpg Detailed Policy Proposals Refugee Admissions: The Biden administration has caused a collapse in border security and internal immigration enforcement, according to Skinner. She argues that the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) should be resized. "The federal government should redirect screening and verification resources to the border crisis, indefinitely reducing the number of USRAP refugee admissions until the crisis can be contained" (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/a5740b33842e47b9a1ab58c7b72bd6514f9b6ffbb18706deed1445c59236bc0d.jpg Corporate Collaboration with China: Skinner criticizes the collaboration of companies like BlackRock and Disney with the Chinese regime, noting that "many are invested in an unwavering faith in the international system and global norms," refusing to acknowledge Beijing's malign activities. She emphasizes that the real issue is the communist dictatorship that oppresses the Chinese people, not the Chinese citizens themselves (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/05a3c787f144c4519c2ee8a4b22e64b8729842819ace4b439c849ef70ecd60b4.jpg Fentanyl and Mexico: The trafficking of fentanyl, facilitated by Mexican cartels in collaboration with Chinese precursor chemical manufacturers, is a critical problem. "Mexican cartels, working closely with Chinese manufacturers of fentanyl precursor chemicals, are sending this drug to the U.S., causing an unprecedented lethal impact" (Skinner). The next administration should adopt a firm stance to halt this public health crisis. https://image.nostr.build/59e32aeef5dabab3344a94a3e415d57fed91fece8bc3c5f068e9f6f7d71f99bd.jpg Re-hemispherization of Manufacturing: Kiron proposes that the U.S. promote the relocation of manufacturing to partner countries such as Mexico and Canada. "The U.S. should do everything possible to shift global manufacturing to Central and South American countries, especially to move it away from China" (Skinner). This would improve the supply chain and represent a significant economic boost for the region. https://image.nostr.build/5d5d7d792f1c94eb6e2bd7a4b86c43236765719e183be8ba8e00ed7dd07eca66.jpg Abraham Accords and a New “Quad”: Skinner suggests that the next administration should expand the Abraham Accords to include countries like Saudi Arabia and form a new security pact in the Middle East that includes Israel, Egypt, Gulf states, and possibly India. "Protecting the freedom of navigation in the Gulf and the Red Sea/Suez Canal is vital for the global economy and, therefore, for U.S. prosperity" (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/c87cd99cb3ea2bef40e9d1f1fea48b0c9f9f031f3077fff658f15f850e7b8589.jpg Policy for Africa: The U.S. strategy for Africa should shift focus from humanitarian assistance to economic growth and countering China’s malign activities. "Development assistance should focus on fostering free market systems and involving the U.S. private sector" (Skinner). She also highlights that African nations are opposed to the imposition of policies such as abortion and LGBT lobbying. https://image.nostr.build/44df42f32e61c14786ac46c231d368b14df4dc18124a0da458e8506f917302f2.jpg Relations with Europe and Asia Europe: The U.S. should demand that NATO countries increase their contributions to defense. "The U.S. cannot be expected to provide a defense umbrella for countries that do not contribute adequately" (Skinner). Additionally, urgent trade agreements should be pursued with the post-Brexit United Kingdom. https://image.nostr.build/6c013bacfa9e6505ad717104d9a6065f27664a321dd2c3d41fd7635258042d2f.jpg Asia: The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan was humiliating and created new challenges. Skinner emphasizes the importance of India as a critical partner to counterbalance the Chinese threat and promote a free and open Indo-Pacific. Cooperation within the Quad, which includes the U.S., India, Japan, and Australia, is essential to this strategy. "The priority is to advance U.S.-India cooperation as a pillar of the Quad" (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/1cc988b2f70d855c9676d7e38ffdb23564d04ad6333a8d256698f416a1c6704e.jpg International Organizations Skinner criticizes the corruption and failure of the World Health Organization (WHO) during the Covid-19 pandemic. "The next administration should end blind support for international organizations and direct the Secretary of State to initiate a cost-benefit analysis of U.S. participation in all international organizations" (Skinner). She also supports the “Geneva Consensus Declaration on Women’s Health and Protection of the Family,” which is against abortion, and believes that the U.S. government should not fund international organizations that promote abortion (Skinner). https://image.nostr.build/0b583511fef16d68736804fae2f15850eb5c803af01f006a3fe10cdbc583f48c.jpg Conclusion Skinner’s document provides a detailed vision for reorienting U.S. foreign policy under a conservative administration, with an emphasis on ensuring that the State Department serves the national interests defined by the president. With these guidelines, the next administration has the opportunity to redefine the U.S. position on the global stage, promoting security, prosperity, and freedom. https://image.nostr.build/697522745c5947cd4384cdd302b531ee98ce5d59a5d72de0b4f3a52c9abd4821.jpg

@ 129f5189:3a441803

Project 2025, outlined in the "Mandate for Leadership" document by the Heritage Foundation, is a crucial guide for the next Republican administration. Crafted by conservative intellectuals from major American think tanks, this plan promises to have significant influence on a potential Donald Trump administration, even if he does not formally acknowledge it as his government plan. https://image.nostr.build/443d69c16dc32659be2353ce48d170d397e0ee682ffc3c4108df3047fd54472d.jpg This document presents proposals to depoliticize government agencies, increase efficiency, and reduce costs, aiming to dismantle the Deep State and combat the Woke agenda associated with the Democratic Party. https://image.nostr.build/06de3f0de3d48e086f47d0418d30e32cbfe0d88f452a93706987b7394458952d.jpg Dissolution of the DHS and Redistribution of Functions The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was established in 2002 in response to the September 11 attacks, with the goal of consolidating various agencies responsible for domestic security under a single command. The DHS includes agencies such as FEMA, TSA, ICE, and CISA. Project 2025's proposal to dissolve the DHS and redistribute its functions to other agencies aims to address excessive bureaucracy and a lack of cohesion, arguing that centralization has failed to effectively integrate its diverse missions. https://image.nostr.build/ffca8d274914b725183b8fb19162c1b63f4d987c24e598f2eca88901d4a1a43c.jpg Impact on the Democratic Deep State: The dissolution of the DHS would pose a significant threat to the Democratic Deep State, as it would redistribute the power concentrated in a single entity across multiple other agencies, making it more difficult to politicize and centralize control over domestic security operations. This decentralization would reduce the ability to use the DHS as a political tool against opponents. https://image.nostr.build/1597e3b88572fe8aae7ce67cdaf975a873cf8bc68f76d59cb4253ad1520fc7bc.jpg Primary Recommendations Combining Immigration Agencies: Merge U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) of the Department of Justice (DOJ) into a new autonomous border and immigration agency. https://image.nostr.build/58eef4f2eca0ed2400261ec878c1dba2ca4bca519a16751b1fb7abd45da2906b.jpg Privatization of the TSA: Privatize the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), drawing inspiration from Canadian and European models, to reduce costs and improve service for travelers. Division of the Secret Service (USSS): The U.S. Secret Service (USSS), responsible for protecting national leaders and investigating financial crimes, would be divided. The protective element would be transferred to the Department of Justice (DOJ), while the financial investigations element would be moved to the Department of the Treasury. https://image.nostr.build/0a065cdbf158db4bc17b9aacd4af5a94029004caaa152eebf2c557042b08a641.jpg Impact on the Democratic Deep State: The division of the USSS would significantly weaken centralized control over protection and financial investigations, making it more difficult to use these functions for political purposes. Transferring the protective element to the DOJ and the financial investigations element to the Treasury would complicate efforts for any group or party to manipulate these crucial government functions for partisan objectives. https://image.nostr.build/1597e3b88572fe8aae7ce67cdaf975a873cf8bc68f76d59cb4253ad1520fc7bc.jpg Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Established in 2018, CISA is a federal agency responsible for protecting the U.S. critical infrastructure from cyber threats. CISA's mandate includes ensuring cybersecurity for sectors such as energy, transportation, and healthcare, and it collaborates with public and private entities to strengthen the country’s cyber resilience. Criticisms and Restructuring Proposals: Project 2025 strongly criticizes CISA for deviating from its original mission and being used as a political tool for censoring speech and influencing elections. The proposal is to transfer CISA to the Department of Transportation (DOT) and return the agency to its statutory focus. https://image.nostr.build/8bfb4a45053de96a775f67e3e1b83a44d9a65fee4705e3b16d3359bd799b8af2.jpg Review of Executive Order 12333 Executive Order 12333, issued in 1981, sets guidelines for U.S. intelligence activities, including the collection, analysis, and dissemination of information. Project 2025 proposes a review of this order to ensure that intelligence agencies are not used for political purposes but are focused on protecting national security. Objectives of the Review: Prevent Abuse: Ensure that intelligence collection is conducted legally, without being used to target political opponents. Ensure Impartiality: Reaffirm that intelligence operations must be conducted impartially, with a sole focus on the country's security. https://image.nostr.build/90d31cb35a33048d311716df2fbc65c97bd4c1972977e266133654404393fca0.jpg Reforms in Public Service Facilitation of Public Employee Dismissal: Project 2025 emphasizes the need to simplify the process for dismissing public employees who do not perform their duties impartially or who promote specific political agendas. Performance Evaluations: The document highlights the importance of merit-based compensation, stating that performance evaluations are only effective when tied to real consequences. Research indicates that 90% of major private companies in the U.S. use a merit-based pay system linked to evaluations. However, in the federal government, compensation remains largely based on seniority, despite efforts to adopt merit-based pay. https://image.nostr.build/1b858fd7b2a23c3c65c0677d3e69c44976721bbdcbe7facf4682ba3371562cff.jpg Inclusion of Employees Aligned with Conservative Values: Aligned Hiring: Establish mechanisms to hire public employees who share conservative values, ensuring that the policies and practices of agencies are consistent with the principles endorsed by the administration. https://image.nostr.build/ddbf5c59e7bb479998433991347f9d301dd117fbca0edb0f94e98fcac90b2974.jpg Controversial Cases and Politicization: Hunter Biden Laptop Case: Project 2025 harshly criticizes the FBI and the Department of Justice, accusing them of acting in a biased and politically motivated manner. The authors suggest that the agency is intimidating parents who protest by labeling them as "domestic terrorists," while simultaneously suppressing politically unfavorable speech under the guise of combating "disinformation." Furthermore, the critique highlights that the FBI is alleged to be neglecting violent attacks on pregnancy centers and violations of laws prohibiting attempts to intimidate Supreme Court justices. The criticism intensifies with allegations that the FBI interfered in domestic elections and engaged in propaganda operations, specifically citing the purported Russian collusion conspiracy in 2016 and the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop case in 2020, which is seen as a threat to the Republic. https://image.nostr.build/e4f571a14102a939164465498bef514379ec0443e71a58e12f50c518e00570c6.jpg Politicization of the FBI: Election Interference: Russia Hoax and Trump, Suppression of Hunter Biden’s Laptop, and Big Tech Collusion. Revelations about the FBI’s role in the 2016 "Russia Hoax" and the suppression of Hunter Biden’s laptop in 2020 suggest that the agency may have strayed from its impartial duties. These actions indicate concerning politicization, where the agency appears to have been used to influence the political landscape in favor of certain interests. This includes collaboration between the FBI and Big Tech companies to control discourse. https://image.nostr.build/5dcd45fcec939b782d29d8d2e3d3b45244c525b5dbd3240f1629a4632e390a86.jpg Comprehensive Review of FBI Investigations: It is crucial to conduct an immediate and thorough review of all significant investigations and activities within the FBI, terminating those that are illegal or contrary to national interests. This step is essential for restoring public trust in the FBI. A public report on the findings of this review could enhance transparency and confidence. https://image.nostr.build/df98e2c6aff123d806187eab13d24a3ebb30a87df1f44cf57be97dc5624fff88.jpg Structural Reorganization: Align the FBI within the Department of Justice (DOJ) according to its purposes of national security and law enforcement. The agency should be under the supervision of the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division and the National Security Division, ensuring that the FBI does not operate as an independent entity but is instead subordinated to the DOJ’s directives. https://image.nostr.build/0d1c0015c6b67a8afc2dd1595357ea571fcd5a9d83829065f49f9b60cf553eb0.jpg Prohibition on Policing Speech: Prohibit the FBI from engaging in activities related to combating "disinformation" or "misinformation" disseminated by Americans who are not linked to plausible criminal activities. The Constitution, through the First Amendment, prohibits the government from policing speech, ensuring a healthy public debate without governmental intervention. All these measures represent a significant attack on the "Deep State" within American institutions. These public policies have been considered a dictatorial threat by many sectors of the American press. However, the real issue should be the politicization of unelected bureaucrats by a political faction. https://image.nostr.build/9a44b19d15d53314f89528c1d89e2f637030ea18d8907a6a8c4e27d07064b8ec.jpg Combating Woke Culture in the Intelligence Community Future leadership of the Intelligence Community (IC) needs to implement a plan to replace the "woke" culture and identity politics that have spread throughout the federal government. The goal is to restore traditional American values such as patriotism, racial impartiality, and job competence, which have been replaced by advocacy for "social justice" and identity politics. https://image.nostr.build/7929dca5e36273c8e751f36d6ca6229f362e30792bce735f10be7e5d8581af5f.jpg Final Considerations The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 is not merely an administrative reform plan; it is a manifesto of resistance against the Washington status quo. The proposals aim to dismantle established power structures, eliminate politicization, and combat the Woke agenda. If implemented, this plan would profoundly impact how the U.S. government operates, promoting a more efficient, limited government aligned with conservative principles. Threat to the Democratic Deep State: A potential new administration under Donald Trump represents an existential threat to the Democratic Deep State entrenched in American institutions. The dissolution of the DHS, depoliticization of intelligence agencies, division of the Secret Service, review of Executive Order 12333, privatization of the TSA, and the hiring of employees aligned with conservative values are all measures that would significantly weaken centralized control and the ability to use these institutions for political purposes. By dismantling concentrated power and promoting a more transparent and accountable government, Project 2025 aims to restore public trust and ensure that government agencies serve national interests rather than partisan ones. Of course, not all aspects of the plan may be implemented, but the prospect of several of these measures being enacted should be a cause for concern for the Democratic Deep State.

@ 129f5189:3a441803

Today we will understand how Argentina, when under the control of the Foro de São Paulo, was an important asset for the Chinese Communist Party in South America and how Javier Milei is charting paths to change this scenario. The Chinese government has been making diplomatic overtures to areas near the polar regions as part of its maritime strategy. After a "strategic retreat," the Southern Hemisphere has assumed a new dimension for Chinese interests in South America. Beijing has been increasing its diplomatic engagement with countries in the region, especially Argentina in recent times, through a series of economic, sociocultural, and to a lesser extent, military agreements. This includes the delivery of vaccines and the intention to accelerate an investment plan worth $30 million. China has focused on several geopolitically sensitive projects in Argentina, all strategic: controlling air and maritime space and strategic facilities in territorial areas monitored by Beijing over Antarctica and the South Atlantic. However, doubts arise about China's intentions... https://image.nostr.build/f55fc5464d8d09cbbddd0fe803b264a5e885da387c2c6c1702f021875beb18c2.jpg For Xi Jinping's government, Argentina stands out for its strategic location, the influential posture of its leaders, and its alignment with China's economic and military power expansion. China has made significant investments and infrastructure initiatives in various Argentine regions. In addition to establishing a presence in the province of Neuquén, China has targeted the port city of Ushuaia in Tierra del Fuego, Antarctica, the South Atlantic islands, and the San Juan region near the Chilean border. A 2012 agreement between authorities in Argentina's Neuquén province and Beijing allowed the construction of a deep space tracking station near the Chilean border, which caught Washington's attention. https://image.nostr.build/a3fa7f2c7174ee9d90aaecd9eadb69a2ef82c04c94584165a213b29d2ae8a66e.jpg In 2014, through a bilateral agreement between the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program, represented by the Satellite Launch and Tracking Control General (CLTC) of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and Argentina's National Commission on Space Activities (CONAE), the agreement identified the Argentine space station at Bajada del Agrio as the most favorable location for hosting a Chinese base in the Southern Hemisphere. The project became operational in 2017 on a 200-hectare area and represents the third in a global network and the first outside China. It features a 110-ton, 35-meter-diameter antenna for deep space exploration (telemetry and technology for "terrestrial tracking, command, and data acquisition"), with the CLTC having a special exploration license for a period of 50 years. https://image.nostr.build/0a469d8bab900c7cefa854594dfdb934febf2758e1a77c7639d394f14cd98491.jpg The 50-year contract grants the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) the ability to operate freely on Argentine soil. The facility, known as Espacio Lejano, set a precedent for a Chinese ground tracking station in Río Gallegos, on the southeastern coast of Argentina, which was formally announced in 2021. In 2016, a document issued by the U.S. State Council Information Office raised concerns among the U.S. government and European Union (EU) countries about the potential military and geopolitical uses of the base in the Southern Hemisphere and Antarctica. Another element fueling suspicion is the existence of "secret clauses" in a document signed by the General Directorate of Legal Advisory (DICOL) of Argentina’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Trade, and Worship with the Chinese government. https://image.nostr.build/1733ba03475755ddf9be4eafc3e9eb838ba8f9fa6e783a4b060f12b89c3f4165.jpg Since the Espacio Lejano contract was signed, U.S. analysts and authorities have repeatedly expressed concern about China's growing collaboration with Argentina on security and surveillance issues. In 2023, a general from the U.S. Southern Command stated during a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee: "The PRC [People's Republic of China] has expanded its capacity to extract resources, establish ports, manipulate governments through predatory investment practices, and build potential dual-use space facilities." https://image.nostr.build/16bbdeae11247d47a97637402866a0414d235d41fe8039218e26c9d11392b487.jpg The shift in the Argentine government from a leftist spectrum, led by leaders of the São Paulo Forum, to a Milei administration, which has always advocated for libertarian and pro-Western rhetoric, has altered the dynamics of Chinese-Argentine relations in 2024. Milei assumed office on December 10, 2023, replacing the progressive president Alberto Fernández, who had strengthened ties with China and signed an agreement in 2022 to join the CCP’s Belt and Road Initiative. During his campaign, Milei did not hide his disdain for communist regimes and signaled his intention to move away from socialist policies in favor of a more libertarian direction. In the nearly seven months since taking office, Milei has implemented major economic reforms and streamlined the government. https://image.nostr.build/1d534b254529bf10834d81e2ae35ce2698eda2453d5e2b39d98fa50b45c00a59.jpg Other recent "positive indicators" suggest that the Milei administration is prioritizing defense relations with the United States over China, according to Leland Lazarus, Associate Director of National Security at the Jack D. Gordon Institute for Public Policy at Florida International University. "The fact is that, in just six months, he has already visited the United States several times. He has met with Secretary [Antony] Blinken, been to the White House... all of this is like absolute music to General Richardson's ears; to President [Joe] Biden's ears," Lazarus told Epoch Times. General Richardson visited Argentina in April, a trip that included the donation of a C-130H Hercules transport aircraft to the Argentine Air Force and a visit to a naval facility in Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego, at the southern tip of the country. "We are committed to working closely with Argentina so that our collaborative security efforts benefit our citizens, our countries, and our hemisphere in enduring and positive ways," she said in a statement at the time. In Ushuaia, General Richardson met with local military personnel to discuss their role in "safeguarding vital maritime routes for global trade." https://image.nostr.build/f6d80fee8a7bba03bf11235d86c4f72435ae4be7d201dba81cc8598551e5ed24.jpg In a statement from the Argentine Ministry of Defense, Milei confirmed that General Richardson also reviewed the progress of an "integrated naval base" at the Ushuaia naval facility. Argentine officials said they also discussed "legislative modernization on defense issues." Under the previous administration, China had received preferential treatment. In June 2023, Tierra del Fuego Governor Gustavo Melella approved China's plans to build a "multi-use" port facility near the Strait of Magellan. The project was met with legislative backlash, as three national deputies and members of the Civic Coalition filed an official complaint against the governor's provincial decree to build the port with Beijing. The same group also accused Melella of compromising Argentina’s national security. No public records show that the project has progressed since then. https://image.nostr.build/3b2b57875dc7ac162ab2b198df238cb8479a7d0bbce32b4042e11063b5e2779b.jpg Argentina's desire for deeper security cooperation with Western partners was also evident in April when Argentine Defense Minister Luis Petri signed a historic agreement to purchase 24 F-16 fighter jets from Denmark. "Today we are concluding the most important military aviation acquisition since 1983," Petri said in an official statement. "Thanks to this investment in defense, I can proudly say that we are beginning to restore our air sovereignty and that our entire society is better protected against all the threats we face." https://image.nostr.build/8aa0a6261e61e35c888d022a537f03a0fb7a963a78bf2f1bec9bf0a242289dba.jpg The purchase occurred after several media reports in 2022 indicated that the previous Fernández administration was considering buying JF-17 fighter jets made in China and Pakistan. A former minister from ex-president Mauricio Macri's government, who requested anonymity, confirmed to Epoch Times that a deal to acquire JF-17 jets was being considered during the Fernández era. Chinese investment did not occur only in Argentina. According to a document from the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee: "From 2009 to 2019, China transferred a total of $634 million in significant military equipment to five South American countries—Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela. The governments of Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Argentina purchased defense equipment from the PRC, cooperated in military exercises, and engaged in educational exchanges and training for their military personnel." https://image.nostr.build/ed6d8daeea418b7e233ef97c90dee5074be64bd572f1fd0a5452b5960617c9ca.jpg Access to space plays a crucial role in the CCP's strategic objectives. Thus, when reports emerged in early April that Milei's government wanted to inspect Espacio Lejano, experts suggested it supported his national security moves away from China. According to the Espacio Lejano contract, signed under Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's Peronist regime, CCP officials are not required to let anyone—including the Argentine president—enter the facility without prior notice. According to Article 3, the agreement stipulates that Argentine authorities cannot interfere with or interrupt the "normal activities" of the facility and must explore alternative options and provide an unspecified amount of notice before being granted access. China has maintained that Espacio Lejano is for deep space exploration, lunar missions, and communication with satellites already in orbit. However, there is deep skepticism that the claim of space exploration alone is highly unlikely. The big question is: what could this facility do in times of war? https://image.nostr.build/f46a2807c02c512e70b14981f07a7e669223a42f3907cbddec952d5b27da9895.jpg Neuquén is just one of 11 ground stations and space research facilities China has in Latin America and the Caribbean. This represents the largest concentration of space equipment China has outside its own country. According to data from the Gordon Institute, the Chinese Espacio Lejano station and the Río Gallegos facility provide an ideal surveillance position near the polar orbit. The polar orbit is useful for data collection, transmission, and tracking because it allows for observation of the entire planet from space. The resolution of communications is also improved due to the proximity of satellites in orbit to the Earth's surface. Additionally, it offers strategic advantages for any government involved in espionage. https://image.nostr.build/39215a4c9f84cbbaf517c4fda8a562bba9e0cd3af3d453a24d3a9b454c5d015d.jpg Regarding deeper security collaboration with the United States, the trend is that Milei’s government will do as much as possible without jeopardizing its contracts with China, which is currently Argentina's second-largest trading partner. However, if Argentina's defense cooperation with China cools, the communist regime might wait for another Argentine government to continue its expansion—a government that could be more favorable to the CCP's objectives. Everything will depend on the continued success of Javier Milei's economic miracle, ensuring his government is re-elected and he can appoint a successor, making it more challenging for China, and avoiding a situation similar to what occurred in Brazil starting in 2023. https://image.nostr.build/a5dd3e59a703c553be60534ac5a539b1e50496c71904d01b16471086e9843cd4.jpg

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

Here are some of the more interesting projects that I like:

Messaging:

https://www.0xchat.com/#/ - Private messaging - think WhatsApp

Xitter Like Clients:

https://damus.io/ - iPhone client

https://nostrapps.com/amethyst - Android client

https://primal.net/downloads - Android, iPhone & Desktop

Interesting sites:

https://zap.stream/ - Video streaming

https://fountain.fm/ - Podcasting

https://wavlake.com/ - Music streaming

https://shopstr.store/ - Online shop

https://zap.cooking/recent - Cooking recipes

https://ostrich.work/ - NOSTR jobs board

NOSTR tools

https://nostr.band/ - Powerful search tool

https://nostr.wine/ - Powerful, but centralised paid relay

https://npub.pro/ - Website creation tool

https://nostr.build/ - Media and file storage

https://relay.tools/ - Build and curate your own relay

https://creatr.nostr.wine/subscriptions/new-user - Creator tools

List of NOSTR apps:

https://nostrapps.com/

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

We have a confession to make. NOSTR is not perfect, we are still building. No client you use does everything you want it to, and everything it does is imperfect.

Therefore, I strongly advise you to run multiple clients.

On iPhone, I run: Damus: https://nostrapps.com/damus Primal: https://primal.net/downloads Nostur: https://nostrapps.com/nostur

On Android I run: Primal: https://primal.net/downloads Amethyst: https://nostrapps.com/amethyst

On desktop I run: Primal: https://primal.net/downloads noStrudel: https://nostrapps.com/nostrudel

Also, because I run a node (Umbrel & Start9), I self host noStrudel on my own relay.

If you haven’t taken the plunge to run a node, now might be a good time to think about it.

There are many, many options for clients, the “Social” section of https://nostrapps.com/

lists 23 currently.

Play with them, see what they do, if you’re a developer, you could even consider building or forking your own.

Have fun and realise we are building freedom tech, not just running it.

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

First,

Key management.

When you “created” your NOSTR account, what you actually created was a cryptographic key pair. This consists of a private key, which starts “nsec” and a public key which starts with “npub”.

As the names suggest, your “nsec” key is private and you should never reveal it to anyone. Your “npub” key is your public key, feel free to share that everywhere.

Your “npub” key is used by others to verify your identity, through the signature added to your messages. It is also used by others to encrypt private messages to you.

We don’t have perfect key management yet and because of the limitation of smart phones and various eco systems, it often becomes necessary for you to copy and paste your private key into apps in order to use them. This is less than ideal, but until we have ubiquitous cross platform key management devices, this situation will remain necessary.

For the moment, consider using software key management options, some of which are listed under “signers” here: https://nostrapps.com/

N.B. We do have projects like Seedsigner that provide more secure hardware key management, but this isn’t for the faint hearted:

Secondly,

Lightning wallets.

It is common for most people to link a Bitcoin Lightning wallet to their NOSTR profile

N.B. Your profile is stored on relays and signed by your private key, which is verified by others through your public key.

You are not tied to any specific wallet for sending payments (called zaps), but you do provide a specific incoming LN address for receiving payments. This could be something like a wallet of Satoshi Address i.e. “randomname@walletofsatoshi.com” or could you be your own node with a connection to it via “Nostr Wallet Connect” a free plugin that connects a lightning wallet.

Enabling this allows people to “zap” any posts or content or even send you payments directly at any time or for any reason. N.B. It is called freedom money for a reason….

It also allows you to send small micropayments to posts or people you like.

Thirdly,

Paid Services

As you go deeper into the NOSTR ecosystem, you’ll notice there is no advertising being pushed at you and there are no algorithms manipulating the content you receive. This is because there is no company behind NOSTR, it is a protocol. Because of this, while all the ecosystem is free to use and will remain so for the foreseeable future, most of it is run by enthusiastic volunteers or developers and incurs a cost to them. For that reason many of us choose to support these #devs by paying for services. This can also enhance our experience, giving our “npub” greater reach and discoverability.

I, for example choose to pay for the following services:

https://nostr.wine/ - 120,000 Sats for 2 years relay https://relay.tools/ - My own relay - https://nortis.nostr1.com/ 12,000 Sats a month https://nostr.build/ - Media storage - 69,000 Sats for 1 year

Total: 22,750 Sats per month Approx $15 per month

This is not strictly necessary, but I decided to support the various developers behind these projects.

Do not feel any pressure at this early stage to pay for any service, but if you enjoy the freedom NOSTR brings, you may want to consider supporting the projects that become important to you going forward.

@ c11cf5f8:4928464d

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/678432

@ e968e50b:db2a803a

Open the frozen pizza bay doors, Hal.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/678403

@ 6bae33c8:607272e8

I’ll write a separate Week 1 Observations later, but I wanted to dedicate this space solely to mourning my Circa Survivor entry.

Circa Survivor costs $1000 to enter and has a $10M prize for the winner, usually split by several as things get down to the wire. Three years ago, when the prize was $6M Dalton Del Don and I — the first time we ever entered — made it to the final 23 in Week 12. The value of our share was something like $260K at that point, but we got bounced by the Lions who beat the 12-point favored Cardinals and took home nothing.

When you enter a large survivor pool, the overwhelming likelihood is you’ll meet this fate at some point, whether in Week 1 or 12. So it’s not really the loss that’s painful, so much as not getting to live and die each week with a chosen team. You lose your status as “the man in the arena whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood” and become just an observer watching and commentating on the games without the overarching purpose of surviving each week.

This year was also different due to the lengths to which I went to sign up. It’s not just the $1000 fee, it’s getting to Vegas in person, the $400 in proxy fees (you need locals to input your picks for you if you don’t live there), the $60 credit card fee, the $200 crappy hotel I booked at the last minute, the flights (one of which was cancelled due to heat), the rental car that necessitated, the gas, getting lost in the desert, the entire odyssey while sick and still jet-lagged in 122-degree heat.

But it’s not about the money, and it’s not even about the herculean effort per se, but the feeling and narrative I crafted around it. I was the guy who got this done. I flew from Portugal to San Francisco for 12 hours, two days later from SF to Palm Springs to help my 87-YO uncle with his affairs, improvised to get from Palm Springs to Vegas, which took six hours due to road closures, signed up for the contests, made the flight back to San Francisco, flew to Denver at 7 am the next day, took my daughter the Rockies game in the afternoon and then on to Boulder the following day. Maybe that’s not so impressive to some of you, but for me, an idle ideas person, a thinker, observer, someone who likes to express himself via a keyboard, it was like Alexander the Great conquering Persia.

And it’s not only about that smaller mission, or the narrative I crafted around it, but a larger one which was to bring sports content to nostr which I vowed to do before the summer which is why I felt I had to make the effort to get to Vegas to sign up for the contests, to have sufficient skin in the game, to have something real about which to write.

And I got the idea to do this seriously because Heather wrote a guide to Lisbon which I posted on nostr, and a few prominent developers there were surprisingly excited about getting that kind of quality content on the protocol. And I thought — if they’re this excited about a (very in-depth) guide to one particular city in Europe, how much more value could I create posting about a hobby shared by 50-odd million Americans? And that thought (and the fact I had to go to Palm Springs anyway) is what set me off on the mission in the first place and got me thinking this would be Team of Destiny, Part 2, only to discover, disappointingly, it’s real destiny was not to make it out of the first week.

. . .

While my overwhelming emotion is one of disappointment, there’s a small element of relief. Survivor is a form of self-inflicted torture that probably subtracts years from one’s life. Every time Rhamondre Stevenson broke the initial tackle yesterday was like someone tightening a vice around my internal organs. There was nothing I could do but watch, and I even thought about turning it off. At one point, I was so enraged, I had to calm down consciously and refuse to get further embittered by events going against me. Mike Gesicki had a TD catch overturned because he didn’t hold the ball to the ground, The next play Tanner Hudson fumbled while running unimpeded to the end zone. I kept posting, “Don’t tilt” after every negative play.

There’s a perverse enjoyment to getting enraged about what’s going on, out of your control, on a TV screen, but when you examine the experience, it really isn’t good or wholesome. I become like a spoiled child, ungrateful for everything, miserable and indignant at myriad injustices and wrongs I’m powerless to prevent.

At one point Sasha came in to tell me she had downloaded some random game from the app store on her Raspberry Pi computer. I had no interest in this as I was living and dying with every play, but I had forced myself to calm down so much already, I actually went into her room to check it out, not a trace of annoyance in my voice or demeanor.

I don’t think she cared about the game, or about showing it to me, but had stayed with her friends most of the weekend and was just using it as an excuse to spend a moment together with her dad. I scratched her back for a couple seconds while standing behind her desk chair. The game was still going on, and even though I was probably going to lose, and I was still sick about it, I was glad to have diverted a moment’s attention from it to Sasha.

. . .

In last week’s Survivor post, I wrote:

What method do I propose to see into the future? Only my imagination. I’m going to spend a lot of time imagining what might happen, turn my brain into a quantum device, break space-time and come to the right answers. Easier said than done, but I’m committed.

It’s possible I did this, but simply retrieved my information from the wrong branch of the multiverse. It happens.

. . .

I picked the Bengals knowing full well the Bills were the correct “pot odds” play which is my usual method. Maybe when the pot-odds are close, I might go with my gut, but they were not especially close this week, and yet I still stuck with Cincinnati because they were the team I trusted more.

And despite it being a bad pick — there are no excuses in Survivor, no matter what happens in the game, if you win it’s good, and lose it’s bad — I don’t feel that badly about it.

I regret it only because I wish I were still alive, but it was my error. I went with what I believed, and it was wrong. That I can live with 100 times better than swapping out my belief for someone else’s and losing. Had I done that I’d be inconsolable.

. . .

I won’t let the Survivor debacle undermine my real mission to bring sports to nostr. Team of Destiny 2 would have been a compelling story, but it was never essential. After all, my flight was cancelled and I had to improvise, so now my Survivor entry is cancelled, and I’ll have to improvise again. The branch of the multiverse where the Bengals won didn’t give me the information I wanted, but maybe it was what I really needed to know. That I am the man in the arena yet, the battle was ever against myself, and for a brief moment, while my team was losing, I prevailed.

@ d3052ca3:d84a170e

I bought this for my son but it's a little advanced for his skills. Well, somebody has to find the princess and save Hyrule, right? Looks like it's gotta be me. :)

I have found the climbing, skydiving, and barbarian armor sets most useful. What other items can I unlock that will enhance my play experience? I just found the gloom resistance helmet but haven't tried it out yet.

What is the deal with horses? I tamed and boarded two so far but I haven't found an actual use for them yet except one korok hidden under a drain plug that I needed a horse to unplug. You don't need them for travel. They can't climb steep slopes or cross water so it's just easier and faster to skydive close to your destination and cover the last miles on foot. Do mounts serve a purpose or just look cool and help you get a few korok seeds?

What is your experience? I'd love to hear about it!

@ e968e50b:db2a803a

I just wanted to let y'all know that I added a more sports themed UI option for the crossword puzzle from last week. You can get to it like so:

Also, there's still an unclaimed bounty for anybody interested in solving the additional puzzle.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/678010

@ 44dc1c2d:31c74f0b

Chef's notes

Makes an excellent Chicken sandwich.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 6 Ish hours
• 🍳 Cook time: 40 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 1 loaf

Ingredients

• 3 ½ - 4 cups bread flour, or more as needed
• 1 ⅓ cups warm milk (110°F – 115°F)
• 5 tablespoons honey
• 4 tablespoons salted butter, melted and slightly cooled
• 1 tablespoon instant “rapid rise” yeast
• 1 ½ teaspoons salt
• Oil or butter for greasing the bowl
• 1 tablespoon melted salted butter, for brushing the crust at the end

Directions

1. To prepare the dough, weigh the flour or measure it by gently spooning it into a cup, then leveling off any excess. In a large bowl, combine the flour with the warm milk, honey, melted butter, instant yeast, and salt. Mix by hand or with the paddle attachment of a stand mixer until a shaggy dough forms, gradually adding more flour, as necessary, to get the dough to come together so that it just pulls away from the sides of the bowl.
2. Switch to the dough hook attachment (or use your hands) to knead the dough until fairly smooth, about 7-8 minutes.
3. Oil a large mixing bowl. Place the dough in the greased bowl, turning once to grease the top. Cover and let rise in a warm place until doubled, 1 ½ - 2 hours.
4. Punch down the dough. Transfer to a lightly floured work surface. Pat the dough into a 9 x 12-inch rectangle. Starting on one of the short sides, roll up the dough to make a log; pinch the seams. Place the dough seam-side down in a lightly greased 9 x 5-inch loaf pan.
5. Cover the pan with lightly greased plastic wrap; allow to rise for 1-2 hours, until it’s crowned about 1-2 inches over the rim of the pan. Towards the end of the rising time, preheat the oven to 350°F.
6. Bake the bread for 40-45 minutes, tenting the top of the bread loosely with foil towards the end if the top starts to get too brown. The bread should be golden brown, and it should sound hollow when tapped.
7. Brush the top of the warm bread with melted butter.
8. Remove from the pan and cool on a wire rack for at least 1 hour before slicing.

@ 8dc86882:9dc4ba5e

Why do lightning nodes need channels? Why can a node not just send and receive without a channel? I wonder what the benefit it serves other than making running a node difficult or making it cost to open one?

Thanks

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/677439

@ eed76ece:afa98124

Seems like if you want to sell an item on SN using @AGORA makes logical sense.

Perhaps if your a manufacturer, importer, exporter, stocking distributor, wholesaler etc. you should also consider using @Import_Export or both @AGORA and see if they help each other. Being totally upfront Import_Export is probably a better use case especially if you are running over 75% B2B.

We are note promoting the use of B2C on SN. We're 100% focused on interactions between businesses only. Our primary markets are in Asia and Southeast Asia. Europe and the UK are dying a slow death, and the last straw was the Telegram event.

So I am endorsing you to please at least on SN refer to @AGORA for basic B2C (retail).

Thank you, https://www.globalmerchant.io

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/677390

@ e8b86bc1:3503c58f

Opinion about Freewallet Multi Crypto Wallet (iphone)

Freewallet is now charging inactivity fees, a sneaky method to take money from users who aren’t regularly using the app. Avoid this scam wallet!

WalletScrutiny #nostrOpinion

Join the conversation!

@ c11cf5f8:4928464d

Considering the "whatever" item in question is a random item, a unique piece --not something you produce or need to market-- which platform, website or which strategy you'll put in place to get the value of your item in sats, immediately, anonymously, via the Lightning Network?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/677270

@ 6f170f27:711e26dd

Far too many people: "GDP is bad. I prefer [thing correlated at 0.9 with GDP]."

Manufacturing:

Life expectancy:

Happiness:

Many other metrics & discussion in the source:

https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1832588128084730334

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/677211

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

由于telegram的政策调整，不允许滥用telegraph匿名上传图片了。 导致之前通过telegraph搭建的图床无法上传（已上传的能正常查看）。

---

有人通过原项目的基础上分支另外项目，可以通过频道上传图片。

项目是通过cloudflare pages搭建的。 - 项目地址：https://github.com/MarSeventh/CloudFlare-ImgBed

项目的教程很详细，具体去看项目教程。

telegram设置：

• 需要有telegram账号
• 通过@BotFather创建一个telegram机器人，并获取api key。
• 创建一个频道，获取频道id，通过转发一条消息到 @VersaToolsBot机器人可以查看频道id。
• 一定要添加创建的机器人到频道作为管理员才能使用。

cloudflare的设置

• 通过git项目部署，设置变量：TG_BOT_TOKEN和TG_CHAT_ID就基本可以使用了。
• 如果需要后台，需要添加kv空间，并在设置里面的函数，选择对应的kv空间，如图：
• BASIC_USER 后台登陆名
• BASIC_PASS 后台密码
• AUTH_CODE 鉴权，防止别人使用，设置后，别人使用必须输入这个。

其他

• 成人内容屏蔽
• pico 使用api接口 去项目地址看

最后

我搭建的地址： https://imgbed.lepidus.me

@ d52f4f20:98efcdfb

original post 28/12/2010 .net

Para você que se sente meio preso ao instalar o Ubuntu, pois ele já vem pronto para um usuário final, mas isso não me agrada parece que perco o espirito de liberdade.

Mas o ponto forte Ubuntu são suas atualizações, então eu fui em busca de como fazer uma instalação customizada somente com os pacotes do Ubuntu. Depois de muita pesquisa e anos de experiência com linux desenvolvi o que chamo de instalação mínima

Alguns conceitos da minha instalação – Não tem gerenciador de login gráfico. – Precisar habilitar o root, na unha e você usa isso. – Não tem menus, os aplicativos são chamados via tecla de atalho ou docks. – Não tem menu para desligar. – Não é um desktop, usa apenas um gerenciador de Janelas. – Aqui tudo é minimalista, não é bonito também não quer dizer que é feio, é apenas simples faz o necessário. – Não importa a versão do ubuntu, atual ou não essa técnica quase nunca mudará.

Seria bom/Pré-Requisitos – Se você tem conceitos de particionamento. – Se você já instalou um Debian. – Se você sabe usar o vim. – Conexão com internet via placa de rede 10/100 (sim tem que ser assim).

Introdução A idéia é usar a instalação mínima do Ubuntu (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/MinimalCD), onde é bem parecida com a NetInstall do Debian. Iremos baixar a imagem(12 ~ 13MB) do link acima e queimar em um cd rom e dar boot.

Vamos usar o assistente de instalação, e não selecionaremos nenhum pacote na instalação, tudo sera instalado via linha de comando usando o apt. Pra quem já instalou usando o anaconda da RedHat não terá problemas, qualquer ser capaz de ler consegue instalar. Esta é a primeira tela exibida após o boot, selecione o menu

Va seguindo o instalador conforme as telas, não quer que eu fique explicando tudo né?

Coloque o nome que quiser, este é o nome da sua maquina pense em algo inspirador.

Aqui você estara selecionando daonde pacotes serão baixados.

Se não tiver proxy de um [enter], se tiver pesquise no google como configurar.

Chegamos a parte onde todo usuário de windows faz cagada, na configuração das particões, bom use o método manual, não vou entrar em detalhes, pra esse tutorial eu criei uma partição só.

Após criar, FINISH!

Aguarde, vai demorar, o instalador esta baixando o minimo para poder instalar o sistema, no debian o cd é de 170mb essa parte é mais rápida.

O nome do usuario, eu coloquei “lion”, coloque ai o seu usuário.

senha é bom por né.

Aqui você tem a opção de encriptar seus dados, tudo que estiver no /home/ você deve pro governo? eu encriptei.

Aqui você pode selecionar a primeira opção, eu prefiro atualizar manualmente.

Neste tela desmarque tudo, isso faz você ser o cara livre do sistema, aguarde pois vai demorar.

Grub é o gerenciador de boot, instale ele ai sem medo.

Cara se você chegou nessa tela eu já estou orgulhoso, pois provavelmente não fez nenhuma cagada.

Logue-se com seu usuário, meu caso “lion” (que coisa gay figura 24 ainda).

**Apartir daqui acabou as figurinhas fio, espero que você saiba o mínimo de VI.

Torna-se root Isso é primordio no linux, sempre somos o ROOT, o Ubuntu tem essa filosofia para você não fazer cagada, mas na vida uma boa técnica de aprendizado é fazendo cagada, então vamos habilitar o root. Calma usaremos o root para tarefas como instalar novos software, mas a execução e configuração de nosso ambiente será com nosso usuário.

$ sudo passwd root

Pronto a partir de agora os comandos começados com # quer dizer que você tem que estar logado como root, e quando estiver $ você deve executar com seu usuário.

Loge-se como root vamos usar bastante de um $su ou entre num novo tty como root.

Instalando o vim

```

apt-get install vim

``` (repare # você tem que estar logado como root)

Removendo o boot-splash Amigos estamos falando de uma maquina limpa, o boot splash só come memória. Faça um backup antes e depois edite o arquivo “/boot/grub/grub.cfg” procure a palavra splash e apague somente ela e salve o arquivo. É necessário dar diretos de gravação e depois volte como somente leitura.

Removendo Mensagem de boas vindas MOTD Logo após o login, é exibida uma mensagem de boas vindas enorme do ubuntu, eu não gosto dela, nem do debian eu gostava e eu a removia editando o script “/etc/init.d/boot-misc.sh” mas no ubuntu esse arquivo não existe. Depois de muito fuçar eu descobri que removendo os arquivos do diretorio “/etc/update-motd.d/” a mensagem some, pra mim basta, também removi o conteudo do arquivo /var/run/motd ;

UPDATE Dica do comentário do Marcelo Godim Ele é gerenciado pelo pam_motd basta ir em /etc/pam.d nos arquivos “login” e “sshd” e comentar essas linhas abaixo: login:

session optional pam_motd.so

sshd:

session optional pam_motd.so # [1]

Mudando mensagem da versão

Dica velha edite o arquivo “/etc/issue” coloque o que preferir.

——Se você não precisa de modo gráfico a instalação terminou aqui.

Alterando o sources.list adicionando outros repositórios

Edite o arquivo /etc/apt/sources.list e deixe assim, basicamente adicionados pacotes do site Medibuntu, se prefereir siga esses passos é melhor do que editar o arquivo.

Instalando o resto dos pacotes

apt-get install xserver-xorg xinit alsa-base alsa-utils openbox obconf obmenu feh nitrogen tint2 k3b conky gmrun pcmanfm gtk-theme-switch ssh smbfs smbclient dosfstools setserial usbutils leafpad x11-apps openbox-themes terminator chromium-browser xcompmgr gcc g++ openjdk-6-jdk mysql-server mysql-query-browser gftp gcc-avr avrdude imagemagick gparted ntfs-3g file-roller zip unrar gpicview gtk2-engines gnome-icon-theme-gartoon vim unace rar unrar zip unzip p7zip-full p7zip-rar sharutils uudeview mpack lha arj cabextract file-roller pidgin pidgin-data pidgin-lastfm pidgin-guifications msn-pecan pidgin-musictracker pidgin-plugin-pack pidgin-themes mplayer vlc cairo-dock w32codecs audacious

Vai dormir, seila vai baixar ai uns 500mb, você pode tirar ou por o que quiser ai isso é minha instalação.

Como entrar no modo gráfico?

Logue-se com seu usuário

$startx

O comando antigo, simples, que dei a primeira vez no meu conectiva 4.

Este é o resultado final, mas para isso vamos algumas dicas.

Toda incialização dos aplicativos eu concentrei no .config/openbox/autostart.sh segue o meu ai

```

Set desktop wallpaper

nitrogen –restore &

Enable Eyecandy – off by default

xcompmgr -cCfF -r7 -o.65 -l-10 -t-8 &

Launch network manager applet

(sleep 4s && nm-applet) &

Launch clipboard manager

(sleep 1s && parcellite) &

Uncomment to enable system updates at boot

(sleep 180s && system-update) &

cairo-dock &

Launch Conky

conky -q &

Launch panel

tint2 & ``` Configurando teclas de atalho, edite o arquivo .config/openbox/rc.xml, vá até a seção keybinds as minhas são essas abaixo:

<keybind key=”W-a”><action name=”Execute”> <execute>audacious</execute></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-1″><action name=”Execute”> <execute>xcompmgr -cCfF -r7 -o.65 -l-10 -t-8</execute></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-2″><action name=”Execute”> <execute>pkill xcompmgr</execute></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-a”><action name=”Execute”> <execute>audacious</execute></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-e”><action name=”Execute”> <execute>pcmanfm</execute></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-g”><action name=”Execute”> <startupnotify> <enabled>true</enabled> <name>transset</name> </startupnotify> <command>transset .50</command></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-h”><action name=”Execute”> <startupnotify><enabled>true</enabled><name>transset 1</name></startupnotify><command>transset 1</command></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-l”><action name=”Execute”><startupnotify><enabled>true</enabled><name>Lock screen</name></startupnotify><command>gnome-screensaver-command -l</command></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-t”><action name=”Execute”><execute>terminator</execute></action></keybind><keybind key=”W-r”> <action name=”Execute”> <execute>gmrun</execute> </action></keybind>

Pesquise como instalar temas GTK, configurar o TINT2 (desk bar), Cairo Dock, também tem muitas configurações de openbox na internet.

Esse tutorial vem de anos de convivio com linux, é duro passar tudo a limpo aqui, uma dica e testar o Linux Crunch-Bang aprendi muitas customizações com ele.

blog #tech

@ c11cf5f8:4928464d

Let's hear some of your latest Bitcoin purchases, feel free to include links to the shops or merchants you bought from too.

If you missed our last thread, here are some of the items stackers recently spent their sats on.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/676757

@ c6f7077f:ad5d48fd

“The more you learn about something, the more you realize you know nothing.” This saying resonates deeply with me. The truth is, no one really has all the big answers. Many in the scientific community seem to pretend they do. Let’s explore this further.

Consider the Most Fundamental Questions

1. The Origin of the Universe
2. The Origin of Life on Earth

The Origin of the Universe

You might think we have a solid answer: the Big Bang. However, this explanation has its limitations, and calling it a “start” can be misleading. In fact, this theory might be entirely wrong. New research challenges the Big Bang theory, and I highly recommend listening to Sir Roger Penrose for a deeper understanding.

The only substantial evidence we have is the universe's expansion. Penrose proposes a different hypothesis: the endless expansion and contraction of the universe. This idea doesn’t contradict our current understanding.

Thus, the evidence for the Big Bang and Penrose’s theory are both radically different, yet neither can be definitively proven over the other. This highlights the limitations of our current understanding.

The Origin of Life on Earth

The origin of life is even more complex. Life requires three essential components: - Proteins for basic functioning - RNA for storing and replicating genes - Lipids (cell walls) to create separation from the environment

Mathematical models suggest that while proteins and lipids have a reasonable probability of forming, the creation of RNA seems nearly impossible through random mutations in a short time frame. The best explanations indicate that we either lack crucial information or that these RNA molecules—and life as a whole—might have come from outside sources. Some scholars even question the entire random mutation model.

The Question of Certainty

If scientists don’t know the answers, why do they pretend they do? In my humble opinion, It seems they do this to distance science from religion and to close the discussion before the wealthiest can fit God into the narrative, Interestingly, I’m not alone in believing they closed the books too early.

Reclaiming Control of Science and Education

The best way to reclaim control of science and education is to learn. If you’re looking for a starting point, I highly recommend: - “A Brief History of Time” by Stephen Hawking for physics - “Sapiens” or “The Selfish Gene” for evolutionary biology

All three are excellent starting points—densely packed with information and covering a wide range of topics in a concise and accessible manner.

@ 9358c676:9f2912fc

Introduction

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) began as a pandemic in the 1980s. In its early days, it was seen as a certain death sentence, a taboo associated with marginalized groups, and it highlighted the failures of poverty in accessing healthcare. Gradually, the struggle for life and the suffering of those who are no longer with us, including both famous and anonymous individuals, became visible.

Today, 40 years later, HIV is presented as a chronic disease with effective treatment. Patients living with HIV who receive appropriate treatment have no detectable virus in their circulating blood, enjoy a good quality of life, and are more concerned about other aspects of their health during medical consultations, almost forgetting their condition. For these patients, daily treatment is the cure, similar to someone taking a pill every day for high blood pressure or diabetes.

The Global Impact

HIV is a lentivirus, a subgroup of retroviruses composed of RNA. The natural history of HIV infection involves an attack on the immune system, particularly targeting CD4 cells, where chronic deterioration can lead to the acquisition of infectious and oncological diseases that may be fatal over the years, resulting in acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).

Interestingly, there is a small group of people known as "elite controllers" who manage to control HIV infection without treatment and remain healthy for much of their lives, despite having a hidden deep viral reservoir. The primary modes of transmission are sexual, followed by blood and vertical transmission from mother to child, with the first mode predominating today.

Today, in the downward trend of the HIV epidemic, it is estimated that 39 million people are living with HIV worldwide. Depending on the region, nearly half of this population belongs to at-risk groups, such as men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender individuals, sex workers, and people who inject drugs. These vulnerable groups are especially important for prevention efforts. However, little is done for prevention in the general population, which sometimes represents the other half of the cake of people living with HIV (PLWH).

Breaking the Dogma: The Concept of Undetectable = Untransmittable (U=U)

The introduction of highly effective antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in 1994 broke the curve of the HIV epidemic. The introduction of new medications with fewer side effects and greater effectiveness in controlling the virus has been crucial. In 2007, the launch of Raltegravir as the first viral integrase inhibitor marked a milestone in current treatments, allowing patients to effectively control the virus within 3 to 6 months.

The positive impact of these treatments led health organizations to launch the concept of undetectable = untransmittable (U=U) to impact the general population and at-risk groups, updating the dogma and eradicating stigma: a patient living with HIV who maintains an undetectable viral load in their blood through treatment will not transmit HIV sexually.

Although this concept has transformed the social dynamics and stigma surrounding the disease, adherence to treatment must be complete to achieve this new paradigm.

Prophylaxis as a Method to Prevent HIV in Healthy Populations

The correct use of condoms has been the cornerstone of HIV prevention and other sexually transmitted infections over the years. However, it is not the only tool available today and can be complemented for comprehensive sexual health.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a novel strategy that involves administering antiretroviral medication to vulnerable groups before they are exposed to HIV (MSM, transgender individuals, sex workers, people who inject drugs). It involves taking medication daily, effectively reducing the risk of contracting HIV and providing protection to these groups. It is similar to taking a contraceptive pill daily. It has had a very positive impact on protecting these populations. In the Americas, it has been successfully implemented in the United States, Mexico, Peru, and Brazil. Other countries, although with some delay, are now implementing this strategy.

Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), on the other hand, is a strategy that involves administering antiretroviral treatment after a potential exposure to HIV. If the treatment is administered within the first 72 hours and maintained for 4 weeks, the chances of contracting HIV decrease substantially.

Both strategies have been remarkably successful in preventing HIV in at-risk populations and healthy populations, although their dissemination and awareness remain limited.

https://image.nostr.build/08682bf763ade56741d8e4c8c6d870cb8d71ab7d72c605b9aa805af2234348ff.jpg

The New Horizon: Long-Acting Antiretrovirals, HIV Vaccines, and Promising Therapies

The introduction of viral integrase inhibitors and new nucleoside analogs in the last 15 years has allowed for the availability of safe drugs with minimal side effects in the treatment of HIV, many of which are included in a single pill regimen per day. However, the pharmaceutical industry continues to diversify the offerings in a healthy manner.

Cabotegravir is a new long-acting integrase inhibitor that is administered via injection. Combined with Rilpivirine, it has proven to be effective and safe in the treatment of HIV, with injections every 2 months. This has revolutionized treatment for people who are tired of taking pills daily, as well as in PrEP, where effective prevention against HIV can be achieved with injections every 2 months for at-risk groups.

Additionally, subdermal implants of Islatravir, a new long-acting nucleoside analog, are being tested as a PrEP strategy. Similar to monthly hormonal contraceptive injections or hormonal contraceptive implants, this strategy has proven effective in at-risk groups.

Regarding the HIV vaccine, we have been developing it for over two decades, with advances and setbacks. While vaccines have shown promising results in terms of safety and antibody generation, we still need to await conclusive phase III results demonstrating their effectiveness in at-risk groups and the general population.

The Eradication of HIV and Patients Cured Without Treatment

While current treatment allows for the elimination of HIV from the bloodstream and sexual transmission, there remains a reservoir in some deep immune cells that have been infected by the retrovirus, which contain latent HIV DNA and have the potential to reactivate if daily treatment is interrupted.

However, there are patients who have managed to eliminate HIV from their bodies, including these deep cells, and HIV is undetectable upon discontinuation of treatment. These cases are very rare, with only 7 to 8 individuals being the subject of intensive scientific study. Among them are the "Berlin patient" of Germany and "City of Hope patient" from Argentina. Some of these cases involved patients under effective HIV treatment who underwent suppressive chemotherapy for bone marrow transplants and managed to eliminate these deep cells with latent HIV DNA.

Unfortunately, this treatment is not scalable for the entire HIV-positive population, both due to its cost and potential side effects. However, "Shock and Kill" strategies have been proposed, aiming to use monoclonal antibodies to activate these latent cells during HIV treatment, exposing them to antiretroviral medication for elimination, thereby eradicating these small reservoirs of HIV.

WHO Goals

The World Health Organization (WHO) has established clear objectives that are constantly updated to achieve the eradication of HIV in the population.

The updated goals of the WHO propose that, to end the HIV epidemic, three objectives must be met by the year 2025-2030:

1. 95% of people living with HIV must be diagnosed through testing.
2. 95% of diagnosed individuals must be on highly effective antiretroviral therapy (HAART).
3. 95% of those on HAART must have an undetectable viral load in their blood.

Developing and underdeveloped countries currently have an effectiveness rate for these strategies that disagree significantly.

https://image.nostr.build/ac6693df57aaca6dac0b06b5db9eb1a2757e7c08511edb0f11617e12653d3db5.png

Key Takeaways

• HIV has a cure, and the cure is permanent treatment.
• Treatment for HIV is free and accessible to the population, as it is a public health impact disease.
• A person living with HIV who receives appropriate treatment will not transmit the virus sexually, will enjoy a full life without the disease, and can have children without HIV.
• In the event of a potential HIV exposure (such as unprotected sexual contact with an infrequent partner), you can go to a hospital within the first 72 hours to receive treatment that will prevent HIV infection.
• Just as we witnessed the eradication of smallpox from the face of the earth in 1978 due to scientific advances, we will live to see the eradication of HIV.

Autor

Kamo Weasel - MD Infectious Diseases - MD Internal Medicine - #DocChain Community npub1jdvvva54m8nchh3t708pav99qk24x6rkx2sh0e7jthh0l8efzt7q9y7jlj

Resources

1. World Health Organization (WHO)
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
3. UNAIDS

Bibliography

1. The natural history of HIV infection. DOI: 10.1097/COH.0b013e328361fa66
2. Changing Knowledge and Attitudes Towards HIV Treatment-as-Prevention and "Undetectable = Untransmittable": A Systematic Review. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-021-03296-8
3. Challenges of HIV diagnosis and management in the context of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), test and start and acute HIV infection: a scoping review. DOI: 10.1002/jia2.25419
4. Long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine dosed every 2 months in adults with HIV-1 infection (ATLAS-2M), 48-week results: a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority study. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32666-0
5. Efficacy and safety of long-acting cabotegravir compared with daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus emtricitabine to prevent HIV infection in cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men 1 year after study unblinding: a secondary analysis of the phase 2b and 3 HPTN 083 randomised controlled trial. DOI: 10.1016/S2352-3018(23)00261-8
6. Safety and immunogenicity of a subtype C ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) vaccine prime plus bivalent subtype C gp120 vaccine boost adjuvanted with MF59 or alum in healthy adults without HIV (HVTN 107): A phase 1/2a randomized trial. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004360
7. Shock and kill within the CNS: A promising HIV eradication approach?. DOI: 10.1002/JLB.5VMR0122-046RRR

@ 41d0a715:9733c512

Blaise Pascal: 'I have made this letter longer than usual, only because I have not had the time to make it shorter.'

Some of you Stackers need to spend a little more time to make your posts short and sweet. Sometimes I realize a post doesn't even have a point after wasting time reading it. A long poorly written post is a waste of my time and yours too!

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/676136

@ 655a7cf1:d0510794

I can't stop thinking about it. When I go to clear out a cave in Skyrim I always find the troll the spider some version of some enemy with gold. I ask myself how did they get this gold.? Is there someone in the cities that goes to and fro to have commerce with underworld. If so what would this market look like. Would it be trade based or commodity based. Sometimes in these caves I can find upwards of 100 gold I can also find individuals with upwards of 20 gold on them. Assuming they live paycheck to paycheck this is a moderate size of money they're carrying around from week to week. It tells me that the trade is doing well. Am I completely psychotic for constantly thinking about this? Does anybody else thought about this or done any research or have any links that I can find?

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/673609

@ 8cb60e21:5f2deaea

@ 472f440f:5669301e

I had the pleasure of sitting back down with Will Reeves, Founder and CEO of Fold, on TFTC last week to discuss Fold's journey from a startup to (soon to be) a publicly listed company. I particularly liked this conversation because it was a great lens into the grit it takes to run a successful bitcoin company.

https://fountain.fm/episode/1FrspxmpK5bsoReGx73n

Building a successful company is extremely hard in its own right. Building a successful bitcoin company is significantly harder considering the fact that you're building a company in parallel with a nascent and volatile monetary asset that is monetizing in real time. Bitcoin adoption comes in waves. People flood in when the price is ripping and fade out when the price corrects and goes into a multi-year bear market before the tide comes back in. This means that your potential user base is expanding and contracting more than it would be in other industries. As a company you need to be able to absorb the incoming waves of new adopters and then capture and retain the users who stick around for the bear market.

To do this correctly, a founder and their team needs to thread many needles. First, can you assemble a team that can actually build something? Second, can you bring a product to market that people actually use because it provides value to them? Third, can you stick out against the crowd? So on and so forth. One of the most important aspects of building a bitcoin company during bitcoin's monetization phase is timing. There are many great ideas that people have in terms of companies, products and tools that can built using bitcoin. There are sci-fi futures that can be built today on bitcoin if people really wanted to.

The problem that arises is that adoption and understanding of bitcoin are at a point where, even though a functional product could be brought to market, it won't be adopted by a large number of people because there 1.) aren't enough people who would understand how to use it and 2.) for the people who do understand how to use it and could benefit from it, the universe of people they can interact with using that product is minuscule.

Timing is everything. And I think Fold nailed the timing of their product. Allowing people to passively stack sats by offering a product that enables them to go about their daily spending and get sats back instead of cash back rewards is a great first-touch bitcoin experience. Once Fold found their sticky user base and perfected their sats back experience, they began expanding their product offering to provide their users with more bitcoin services. Buy/sell bitcoin in-app, bill pay for sats back, and more. They'll eventually roll out a credit card and additional financial services. Start simple, provide something of value, nail the timing and then expand from there. That seems to be the recipe.

For any founders in the space reading this, I highly recommend you listen to the episode. Particularly for the advice Will gives about knowing when to sprint on product and when to lean into growth. Bear markets are for building and bull markets are for casting the widest net possible and capturing as many new users as possible.

At Ten31 we are extremely proud to back Fold and a number of other companies in the bitcoin space that understand the intricacies described above. We work with some of the best founders in the world. Founders who know how to eat glass with the best of them. Bitcoin can be a cruel mistress and no one knows that more intimately than the founders building bitcoin companies.

---

Final thought...

The NFL having a week 1 game in Brazil should get Roger Godell fired.

Enjoy your weekend, freaks.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Nostr: a quick introduction, attempt #2

Nostr doesn't subscribe to any ideals of "free speech" as these belong to the realm of politics and assume a big powerful government that enforces a common ruleupon everybody else.

Nostr instead is much simpler, it simply says that servers are private property and establishes a generalized framework for people to connect to all these servers, creating a true free market in the process. In other words, Nostr is the public road that each market participant can use to build their own store or visit others and use their services.

(Of course a road is never truly public, in normal cases it's ran by the government, in this case it relies upon the previous existence of the internet with all its quirks and chaos plus a hand of government control, but none of that matters for this explanation).

More concretely speaking, Nostr is just a set of definitions of the formats of the data that can be passed between participants and their expected order, i.e. messages between clients (i.e. the program that runs on a user computer) and relays (i.e. the program that runs on a publicly accessible computer, a "server", generally with a domain-name associated) over a type of TCP connection (WebSocket) with cryptographic signatures. This is what is called a "protocol" in this context, and upon that simple base multiple kinds of sub-protocols can be added, like a protocol for "public-square style microblogging", "semi-closed group chat" or, I don't know, "recipe sharing and feedback".

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Drivechain

Understanding Drivechain requires a shift from the paradigm most bitcoiners are used to. It is not about "trustlessness" or "mathematical certainty", but game theory and incentives. (Well, Bitcoin in general is also that, but people prefer to ignore it and focus on some illusion of trustlessness provided by mathematics.)

Here we will describe the basic mechanism (simple) and incentives (complex) of "hashrate escrow" and how it enables a 2-way peg between the mainchain (Bitcoin) and various sidechains.

The full concept of "Drivechain" also involves blind merged mining (i.e., the sidechains mine themselves by publishing their block hashes to the mainchain without the miners having to run the sidechain software), but this is much easier to understand and can be accomplished either by the BIP-301 mechanism or by the Spacechains mechanism.

How does hashrate escrow work from the point of view of Bitcoin?

A new address type is created. Anything that goes in that is locked and can only be spent if all miners agree on the Withdrawal Transaction (WT^) that will spend it for 6 months. There is one of these special addresses for each sidechain.

To gather miners' agreement bitcoind keeps track of the "score" of all transactions that could possibly spend from that address. On every block mined, for each sidechain, the miner can use a portion of their coinbase to either increase the score of one WT^ by 1 while decreasing the score of all others by 1; or they can decrease the score of all WT^s by 1; or they can do nothing.

Once a transaction has gotten a score high enough, it is published and funds are effectively transferred from the sidechain to the withdrawing users.

If a timeout of 6 months passes and the score doesn't meet the threshold, that WT^ is discarded.

What does the above procedure mean?

It means that people can transfer coins from the mainchain to a sidechain by depositing to the special address. Then they can withdraw from the sidechain by making a special withdraw transaction in the sidechain.

The special transaction somehow freezes funds in the sidechain while a transaction that aggregates all withdrawals into a single mainchain WT^, which is then submitted to the mainchain miners so they can start voting on it and finally after some months it is published.

Now the crucial part: the validity of the WT^ is not verified by the Bitcoin mainchain rules, i.e., if Bob has requested a withdraw from the sidechain to his mainchain address, but someone publishes a wrong WT^ that instead takes Bob's funds and sends them to Alice's main address there is no way the mainchain will know that. What determines the "validity" of the WT^ is the miner vote score and only that. It is the job of miners to vote correctly -- and for that they may want to run the sidechain node in SPV mode so they can attest for the existence of a reference to the WT^ transaction in the sidechain blockchain (which then ensures it is ok) or do these checks by some other means.

What? 6 months to get my money back?

Yes. But no, in practice anyone who wants their money back will be able to use an atomic swap, submarine swap or other similar service to transfer funds from the sidechain to the mainchain and vice-versa. The long delayed withdraw costs would be incurred by few liquidity providers that would gain some small profit from it.

Why bother with this at all?

Drivechains solve many different problems:

It enables experimentation and new use cases for Bitcoin

Issued assets, fully private transactions, stateful blockchain contracts, turing-completeness, decentralized games, some "DeFi" aspects, prediction markets, futarchy, decentralized and yet meaningful human-readable names, big blocks with a ton of normal transactions on them, a chain optimized only for Lighting-style networks to be built on top of it.

These are some ideas that may have merit to them, but were never actually tried because they couldn't be tried with real Bitcoin or inferfacing with real bitcoins. They were either relegated to the shitcoin territory or to custodial solutions like Liquid or RSK that may have failed to gain network effect because of that.

It solves conflicts and infighting

Some people want fully private transactions in a UTXO model, others want "accounts" they can tie to their name and build reputation on top; some people want simple multisig solutions, others want complex code that reads a ton of variables; some people want to put all the transactions on a global chain in batches every 10 minutes, others want off-chain instant transactions backed by funds previously locked in channels; some want to spend, others want to just hold; some want to use blockchain technology to solve all the problems in the world, others just want to solve money.

With Drivechain-based sidechains all these groups can be happy simultaneously and don't fight. Meanwhile they will all be using the same money and contributing to each other's ecosystem even unwillingly, it's also easy and free for them to change their group affiliation later, which reduces cognitive dissonance.

It solves "scaling"

Multiple chains like the ones described above would certainly do a lot to accomodate many more transactions that the current Bitcoin chain can. One could have special Lightning Network chains, but even just big block chains or big-block-mimblewimble chains or whatnot could probably do a good job. Or even something less cool like 200 independent chains just like Bitcoin is today, no extra features (and you can call it "sharding"), just that would already multiply the current total capacity by 200.

Use your imagination.

It solves the blockchain security budget issue

The calculation is simple: you imagine what security budget is reasonable for each block in a world without block subsidy and divide that for the amount of bytes you can fit in a single block: that is the price to be paid in satoshis per byte. In reasonable estimative, the price necessary for every Bitcoin transaction goes to very large amounts, such that not only any day-to-day transaction has insanely prohibitive costs, but also Lightning channel opens and closes are impracticable.

So without a solution like Drivechain you'll be left with only one alternative: pushing Bitcoin usage to trusted services like Liquid and RSK or custodial Lightning wallets. With Drivechain, though, there could be thousands of transactions happening in sidechains and being all aggregated into a sidechain block that would then pay a very large fee to be published (via blind merged mining) to the mainchain. Bitcoin security guaranteed.

It keeps Bitcoin decentralized

Once we have sidechains to accomodate the normal transactions, the mainchain functionality can be reduced to be only a "hub" for the sidechains' comings and goings, and then the maximum block size for the mainchain can be reduced to, say, 100kb, which would make running a full node very very easy.

Can miners steal?

Yes. If a group of coordinated miners are able to secure the majority of the hashpower and keep their coordination for 6 months, they can publish a WT^ that takes the money from the sidechains and pays to themselves.

Will miners steal?

No, because the incentives are such that they won't.

Although it may look at first that stealing is an obvious strategy for miners as it is free money, there are many costs involved:

1. The cost of ceasing blind-merged mining returns -- as stealing will kill a sidechain, all the fees from it that miners would be expected to earn for the next years are gone;
2. The cost of Bitcoin price going down: If a steal is successful that will mean Drivechains are not safe, therefore Bitcoin is less useful, and miner credibility will also be hurt, which are likely to cause the Bitcoin price to go down, which in turn may kill the miners' businesses and savings;
3. The cost of coordination -- assuming miners are just normal businesses, they just want to do their work and get paid, but stealing from a Drivechain will require coordination with other miners to conduct an immoral act in a way that has many pitfalls and is likely to be broken over the months;
4. The cost of miners leaving your mining pool: when we talked about "miners" above we were actually talking about mining pools operators, so they must also consider the risk of miners migrating from their mining pool to others as they begin the process of stealing;
5. The cost of community goodwill -- when participating in a steal operation, a miner will suffer a ton of backlash from the community. Even if the attempt fails at the end, the fact that it was attempted will contribute to growing concerns over exaggerated miners power over the Bitcoin ecosystem, which may end up causing the community to agree on a hard-fork to change the mining algorithm in the future, or to do something to increase participation of more entities in the mining process (such as development or cheapment of new ASICs), which have a chance of decreasing the profits of current miners.

Another point to take in consideration is that one may be inclined to think a newly-created sidechain or a sidechain with relatively low usage may be more easily stolen from, since the blind merged mining returns from it (point 1 above) are going to be small -- but the fact is also that a sidechain with small usage will also have less money to be stolen from, and since the other costs besides 1 are less elastic at the end it will not be worth stealing from these too.

All of the above consideration are valid only if miners are stealing from good sidechains. If there is a sidechain that is doing things wrong, scamming people, not being used at all, or is full of bugs, for example, that will be perceived as a bad sidechain, and then miners can and will safely steal from it and kill it, which will be perceived as a good thing by everybody.

What do we do if miners steal?

Paul Sztorc has suggested in the past that a user-activated soft-fork could prevent miners from stealing, i.e., most Bitcoin users and nodes issue a rule similar to this one to invalidate the inclusion of a faulty WT^ and thus cause any miner that includes it in a block to be relegated to their own Bitcoin fork that other nodes won't accept.

This suggestion has made people think Drivechain is a sidechain solution backed by user-actived soft-forks for safety, which is very far from the truth. Drivechains must not and will not rely on this kind of soft-fork, although they are possible, as the coordination costs are too high and no one should ever expect these things to happen.

If even with all the incentives against them (see above) miners do still steal from a good sidechain that will mean the failure of the Drivechain experiment. It will very likely also mean the failure of the Bitcoin experiment too, as it will be proven that miners can coordinate to act maliciously over a prolonged period of time regardless of economic and social incentives, meaning they are probably in it just for attacking Bitcoin, backed by nation-states or something else, and therefore no Bitcoin transaction in the mainchain is to be expected to be safe ever again.

Why use this and not a full-blown trustless and open sidechain technology?

Because it is impossible.

If you ever heard someone saying "just use a sidechain", "do this in a sidechain" or anything like that, be aware that these people are either talking about "federated" sidechains (i.e., funds are kept in custody by a group of entities) or they are talking about Drivechain, or they are disillusioned and think it is possible to do sidechains in any other manner.

No, I mean a trustless 2-way peg with correctness of the withdrawals verified by the Bitcoin protocol!

That is not possible unless Bitcoin verifies all transactions that happen in all the sidechains, which would be akin to drastically increasing the blocksize and expanding the Bitcoin rules in tons of ways, i.e., a terrible idea that no one wants.

What about the Blockstream sidechains whitepaper?

Yes, that was a way to do it. The Drivechain hashrate escrow is a conceptually simpler way to achieve the same thing with improved incentives, less junk in the chain, more safety.

Isn't the hashrate escrow a very complex soft-fork?

Yes, but it is much simpler than SegWit. And, unlike SegWit, it doesn't force anything on users, i.e., it isn't a mandatory blocksize increase.

Why should we expect miners to care enough to participate in the voting mechanism?

Because it's in their own self-interest to do it, and it costs very little. Today over half of the miners mine RSK. It's not blind merged mining, it's a very convoluted process that requires them to run a RSK full node. For the Drivechain sidechains, an SPV node would be enough, or maybe just getting data from a block explorer API, so much much simpler.

What if I still don't like Drivechain even after reading this?

That is the entire point! You don't have to like it or use it as long as you're fine with other people using it. The hashrate escrow special addresses will not impact you at all, validation cost is minimal, and you get the benefit of people who want to use Drivechain migrating to their own sidechains and freeing up space for you in the mainchain. See also the point above about infighting.

See also

• Podcast episode with Ruben Somsen and Aaron van Wirdum explaining Drivechain
• Alternatives to Drivechain
• Drivechain comparison with Ethereum

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Personagens de jogos e símbolos

A sensação de "ser" um personagem em um jogo ou uma brincadeira talvez seja o mais próximo que eu tenha conseguido chegar do entendimento de um símbolo religioso.

A hóstia consagrada é, segundo a religião, o corpo de Cristo, mas nossa mente moderna só consegue concebê-la como sendo uma representação do corpo de Cristo. Da mesma forma outras culturas e outras religiões têm símbolos parecidos, inclusive nos quais o próprio participante do ritual faz o papel de um deus ou de qualquer coisa parecida.

"Faz o papel" é de novo a interpretação da mente moderna. O sujeito ali é a coisa, mas ele ao mesmo tempo que é também sabe que não é, que continua sendo ele mesmo.

Nos jogos de videogame e brincadeiras infantis em que se encarna um personagem o jogador é o personagem. não se diz, entre os jogadores, que alguém está "encenando", mas que ele é e pronto. nem há outra denominação ou outro verbo. No máximo "encarnando", mas já aí já é vocabulário jornalístico feito para facilitar a compreensão de quem está de fora do jogo.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

A Causa

o Princípios de Economia Política de Menger é o único livro que enfatiza a CAUSA o tempo todo. os cientistas todos parecem não saber, ou se esquecer sempre, que as coisas têm causa, e que o conhecimento verdadeiro é o conhecimento da causa das coisas.

a causa é uma categoria metafísica muito superior a qualquer correlação ou resultado de teste de hipótese, ela não pode ser descoberta por nenhum artifício econométrico ou reduzida à simples antecedência temporal estatística. a causa dos fenômenos não pode ser provada cientificamente, mas pode ser conhecida.

o livro de Menger conta para o leitor as causas de vários fenômenos econômicos e as interliga de forma que o mundo caótico da economia parece adquirir uma ordem no momento em que você lê. é uma sensação mágica e indescritível.

quando eu te o recomendei, queria é te imbuir com o espírito da busca pela causa das coisas. depois de ler aquilo, você está apto a perceber continuidade causal nos fenômenos mais complexos da economia atual, enxergar as causas entre toda a ação governamental e as suas várias consequências na vida humana. eu faço isso todos os dias e é a melhor sensação do mundo quando o caos das notícias do caderno de Economia do jornal -- que para o próprio jornalista que as escreveu não têm nenhum sentido (tanto é que ele escreve tudo errado) -- se incluem num sistema ordenado de causas e consequências.

provavelmente eu sempre erro em alguns ou vários pontos, mas ainda assim é maravilhoso. ou então é mais maravilhoso ainda quando eu descubro o erro e reinsiro o acerto naquela racionalização bela da ordem do mundo econômico que é a ordem de Deus.

em scrap para T.P.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Veterano não é dono de bixete

"VETERANO NÃO É DONO DE BIXETE". A frase em letras garrafais chama a atenção dos transeuntes neófitos. Paira sobre um cartaz amarelo que lista várias reclamações contra os "trotes machistas", que, na opinião do responsável pelo cartaz, "não é brincadeira, é opressão".

Eis aí um bizarro exemplo de como são as coisas: primeiro todos os universitários aprovam a idéia do trote, apoiam sua realização e até mesmo desejam sofrer o trote -- com a condição de o poderem aplicar eles mesmos depois --, louvam as maravilhas do mundo universitário, onde a suprema sabedoria se esconde atrás de rituais iniciáticos fora do alcance da imaginação do homem comum e rude, do pobre e do filhinho-de-papai das faculdades privadas; em suma: fomentam os mais baixos, os mais animalescos instintos, a crueldade primordial, destroem em si mesmos e nos colegas quaisquer valores civilizatórios que tivessem sobrado ali, ficando todos indistingüíveis de macacos agressivos e tarados.

Depois vêm aí com um cartaz protestar contra os assédios -- que sem dúvida acontecem em larguíssima escala -- sofridos pelas calouras de 17 anos e que, sendo também novatas no mundo universitário, ainda conservam um pouco de discernimento e pudor.

A incompreensão do fenômeno, porém, é tão grande, que os trotes não são identificados como um problema mental, uma doença que deve ser tratada e eliminada, mas como um sintoma da opressão machista dos homens às mulheres, um produto desta civilização paternalista que, desde que Deus é chamado "o Pai" e não "a Mãe", corrompe a benéfica, pura e angélica natureza do homem primitivo e o torna esta tão torpe criatura.

Na opinião dos autores desse cartaz é preciso, pois, continuar a destruir o que resta da cultura ocidental, e então esperar que haja trotes menos opressores.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

neuron.vim

I started using this neuron thing to create an update this same zettelkasten, but the existing vim plugin had too many problems, so I forked it and ended up changing almost everything.

Since the upstream repository was somewhat abandoned, most users and people who were trying to contribute upstream migrate to my fork too.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/neuron.vim

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

On "zk-rollups" applied to Bitcoin

ZK rollups make no sense in bitcoin because there is no "cheap calldata". all data is already ~~cheap~~ expensive calldata.

There could be an onchain zk verification that allows succinct signatures maybe, but never a rollup.

What happens is: you can have one UTXO that contains multiple balances on it and in each transaction you can recreate that UTXOs but alter its state using a zk to compress all internal transactions that took place.

The blockchain must be aware of all these new things, so it is in no way "L2".

And you must have an entity responsible for that UTXO and for conjuring the state changes and zk proofs.

But on bitcoin you also must keep the data necessary to rebuild the proofs somewhere else, I'm not sure how can the third party responsible for that UTXO ensure that happens.

I think such a construct is similar to a credit card corporation: one central party upon which everybody depends, zero interoperability with external entities, every vendor must have an account on each credit card company to be able to charge customers, therefore it is not clear that such a thing is more desirable than solutions that are truly open and interoperable like Lightning, which may have its defects but at least fosters a much better environment, bringing together different conflicting parties, custodians, anyone.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Splitpages

The simplest possible service: it splitted PDF pages in half.

Created specially to solve the problem of those scanned books that come with two pages side-by-side as if they were a single page and are much harder to read on Kindle because of that.

It required me to learn about Heroku Buildpacks though, and fork or contribute to a Heroku Buildpack that embedded a mupdf binary.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/splitpages
• https://splitpages.herokuapp.com/

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

tempreites

My first library to get stars on GitHub, was a very stupid templating library that used just HTML and HTML attributes ("DSL-free"). I was inspired by http://microjs.com/ at the time and ended up not using the library. Probably no one ever did.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/tempreites

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

litepub

A Go library that abstracts all the burdensome ActivityPub things and provides just the right amount of helpers necessary to integrate an existing website into the "fediverse" (what an odious name). Made for the gravity integration.

• https://godoc.org/github.com/fiatjaf/litepub

See also

-

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

questo.email

This was a thing done in a brief period I liked the idea of "indiewebcamp", a stupid movement of people saying everybody should have their site and post their lives in it.

From the GitHub postmortem:

questo.email was a service that integrated email addresses into the indieweb ecosystem by providing email-to-note and email-to-webmention triggers, which could be used for people to comment through webmention using their email addresses, and be replied, and also for people to send messages from their sites directly to the email addresses of people they knew; Questo also worked as an IndieAuth provider that used people's email addresses and Mozilla Persona.

It was live from December 2014 through December 2015.

Here's how the home page looked:

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/questo.email

See also

• jekmentions, another thing related to "indieweb"

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

idea: Rumple

a payments network based on trust channels

This is the description of a Lightning-like network that will work only with credit or trust-based channels and exist alongside the normal Lightning Network. I imagine some people will think this is undesirable and at the same time very easy to do (such that if it doesn't exist yet it must be because no one cares), but in fact it is a very desirable thing -- which I hope I can establish below -- and at the same time a very non-trivial problem to solve, as the history of Ryan Fugger's Ripple project and posterior copies of it show.

Read these first to get the full context:

1. Ryan Fugger's Ripple
2. Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit
3. The Lightning Network solves the problem of the decentralized commit
4. Parallel Chains

Explanation about the name

Since we're copying the fundamental Ripple idea from Ryan Fugger and since the name "Ripple" is now associated with a scam coin called XRP, and since Ryan Fugger has changed the name of his old website "Ripplepay" to "Rumplepay", we will follow his lead here. If "Ripplepay" was the name of a centralized prototype to the open peer-to-peer network "Ripple", now that the centralized version is called "Rumplepay" the peer-to-peer version must be called "Rumple".

Now the idea

Basically we copy the Lightning Network, but without HTLCs or channels being opened and closed with funds committed to them on multisig Bitcoin transactions published to the blockchain. Instead we use pure trust relationships like the original Ripple concept.

And we use the blockchain commit method, but instead of spending an absurd amount of money to use the actual Bitcoin blockchain instead we use a parallel chain.

How exactly -- a protocol proposal attempt

It could work like this:

The parallel chain, or "Rumple Chain"

1. We define a parallel chain with a genesis block;
2. Following blocks must contain a. the ID of the previous block; b. a list of up to 32768 entries of arbitrary 32-byte values; c. an ID constituted by sha256(the previous block ID + the merkle root of all the entries)
3. To be mined, each parallel block must be included in the Bitcoin chain according as explained above.

Now that we have a structure for a simple "blockchain" that is completely useless, just blocks over blocks of meaningless values, we proceed to the next step of assigning meaning to these values.

The off-chain payments network, or "Rumple Network"

1. We create a network of nodes that can talk to each other via TCP messages (all details are the same as the Lightning Network, except where mentioned otherwise);
2. These nodes can create trust channels to each other. These channels are backed by nothing except the willingness of one peer to pay the other what is owed.
3. When Alice creates a trust channel with Bob (Alice trusts Bob), contrary to what happens in the Lightning Network, it's A that can immediately receive payments through that channel, and everything A receives will be an IOU from Bob to Alice. So Alice should never open a channel to Bob unless Alice trusts Bob. But also Alice can choose the amount of trust it has in Bob, she can, for example, open a very small channel with Bob, which means she will only lose a few satoshis if Bob decides to exit scam her. (in the original Ripple examples these channels were always depicted as friend relationships, and they can continue being that, but it's expected -- given the experience of the Lightning Network -- that the bulk of the channels will exist between users and wallet provider nodes that will act as hubs).
4. As Alice receive a payment through her channel with Bob, she becomes a creditor and Bob a debtor, i.e., the balance of the channel moves a little to her side. Now she can use these funds to make payments over that channel (or make a payment that combines funds from multiple channels using MPP).
5. If at any time Alice decides to close her channel with Bob, she can send all the funds she has standing there to somewhere else (for example, another channel she has with someone else, another wallet somewhere else, a shop that is selling some good or service, or a service that will aggregate all funds from all her channels and send a transaction to the Bitcoin chain on her behalf).
6. If at any time Bob leaves the network Alice is entitled by Bob's cryptographic signatures to knock on his door and demand payment, or go to a judge and ask him to force Bob to pay, or share the signatures and commitments online and hurt Bob's reputation with the rest of the network (but yes, none of these things is good enough and if Bob is a very dishonest person none of these things is likely to save Alice's funds).

The payment flow

1. Suppose there exists a route Alice->Bob->Carol and Alice wants to send a payment to Carol.
2. First Alice reads an invoice she received from Carol. The invoice (which can be pretty similar or maybe even the same as BOLT11) contains a payment hash h and information about how to reach Carol's node, optionally an amount. Let's say it's 100 satoshis.
3. Using the routing information she gathered, Alice builds an onion and sends it to Bob, at the same time she offers to Bob a "conditional IOU". That stands for a signed commitment that Alice will owe Bob an 100 satoshis if in the next 50 blocks of the Rumple Chain there appears a block containing the preimage p such that sha256(p) == h.
4. Bob peels the onion and discovers that he must forward that payment to Carol, so he forwards the peeled onion and offers a conditional IOU to Carol with the same h. Bob doesn't know Carol is the final recipient of the payment, it could potentially go on and on.
5. When Carol gets the conditional IOU from Bob, she makes a list of all the nodes who have announced themselves as miners (which is not something I have mentioned before, but nodes that are acting as miners will must announce themselves somehow) and are online and bidding for the next Rumple block. Each of these miners will have previously published a random 32-byte value v they they intend to include in their next block.
6. Carol sends payments through routes to all (or a big number) of these miners, but this time the conditional IOU contains two conditions (values that must appear in a block for the IOU to be valid): p such that sha256(p) == h (the same that featured in the invoice) and v (which must be unique and constant for each miner, something that is easily verifiable by Carol beforehand). Also, instead of these conditions being valid for the next 50 blocks they are valid only for the single next block.
7. Now Carol broadcasts p to the mempool and hopes one of the miners to which she sent conditional payments sees it and, allured by the possibility of cashing in Carol's payment, includes p in the next block. If that does not happen, Carol can try again in the next block.

Why bother with this at all?

1. The biggest advantage of Lightning is its openness

   It has been said multiple times that if trust is involved then we don't need Lightning, we can use Coinbase, or worse, Paypal. This is very wrong. Lightning is good specially because it serves as a bridge between Coinbase, Paypal, other custodial provider and someone running their own node. All these can transact freely across the network and pay each other without worrying about who is in which provider or setup.

   Rumple inherits that openness. In a Rumple Network anyone is free to open new trust channels and immediately route payments to anyone else.

   Also, since Rumple payments are also based on the reveal of a preimage it can do swaps with Lightning inside a payment route from day one (by which I mean one can pay from Rumple to Lightning and vice-versa).

2. Rumple fixes Lightning's fragility

   Lightning is too fragile.

   It's known that Lightning is vulnerable to multiple attacks -- like the flood-and-loot attack, for example, although not an attack that's easy to execute, it's still dangerous even if failed. Given the existence of these attacks, it's important to not ever open channels with random anonymous people. Some degree of trust must exist between peers.

   But one does not even have to consider attacks. The creation of HTLCs is a liability that every node has to do multiple times during its life. Every initiated, received or forwarded payment require adding one HTLC then removing it from the commitment transaction.

   Another issue that makes trust needed between peers is the fact that channels can be closed unilaterally. Although this is a feature, it is also a bug when considering high-fee environments. Imagine you pay $2 in fees to open a channel, your peer may close that unilaterally in the next second and then you have to pay another $15 to close the channel. The opener pays (this is also a feature that can double as a bug by itself). Even if it's not you opening the channel, a peer can open a channel with you, make a payment, then clone the channel, and now you're left with, say, an output of 800 satoshis, which is equal to zero if network fees are high.

   So you should only open channels with people you know and know aren't going to actively try to hack you and people who are not going to close channels and impose unnecessary costs on you. But even considering a fully trusted Lightning Network, even if -- to be extreme -- you only opened channels with yourself, these channels would still be fragile. If some HTLC gets stuck for any reason (peer offline or some weird small incompatibility between node softwares) and you're forced to close the channel because of that, there are the extra costs of sweeping these UTXO outputs plus the total costs of closing and reopening a channel that shouldn't have been closed in the first place. Even if HTLCs don't get stuck, a fee renegotiation event during a mempool spike may cause channels to force-close, become valueless or settle for very high closing fee.

   Some of these issues are mitigated by Eltoo, others by only having channels with people you trust. Others referenced above, plus the the griefing attack and in general the ability of anyone to spam the network for free with payments that can be pending forever or a lot of payments fail repeatedly makes it very fragile.

   Rumple solves most of these problems by not having to touch the blockchain at all. Fee negotiation makes no sense. Opening and closing channels is free. Flood-and-loot is a non-issue. The griefing attack can be still attempted as funds in trust channels must be reserved like on Lightning, but since there should be no theoretical limit to the number of prepared payments a channel can have, the griefing must rely on actual amounts being committed, which prevents large attacks from being performed easily.

3. Rumple fixes Lightning's unsolvable reputation issues

   In the Lightning Conference 2019, Rusty Russell promised there would be pre-payments on Lightning someday, since everybody was aware of potential spam issues and pre-payments would be the way to solve that. Fast-forward to November 2020 and these pre-payments have become an apparently unsolvable problem[^thread-402]: no one knows how to implement them reliably without destroying privacy completely or introducing worse problems.

   Replacing these payments with tables of reputation between peers is also an unsolved problem[^reputation-lightning], for the same reasons explained in the thread above.

4. Rumple solves the hot wallet problem

   Since you don't have to use Bitcoin keys or sign transactions with a Rumple node, only your channel trust is at risk at any time.

5. Rumple ends custodianship

   Since no one is storing other people's funds, a big hub or wallet provider can be used in multiple payment routes, but it cannot be immediately classified as a "custodian". At best, it will be a big debtor.

6. Rumple is fun

   Opening channels with strangers is boring. Opening channels with friends and people you trust even a little makes that relationship grow stronger and the trust be reinforced. (But of course, like it happens in the Lightning Network today, if Rumple is successful the bulk of trust will be from isolated users to big reliable hubs.)

Questions or potential issues

1. So many advantages, yes, but trusted? Custodial? That's easy and stupid!

   Well, an enormous part of the current Lightning Network (and also onchain Bitcoin wallets) already rests on trust, mainly trust between users and custodial wallet providers like ZEBEDEE, Alby, Wallet-of-Satoshi and others. Worse: on the current Lightning Network users not only trust, they also expose their entire transaction history to these providers[^hosted-channels].

   Besides that, as detailed in point 3 of the previous section, there are many unsolvable issues on the Lightning protocol that make each sovereign node dependent on some level of trust in its peers (and the network in general dependent on trusting that no one else will spam it to death).

   So, given the current state of the Lightning Network, to trust peers like Rumple requires is not a giant change -- but it is still a significant change: in Rumple you shouldn't open a large trust channel with someone just because it looks trustworthy, you must personally know that person and only put in what you're willing to lose. In known brands that have reputation to lose you can probably deposit more trust, same for long-term friends, and that's all. Still it is probably good enough, given the existence of MPP payments and the fact that the purpose of Rumple is to be a payments network for day-to-day purchases and not a way to buy real estate.

2. Why would anyone run a node in this parallel chain?

   I don't know. Ideally every server running a Rumple Network node will be running a Bitcoin node and a Rumple chain node. Besides using it to confirm and publish your own Rumple Network transactions it can be set to do BMM mining automatically and maybe earn some small fees comparable to running a Lightning routing node or a JoinMarket yield generator.

   Also it will probably be very lightweight, as pruning is completely free and no verification-since-the-genesis-block will take place.

3. What is the maturity of the debt that exists in the Rumple Network or its legal status?

   By default it is to be understood as being payable on demand for payments occurring inside the network (as credit can be used to forward or initiate payments by the creditor using that channel). But details of settlement outside the network or what happens if one of the peers disappears cannot be enforced or specified by the network.

   Perhaps some standard optional settlement methods (like a Bitcoin address) can be announced and negotiated upon channel creation inside the protocol, but nothing more than that.

[^thread-402]: Read at least the first 10 messages of the thread to see how naïve proposals like you and me could have thought about are brought up and then dismantled very carefully by the group of people most committed to getting Lightning to work properly. [^reputation-lightning]: See also the footnote at Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit. [^hosted-channels]: Although that second part can be solved by hosted channels.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Boardthreads

This was a very badly done service for turning a Trello list into a helpdesk UI.

Surprisingly, it had more paying users than Websites For Trello, which I was working on simultaneously and dedicating much more time to it.

The Neo4j database I used for this was a very poor choice, it was probably the cause of all the bugs.

-https://github.com/fiatjaf/boardthreads

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Webvatar

Like Gravatar, but using profile images from websites tagged with "microformats-2" tags, like people from the indiewebcamp movement liked. It falled back to favicon, gravatar and procedural avatar generators.

No one really used this, despite people saying they liked it. Since I was desperate to getting some of my programs appreciated by someone I even bought a domain. It was sad, but an enriching experience.

• https://github.com/fiatjaf/webvatar.com
• http://webvatar.com

See also

• jekmentions
• questo.email

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

The problem with ION

ION is a DID method based on a thing called "Sidetree".

I can't say for sure what is the problem with ION, because I don't understand the design, even though I have read all I could and asked everybody I knew. All available information only touches on the high-level aspects of it (and of course its amazing wonders) and no one has ever bothered to explain the details. I've also asked the main designer of the protocol, Daniel Buchner, but he may have thought I was trolling him on Twitter and refused to answer, instead pointing me to an incomplete spec on the Decentralized Identity Foundation website that I had already read before. I even tried to join the DIF as a member so I could join their closed community calls and hear what they say, maybe eventually ask a question, so I could understand it, but my entrance was ignored, then after many months and a nudge from another member I was told I had to do a KYC process to be admitted, which I refused.

One thing I know is:

• ION is supposed to provide a way to rotate keys seamlessly and automatically without losing the main identity (and the ION proponents also claim there are no "master" keys because these can also be rotated).
• ION is also not a blockchain, i.e. it doesn't have a deterministic consensus mechanism and it is decentralized, i.e. anyone can publish data to it, doesn't have to be a single central server, there may be holes in the available data and the protocol doesn't treat that as a problem.
• From all we know about years of attempts to scale Bitcoins and develop offchain protocols it is clear that you can't solve the double-spend problem without a central authority or a kind of blockchain (i.e. a decentralized system with deterministic consensus).
• Rotating keys also suffer from the double-spend problem: whenever you rotate a key it is as if it was "spent", you aren't supposed to be able to use it again.

The logic conclusion of the 4 assumptions above is that ION is flawed: it can't provide the key rotation it says it can if it is not a blockchain.

See also

• Excerpt of discussion about DIDs and ION

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

bolt12 problems

• clients can't programatically build new offers by changing a path or query params (services like zbd.gg or lnurl-pay.me won't work)
• impossible to use in a load-balanced custodian way -- since offers would have to be pregenerated and tied to a specific lightning node.
• the existence of fiat currency fields makes it so wallets have to fetch exchange rates from somewhere on the internet (or offer a bad user experience), using HTTP which hurts user privacy.
• the vendor field is misleading, can be phished very easily, not as safe as a domain name.
• onion messages are an improvement over fake HTLC-based payments as a way of transmitting data, for sure. but we must decide if they are (i) suitable for transmitting all kinds of data over the internet, a replacement for tor; or (ii) not something that will scale well or on which we can count on for the future. if there was proper incentivization for data transmission it could end up being (i), the holy grail of p2p communication over the internet, but that is a very hard problem to solve and not guaranteed to yield the desired scalability results. since not even hints of attempting to solve that are being made, it's safer to conclude it is (ii).

bolt12 limitations

• not flexible enough. there are some interesting fields defined in the spec, but who gets to add more fields later if necessary? very unclear.
• services can't return any actionable data to the users who paid for something. it's unclear how business can be conducted without an extra communication channel.

bolt12 illusions

• recurring payments is not really solved, it is just a spec that defines intervals. the actual implementation must still be done by each wallet and service. the recurring payment cannot be enforced, the wallet must still initiate the payment. even if the wallet is evil and is willing to initiate a payment without the user knowing it still needs to have funds, channels, be online, connected etc., so it's not as if the services could rely on the payments being delivered in time.
• people seem to think it will enable pushing payments to mobile wallets, which it does not and cannot.
• there is a confusion of contexts: it looks like offers are superior to lnurl-pay, for example, because they don't require domain names. domain names, though, are common and well-established among internet services and stores, because these services have websites, so this is not really an issue. it is an issue, though, for people that want to receive payments in their homes. for these, indeed, bolt12 offers a superior solution -- but at the same time bolt12 seems to be selling itself as a tool for merchants and service providers when it includes and highlights features as recurring payments and refunds.
• the privacy gains for the receiver that are promoted as being part of bolt12 in fact come from a separate proposal, blinded paths, which should work for all normal lightning payments and indeed are a very nice solution. they are (or at least were, and should be) independent from the bolt12 proposal. a separate proposal, which can be (and already is being) used right now, also improves privacy for the receiver very much anway, it's called trampoline routing.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

The Lightning Network solves the problem of the decentralized commit

Before reading this, see Ripple and the problem of the decentralized commit.

The Bitcoin Lightning Network can be thought as a system similar to Ripple: there are conditional IOUs (HTLCs) that are sent in "prepare"-like messages across a route, and a secret p that must travel from the final receiver backwards through the route until it reaches the initial sender and possession of that secret serves to prove the payment as well as to make the IOU hold true.

The difference is that if one of the parties don't send the "acknowledge" in time, the other has a trusted third-party with its own clock (that is the clock that is valid for everybody involved) to complain immediately at the timeout: the Bitcoin blockchain. If C has p and B isn't acknowleding it, C tells the Bitcoin blockchain and it will force the transfer of the amount from B to C.

Differences (or 1 upside and 3 downside)

1. The Lightning Network differs from a "pure" Ripple network in that when we send a "prepare" message on the Lightning Network, unlike on a pure Ripple network we're not just promising we will owe something -- instead we are putting the money on the table already for the other to get if we are not responsive.

2. The feature above removes the trust element from the equation. We can now have relationships with people we don't trust, as the Bitcoin blockchain will serve as an automated escrow for our conditional payments and no one will be harmed. Therefore it is much easier to build networks and route payments if you don't always require trust relationships.

3. However it introduces the cost of the capital. A ton of capital must be made available in channels and locked in HTLCs so payments can be routed. This leads to potential issues like the ones described in https://twitter.com/joostjgr/status/1308414364911841281.

4. Another issue that comes with the necessity of using the Bitcoin blockchain as an arbiter is that it may cost a lot in fees -- much more than the value of the payment that is being disputed -- to enforce it on the blockchain.[^closing-channels-for-nothing]

Solutions

Because the downsides listed above are so real and problematic -- and much more so when attacks from malicious peers are taken into account --, some have argued that the Lightning Network must rely on at least some trust between peers, which partly negate the benefit.

The introduction of purely trust-backend channels is the next step in the reasoning: if we are trusting already, why not make channels that don't touch the blockchain and don't require peers to commit large amounts of capital?

The reason is, again, the ambiguity that comes from the problem of the decentralized commit. Therefore hosted channels can be good when trust is required only from one side, like in the final hops of payments, but they cannot work in the middle of routes without eroding trust relationships between peers (however they can be useful if employed as channels between two nodes ran by the same person).

The next solution is a revamped pure Ripple network, one that solves the problem of the decentralized commit in a different way.

[^closing-channels-for-nothing]: That is even true when, for reasons of the payment being so small that it doesn't even deserve an actual HTLC that can be enforced on the chain (as per the protocol), even then the channel between the two nodes will be closed, only to make it very clear that there was a disagreement. Leaving it online would be harmful as one of the peers could repeat the attack again and again. This is a proof that ambiguity, in case of the pure Ripple network, is a very important issue.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

Eltoo

Read the paper, it's actually nice and small. You can read only everything up to section 4.2 and it will be enough. Done.

Ok, you don't want to. Or you tried but still want to read here.

Eltoo is a way of keeping payment channel state that works better than the original scheme used in Lightning. Since Lightning is a bunch of different protocols glued together, it can It replace just the part the previously dealed with keeping the payment channel.

Eltoo works like this: A and B want a payment channel, so they create a multisig transaction with deposits from both -- or from just one, doesn't matter. That transaction is only spendable if both cooperate. So if one of them is unresponsive or non-cooperative the other must have a way to get his funds back, so they also create an update transaction but don't publish it to the blockchain. That update transaction spends to a settlement transaction that then distributes the money back to A and B as their balances say.

If they are cooperative they can change the balances of the channel by just creating new update transactions and settlement transactions and number them like 1, 2, 3, 4 etc.

Solid arrows means a transaction is presigned to spend only that previous other transaction; dotted arrows mean it's a floating transaction that can spend any of the previous.

Why do they need and update and a settlement transaction?

Because if B publishes update2 (in which his balances were greater) A needs some time to publish update4 (the latest, which holds correct state of balances).

Each update transaction can be spent by any newer update transaction immediately or by its own specific settlement transaction only after some time -- or some blocks.

Hopefully you got that.

How do they close the channel?

If they're cooperative they can just agree to spend the funding transaction, that first multisig transaction I mentioned, to whatever destinations they want. If one party isn't cooperating the other can just publish the latest update transaction, wait a while, then publish its settlement transaction.

How is this better than the previous way of keeping channel states?

Eltoo is better because nodes only have to keep the last set of update and settlement transactions. Before they had to keep all intermediate state updates.

If it is so better why didn't they do it first?

Because they didn't have the idea. And also because they needed an update to the Bitcoin protocol that allowed the presigned update transactions to spend any of the previous update transactions. This protocol update is called SIGHASH_NOINPUT[^anyprevout], you've seen this name out there. By marking a transaction with SIGHASH_NOINPUT it enters a mystical state and becomes a floating transaction that can be bound to any other transaction as long as its unlocking script matches the locking script.

Why can't update2 bind itself to update4 and spend that?

Good question. It can. But then it can't anymore, because Eltoo uses OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY to ensure that doesn't actually check not a locktime, but a sequence. It's all arcane stuff.

And then Eltoo update transactions are numbered and their lock/unlock scripts will only match if a transaction is being spent by another one that's greater than it.

Do Eltoo channels expire?

No.

What is that "on-chain protocol" they talk about in the paper?

That's just an example to guide you through how the off-chain protocol works. Read carefully or don't read it at all. The off-chain mechanics is different from the on-chain mechanics. Repeating: the on-chain protocol is useless in the real world, it's just a didactic tool.

[^anyprevout]: Later SIGHASH_NOINPUT was modified to fit better with Taproot and Schnorr signatures and renamed to SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT.

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

doulas.club

A full catalog of all Brazilian doulas with data carefully scrapped from many websites that contained partial catalogs and some data manually included. All this packaged as a Couchapp and served directly from Cloudant.

This was done because the idea of doulas was good, but I spotted an issue: pregnant womwn should know many doulas before choosing one that would match well, therefore a full catalog with a lot of information was necessary.

This was a huge amount of work mostly wasted.

Many doulas who knew about this didn't like it and sent angry and offensive emails telling me to remove them. This was information one should know before choosing a doula.

See also

• About CouchDB

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

idea: Hosted-channels Lightning wallet that runs in the browser

Communicates over HTTP with a server that is actually connected to the Lightning Network, but generates preimages and onions locally, doing everything like the Hosted Channels protocol says. Just the communication method changes.

Could use this library: https://www.npmjs.com/package/bolt04