@ 42342239:1d80db24

Preparedness is a hot topic these days. In Europe, Poland has recently introduced compulsory lessons in weapons handling for schoolchildren for war-preparedness purposes. In Sweden, the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) has recently published the brochure on what to do "If crisis or war comes".

However, in the event of war, a country must have a robust energy infrastructure. Sweden does not seem to have this, at least judging by the recent years' electricity price turbulence in southern Sweden. Nor does Germany. The vulnerabilities are many and serious. It's hard not to be reminded of a Swedish prime minister who, just eleven years ago, saw defense as a special interest.

A secure food supply is another crucial factor for a country's resilience. This is something that Sweden lacks. In the early 1990s, nearly 75 percent of the country's food was produced domestically. Today, half of it must be imported. This makes our country more vulnerable to crises and disruptions. Despite our extensive agricultural areas, we are not even self-sufficient in basic commodities like potatoes, which is remarkable.

The government's signing of the Kunming-Montreal Framework for Biological Diversity two years ago risks exacerbating the situation. According to the framework, countries must significantly increase their protected areas over the coming years. The goal is to protect biological diversity. By 2030, at least 30% of all areas, on land and at sea, must be conserved. Sweden, which currently conserves around 15%, must identify large areas to be protected over the coming years. With shrinking fields, we risk getting less wheat, fewer potatoes, and less rapeseed. It's uncertain whether technological advancements can compensate for this, especially when the amount of pesticides and industrial fertilizers must be reduced significantly.

In Danish documents on the "roadmap for sustainable development" of the food system, the possibility of redistributing agricultural land (land distribution reforms) and agreements on financing for restoring cultivated land to wetlands (the restoration of cultivated, carbon-rich soils) are discussed. One cannot avoid the impression that the cultivated areas need to be reduced, in some cases significantly.

The green transition has been a priority on the political agenda in recent years, with the goal of reducing carbon emissions and increasing biological diversity. However, it has become clear that the transition risks having consequences for our preparedness.

One example is the debate about wind power. On the one hand, wind power is said to contribute to reducing carbon emissions and increasing renewable energy. On the other hand, it is said to pose a security risk, as wind turbines can affect radio communication and radar surveillance.

Of course, it's easy to be in favor of biological diversity, but what do we do if this goal comes into conflict with the needs of a robust societal preparedness? Then we are faced with a difficult prioritization. Should we put the safety of people and society before the protection of nature, or vice versa?

“Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable” said J. K. Galbraith, one of the most influential economists of the 20th century. Maybe we can’t both eat the cake and have it too?

@ 7f29628d:e160cccc

Der gut informierte Bürger denkt bei der Pandemie sofort an Intensivstationen, an die Bilder aus Bergamo und erinnert sich an die Berichterstattung damals – also muss es wohl ein Maximum gewesen sein. Manche Skeptiker behaupten jedoch das Gegenteil. Klarheit sollte ein Blick nach Wiesbaden, zum Statistischen Bundesamt, schaffen. Schließlich sitzen dort gut bezahlte Profis, die seit vielen Jahrzehnten die Sterbestatistik pflegen und veröffentlichen. Jeder Todesfall wird in Deutschland über die Standesämter exakt erfasst.

Doch die Überraschung: Das Statistische Bundesamt liefert uns auf diese einfache Frage zwei extrem unterschiedliche Antworten – ein Minimum und ein Maximum. Das Ergebnis hängt davon ab, wie tief man in die Veröffentlichungen des Bundesamtes eintaucht. Betrachtet man nur die Webseiten und Pressemitteilungen, erhält man den Eindruck eines Maximums. Schaut man jedoch etwas tiefer in die Tabellen und Rohdaten, zeigt sich plötzlich ein Minimum. Aber wie kann das sein? Beides gleichzeitig geht ja wohl kaum. Wer lügt hier – die Tabellen des Amtes oder die Pressemitteilungen? Gehen wir dieser Frage Schritt für Schritt auf den Grund.

2020: Ein historisches Maximum?

Schauen wir uns die vielen Hundert Veröffentlichungen des Statistischen Bundesamtes aus dieser Zeit an. Oder wir kürzen ab und fragen ChatGPT, da die KI auf diesen Daten trainiert wurde und das gesamte Material kennt. Die Frage an ChatGPT lautet also: Wie war das Sterbegeschehen im Jahr 2020 im Vergleich zu den Vorjahren?

ChatGPT antwortet: »Im Jahr 2020 war die Sterblichkeit in Deutschland höher als in den Jahren zuvor. Es gab eine Übersterblichkeit von etwa 982.000 Todesfällen, das sind rund 46.000 mehr als der Durchschnitt der Vorjahre (2016 bis 2019). Dieser Anstieg wurde überwiegend im Zusammenhang mit der COVID-19-Pandemie gesehen. Während die Sterbezahlen in den Vorjahren schwankten, war ein solch signifikanter Anstieg wie 2020 bisher nicht zu beobachten.«

Wir fragen konkreter: Ist es ein Fakt, dass wir eine so ernste Lage im Sterbegeschehen wie im Frühjahr 2020 noch nie erlebt haben?

ChatGPT bestätigt: »Ja, die COVID-19-Pandemie führte im Frühjahr 2020 zu einer außergewöhnlichen Situation im Sterbegeschehen in Deutschland. Die dramatische Übersterblichkeit, die ab der 13. Kalenderwoche auftrat, veranlasste das Statistische Bundesamt, besonders eindringliche Warnungen zu veröffentlichen. Der damalige Vizepräsident des Amtes und andere führende Stimmen wiesen öffentlich darauf hin, dass die Todesfallzahlen stark vom Durchschnitt abwichen. Diese klare Warnung richtete sich an die Öffentlichkeit und die Politik gleichermaßen. Die Medien berichteten intensiv über diese Warnungen, was das Bewusstsein für die Schwere der Pandemie erheblich schärfte. In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten hatte es keine vergleichbare Übersterblichkeit gegeben, die eine solch umfangreiche Kommunikation durch das Statistische Bundesamt erforderlich gemacht hätte.«

Ein gut informierter Zeitungsleser wird sich an dieser Stelle bestätigt fühlen: Ja, so war es damals. Ein Maximum im Sterbegeschehen – wegen der Pandemie. Oder etwa nicht?

2020: Ein historisches Minimum?

Tauchen wir in die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes ein. Die Tabellen, die das Amt seit Jahrzehnten verlässlich veröffentlicht, nennen sich Sterbetafeln. Diese werden jährlich bereitgestellt und stehen auf der Website des Bundesamtes zum Download bereit. Ein erster Blick in die Sterbetafeln mag den Laien abschrecken, doch mit einer kurzen Erklärung wird alles verständlich. Wir gehen schrittweise vor.

Nehmen wir die Sterbetafel des Jahres 2017. Sie enthält zwei große Tabellen – eine für Männer und eine für Frauen. Jede Zeile der Tabelle steht für einen Jahrgang, zum Beispiel zeigt die Zeile 79 die Daten der 79-jährigen Männer. Besonders wichtig ist nun die zweite Spalte, in der der Wert 0,05 eingetragen ist. Das bedeutet, dass 5 Prozent der 79-jährigen Männer im Jahr 2017 verstorben sind. Das ist die wichtige Kennzahl. Wenn wir diesen exakten Wert, den man auch als Sterberate bezeichnet, nun in ein Säulendiagramm eintragen, erhalten wir eine leicht verständliche visuelle Darstellung (Grafik 1).

Es ist wichtig zu betonen, dass dieser Wert weder ein Schätzwert noch eine Modellrechnung oder Prognose ist, sondern ein exakter Messwert, basierend auf einer zuverlässigen Zählung. Sterberaten (für die Fachleute auch Sterbewahrscheinlichkeiten qx) sind seit Johann Peter Süßmilch (1707–1767) der Goldstandard der Sterbestatistik. Jeder Aktuar wird das bestätigen. Fügen wir nun die Sterberaten der 79-jährigen Männer aus den Jahren davor und danach hinzu, um das Gesamtbild zu sehen (Grafik 2). Und nun die entscheidende Frage: Zeigt das Jahr 2020 ein Maximum oder ein Minimum?

Ein kritischer Leser könnte vermuten, dass die 79-jährigen Männer eine Ausnahme darstellen und andere Jahrgänge im Jahr 2020 ein Maximum zeigen würden. Doch das trifft nicht zu. Kein einziger Jahrgang verzeichnete im Jahr 2020 ein Maximum. Im Gegenteil: Auch die 1-Jährigen, 2-Jährigen, 3-Jährigen, 9-Jährigen, 10-Jährigen, 15-Jährigen, 18-Jährigen und viele weitere männliche Jahrgänge hatten ihr Minimum im Jahr 2020. Dasselbe gilt bei den Frauen. Insgesamt hatten 31 Jahrgänge ihr Minimum im Jahr 2020. Wenn wir schließlich alle Jahrgänge in einer einzigen Grafik zusammenfassen, ergibt sich ein klares Bild: Das Minimum im Sterbegeschehen lag im Jahr 2020 (Grafik 3).

Ein kritischer Leser könnte nun wiederum vermuten, dass es innerhalb des Jahres 2020 möglicherweise starke Ausschläge nach oben bei einzelnen Jahrgängen gegeben haben könnte, die später durch Ausschläge nach unten ausgeglichen wurden – und dass diese Schwankungen in der jährlichen Übersicht nicht sichtbar sind. Doch auch das trifft nicht zu. Ein Blick auf die wöchentlichen Sterberaten zeigt, dass die ersten acht Monate der Pandemie keine nennenswerten Auffälligkeiten aufweisen. Es bleibt dabei: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes bestätigen zweifelsfrei, dass die ersten acht Monate der Pandemie das historische Minimum im Sterbegeschehen darstellen. (Für die Fachleute sei angemerkt, dass im gleichen Zeitraum die Lebenserwartung die historischen Höchststände erreicht hatte – Grafik 4.)

So konstruierte das Amt aus einem Minimum ein Maximum:

Zur Erinnerung: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes, die in den jährlichen Sterbetafeln zweifelsfrei dokumentiert sind, zeigen für das Jahr 2020 eindeutig ein Minimum im Sterbegeschehen. Aus diesen »in Stein gemeißelten« Zahlen ein Maximum zu »konstruieren«, ohne die Rohdaten selbst zu verändern, scheint auf den ersten Blick eine unlösbare Aufgabe. Jeder Student würde an einer solchen Herausforderung scheitern. Doch das Statistische Bundesamt hat einen kreativen Weg gefunden - ein Meisterstück gezielter Manipulation. In fünf Schritten zeigt sich, wie diese Täuschung der Öffentlichkeit umgesetzt wurde:

(1) Ignorieren der Sterberaten: Die präzisen, objektiven und leicht verständlichen Sterberaten aus den eigenen Sterbetafeln wurden konsequent ignoriert und verschwiegen. Diese Daten widersprachen dem gewünschten Narrativ und wurden daher gezielt ausgeklammert.

(2) Fokus auf absolute Todeszahlen: Die Aufmerksamkeit wurde stattdessen auf die absolute Zahl der Todesfälle gelenkt. Diese wirkt allein durch ihre schiere Größe dramatisch und emotionalisiert die Diskussion. Ein entscheidender Faktor wurde dabei ignoriert: Die absolute Zahl der Todesfälle steigt aufgrund der demografischen Entwicklung jedes Jahr an. Viele Menschen verstehen diesen Zusammenhang nicht und verbinden die steigenden Zahlen fälschlicherweise mit der vermeintlichen Pandemie.

(3) Einführung der Übersterblichkeit als neue Kennzahl: Erst ab Beginn der „Pandemie“ wurde die Kennzahl "Übersterblichkeit" eingeführt – und dies mit einer fragwürdigen Methode, die systematisch überhöhte Werte lieferte. Diese Kennzahl wurde regelmäßig, oft monatlich oder sogar wöchentlich, berechnet und diente als ständige Grundlage für alarmierende Schlagzeilen.

(4) Intensive Öffentlichkeitsarbeit: Durch eine breit angelegte Kampagne wurden die manipulativen Kennzahlen gezielt in den Fokus gerückt. Pressemitteilungen, Podcasts und öffentliche Auftritte konzentrierten sich fast ausschließlich auf die absoluten Todeszahlen und die Übersterblichkeit. Ziel war es, den Eindruck einer dramatischen Situation in der Öffentlichkeit zu verstärken.

(5) Bekämpfen kritischer Stimmen: Kritiker, die die Schwächen und manipulativen Aspekte dieser Methoden aufdeckten, wurden systematisch diskreditiert. Ihre Glaubwürdigkeit und Kompetenz wurden öffentlich infrage gestellt, um das sorgsam konstruierte Narrativ zu schützen.

Ohne diesen begleitenden Statistik-Betrug wäre das gesamte Pandemie-Theater meiner Meinung nach nicht möglich gewesen. Wer aus einem faktischen Minimum ein scheinbares Maximum "erschafft", handelt betrügerisch. Die Folgen dieses Betruges sind gravierend. Denken wir an die Angst, die in der Bevölkerung geschürt wurde – die Angst, bald sterben zu müssen. Denken wir an Masken, Abstandsregeln, isolierte ältere Menschen, Kinderimpfungen und all die Maßnahmen, die unter anderem auf diese falsche Statistik zurückgehen.

Wollen wir Bürger uns das gefallen lassen?

Wenn wir als Bürger zulassen, dass ein derart offensichtlicher und nachprüfbarer Täuschungsversuch ohne Konsequenzen bleibt, dann gefährdet das nicht nur die Integrität unserer Institutionen – es untergräbt das Fundament unserer Gesellschaft. In der DDR feierte man öffentlich Planerfüllung und Übererfüllung, während die Regale leer blieben. Damals wusste jeder: Statistik war ein Propagandainstrument. Niemand traute den Zahlen, die das Staatsfernsehen verkündete.

Während der Pandemie war es anders. Die Menschen vertrauten den Mitteilungen des Statistischen Bundesamtes und des RKI – blind. Die Enthüllungen durch den "RKI-Leak" haben gezeigt, dass auch das Robert-Koch-Institut nicht der Wissenschaft, sondern den Weisungen des Gesundheitsministers und militärischen Vorgaben folgte. Warum sollte es beim Statistischen Bundesamt anders gewesen sein? Diese Behörde ist dem Innenministerium unterstellt und somit ebenfalls weisungsgebunden.

Die Beweise für Täuschung liegen offen zutage. Es braucht keinen Whistleblower, keine geheimen Enthüllungen: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes sprechen für sich. Sie sind öffentlich einsehbar – klar und unmissverständlich. Die Daten, die Tabellen, die Veröffentlichungen des Amtes selbst – sie sind die Anklageschrift. Sie zeigen, was wirklich war. Nicht mehr und nicht weniger.

Und wir? Was tun wir? Schweigen wir? Oder fordern wir endlich ein, was unser Recht ist? Wir Bürger dürfen das nicht hinnehmen. Es ist Zeit, unsere Behörden zur Rechenschaft zu ziehen. Diese Institutionen arbeiten nicht für sich – sie arbeiten für uns. Wir finanzieren sie, und wir haben das Recht, Transparenz und Verantwortung einzufordern. Manipulationen wie diese müssen aufgearbeitet werden und dürfen nie wieder geschehen. Die Strukturen, die solche Fehlentwicklungen in unseren Behörden ermöglicht haben, müssen offengelegt werden. Denn eine Demokratie lebt von Vertrauen – und Vertrauen muss verdient werden. Jeden Tag aufs Neue.

.

.

MARCEL BARZ, Jahrgang 1975, war Offizier der Bundeswehr und studierte Wirtschafts- und Organisationswissenschaften sowie Wirtschaftsinformatik. Er war Gründer und Geschäftsführer einer Softwarefirma, die sich auf Datenanalyse und Softwareentwicklung spezialisiert hatte. Im August 2021 veröffentlichte Barz den Videovortrag »Die Pandemie in den Rohdaten«, der über eine Million Aufrufe erzielte. Seitdem macht er als "Erbsenzähler" auf Widersprüche in amtlichen Statistiken aufmerksam.

@ f88e6629:e5254dd5

...which allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.

• Without sovereign and accessible payments we are loosing censorship resistance
• Without censorship resistance even other core characteristics are in danger - including scarcity and durability.
• This affects every bitcoiner including sworn hodlers and MSTR followers.

| Property | Description | Fulfillment | | --- | --- | --- | | Scarce | Fixed supply forever. Instantly and costlessly verifiable | 🟢  Good, but can be harmed without censorship resistance | | Portable | Effortless to store and move, with negligible costs | 🟠 Onchain transactions can be expensive, other layers require onchain to be sovereign. Easy portability is offered by custodians only. | | Divisible | Infinitely divisible | 🟠 Smaller units than dust are available only for LN users, which most people can’t use in a sovereign way. | | Durable | Exists forever without deterioration | 🟢  Good, but can be harmed without censorship resistance | | Fungible | Every piece is forever the same as every other piece | 🟡 Onchain bitcoin is not fungible. | | Acceptable | Everyone, anywhere, can send and receive | 🟠 Most people are not able to send and receive in a sovereign way. | | Censorship Resistant | You hold it. Nobody can take it or stop you sending it | 🟠 Custodians are honey-pots that can and will be regulated |

➡️ We need accessible, scalable, and sovereign payment methods

@ 42342239:1d80db24

It's not easy to navigate today's heavily polluted media landscape. If it's not agenda-setting journalism, then it's "government by journalism", or "åfanism" (i.e. clickbait journalism)) that causes distortions in what we, as media consumers, get to see. On social media, bot armies and troll factories pollute the information landscape like the German Ruhr area 100 years ago - and who knows exactly how all these opaque algorithms select the information that's placed in front of our eyes. While true information is sometimes censored, as pointed out by the founder of Meta (then Facebook) the other year, the employees of censorship authorities somehow suddenly go on vacation when those in power spread false information.

The need to carefully weigh the information that reaches us may therefore be more important than ever. A principle that can help us follows from what is called costly signaling in evolutionary biology. Costly signaling refers to traits or behaviors that are expensive to maintain or perform. These signals function as honest indicators. One example is the beauty and complexity of a peacock's feathers. Since only healthy and strong males can afford to invest in these feathers, they become credible and honest signals to peahens looking for a partner.

The idea is also found in economics. There, costly signaling refers to when an individual performs an action with high costs to communicate something with greater credibility. For example, obtaining a degree from a prestigious university can be a costly signal. Such a degree can require significant economic and time resources. A degree from a prestigious university can therefore, like a peacock's extravagant feathers, function as a costly signal (of an individual's endurance and intelligence). Not to peahens, but to employers seeking to hire.

News is what someone, somewhere, doesn't want reported: all the rest is advertisement

-- William Randolph Hearst

Media mogul William Randolph Hearst and renowned author George Orwell are both said to have stated that "News is what someone, somewhere, doesn't want reported: all the rest is advertisement." Although it's a bit drastic, there may be a point to the reasoning. "If the spin is too smooth, is it really news?"

Uri Berliner, a veteran of the American public radio station National Public Radio (NPR) for 25 years, recently shared his concerns about the radio's lack of impartiality in public. He argued that NPR had gone astray when it started telling listeners how to think. A week later, he was suspended. His spin was apparently not smooth enough for his employer.

Uri Berliner, by speaking out publicly in this way, took a clear risk. And based on the theory of costly signaling, it's perhaps precisely why we should consider what he had to say.

Perhaps those who resign in protest, those who forgo income, or those who risk their social capital actually deserve much more attention from us media consumers than we usually give them. It is the costly signal that indicates real news value.

Perhaps the rest should just be disregarded as mere advertising.

@ f88e6629:e5254dd5

• Send a transaction, and the recipient uses the coin for another payment. You then merge these two transactions together and save on fees. 🔥

If you have a Trezor, you can try this out on: https://coiner-mu.vercel.app/

But be cautious. This is a hobby project without any guarantee.

How does it work?

1. Connect Trezor, enter the passphrase, and select an account.
2. The application display your coins, pending transactions, and descendant transactions.
3. Then app shows you how much you can save by merging all transactions and removing duplicate information.
4. Finally, you can sign and broadcast this more efficient transaction

@ cff1720e:15c7e2b2

Einleitung\ \ Schwierige Dinge einfach zu erklären ist der Anspruch von ELI5 (explain me like I'm 5). Das ist in unserer hoch technisierten Welt dringend erforderlich, denn nur mit dem Verständnis der Technologien können wir sie richtig einsetzen und weiter entwickeln.\ Ich starte meine Serie mit Nostr, einem relativ neuen Internet-Protokoll. Was zum Teufel ist ein Internet-Protokoll? Formal beschrieben sind es internationale Standards, die dafür sorgen, dass das Internet seit über 30 Jahren ziemlich gut funktioniert. Es ist die Sprache, in der sich die Rechner miteinander unterhalten und die auch Sie täglich nutzen, vermutlich ohne es bewusst wahrzunehmen. http(s) transportiert ihre Anfrage an einen Server (z.B. Amazon), und html sorgt dafür, dass aus den gelieferten Daten eine schöne Seite auf ihrem Bildschirm entsteht. Eine Mail wird mit smtp an den Mailserver gesendet und mit imap von ihm abgerufen, und da alle den Standard verwenden, funktioniert das mit jeder App auf jedem Betriebssystem und mit jedem Mail-Provider. Und mit einer Mail-Adresse wie roland@pareto.space können sie sogar jederzeit umziehen, egal wohin. Cool, das ist state of the art! Aber warum funktioniert das z.B. bei Chat nicht, gibt es da kein Protokoll? Doch, es heißt IRC (Internet Relay Chat → merken sie sich den Namen), aber es wird so gut wie nicht verwendet. Die Gründe dafür sind nicht technischer Natur, vielmehr wurden mit Apps wie Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram, TikTok u.a. bewusst Inkompatibilitäten und Nutzerabhängigkeiten geschaffen um Profite zu maximieren.

Warum Nostr?

Da das Standard-Protokoll nicht genutzt wird, hat jede App ihr eigenes, und wir brauchen eine handvoll Apps um uns mit allen Bekannten auszutauschen. Eine Mobilfunknummer ist Voraussetzung für jedes Konto, damit können die App-Hersteller die Nutzer umfassend tracken und mit dem Verkauf der Informationen bis zu 30 USD je Konto und Monat verdienen. Der Nutzer ist nicht mehr Kunde, er ist das Produkt! Der Werbe-SPAM ist noch das kleinste Problem bei diesem Geschäftsmodell. Server mit Millionen von Nutzerdaten sind ein “honey pot”, dementsprechend oft werden sie gehackt und die Zugangsdaten verkauft. 2024 wurde auch der Twitter-Account vom damaligen Präsidenten Joe Biden gehackt, niemand wusste mehr wer die Nachrichten verfasst hat (vorher auch nicht), d.h. die Authentizität der Inhalte ist bei keinem dieser Anbieter gewährleistet. Im selben Jahr wurde der Telegram-Gründer in Frankreich in Beugehaft genommen, weil er sich geweigert hatte Hintertüren in seine Software einzubauen. Nun kann zum Schutz "unserer Demokratie” praktisch jeder mitlesen, was sie mit wem an Informationen austauschen, z.B. darüber welches Shampoo bestimmte Politiker verwenden. 

Und wer tatsächlich glaubt er könne Meinungsfreiheit auf sozialen Medien praktizieren, findet sich schnell in der Situation von Donald Trump wieder (seinerzeit amtierender Präsident), dem sein Twitter-Konto 2021 abgeschaltet wurde (Cancel-Culture). Die Nutzerdaten, also ihr Profil, ihre Kontakte, Dokumente, Bilder, Videos und Audiofiles - gehören ihnen ohnehin nicht mehr sondern sind Eigentum des Plattform-Betreibers; lesen sie sich mal die AGB's durch. Aber nein, keine gute Idee, das sind hunderte Seiten und sie werden permanent geändert. Alle nutzen also Apps, deren Technik sie nicht verstehen, deren Regeln sie nicht kennen, wo sie keine Rechte haben und die ihnen die Resultate ihres Handelns stehlen. Was würde wohl der Fünfjährige sagen, wenn ihm seine ältere Schwester anbieten würde, alle seine Spielzeuge zu “verwalten” und dann auszuhändigen wenn er brav ist? “Du spinnst wohl”, und damit beweist der Knirps mehr Vernunft als die Mehrzahl der Erwachsenen. \ \ Resümee: keine Standards, keine Daten, keine Rechte = keine Zukunft!

\ Wie funktioniert Nostr?

Die Entwickler von Nostr haben erkannt dass sich das Server-Client-Konzept in ein Master-Slave-Konzept verwandelt hatte. Der Master ist ein Synonym für Zentralisierung und wird zum “single point of failure”, der zwangsläufig Systeme dysfunktional macht. In einem verteilten Peer2Peer-System gibt es keine Master mehr sondern nur gleichberechtigte Knoten (Relays), auf denen die Informationen gespeichert werden. Indem man Informationen auf mehreren Relays redundant speichert, ist das System in jeglicher Hinsicht resilienter. Nicht nur die Natur verwendet dieses Prinzip seit Jahrmillionen erfolgreich, auch das Internet wurde so konzipiert (das ARPAnet wurde vom US-Militär für den Einsatz in Kriegsfällen unter massiven Störungen entwickelt). Alle Nostr-Daten liegen auf Relays und der Nutzer kann wählen zwischen öffentlichen (zumeist kostenlosen) und privaten Relays, z.B. für geschlossene Gruppen oder zum Zwecke von Daten-Archivierung. Da Dokumente auf mehreren Relays gespeichert sind, werden statt URL's (Locator) eindeutige Dokumentnamen (URI's = Identifier) verwendet, broken Links sind damit Vergangenheit und Löschungen / Verluste ebenfalls.\ \ Jedes Dokument (Event genannt) wird vom Besitzer signiert, es ist damit authentisch und fälschungssicher und kann nur vom Ersteller gelöscht werden. Dafür wird ein Schlüsselpaar verwendet bestehend aus privatem (nsec) und öffentlichem Schlüssel (npub) wie aus der Mailverschlüsselung (PGP) bekannt. Das repräsentiert eine Nostr-Identität, die um Bild, Namen, Bio und eine lesbare Nostr-Adresse ergänzt werden kann (z.B. roland@pareto.space ), mehr braucht es nicht um alle Ressourcen des Nostr-Ökosystems zu nutzen. Und das besteht inzwischen aus über hundert Apps mit unterschiedlichen Fokussierungen, z.B. für persönliche verschlüsselte Nachrichten (DM → OxChat), Kurznachrichten (Damus, Primal), Blogbeiträge (Pareto), Meetups (Joinstr), Gruppen (Groups), Bilder (Olas), Videos (Amethyst), Audio-Chat (Nostr Nests), Audio-Streams (Tunestr), Video-Streams (Zap.Stream), Marktplätze (Shopstr) u.v.a.m. Die Anmeldung erfolgt mit einem Klick (single sign on) und den Apps stehen ALLE Nutzerdaten zur Verfügung (Profil, Daten, Kontakte, Social Graph → Follower, Bookmarks, Comments, etc.), im Gegensatz zu den fragmentierten Datensilos der Gegenwart.\ \ Resümee: ein offener Standard, alle Daten, alle Rechte = große Zukunft!

\ Warum ist Nostr die Zukunft des Internet?

“Baue Dein Haus nicht auf einem fremden Grundstück” gilt auch im Internet - für alle App-Entwickler, Künstler, Journalisten und Nutzer, denn auch ihre Daten sind werthaltig. Nostr garantiert das Eigentum an den Daten, und überwindet ihre Fragmentierung. Weder die Nutzung noch die kreativen Freiheiten werden durch maßlose Lizenz- und Nutzungsbedingungen eingeschränkt. Aus passiven Nutzern werden durch Interaktion aktive Teilnehmer, Co-Creatoren in einer Sharing-Ökonomie (Value4Value). OpenSource schafft endlich wieder Vertrauen in die Software und ihre Anbieter. Offene Standards ermöglichen den Entwicklern mehr Kooperation und schnellere Entwicklung, für die Anwender garantieren sie Wahlfreiheit. Womit wir letztmalig zu unserem Fünfjährigen zurückkehren. Kinder lieben Lego über alles, am meisten die Maxi-Box “Classic”, weil sie damit ihre Phantasie im Kombinieren voll ausleben können. Erwachsene schenken ihnen dann die viel zu teuren Themenpakete, mit denen man nur eine Lösung nach Anleitung bauen kann. “Was stimmt nur mit meinen Eltern nicht, wann sind die denn falsch abgebogen?" fragt sich der Nachwuchs zu Recht. Das Image lässt sich aber wieder aufpolieren, wenn sie ihren Kindern Nostr zeigen, denn die Vorteile verstehen sogar Fünfjährige.

\ Das neue Internet ist dezentral. Das neue Internet ist selbstbestimmt. Nostr ist das neue Internet.

https://nostr.net/ \ https://start.njump.me/

Hier das Interview zum Thema mit Radio Berliner Morgenröte

https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-yxc36-17bb4be

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The EU's regulations aimed at combating disinformation raise questions about who is really being protected and also about the true purpose of the "European Democracy Shield".

In recent years, new regulations have been introduced, purportedly to combat the spread of false or malicious information. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, has been keen to push forward with her plans to curb online content and create a "European Democracy Shield" aimed at detecting and removing disinformation.

Despite frequent discussions about foreign influence campaigns, we often tend to overlook the significant impact that domestic actors and mass media have on news presentation (and therefore also on public opinion). The fact that media is often referred to as the fourth branch of government, alongside the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, underscores its immense importance.

In late 2019, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) seized a laptop from a repair shop. The laptop belonged to the son of then-presidential candidate Biden. The FBI quickly determined that the laptop was the son's and did not appear to have been tampered with.

Almost a year later, the US presidential election took place. Prior to the election, the FBI issued repeated warnings to various companies to be vigilant against state-sponsored actors [implying Russia] that could carry out "hack-and-leak campaigns". Just weeks before the 2020 presidential election, an October surprise occurred when the NY Post published documents from the laptop. The newspaper's Twitter account was locked down within hours. Twitter prevented its users from even sharing the news. Facebook (now Meta) took similar measures to prevent the spread of the news. Shortly thereafter, more than 50 former high-ranking intelligence officials wrote about their deep suspicions that the Russian government was behind the story: "if we're right", "this is about Russia trying to influence how Americans vote". Presidential candidate Biden later cited these experts' claims in a debate with President Trump.

In early June this year, the president's son was convicted of lying on a gun license application. The laptop and some of its contents played a clear role in the prosecutors' case. The court concluded that parts of the laptop's contents were accurate, which aligns with the FBI's assessment that the laptop did not appear to have been tampered with. The president's son, who previously filed a lawsuit claiming that the laptop had been hacked and that data had been manipulated, has now withdrawn this lawsuit, which strengthens the image that the content is true.

This raises questions about the true purpose of the "European Democracy Shield". Who is it really intended to protect? Consider the role of news editors in spreading the narrative that the laptop story was Russian disinformation. What impact did social media's censorship of the news have on the outcome of the US election? And if the laptop's contents were indeed true - as appears to be the case - what does it say about the quality of the media's work that it took almost four years for the truth to become widely known, despite the basic information being available as early as 2020?

@ eac63075:b4988b48

Since its creation in 2009, Bitcoin has symbolized innovation and resilience. However, from time to time, alarmist narratives arise about emerging technologies that could "break" its security. Among these, quantum computing stands out as one of the most recurrent. But does quantum computing truly threaten Bitcoin? And more importantly, what is the community doing to ensure the protocol remains invulnerable?

The answer, contrary to sensationalist headlines, is reassuring: Bitcoin is secure, and the community is already preparing for a future where quantum computing becomes a practical reality. Let’s dive into this topic to understand why the concerns are exaggerated and how the development of BIP-360 demonstrates that Bitcoin is one step ahead.

---

What Is Quantum Computing, and Why Is Bitcoin Not Threatened?

Quantum computing leverages principles of quantum mechanics to perform calculations that, in theory, could exponentially surpass classical computers—and it has nothing to do with what so-called “quantum coaches” teach to scam the uninformed. One of the concerns is that this technology could compromise two key aspects of Bitcoin’s security:

1. Wallets: These use elliptic curve algorithms (ECDSA) to protect private keys. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could deduce a private key from its public key.
2. Mining: This is based on the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the consensus process. A quantum attack could, in theory, compromise the proof-of-work mechanism.

---

Understanding Quantum Computing’s Attack Priorities

While quantum computing is often presented as a threat to Bitcoin, not all parts of the network are equally vulnerable. Theoretical attacks would be prioritized based on two main factors: ease of execution and potential reward. This creates two categories of attacks:

1. Attacks on Wallets

Bitcoin wallets, secured by elliptic curve algorithms, would be the initial targets due to the relative vulnerability of their public keys, especially those already exposed on the blockchain. Two attack scenarios stand out:

• Short-term attacks: These occur during the interval between sending a transaction and its inclusion in a block (approximately 10 minutes). A quantum computer could intercept the exposed public key and derive the corresponding private key to redirect funds by creating a transaction with higher fees.

• Long-term attacks: These focus on old wallets whose public keys are permanently exposed. Wallets associated with Satoshi Nakamoto, for example, are especially vulnerable because they were created before the practice of using hashes to mask public keys.

We can infer a priority order for how such attacks might occur based on urgency and importance.

Bitcoin Quantum Attack: Prioritization Matrix (Urgency vs. Importance)

2. Attacks on Mining

Targeting the SHA-256 algorithm, which secures the mining process, would be the next objective. However, this is far more complex and requires a level of quantum computational power that is currently non-existent and far from realization. A successful attack would allow for the recalculation of all possible hashes to dominate the consensus process and potentially "mine" it instantly.

---

Satoshi Nakamoto in 2010 on Quantum Computing and Bitcoin Attacks

Recently, Narcelio asked me about a statement I made on Tubacast:

https://x.com/eddieoz/status/1868371296683511969

If an attack became a reality before Bitcoin was prepared, it would be necessary to define the last block prior to the attack and proceed from there using a new hashing algorithm. The solution would resemble the response to the infamous 2013 bug. It’s a fact that this would cause market panic, and Bitcoin's price would drop significantly, creating a potential opportunity for the well-informed.

Preferably, if developers could anticipate the threat and had time to work on a solution and build consensus before an attack, they would simply decide on a future block for the fork, which would then adopt the new algorithm. It might even rehash previous blocks (reaching consensus on them) to avoid potential reorganization through the re-mining of blocks using the old hash. (I often use the term "shielding" old transactions).

---

How Can Users Protect Themselves?

While quantum computing is still far from being a practical threat, some simple measures can already protect users against hypothetical scenarios:

• Avoid using exposed public keys: Ensure funds sent to old wallets are transferred to new ones that use public key hashes. This reduces the risk of long-term attacks.
• Use modern wallets: Opt for wallets compatible with SegWit or Taproot, which implement better security practices.
• Monitor security updates: Stay informed about updates from the Bitcoin community, such as the implementation of BIP-360, which will introduce quantum-resistant addresses.
• Do not reuse addresses: Every transaction should be associated with a new address to minimize the risk of repeated exposure of the same public key.
• Adopt secure backup practices: Create offline backups of private keys and seeds in secure locations, protected from unauthorized access.

---

BIP-360 and Bitcoin’s Preparation for the Future

Even though quantum computing is still beyond practical reach, the Bitcoin community is not standing still. A concrete example is BIP-360, a proposal that establishes the technical framework to make wallets resistant to quantum attacks.

BIP-360 addresses three main pillars:

1. Introduction of quantum-resistant addresses: A new address format starting with "BC1R" will be used. These addresses will be compatible with post-quantum algorithms, ensuring that stored funds are protected from future attacks.
2. Compatibility with the current ecosystem: The proposal allows users to transfer funds from old addresses to new ones without requiring drastic changes to the network infrastructure.
3. Flexibility for future updates: BIP-360 does not limit the choice of specific algorithms. Instead, it serves as a foundation for implementing new post-quantum algorithms as technology evolves.

This proposal demonstrates how Bitcoin can adapt to emerging threats without compromising its decentralized structure.

---

Post-Quantum Algorithms: The Future of Bitcoin Cryptography

The community is exploring various algorithms to protect Bitcoin from quantum attacks. Among the most discussed are:

• Falcon: A solution combining smaller public keys with compact digital signatures. Although it has been tested in limited scenarios, it still faces scalability and performance challenges.
• Sphincs: Hash-based, this algorithm is renowned for its resilience, but its signatures can be extremely large, making it less efficient for networks like Bitcoin’s blockchain.
• Lamport: Created in 1977, it’s considered one of the earliest post-quantum security solutions. Despite its reliability, its gigantic public keys (16,000 bytes) make it impractical and costly for Bitcoin.

Two technologies show great promise and are well-regarded by the community:

1. Lattice-Based Cryptography: Considered one of the most promising, it uses complex mathematical structures to create systems nearly immune to quantum computing. Its implementation is still in its early stages, but the community is optimistic.
2. Supersingular Elliptic Curve Isogeny: These are very recent digital signature algorithms and require extensive study and testing before being ready for practical market use.

The final choice of algorithm will depend on factors such as efficiency, cost, and integration capability with the current system. Additionally, it is preferable that these algorithms are standardized before implementation, a process that may take up to 10 years.

---

Why Quantum Computing Is Far from Being a Threat

The alarmist narrative about quantum computing overlooks the technical and practical challenges that still need to be overcome. Among them:

• Insufficient number of qubits: Current quantum computers have only a few hundred qubits, whereas successful attacks would require millions.
• High error rate: Quantum stability remains a barrier to reliable large-scale operations.
• High costs: Building and operating large-scale quantum computers requires massive investments, limiting their use to scientific or specific applications.

Moreover, even if quantum computers make significant advancements, Bitcoin is already adapting to ensure its infrastructure is prepared to respond.

---

Conclusion: Bitcoin’s Secure Future

Despite advancements in quantum computing, the reality is that Bitcoin is far from being threatened. Its security is ensured not only by its robust architecture but also by the community’s constant efforts to anticipate and mitigate challenges.

The implementation of BIP-360 and the pursuit of post-quantum algorithms demonstrate that Bitcoin is not only resilient but also proactive. By adopting practical measures, such as using modern wallets and migrating to quantum-resistant addresses, users can further protect themselves against potential threats.

Bitcoin’s future is not at risk—it is being carefully shaped to withstand any emerging technology, including quantum computing.

@ bf7973ed:841ad12a

Today marked the end of the tik tok era (is it really the end?) and if think it shows how powerful social engineering is. People are experiencing withdrawals and some have resorted to a more dangerous drug (Rednote) which I find funny because they can't understand any writing in the app. They just need that cheap thrill.

Social media was first created to keep in tough with friends and family and possibly make new friends. It wasn't long before social media was turned into for profit advertising platforms. This introduced "The Algorithm" to make the experience more "relatable" to users. This is where the addiction began.

Nostr doesn't have an algorithm. It is a place to keep in touch with family, friends and make a lot of new friends. Nostr is a protocol at heart. Nostr is a place for everyone. A true freedom of speech. A place with no controlling autority. Nostr is what social media was meant to be.

@ ee11a5df:b76c4e49

China

I might be wrong, but this is how I see it

This is a post within a series I am going to call "I might be wrong, but this is how I see it"

I have repeatedly found that my understanding of China is quite different from that of many libertarian-minded Americans. And so I make this post to explain how I see it. Maybe you will learn something. Maybe I will learn something.

It seems to me that many American's see America as a shining beacon of freedom with a few small problems, and China is an evil communist country spreading communism everywhere. From my perspective, America was a shining beacon of freedom that has fallen to being typical in most ways, and which is now acting as a falling empire, and China was communist for about a decade, but turned and ran away from that as fast as they could (while not admitting it) and the result is that the US and China are not much different anymore when it comes to free markets. Except they are very different in some other respects.

China has a big problem

China has a big problem. But it is not the communism problem that most Westerners diagnose.

I argue that China is no longer communist, it is only communist in name. And that while it is not a beacon of free market principles, it is nearly as free market now as Western nations like Germany and New Zealand are (being somewhat socialist themselves).

No, China's real problem is authoritarian one-party rule. And that core problem causes all of the other problems, including its human rights abuses.

Communism and Socialism

Communism and Socialism are bad ideas. I don't want to argue it right here, but most readers will already understand this. The last thing I intend to do with this post is to bolster or defend those bad ideas. If you dear reader hold a candle for socialism, let me know and I can help you extinguish it with a future "I might be wrong, but this is how I see it" installment.

Communism is the idea of structuring a society around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, and the idea of allocating goods and services based on need. It eliminates the concept of private property, of social classes, ultimately of money and finally of the state itself.

Back under Mao in 1958-1962 (The Great Leap Forward), China tried this (in part). Some 50+ million people died. It was an abject failure.

But due to China's real problem (authoritarianism, even worship of their leaders), the leading classes never admitted this. And even today they continue to use the word "Communist" for things that aren't communist at all, as a way to save face, and also in opposition to the United States of America and Europe.

Authorities are not eager to admit their faults. But this is not just a Chinese fault, it is a fault in human nature that affects all countries. The USA still refuses to admit they assassinated their own president JFK. They do not admit they bombed the Nord Stream pipeline.

China defines "socialism with Chinese characteristics" to mean "the leadership of the Communist Party of China". So they still keep the words socialism and communism, but they long ago dropped the meanings of those words. I'm not sure if this is a political ploy against us in the West or not.

China's Marketplace Today

Today China exhibits very few of the properties of communism.

They have some common ownership and state enterprises, but not much differently than Western countries (New Zealand owns Air New Zealand and Kiwibank and Kiwirail, etc). And there are private enterprises all over China. They compete and some succeed and some fail. You might hear about a real-estate bank collapsing. China has private property. They have mostly free markets. They have money, and the most definitely have social classes and a very strong state.

None of that is inline with what communist thinkers want. Communist thinkers in China moan that China has turned away from communism.

Deng Xiaoping who succeeded Mao and attempted to correct the massive mistake, did much when he said "to get rich is glorious."

China achieved staggering rates of economic growth. 10% annually on average since 1977. Chinese economic reform started in 1979 and has continued through successive administrations (Deng, Jiang, Hu and now Xi).

China is now the world's largest economy (by GDP in PPP terms) since 2016.

I was first made aware of China's economic growth by Jim Rogers, an American commodities expert who travelled through China (and the rest of the world from 1990-1992) and in 2007 moved to Singapore where he ensured his daughters learned to speak Mandarin, because Jim knew where the economic growth was going to happen. Jim always spoke positively of China's economic prospects, and his view was so different from the "China is a nasty communist place" view that I had grown up with that my mind opened.

How can anybody believe they are still a communist country? In what world does it make sense that communism can produce such a massively booming economy? It doesn't make sense because it is simply wrong.

What does happen is that the CPC interferes. It lets the market do what markets do, but it interferes where it thinks oversight and regulation would produce a better result.

Western nations interfere with their markets too. They have oversight and regulation. In fact some of China's planned reforms had to be put on hold by Xi due to Donald Trump's trade war with China. That's right, they were trying to be even more free market than America, but America's protectionism prodded Xi to keep control so he could fight back efficiently.

Government oversight and regulation IMHO is mostly bad because it gets out of control, and there are no market forces to correct this. This gets even more extreme in a one-party system, so I can judge that China's oversight and regulation problems are very likely worse than those in Western nations (but I have no first hand experience or evidence).

Why do you keep saying CPC?

The Communist Party of China (CPC) is the ruling party in China. That is their official name. To call them the CCP is to concede to the idea that the British and Americans get to name everybody. I'm not sure who is right, since CPC or CCP is their "English" name (in Chinese it is 中国共产党 and Westernized it is Zhōngguó Gòngchǎndǎng). Nonetheless, I'll call them CPC because that is their wish.

Social Credit System

China moved from a planned economy to a market economy in stages. They didn't want any more sudden changes (can you blame them?). In the process, many institutions that have existed in the West for a long time didn't exist in China and they had to arise somehow. IMHO market forces would have brought these about in the private sector, but the one-party CP of China instead decided to create these.

One of those institutions was a credit score system. In the West we have TransUnion and Equifax that maintain credit ratings on people, and we have S&P, Moody's and Fitch that maintain credit ratings on companies. The domain of these ratings is their financial credit-worthiness.

So the People's Bank of China developed a credit information database for it's own needs. The government picked up on the idea and started moving towards a National Credit Management System. In 2004 it became an official goal to establish a credit system compatible with a modern market system. By 2006 banks were required to report on consumer creditworthiness.

But unchecked one-party governmental power will often take a good idea (credit worthiness data shared among private parties) and systematize it and apply it top-down, creating a solution and a new problem at the same time.

Nonetheless, originally it was about credit worthiness and also criminal convictions. That is no big scary thing that some right-wing American commentators will lead you to believe. In the US for example criminal records are public, so China's Social Credit System started out being no more over-reaching in scope than what Americans have lived under their entire lives, its only fault (a severe one) being centrally planned. And that remained the case up until about 2016 (in my estimation).

But of course there is always scope creep. As it exists today, I have reason to believe that CPC officials and even A.I. use judgement calls to score someone on how moral that person has been! Of course that is not a good idea, and IMHO the problem stems from one-party rule, and authoritarian administration of ideas that should instead be handled by the private sector.

Environmental, Social, and Governance

ESG is a system that came out of a couple basic ideas. The first is that many two-party transactions actually have externalities. They don't just affect the two parties, they also affect everybody else. When you fly in an airplane, you increase the CO2 in the atmosphere that everybody has to pay for (eventually). You may dispute that example, but that is no doubt one of the motivations of ESG.

But of course the recognition of this basic issue didn't lead all people towards market solutions (well it did, but those have been mostly messed up by others), but instead led many people towards ESG, which is a social credit scoring system which applies scores based on environmental and social side-effects of market transactions.

This is not at all the same as China's social credit system, which I described above. I hope you can see the difference.

In fact, China imported ESG from the West. Chinese companies, of their free will, in an attempt to court Western capital, achieve ESG goals for those Western investors. They have been playing this ESG game for 20 years just like the entire world has, because the West has imposed this faux-morality upon them. It isn't something China exported to us, it is something we exported to them.

I think China has avoided Woke-ism

My understanding of Chinese people, based on what I've heard many Chinese people say, is that China isn't affected by the Western woke-ism epidemic. They deride Western white woke people with the term "Baizuo". They have never sent an incompetent break dancer to the Olympics because of wok-ism. Competence is highly respected as is the competition to be the most competent, which (when augmented by a one-child policy which is no longer) has produced child prodigies like no other country has.

What about predatory loans of the Belt and Road initiative?

Predatory is an odd name for loans to people in need. The World Bank makes loans to people in need. China does too. China stands in opposition to Western Empire, and in that regard they produce their own alternative BRICS institutions. This is one of them.

There is AFAIK nothing more predatory about them. It is just that in some cases the borrowers have trouble paying them back and they get foreclosed upon. I don't think this is worthy of much discussion, except that the term "predatory" seems to me to be a propaganda device.

What about foreign influence from China?

China wants to influence the world, especially its own trading partners and potential trading partners. Doing that above board is fine by me.

But some of it is undoubtedly covert. Sometimes Chinese-born people run for public office in Western countries. In New Zealand we stood down some when it became clear they were being influenced too much by the CPC while being charged with representing their local town (dual loyalty issues). If only the USA would do the same thing to their dually-loyal politicians.

And all large nations run influence operations. The USA has the CIA, for example, and claims this "soft power" is actually the better alternative to what would otherwise be military intervention (but IMHO shouldn't be either). I'm not defending such operations (I despise them), I'm just explaining how China's position of exerting influence is not only no big deal and totally expected, it pales in comparison to the United States' influence operations which often become military excursions (something China rarely ever does).

What about the Great Firewall?

Yeah, that sucks. Again, single-party authoritarian control gone to extremes.

What about Human Rights Abuses? What about the Uyghur Genocide?

I don't like them. To the extent they are occurring (and I lean towards the belief that they are occurring), I condemn them.

China has anti-terrorism and anti-extremism policies that go too far. They end up oppressing and/or criminalizing cultures that aren't Chinese enough. But especially, China punishes dissent. Disagreement with the CPC is the high crime. It is the one-party rule that causes this problem. Anybody who speaks out against the CPC or goes against the state in any way is harshly punished. This happens to Uyghurs, to Falun Gong, to Tibetans, and to any religion that is seen as subversive.

Amnesty International and the UN OHCHR have documented issues around the Xinjiang Uyghur autonomous region, Tibet, LGBT rights, death penalty, workers rights, and the Hong Kong special administrative region. I am not about to pretend I know better than they do, but to some extent they go too far.

Amnesty International says this about the USA: Discrimination and violence against LGBTI people were widespread and anti-LGBTI legislation increased. Bills were introduced to address reparations regarding slavery and its legacies. Multiple states implemented total bans on abortion or severely limited access to it. Gender-based violence disproportionately affected Indigenous women. Access to the USA for asylum seekers and migrants was still fraught with obstacles, but some nationalities continued to enjoy Temporary Protected Status. Moves were made to restrict the freedom to protest in a number of states. Black people were disproportionately affected by the use of lethal force by police. No progress was made in the abolition of the death penalty, apart from in Washington. Arbitrary and indefinite detention in the US naval base Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, continued. Despite extensive gun violence, no further firearm reform policies were considered, but President Biden did announce the creation of the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. The USA continued to use lethal force in countries around the world. Black people, other racialized groups and low-income people bore the brunt of the health impacts of the petrochemical industry, and the use of fossil fuels continued unabated.

Amnesty international didn't even point out that the US government quashes free speech via pressure on social media corporations (because Amnesty International is far too lefty).

So who is worse, China or the US? I'm not going to make that judgement call, but suffice it to say that in my mind, China is not obviously worse.

China violates freedom of expression, association, and assembly of all people. This is bad, and a consequence mainly of one-party rule (again, what I think is the root cause of most of their ills). They arrest, detain, potentially kill anybody who publicly disagrees openly with their government. Clearly this is an excess of authoritarianism, a cancer that is very advanced in China.

As to organ harvesting of Uyghur Muslims, I think this is a myth.

China has dealt harshly with Muslim extremism. They don't offer freedom of religion to ISIS. And Amnesty International complains about that. But practically speaking you probably shouldn't respect the extremist religion of people who want to force everybody into a global caliphate through threat of violence. As you are well aware, some extremist Muslims (<1% of Islam) believe in using violence to bring about a global caliphate. Those extremists pop up in every country and are usually dealt with harshly. China has had to deal with them too.

I have watched two different Western YouTubers travel to Xinjiang province trying to find the oppressed Uyghurs and interview them. They can't find them. What they find instead are Uyghur Muslims doing their prayers five times a day at the local mosque. And also stories that the CPC pitched in some money to help them renovate the mosque. Maybe they were afraid it was a CPC trap and so they wouldn't speak freely. Amnesty International and the UN OHCHR say more than a million are "arbitrarily detained" and I'm not going to argue otherwise. But I'd be more convinced if there were a stream of pictures and news like there is out of Gaza, and it is suspicious that there isn't.

Conclusion

China is more like a Western nation that Westerners realize. Economically, militarily, socially. It still has a very serious obstacle to overcome: one-party rule. I don't think the one-party is going to voluntarily give up power. So most probably at some point in the future there will be a revolution. But in my opinion it won't happen anytime soon. For the most part Chinese people are living high on the hog, getting rich, enjoying the good life, in positive spirits about life, and are getting along with their government quite well at present.

@ f9cf4e94:96abc355

Scuttlebutt foi iniciado em maio de 2014 por Dominic Tarr ( dominictarr ) como uma rede social alternativa off-line, primeiro para convidados, que permite aos usuários obter controle total de seus dados e privacidade. Secure Scuttlebutt (ssb) foi lançado pouco depois, o que coloca a privacidade em primeiro plano com mais recursos de criptografia.

Se você está se perguntando de onde diabos veio o nome Scuttlebutt:

Este termo do século 19 para uma fofoca vem do Scuttlebutt náutico: “um barril de água mantido no convés, com um buraco para uma xícara”. A gíria náutica vai desde o hábito dos marinheiros de se reunir pelo boato até a fofoca, semelhante à fofoca do bebedouro.

Marinheiros se reunindo em torno da rixa. ( fonte )

Dominic descobriu o termo boato em um artigo de pesquisa que leu.

Em sistemas distribuídos, fofocar é um processo de retransmissão de mensagens ponto a ponto; as mensagens são disseminadas de forma análoga ao “boca a boca”.

Secure Scuttlebutt é um banco de dados de feeds imutáveis apenas para acréscimos, otimizado para replicação eficiente para protocolos ponto a ponto. Cada usuário tem um log imutável somente para acréscimos no qual eles podem gravar. Eles gravam no log assinando mensagens com sua chave privada. Pense em um feed de usuário como seu próprio diário de bordo, como um diário de bordo (ou diário do capitão para os fãs de Star Trek), onde eles são os únicos autorizados a escrever nele, mas têm a capacidade de permitir que outros amigos ou colegas leiam ao seu diário de bordo, se assim o desejarem.

Cada mensagem possui um número de sequência e a mensagem também deve fazer referência à mensagem anterior por seu ID. O ID é um hash da mensagem e da assinatura. A estrutura de dados é semelhante à de uma lista vinculada. É essencialmente um log somente de acréscimo de JSON assinado. Cada item adicionado a um log do usuário é chamado de mensagem.

Os logs do usuário são conhecidos como feed e um usuário pode seguir os feeds de outros usuários para receber suas atualizações. Cada usuário é responsável por armazenar seu próprio feed. Quando Alice assina o feed de Bob, Bob baixa o log de feed de Alice. Bob pode verificar se o registro do feed realmente pertence a Alice verificando as assinaturas. Bob pode verificar as assinaturas usando a chave pública de Alice.

Estrutura de alto nível de um feed

Pubs são servidores de retransmissão conhecidos como “super peers”. Pubs conectam usuários usuários e atualizações de fofocas a outros usuários conectados ao Pub. Um Pub é análogo a um pub da vida real, onde as pessoas vão para se encontrar e se socializar. Para ingressar em um Pub, o usuário deve ser convidado primeiro. Um usuário pode solicitar um código de convite de um Pub; o Pub simplesmente gerará um novo código de convite, mas alguns Pubs podem exigir verificação adicional na forma de verificação de e-mail ou, com alguns Pubs, você deve pedir um código em um fórum público ou chat. Pubs também podem mapear aliases de usuário, como e-mails ou nome de usuário, para IDs de chave pública para facilitar os pares de referência.

Depois que o Pub enviar o código de convite ao usuário, o usuário resgatará o código, o que significa que o Pub seguirá o usuário, o que permite que o usuário veja as mensagens postadas por outros membros do Pub, bem como as mensagens de retransmissão do Pub pelo usuário a outros membros do Pub.

Além de retransmitir mensagens entre pares, os Pubs também podem armazenar as mensagens. Se Alice estiver offline e Bob transmitir atualizações de feed, Alice perderá a atualização. Se Alice ficar online, mas Bob estiver offline, não haverá como ela buscar o feed de Bob. Mas com um Pub, Alice pode buscar o feed no Pub mesmo se Bob estiver off-line porque o Pub está armazenando as mensagens. Pubs são úteis porque assim que um colega fica online, ele pode sincronizar com o Pub para receber os feeds de seus amigos potencialmente offline.

Um usuário pode, opcionalmente, executar seu próprio servidor Pub e abri-lo ao público ou permitir que apenas seus amigos participem, se assim o desejarem. Eles também podem ingressar em um Pub público. Aqui está uma lista de Pubs públicos em que todos podem participar . Explicaremos como ingressar em um posteriormente neste guia. Uma coisa importante a observar é que o Secure Scuttlebutt em uma rede social somente para convidados significa que você deve ser “puxado” para entrar nos círculos sociais. Se você responder às mensagens, os destinatários não serão notificados, a menos que estejam seguindo você de volta. O objetivo do SSB é criar “ilhas” isoladas de redes pares, ao contrário de uma rede pública onde qualquer pessoa pode enviar mensagens a qualquer pessoa.

Perspectivas dos participantes

Scuttlebot

O software Pub é conhecido como servidor Scuttlebutt (servidor ssb ), mas também é conhecido como “Scuttlebot” e sbotna linha de comando. O servidor SSB adiciona comportamento de rede ao banco de dados Scuttlebutt (SSB). Estaremos usando o Scuttlebot ao longo deste tutorial.

Os logs do usuário são conhecidos como feed e um usuário pode seguir os feeds de outros usuários para receber suas atualizações. Cada usuário é responsável por armazenar seu próprio feed. Quando Alice assina o feed de Bob, Bob baixa o log de feed de Alice. Bob pode verificar se o registro do feed realmente pertence a Alice verificando as assinaturas. Bob pode verificar as assinaturas usando a chave pública de Alice.

Estrutura de alto nível de um feed

Pubs são servidores de retransmissão conhecidos como “super peers”. Pubs conectam usuários usuários e atualizações de fofocas a outros usuários conectados ao Pub. Um Pub é análogo a um pub da vida real, onde as pessoas vão para se encontrar e se socializar. Para ingressar em um Pub, o usuário deve ser convidado primeiro. Um usuário pode solicitar um código de convite de um Pub; o Pub simplesmente gerará um novo código de convite, mas alguns Pubs podem exigir verificação adicional na forma de verificação de e-mail ou, com alguns Pubs, você deve pedir um código em um fórum público ou chat. Pubs também podem mapear aliases de usuário, como e-mails ou nome de usuário, para IDs de chave pública para facilitar os pares de referência.

Depois que o Pub enviar o código de convite ao usuário, o usuário resgatará o código, o que significa que o Pub seguirá o usuário, o que permite que o usuário veja as mensagens postadas por outros membros do Pub, bem como as mensagens de retransmissão do Pub pelo usuário a outros membros do Pub.

Além de retransmitir mensagens entre pares, os Pubs também podem armazenar as mensagens. Se Alice estiver offline e Bob transmitir atualizações de feed, Alice perderá a atualização. Se Alice ficar online, mas Bob estiver offline, não haverá como ela buscar o feed de Bob. Mas com um Pub, Alice pode buscar o feed no Pub mesmo se Bob estiver off-line porque o Pub está armazenando as mensagens. Pubs são úteis porque assim que um colega fica online, ele pode sincronizar com o Pub para receber os feeds de seus amigos potencialmente offline.

Um usuário pode, opcionalmente, executar seu próprio servidor Pub e abri-lo ao público ou permitir que apenas seus amigos participem, se assim o desejarem. Eles também podem ingressar em um Pub público. Aqui está uma lista de Pubs públicos em que todos podem participar . Explicaremos como ingressar em um posteriormente neste guia. Uma coisa importante a observar é que o Secure Scuttlebutt em uma rede social somente para convidados significa que você deve ser “puxado” para entrar nos círculos sociais. Se você responder às mensagens, os destinatários não serão notificados, a menos que estejam seguindo você de volta. O objetivo do SSB é criar “ilhas” isoladas de redes pares, ao contrário de uma rede pública onde qualquer pessoa pode enviar mensagens a qualquer pessoa.

Perspectivas dos participantes

Pubs - Hubs

Pubs públicos

| Pub Name | Operator | Invite Code | | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | scuttle.us | @Ryan | scuttle.us:8008:@WqcuCOIpLtXFRw/9vOAQJti8avTZ9vxT9rKrPo8qG6o=.ed25519~/ZUi9Chpl0g1kuWSrmehq2EwMQeV0Pd+8xw8XhWuhLE= | | pub1.upsocial.com | @freedomrules | pub1.upsocial.com:8008:@gjlNF5Cyw3OKZxEoEpsVhT5Xv3HZutVfKBppmu42MkI=.ed25519~lMd6f4nnmBZEZSavAl4uahl+feajLUGqu8s2qdoTLi8= | | Monero Pub | @Denis | xmr-pub.net:8008:@5hTpvduvbDyMLN2IdzDKa7nx7PSem9co3RsOmZoyyCM=.ed25519~vQU+r2HUd6JxPENSinUWdfqrJLlOqXiCbzHoML9iVN4= | | FreeSocial | @Jarland | pub.freesocial.co:8008:@ofYKOy2p9wsaxV73GqgOyh6C6nRGFM5FyciQyxwBd6A=.ed25519~ye9Z808S3KPQsV0MWr1HL0/Sh8boSEwW+ZK+8x85u9w= | | ssb.vpn.net.br | @coffeverton | ssb.vpn.net.br:8008:@ze8nZPcf4sbdULvknEFOCbVZtdp7VRsB95nhNw6/2YQ=.ed25519~D0blTolH3YoTwSAkY5xhNw8jAOjgoNXL/+8ZClzr0io= | | gossip.noisebridge.info | Noisebridge Hackerspace @james.network | gossip.noisebridge.info:8008:@2NANnQVdsoqk0XPiJG2oMZqaEpTeoGrxOHJkLIqs7eY=.ed25519~JWTC6+rPYPW5b5zCion0gqjcJs35h6JKpUrQoAKWgJ4= |

Pubs privados

Você precisará entrar em contato com os proprietários desses bares para receber um convite.

| Pub Name | Operator | Contact | | --------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------- | | many.butt.nz | @dinosaur | mikey@enspiral.com | | one.butt.nz | @dinosaur | mikey@enspiral.com | | ssb.mikey.nz | @dinosaur | mikey@enspiral.com | | ssb.celehner.com | @cel | cel@celehner.com |

Pubs muito grandes

Aviso: embora tecnicamente funcione usar um convite para esses pubs, você provavelmente se divertirá se o fizer devido ao seu tamanho (muitas coisas para baixar, risco para bots / spammers / idiotas)

| Pub Name | Operator | Invite Code | | --------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | scuttlebutt.de | SolSoCoG | scuttlebutt.de:8008:@yeh/GKxlfhlYXSdgU7CRLxm58GC42za3tDuC4NJld/k=.ed25519~iyaCpZ0co863K9aF+b7j8BnnHfwY65dGeX6Dh2nXs3c= | | Lohn's Pub | @lohn | p.lohn.in:8018:@LohnKVll9HdLI3AndEc4zwGtfdF/J7xC7PW9B/JpI4U=.ed25519~z3m4ttJdI4InHkCtchxTu26kKqOfKk4woBb1TtPeA/s= | | Scuttle Space | @guil-dot | Visit scuttle.space | | SSB PeerNet US-East | timjrobinson | us-east.ssbpeer.net:8008:@sTO03jpVivj65BEAJMhlwtHXsWdLd9fLwyKAT1qAkc0=.ed25519~sXFc5taUA7dpGTJITZVDCRy2A9jmkVttsr107+ufInU= | | Hermies | s | net:hermies.club:8008~shs:uMYDVPuEKftL4SzpRGVyQxLdyPkOiX7njit7+qT/7IQ=:SSB+Room+PSK3TLYC2T86EHQCUHBUHASCASE18JBV24= |

GUI - Interface Gráfica do Utilizador(Usuário)

Patchwork - Uma GUI SSB (Descontinuado)

Patchwork é o aplicativo de mensagens e compartilhamento descentralizado construído em cima do SSB . O protocolo scuttlebutt em si não mantém um conjunto de feeds nos quais um usuário está interessado, então um cliente é necessário para manter uma lista de feeds de pares em que seu respectivo usuário está interessado e seguindo.

Fonte: scuttlebutt.nz

Quando você instala e executa o Patchwork, você só pode ver e se comunicar com seus pares em sua rede local. Para acessar fora de sua LAN, você precisa se conectar a um Pub. Um pub é apenas para convidados e eles retransmitem mensagens entre você e seus pares fora de sua LAN e entre outros Pubs.

Lembre-se de que você precisa seguir alguém para receber mensagens dessa pessoa. Isso reduz o envio de mensagens de spam para os usuários. Os usuários só veem as respostas das pessoas que seguem. Os dados são sincronizados no disco para funcionar offline, mas podem ser sincronizados diretamente com os pares na sua LAN por wi-fi ou bluetooth.

Patchbay - Uma GUI Alternativa

Patchbay é um cliente de fofoca projetado para ser fácil de modificar e estender. Ele usa o mesmo banco de dados que Patchwork e Patchfoo , então você pode facilmente dar uma volta com sua identidade existente.

Planetary - GUI para IOS

Planetary é um app com pubs pré-carregados para facilitar integração.

Manyverse - GUI para Android

Manyverse é um aplicativo de rede social com recursos que você esperaria: posts, curtidas, perfis, mensagens privadas, etc. Mas não está sendo executado na nuvem de propriedade de uma empresa, em vez disso, as postagens de seus amigos e todos os seus dados sociais vivem inteiramente em seu telefone .

Fontes

• https://scuttlebot.io/

• https://decentralized-id.com/decentralized-web/scuttlebot/#plugins

• https://medium.com/@miguelmota/getting-started-with-secure-scuttlebut-e6b7d4c5ecfd

• Secure Scuttlebutt : um protocolo de banco de dados global.

@ c631e267:c2b78d3e

Die grauenvollste Aussicht ist die der Technokratie – \ einer kontrollierenden Herrschaft, \ die durch verstümmelte und verstümmelnde Geister ausgeübt wird. \ Ernst Jünger

«Davos ist nicht mehr sexy», das Weltwirtschaftsforum (WEF) mache Davos kaputt, diese Aussagen eines Einheimischen las ich kürzlich in der Handelszeitung. Während sich einige vor Ort enorm an der «teuersten Gewerbeausstellung der Welt» bereicherten, würden die negativen Begleiterscheinungen wie Wohnungsnot und Niedergang der lokalen Wirtschaft immer deutlicher.

Nächsten Montag beginnt in dem Schweizer Bergdorf erneut ein Jahrestreffen dieses elitären Clubs der Konzerne, bei dem man mit hochrangigen Politikern aus aller Welt und ausgewählten Vertretern der Systemmedien zusammenhocken wird. Wie bereits in den vergangenen vier Jahren wird die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission, Ursula von der Leyen, in Begleitung von Klaus Schwab ihre Grundsatzansprache halten.

Der deutsche WEF-Gründer hatte bei dieser Gelegenheit immer höchst lobende Worte für seine Landsmännin: 2021 erklärte er sich «stolz, dass Europa wieder unter Ihrer Führung steht» und 2022 fand er es bemerkenswert, was sie erreicht habe angesichts des «erstaunlichen Wandels», den die Welt in den vorangegangenen zwei Jahren erlebt habe; es gebe nun einen «neuen europäischen Geist».

Von der Leyens Handeln während der sogenannten Corona-«Pandemie» lobte Schwab damals bereits ebenso, wie es diese Woche das Karlspreis-Direktorium tat, als man der Beschuldigten im Fall Pfizergate die diesjährige internationale Auszeichnung «für Verdienste um die europäische Einigung» verlieh. Außerdem habe sie die EU nicht nur gegen den «Aggressor Russland», sondern auch gegen die «innere Bedrohung durch Rassisten und Demagogen» sowie gegen den Klimawandel verteidigt.

Jene Herausforderungen durch «Krisen epochalen Ausmaßes» werden indes aus dem Umfeld des WEF nicht nur herbeigeredet – wie man alljährlich zur Zeit des Davoser Treffens im Global Risks Report nachlesen kann, der zusammen mit dem Versicherungskonzern Zurich erstellt wird. Seit die Globalisten 2020/21 in der Praxis gesehen haben, wie gut eine konzertierte und konsequente Angst-Kampagne funktionieren kann, geht es Schlag auf Schlag. Sie setzen alles daran, Schwabs goldenes Zeitfenster des «Great Reset» zu nutzen.

Ziel dieses «großen Umbruchs» ist die totale Kontrolle der Technokraten über die Menschen unter dem Deckmantel einer globalen Gesundheitsfürsorge. Wie aber könnte man so etwas erreichen? Ein Mittel dazu ist die «kreative Zerstörung». Weitere unabdingbare Werkzeug sind die Einbindung, ja Gleichschaltung der Medien und der Justiz.

Ein «Great Mental Reset» sei die Voraussetzung dafür, dass ein Großteil der Menschen Einschränkungen und Manipulationen wie durch die Corona-Maßnahmen praktisch kritik- und widerstandslos hinnehme, sagt der Mediziner und Molekulargenetiker Michael Nehls. Er meint damit eine regelrechte Umprogrammierung des Gehirns, wodurch nach und nach unsere Individualität und unser soziales Bewusstsein eliminiert und durch unreflektierten Konformismus ersetzt werden.

Der aktuelle Zustand unserer Gesellschaften ist auch für den Schweizer Rechtsanwalt Philipp Kruse alarmierend. Durch den Umgang mit der «Pandemie» sieht er die Grundlagen von Recht und Vernunft erschüttert, die Rechtsstaatlichkeit stehe auf dem Prüfstand. Seiner dringenden Mahnung an alle Bürger, die Prinzipien von Recht und Freiheit zu verteidigen, kann ich mich nur anschließen.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, \ um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben. \ Mark Zuckerberg

Sind euch auch die Tränen gekommen, als ihr Mark Zuckerbergs Wendehals-Deklaration bezüglich der Meinungsfreiheit auf seinen Portalen gehört habt? Rührend, oder? Während er früher die offensichtliche Zensur leugnete und später die Regierung Biden dafür verantwortlich machte, will er nun angeblich «die Zensur auf unseren Plattformen drastisch reduzieren».

«Purer Opportunismus» ob des anstehenden Regierungswechsels wäre als Klassifizierung viel zu kurz gegriffen. Der jetzige Schachzug des Meta-Chefs ist genauso Teil einer kühl kalkulierten Business-Strategie, wie es die 180 Grad umgekehrte Praxis vorher war. Social Media sind ein höchst lukratives Geschäft. Hinzu kommt vielleicht noch ein bisschen verkorkstes Ego, weil derartig viel Einfluss und Geld sicher auch auf die Psyche schlagen. Verständlich.

«Es ist an der Zeit, zu unseren Wurzeln der freien Meinungsäußerung auf Facebook und Instagram zurückzukehren. Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben», sagte Zuckerberg.

Welche Wurzeln? Hat der Mann vergessen, dass er von der Überwachung, dem Ausspionieren und dem Ausverkauf sämtlicher Daten und digitaler Spuren sowie der Manipulation seiner «Kunden» lebt? Das ist knallharter Kommerz, nichts anderes. Um freie Meinungsäußerung geht es bei diesem Geschäft ganz sicher nicht, und das war auch noch nie so. Die Wurzeln von Facebook liegen in einem Projekt des US-Militärs mit dem Namen «LifeLog». Dessen Ziel war es, «ein digitales Protokoll vom Leben eines Menschen zu erstellen».

Der Richtungswechsel kommt allerdings nicht überraschend. Schon Anfang Dezember hatte Meta-Präsident Nick Clegg von «zu hoher Fehlerquote bei der Moderation» von Inhalten gesprochen. Bei der Gelegenheit erwähnte er auch, dass Mark sehr daran interessiert sei, eine aktive Rolle in den Debatten über eine amerikanische Führungsrolle im technologischen Bereich zu spielen.

Während Milliardärskollege und Big Tech-Konkurrent Elon Musk bereits seinen Posten in der kommenden Trump-Regierung in Aussicht hat, möchte Zuckerberg also nicht nur seine Haut retten – Trump hatte ihn einmal einen «Feind des Volkes» genannt und ihm lebenslange Haft angedroht –, sondern am liebsten auch mitspielen. KI-Berater ist wohl die gewünschte Funktion, wie man nach einem Treffen Trump-Zuckerberg hörte. An seine Verhaftung dachte vermutlich auch ein weiterer Multimilliardär mit eigener Social Media-Plattform, Pavel Durov, als er Zuckerberg jetzt kritisierte und gleichzeitig warnte.

Politik und Systemmedien drehen jedenfalls durch – was zu viel ist, ist zu viel. Etwas weniger Zensur und mehr Meinungsfreiheit würden die Freiheit der Bürger schwächen und seien potenziell vernichtend für die Menschenrechte. Zuckerberg setze mit dem neuen Kurs die Demokratie aufs Spiel, das sei eine «Einladung zum nächsten Völkermord», ernsthaft. Die Frage sei, ob sich die EU gegen Musk und Zuckerberg behaupten könne, Brüssel müsse jedenfalls hart durchgreifen.

Auch um die Faktenchecker macht man sich Sorgen. Für die deutsche Nachrichtenagentur dpa und die «Experten» von Correctiv, die (noch) Partner für Fact-Checking-Aktivitäten von Facebook sind, sei das ein «lukratives Geschäftsmodell». Aber möglicherweise werden die Inhalte ohne diese vermeintlichen Korrektoren ja sogar besser. Anders als Meta wollen jedoch Scholz, Faeser und die Tagesschau keine Fehler zugeben und zum Beispiel Correctiv-Falschaussagen einräumen.

Bei derlei dramatischen Befürchtungen wundert es nicht, dass der öffentliche Plausch auf X zwischen Elon Musk und AfD-Chefin Alice Weidel von 150 EU-Beamten überwacht wurde, falls es irgendwelche Rechtsverstöße geben sollte, die man ihnen ankreiden könnte. Auch der Deutsche Bundestag war wachsam. Gefunden haben dürften sie nichts. Das Ganze war eher eine Show, viel Wind wurde gemacht, aber letztlich gab es nichts als heiße Luft.

Das Anbiedern bei Donald Trump ist indes gerade in Mode. Die Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) tut das auch, denn sie fürchtet um Spenden von über einer Milliarde Dollar. Eventuell könnte ja Elon Musk auch hier künftig aushelfen und der Organisation sowie deren größtem privaten Förderer, Bill Gates, etwas unter die Arme greifen. Nachdem Musks KI-Projekt xAI kürzlich von BlackRock & Co. sechs Milliarden eingestrichen hat, geht da vielleicht etwas.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Knappheit statt Slogans: eine Dosis ökonomischer Realität für die politischen Debatten

Die EU-Wirtschaft steht vor zahlreichen Herausforderungen, von hohen Energiekosten bis hin zu geringer Produktivität. Doch hinter der offiziellen Rhetorik verbirgt sich eine Annahme, die kaum hinterfragt wird: dass der grüne Wandel automatisch zu Wirtschaftswachstum und mehr Wohlstand führen wird. Aber stimmt das wirklich?

Eine englische Fassung dieses Textes finden Sie hier.

In Deutschland, das wieder einmal das Etikett „Kranker Mann Europas" tragen muss, kämpft Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz vor der Wahl im Februar mit alarmierend niedrigen Vertrauenswerten. Aber vielleicht ist das gar nicht so überraschend. ****Die deutsche Industrieproduktion ist rückläufig, seit die grüne Agenda in Mode gekommen ist. ****Die energieintensive Produktion ist in nur wenigen Jahren um ganze 20 Prozent zurückgegangen. Volkswagen schließt Fabriken, Thyssenkrupp entlässt massiv Mitarbeiter und mehr als drei Millionen Rentner sind von Armut bedroht .

Wenn dies Europas „Mann auf dem Mond"-Moment ist, wie EU-Kommissarin von der Leyen ****es 2019 ausdrückte ****, dann ist das nicht viel, womit man angeben kann . Zumindest nicht, wenn man kein Sadist ist.

Der Bericht des ehemaligen EZB-Chefs Mario Draghi über die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der EU wurde bereits früher diskutiert. Eines der Probleme, auf die hingewiesen wurde, war, dass europäische Unternehmen erheblich höhere Energiekosten haben als ihre amerikanischen Konkurrenten. Die Strompreise sind zwei- bis dreimal so hoch und die Erdgaspreise vier- bis fünfmal so hoch.

Deutschland ist vielleicht am schlimmsten dran, was zum Teil an der Entscheidung der ehemaligen Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel liegt, vollständig aus der Atomkraft auszusteigen (eine Entscheidung, die nicht nur keine breite Unterstützung fand , sondern die sie auch nicht als Fehler eingestehen will). Die Sabotage der Nord Stream 2 hat die Situation noch verschlimmert.

Ohne Realkapital kein wirtschaftlicher Wohlstand

Der Ausstieg aus der Atomenergie in Deutschland ist ein Beispiel dafür, wie politische Entscheidungen zur Verringerung der Kapazität der Wirtschaft beigetragen haben. Dasselbe gilt für die Sabotage der Nord Stream. Realkapital, wie Gebäude, Maschinen und Ausrüstung, ist für die Produktivität der Wirtschaft von entscheidender Bedeutung (z. B. Kennzahlen wie das BIP pro Arbeitsstunde). Ein größerer und effizienterer Kapitalstock ermöglicht die Herstellung von mehr Waren und Dienstleistungen mit der gleichen Menge an Arbeit, was zu mehr Produktion, höheren Löhnen und größerem materiellen Wohlstand führt. Das ist grundlegende Ökonomie. ****Wenn andererseits Realkapital aufgrund politischer Entscheidungen für obsolet erklärt wird, wie im Fall der Abschaltung der Atomkraft, verringert dies die Kapazität der Wirtschaft. ****Dasselbe gilt, wenn Realkapital zerstört wird, wie dies bei Nord Stream der Fall war.

Weiteres reales Betriebskapital wird zurückgestellt

EU-Kommissarin von der Leyen verspricht Besserung. Sie scheint überzeugt, dass der Niedergang der EU durch eine Verdreifachung der grünen Ziele des Blocks umgekehrt werden kann, und hat die Dekarbonisierung als eine der drei wichtigsten Säulen eines neuen „Wettbewerbsfähigkeitskompasses" aufgeführt. Wenn die Realität nicht den Erwartungen entspricht, kann man immer noch „Strg+Alt+Slogan" drücken und hoffen, dass niemand merkt, dass sich nichts verbessert hat.

Ihre Pläne bedeuten jedoch, dass bestehendes und derzeit funktionierendes Realkapital in Zukunft in noch größerem Umfang abgeschrieben wird. Dies lässt sich mit einer Nation vergleichen, die Jahr für Jahr ihre Naturschutzgebiete schrittweise erweitert. Tatsächlich geschieht dies auch. Der Kunming-Montreal-Rahmen für die Artenvielfalt sieht vor, dass bis 2030 30 % aller Flächen an Land und im Meer geschützt werden müssen. Ein Land, das derzeit weniger schützt, muss daher zusätzliche Gebiete identifizieren, die geschützt werden können. ****Der Prozess, 30 % aller Flächen zu schützen, wird wahrscheinlich das Produktionspotenzial der Wirtschaft verringern. ****Mit schrumpfenden Feldern wird es weniger Karotten geben (es sei denn, es werden bedeutende technologische Fortschritte erzielt).

Konsequenzen für Sicherheitspolitik und -vorsorge

Auf dem derzeitigen Weg wird mehr Realkapital auf die lange Bank geschoben, was weitreichende Folgen haben kann, nicht zuletzt für unsere Sicherheitspolitik. Wenn Russland beispielsweise Artilleriegeschosse etwa dreimal schneller produzieren kann, und zwar zu Kosten, die etwa ein Viertel der Kosten betragen, die die westlichen Verbündeten der Ukraine dafür aufbringen , dann ist klar, dass dies sicherheitspolitische Konsequenzen hat. Ebenso wird es negative sicherheitspolitische Konsequenzen haben, wenn die Strompreise in Deutschland fünfmal höher sind als in China, was derzeit der Fall ist . Im Vergleich zur EU hat China tatsächlich einen höheren Kohlendioxidausstoß pro Kopf, wobei der Unterschied den ****verfügbaren Daten zufolge etwa 50 % beträgt ****. Bereinigt um den internationalen Handel emittiert China pro Kopf 10 % mehr als Schweden .

Auch eine Perspektive der Vorsorge ist zu finden. Anfang der 1990er Jahre produzierten schwedische Landwirte fast 75 % der Nahrungsmittel des Landes. Heute ist Schwedens Bevölkerung deutlich gewachsen, aber die Nahrungsmittelproduktion hat nicht Schritt gehalten. Jeder zweite Bissen wird heute importiert. In Schweden können wir uns sogar rühmen, dass wir uns nicht einmal mit der einfachsten aller Feldfrüchte versorgen können -- Kartoffeln . Können wir wirklich sicher sein, dass deutlich erweiterte Naturschutzgebiete, wie sie im Kunming-Montreal-Rahmenwerk für Schweden vorgeschrieben sind, unsere Nahrungsmittelvorsorge nicht noch weiter verschlechtern werden?

Erinnert an kleine Gnome

Ich erinnere mich an eine Folge der 90er-Jahre-Serie South Park, in der kleine Gnome Unterhosen sammeln . Als sie nach ihrem Plan gefragt wurden, beschrieben sie ihre Methode:

1. Unterhosen sammeln
2. ???
3. profitieren!

Übersetzt auf die grüne **Energiewende **:

1. reales Kapital zerstören und Land und Meer erhalten
2. ???
3. wirtschaftlicher Wohlstand!

Was kann sich die EU wirklich leisten?

In der Wirtschaft geht es im Grunde um die Verwaltung knapper Ressourcen, was viele Menschen offenbar vergessen haben. Es ist höchste Zeit, zu hinterfragen, was sich die EU wirklich leisten kann. Können wir es uns wirklich leisten, uns für einen Krieg gegen Russland, China und den Iran zu rüsten und uns gleichzeitig mit grünen Versprechen von reduzierten Kohlendioxidemissionen und erhöhter Artenvielfalt selbst die Hände zu binden? Und das in einer Situation, in der die nächste US-Regierung wahrscheinlich massiv in die Steigerung ihrer Wettbewerbsvorteile durch Deregulierung, niedrigere Energiepreise, Steuersenkungen und einen Rückzug aus dem Pariser Abkommen investieren wird ?

Als von der Leyen für das deutsche Militär verantwortlich war, sei die Lage " katastrophal " gewesen. Alle sechs U-Boote des Landes waren außer Gefecht gesetzt . Zeitweise war kein einziges der 14 Transportflugzeuge des Landes flugfähig. Bei Übungen mussten deutsche Soldaten Besen statt Gewehren verwenden .

Hoffentlich wird von der Leyen in ihrem Umgang mit der Wirtschaft, der Verteidigung und der Abwehrbereitschaft der EU mehr Erfolg zeigen als in ihrer Rolle als deutsche Verteidigungsministerin. Es könnte jedoch auch an der Zeit sein, dass mehr Menschen die vorherrschenden Narrative, die unsere Politik prägen, in Frage stellen. Was, wenn die Fakten nicht ganz mit der Wahrheit übereinstimmen, die uns erzählt wird?

@ 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

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

A new report from the National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF) shows that civilian firearm possession exceeded 490 million in 2022. The total from 1990 to 2022 is estimated at 491.3 million firearms. In 2022, over ten million firearms were domestically produced, leading to a total of 16,045,911 firearms available in the U.S. market.

Of these, 9,873,136 were handguns, 4,195,192 were rifles, and 1,977,583 were shotguns. Handgun availability aligns with the concealed carry and self-defense market, as all states allow concealed carry, with 29 having constitutional carry laws.

@ 1f3ce62e:6e6b5d83

🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: Why do adults associate colors only with children and not with them?

AM: Adults have taken so seriously their role. They have forgotten their inner child, they are not in a permanent communication with it. That has made them forget some things, as colors and what they make them feel.

The whole world has become 🖤🤍🩶 since then.

So when an adult is connected back to her/his inner child, she/he has a big challenge, don’t let it fade away again and hug those who still think the world is just gray.

Sooner or later, the wound of the inner child will knock the door to be hugged and healed, it is just a matter of time. Having someone already connected to her/his inner child will make it easier.

\ 🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: Why is our inner child wounded?

AM: Because we are all here to learn something, even if we don’t remember it. 

That wound is our biggest lesson. 

Once healed, it becomes the talent or gift we came here to share with those others inner childs with the same wound, with the same lesson to transcend.

🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: How can we identify the wound of our inner child?

AM: In those situations that deeply hurt us.

The first step is to become an observer of oneself. Observe the way you talk to yourself, and to your closest ones (mom, dad, siblings, partner, kids and closest friends). 

Then, observe your actions, they talk too. During this exercise you will find a pattern that repeats itself constantly.

The people who said or do something that hurts you, touch that wound. If we find the pattern, we will see the wound. It is always there, waiting to be healed.

🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: Which role do mom and dad have into the inner child’s wound?

AM: If we think that we are here just once, bad things just happened to us and people hurt us, it is going to be a challenge to answer this question.

But if we expand our mind and consciousness and embrace the idea that we are more than just this life time and the situations that happened in it, we will be able to understand that we have lived other lives and we brought into this one other experiences, some of them we have learned and some others we haven’t yet. 

The same happens with our relationships and the souls we shared this and other lives.

It’s from that expansion of consciousness that we can understand why mom and dad have did the things, they did and what was the higher purpose of it.

\ 🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: What is the role of our inner child into the parents’ one with their kids?

AM: It is the most important but an unconscious one.

As adults start healing their inner child, the lessons that we left for kids are easier. Look at how I exchanged “parents” for “adults”. Any adult (aunts, uncles, grandparents, educators) whoever is closed to a child has this task: to connect and heal the inner child.

It’s true that parents has a great mission on this, the most important of their lives. And as they are healing their inner child and they letting their true self to BE, they are providing tools to their kids to BE themselves too.

Every healing process starts inside, to later be shared with others around.

\ 🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: Why is our society so wounded?

AM: Because it is a society of wounded inner children. 

When you want to know how we contribute to a wounded society, don’t look after what the society does (if they do good or bad things), look after what deeply hurt them.

People used to think that because they are “good” people and do “good” things, the society is wounded because of “bad” people who does “bad” things. 

“Bad” and “Good” people is hurt the same way, one is more deep and visible than the other. 

When you see something in society that hurts you, ask your inner child: 

🌱 What does it hurt you, my lovely inner child?

🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: What is the common ground between all of those different inner child wounds?

AM: The lack of love to ourselves. All inner child wounds have that in common, no matter from which discipline you identified them. 

Deeply, the lack of love, it is related to not being able to BE ourselves in its full expression. 

As we start loving ourselves and accepting ourselves as we are, any original wound start to heal. 

🌱 Which wound can’t be healed with love?

\ 🌱 🤍💗💜💙💧💚💛🧡❤️

I: How can we connect with our inner child?

AM: There are many ways, meditations, playing with or like kids, etc. 

But the most important one is observing and identifying what hurt us. In that instant, talk to your inner child and listen what her or his has to say. 

The second step is to observe our inner dialogue, that dialogue we have with ourselves is the one we have we our inner child. That will mark the wound to be healed.

If you ask your inner child right now…How does she/he feel?

🌱 What does she/he would say?

With Universal Love 🤍♾️

I AM Laus 🌱💛

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The EU's economy is facing a number of challenges, from high energy costs to low productivity. But behind the official rhetoric lies an assumption that is rarely questioned: that the green transition will automatically lead to economic growth and increased prosperity. But is this really true?

In Germany, which is once again forced to bear the label "Europe's sick man", Chancellor Olaf Scholz is struggling with alarmingly low confidence figures ahead of the election in February. But perhaps this is not so surprising. German industrial production has been trending downward since the green agenda became fashionable. Energy-intensive production has decreased by a full 20% in just a few years. Volkswagen is closing factories, Thyssenkrupp is massively laying off employees, and more than three million pensioners are at risk of poverty.

If this is Europe's "man on the moon" moment, as EU Commissioner von der Leyen expressed it in 2019, then it's not much to brag about. At least, not if you're not a sadist.

The former ECB chief Mario Draghi's report on the EU's competitiveness has been discussed previously in Affärsvärlden, among other things by the author and by Christian Sandström. One of the problems pointed out was that European companies have significantly higher energy costs than their American competitors, with electricity prices 2-3 times higher and natural gas prices 4-5 times higher.

Germany is perhaps worst off, thanks in part to former Chancellor Angela Merkel's decision to completely phase out nuclear power (a decision that not only lacked popular support but which she also refuses to acknowledge as a mistake). The sabotage of Nord Stream made the situation worse.

Without Real Capital, No Economic Prosperity

Germany's phasing out of nuclear power plants is an example of how political decisions have contributed to reducing the economy's capacity. The same applies to the sabotage of Nord Stream. Real capital, such as buildings, machinery, and equipment, is crucial for the economy's productivity (e.g., measures such as GDP per hour worked). A larger and more efficient capital stock enables the production of more goods and services with the same amount of labor, leading to greater production, higher wages, and increased material prosperity. This is basic economics. On the other hand, when real capital is declared obsolete due to political decisions, as in the case of the shutdown of nuclear power, it reduces the economy's capacity. The same applies when real capital is destroyed, as was the case with Nord Stream.

More Working Real Capital Will Be Put on the Back Burner

EU Commissioner von der Leyen promises improvement. She seems convinced that the EU's decline can be reversed by tripling down on the bloc's green goals, and listed decarbonization as one of three key pillars in a new "Competitiveness Compass". When reality does not live up to expectations, you can always press "Ctrl+Alt+Slogan" and hope that no one notices that nothing has improved.

However, her plans mean that existing and currently functioning real capital will be written off to an even greater extent in the future. This can be compared to a nation that gradually expands its nature reserves year after year. As it happens, this is also taking place. The Kunming-Montreal framework for biodiversity means that 30% of all areas, on land and at sea, must be protected by 2030. A country that currently conserves less than that must therefore identify additional areas that can be protected. The process of protecting 30% of all areas will likely reduce the economy's productive potential. With shrinking fields, there will be fewer carrots (unless significant technological progress is made).

Security Policy and Preparedness Consequences

On the current path, more real capital will be put on the back burner, which can have far-reaching consequences, not least for our security policy. For example, if Russia can produce artillery shells about three times faster, at a cost that is roughly a quarter of what it costs Ukraine's Western allies, then it's clear that this has security policy consequences. Similarly, if electricity prices in Germany are five times higher than in China, which is currently the case, then this will also have negative security policy consequences. Compared to the EU, China actually has a higher carbon dioxide emission level per capita, with a difference of about 50% according to available data. Adjusted for international trade, China emits 10% more than Sweden per capita.

A preparedness perspective can also be found. In the early 1990s, Swedish farmers produced nearly 75% of the country's food. Today, Sweden's population has increased significantly, but food production has not kept pace. Every other bite is imported today. In Sweden, we can even boast that we cannot even provide for ourselves with the simplest of crops - potatoes. Can we really be sure that significantly expanded nature reserves, as prescribed by the Kunming-Montreal framework for Sweden, will not further deteriorate our food preparedness?

Reminds One of Little Gnomes

I am reminded of an episode from the 90s TV series South Park, where little gnomes collect underpants. When asked about their plan, they described their method:

1. collect underpants
2. ???
3. profit!

Translated to the green transition (the German Energiewende):

1. destroy real capital and conserve land and sea
2. ???
3. economic prosperity!

What Can the EU Really Afford?

Economics is fundamentally about managing scarce resources, which many people seem to have forgotten. It's high time to question what the EU can really afford. Can we really afford to arm ourselves for war against Russia, China, and Iran while at the same time tying our own hands with green promises of reduced carbon dioxide emissions and increased biodiversity? This in a situation where the next US administration is likely to invest heavily in increasing its competitive advantages through deregulation, lower energy prices, tax cuts, and a withdrawal from the Paris Agreement?

When von der Leyen was responsible for the German military, the situation became "catastrophic". All six of the country's submarines were out of commission. At times, not a single one of the country's 14 transport aircraft could fly. German soldiers had to use broomsticks instead of guns during exercises.

Hopefully, von der Leyen will show more success in her handling of the EU's economy, defense, and preparedness than she has shown in her role as German Defense Minister. However, it may also be time for more people to challenge the prevailing narratives that shape our policies. What if the facts don't quite add up to the truth we're being told?

@ 6f3670d9:03f04036

Disclaimer: - This will void your warranty - There might be differences between the Bitaxe and the Lucky Miner that might not cause issues or damage immediately, but might manifest long-term - Proceed at your own risk

---

A Different Pickaxe

You live in a place where it's difficult to get a Bitaxe. You have access to AliExpress. You look around. You find something called the "Lucky Miner LV06". A Bitaxe clone that uses the same mining chip as the Bitaxe Ultra (BM1366 ASIC). You buy one.

You plug it in, you enter your wallet address and other settings, and it starts mining. It works! Great!

But it's running a customized firmware. It's not AxeOS. Maybe there's something shady in the stock firmware. It's not open-source, after all. Also, AxeOS looks amazing... And that automatic pool fail-over feature is handy.

You think to yourself: "Maybe I can use the Bitaxe firmware on this?". Guess what? You're right!

Flashing From Web UI

What usually works for me is to: - Download the Bitaxe firmware files (esp-miner.bin and www.bin) from GitHub (here). Version 2.4.1 seems to work well, as of this writing. - Then from the Lucky Miner web interface, upload the "Website" (www.bin) file. - Wait for a minute or two after it's done uploading. - Upload the "Firmware" (esp-miner.bin) file. - Wait another minute or two. - Unplug the power and plug it back in. - Set the "Core Voltage" and "Frequency" to the defaults. - Unplug the power and plug it back in again.

If you're lucky (no pun intended), you'll have a working Lucky Miner with AxeOS. Update the settings and mine away!

However, often times I've been unlucky, like what happened while I was writing this article, ironically. The miner malfunctions for no obvious reason. It keeps rebooting, or it's not mining (zero/low hashrate), or the web interface is inaccessible. You name it.

The miner has become a "brick". How do you "unbrick" it?

When you brick a Bitaxe, you can recover it by flashing (uploading) a "Factory Image". The Bitaxe has a USB port that makes this easy. Follow the guide and it should come back to life again. Unfortunately, the Lucky Miner LV06 doesn't have a USB port. It has a serial port, though. We'll have to get our hands a bit dirty.

Flashing Using the Serial Port

We need to connect the serial port of the miner to a computer and run a program to flash (upload) the firmware file on the miner. Any 3.3v UART serial port should be sufficient. Unfortunately, PCs don't usually come with a UART serial port these days, let alone a 3.3v one. The serial port common in old computers is an RS-232 port, which will most probably fry your miner if you try to connect it directly. Beware.

In my case, as a serial port for my PC, I'm using an Arduino Due I had lying around. We connect it to the PC through USB, and on the other side we connect a few wires to the miner, which gives the PC access to the miner.

WARNING: Make sure your serial port is 3.3v or you will probably kill the miner. Arduino Uno is 5v not 3.3v, for example, and cannot be used for this.

Wiring

First, we need to open the Lucky Miner. Use a small flat screwdriver to gently push the two plastic clips shown in the picture below. Gently pry the top cover away from the bottom cover on the clips side first, then remove the other side. Be careful not to break the display cable.

Once the cover is off, you can find the miner's serial port in the top right corner (J10), as shown in the next picture. We'll also need the reset button (EN).

There are three screws holding the PCB and the bottom cover together. If you're confident in your ability to push the small button on the underside of the PCB with the bottom cover on, then no need to remove these. The following picture shows what we need from that side.

And the next picture shows the pins and USB port we will use from the Arduino.

Now, we need to connect: - The USB port on the Arduino labelled "programming" to the PC - Pin 18 (TX1) on the Arduino to J10 through-hole pad 5 (blue dot) - Pin 19 (RX1) on the Arduino to J10 through-hole pad 3 (green dot) - Any GND pin on the Arduino to J10 through-hole pad 4 (yellow dot)

I didn't need to solder the wires to the pads. Keeping everything stable, perhaps by putting a weight on the wires or a bit of tape, was sufficient in all my attempts.

Setting up the Arduino

To use the Arduino as a serial port for our PC, we'll have to make it pass-through data back and forth between the USB port and UART1, where we connected the miner.

The following steps are all done on a PC running Debian Linux (Bookworm), in the spirit of freedom and open-source.

First, we start the Arduino IDE. If the package for the Arduino Due board is not already installed, you'll see a small prompt at the bottom. Click "Install this package".

Click the "Install" button.

Once the package is installed, click "Close".

Next, we select the Due board. Click the "Tools" menu, select "Board", select "Arduino ARM (32-bits) Boards" and click "Arduino Due (Programming Port)"

Next, we select the port. Click the "Tools" menu again, select "Port", and click the port where the Arduino is connected. In my case it was "/dev/ttyACM0".

Now we need to upload the following code to the Arduino board. The code is actually the "SerialPassthrough" example from the IDE, but with the serial speed changed to match the miner.

``` void setup() { Serial.begin(115200); Serial1.begin(115200); }

void loop() { if (Serial.available()) { // If anything comes in Serial (USB), Serial1.write(Serial.read()); // read it and send it out Serial1 }

if (Serial1.available()) { // If anything comes in Serial1 Serial.write(Serial1.read()); // read it and send it out Serial (USB) } } ```

Copy/paste the code into the IDE and click upload. You'll see "Done uploading" at the bottom.

Next we'll test if we're receiving data from the miner. We start by opening the "Serial Monitor" from the "Tools" menu in the IDE. Then we change the baudrate to 115200.

Set the Arduino and the miner in a comfortable position, make sure the wires are held in place and got a good contact on both sides, and the power is plugged in.

Now we'll put the miner in "download" mode. Press and hold the button on the underside (K1), press and release the reset button (EN), then release the other button (K1).

You should see some text from the miner in the serial monitor window, like in the picture below.

Congratulations! We know we're able to receive data from the miner now. We're not sure transmit is working, but we'll find out when we try to flash.

Flashing Using the Serial Port, for Real

To flash the Lucky Miner we'll need a software tool named esptool and the factory image firmware file.

I usually use "esp-miner-factory-205-v2.1.8.bin" for the factory image (this one) as a base, and then flash the version I want from the Web UI, using the steps I mentioned earlier.

For esptool, the documentation (here) shows us how to install it. To make things a little easier on our Debian Linux system, we'll use pipx instead of pip. The instructions below are adapted for that.

First we make sure pipx is installed. Run this command in a terminal and follow the instructions:

sudo apt-get install pipx

Then we install esptool using pipx. Run the following in a terminal:

pipx install esptool

The output will be something like this:

user@pc:~$ pipx install esptool installed package esptool 4.8.1, installed using Python 3.11.2 These apps are now globally available - esp_rfc2217_server.py - espefuse.py - espsecure.py - esptool.py ⚠️ Note: '/home/user/.local/bin' is not on your PATH environment variable. These apps will not be globally accessible until your PATH is updated. Run `pipx ensurepath` to automatically add it, or manually modify your PATH in your shell's config file (i.e. ~/.bashrc). done! ✨ 🌟 ✨

We can see pipx telling us we won't be able to run our tool because the folder where it was installed is not in the PATH variable. To fix that, we can follow pipx instructions and run:

pipx ensurepath

And we'll see something like this:

``` user@pc:~$ pipx ensurepath Success! Added /home/user/.local/bin to the PATH environment variable.

Consider adding shell completions for pipx. Run 'pipx completions' for instructions.

You will need to open a new terminal or re-login for the PATH changes to take effect.

Otherwise pipx is ready to go! ✨ 🌟 ✨ ```

Now, close the terminal and re-open it so that esptool becomes available.

Finally, to actually flash the miner, put the miner in download mode, then in the following command change the port ("/dev/ttyACM0") to your serial port, as we've seen earlier, and the file path to where your firmware file is, and run it:

esptool.py -p /dev/ttyACM0 --baud 115200 write_flash --erase-all 0x0 ~/Downloads/esp-miner-factory-205-v2.1.8.bin

If everything went fine, the tool will take a few minutes to flash the firmware to the miner. You'll see something like this in the output:

``` user@pc:~$ esptool.py -p /dev/ttyACM0 --baud 115200 write_flash --erase-all 0x0 ~/Downloads/esp-miner-factory-205-v2.1.8.bin esptool.py v4.8.1 Serial port /dev/ttyACM0 Connecting..... Detecting chip type... ESP32-S3 Chip is ESP32-S3 (QFN56) (revision v0.2) Features: WiFi, BLE, Embedded PSRAM 8MB (AP_3v3) Crystal is 40MHz MAC: 3c:84:27:ba:be:01 Uploading stub... Running stub... Stub running... Configuring flash size... Erasing flash (this may take a while)... Chip erase completed successfully in 9.5s Compressed 15802368 bytes to 1320190... Wrote 15802368 bytes (1320190 compressed) at 0x00000000 in 152.1 seconds (effective 831.2 kbit/s)... Hash of data verified.

Leaving... Hard resetting via RTS pin... ```

And we're done! Hopefully the miner will be recovered now.

Hope this helps!

Stay humble,
dumb-package

A Warning About Beta Versions of AxeOS

For reasons unknown to me, while I was writing this article I wanted to try the testing version of AxeOS, which was v2.4.1b (beta). Flashing from Web UI went smooth, but the miner stopped mining. I flashed back to v2.1.8 using the serial port, a known good version for me, but it wouldn't mine, still.

Thankfully, v2.4.1 was released recently, and flashing it from the Web UI magically revived my miner. So, be warned.

Bonus: File Hashes

For convenience, these are the SHA256 hashes of the files I used in this article: ``` da24fceb246f3b8b4dd94e5143f17bd38e46e5285e807ebd51627cb08f665c0a ESP-Miner-v2.4.1/esp-miner.bin 16c5c671391f0e3e88a3e79ce33fad3b0ec232b8572fad5e1e0d1ad3251ab394 ESP-Miner-v2.4.1/www.bin

d5182a15b6fa21d7b9b31bff2026d30afed9d769781a48db914730a5751e20c6 esp-miner-factory-205-v2.1.8.bin ```

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Was du bist hängt von drei Faktoren ab: \ Was du geerbt hast, \ was deine Umgebung aus dir machte \ und was du in freier Wahl \ aus deiner Umgebung und deinem Erbe gemacht hast. \ Aldous Huxley

Das brave Mitmachen und Mitlaufen in einem vorgegebenen, recht engen Rahmen ist gewiss nicht neu, hat aber gerade wieder mal Konjunktur. Dies kann man deutlich beobachten, eigentlich egal, in welchem gesellschaftlichen Bereich man sich umschaut. Individualität ist nur soweit angesagt, wie sie in ein bestimmtes Schema von «Diversität» passt, und Freiheit verkommt zur Worthülse – nicht erst durch ein gewisses Buch einer gewissen ehemaligen Regierungschefin.

Erklärungsansätze für solche Entwicklungen sind bekannt, und praktisch alle haben etwas mit Massenpsychologie zu tun. Der Herdentrieb, also der Trieb der Menschen, sich – zum Beispiel aus Unsicherheit oder Bequemlichkeit – lieber der Masse anzuschließen als selbstständig zu denken und zu handeln, ist einer der Erklärungsversuche. Andere drehen sich um Macht, Propaganda, Druck und Angst, also den gezielten Einsatz psychologischer Herrschaftsinstrumente.

Aber wollen die Menschen überhaupt Freiheit? Durch Gespräche im privaten Umfeld bin ich diesbezüglich in der letzten Zeit etwas skeptisch geworden. Um die Jahreswende philosophiert man ja gerne ein wenig über das Erlebte und über die Erwartungen für die Zukunft. Dabei hatte ich hin und wieder den Eindruck, die totalitären Anwandlungen unserer «Repräsentanten» kämen manchen Leuten gerade recht.

«Desinformation» ist so ein brisantes Thema. Davor müsse man die Menschen doch schützen, hörte ich. Jemand müsse doch zum Beispiel diese ganzen merkwürdigen Inhalte in den Social Media filtern – zur Ukraine, zum Klima, zu Gesundheitsthemen oder zur Migration. Viele wüssten ja gar nicht einzuschätzen, was richtig und was falsch ist, sie bräuchten eine Führung.

Freiheit bedingt Eigenverantwortung, ohne Zweifel. Eventuell ist es einigen tatsächlich zu anspruchsvoll, die Verantwortung für das eigene Tun und Lassen zu übernehmen. Oder die persönliche Freiheit wird nicht als ausreichend wertvolles Gut angesehen, um sich dafür anzustrengen. In dem Fall wäre die mangelnde Selbstbestimmung wohl das kleinere Übel. Allerdings fehlt dann gemäß Aldous Huxley ein Teil der Persönlichkeit. Letztlich ist natürlich alles eine Frage der Abwägung.

Sind viele Menschen möglicherweise schon so «eingenordet», dass freiheitliche Ambitionen gar nicht für eine ganze Gruppe, ein Kollektiv, verfolgt werden können? Solche Gedanken kamen mir auch, als ich mir kürzlich diverse Talks beim viertägigen Hacker-Kongress des Chaos Computer Clubs (38C3) anschaute. Ich war nicht nur überrascht, sondern reichlich erschreckt angesichts der in weiten Teilen mainstream-geformten Inhalte, mit denen ein dankbares Publikum beglückt wurde. Wo ich allgemein hellere Köpfe erwartet hatte, fand ich Konformismus und enthusiastisch untermauerte Narrative.

Gibt es vielleicht so etwas wie eine Herdenimmunität gegen Indoktrination? Ich denke, ja, zumindest eine gestärkte Widerstandsfähigkeit. Was wir brauchen, sind etwas gesunder Menschenverstand, offene Informationskanäle und der Mut, sich freier auch zwischen den Herden zu bewegen. Sie tun das bereits, aber sagen Sie es auch dieses Jahr ruhig weiter.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ ce6b432f:c07ce020

I’ve never lived in LA, though I’ve visited many times. The devastation there from recent fires there is still in the headlines and anyone with a soul feels for the folks without homes, neighbors and communities. Whether they vote the same way or look the same way or worship the same god, “what can I do to help these victims?” is our first question.

The second question is, what is the most responsible way to help? Paragraph two and controversy is already here. Responsible according to who? These people are victims, just give them as much money as they need and let them figure it out according to their local knowledge and culture! The broadest possible answer to this comes from a recent Substack by Arnold Kling: California Tough Love . His position is that there are certain factors controlled locally that led to the disaster, and we shouldn’t be in a rush to replicate them. Having some strings attached to funds that reduce the likelihood of $50,000/year blue collar workers in Iowa footing the bill for the rebuild of $5,000,000 homes in Pacific Palisades AGAIN in the foreseeable future is a very reasonable position.

My position here will be more detailed than Arnold’s, and thus has a higher probability of being wrong. That has never stopped me before. The source of this hubris is a crystal ball. While not a resident of LA, I have been an honorary citizen of Maui for several decades. This attachment is longer than the attachment to the city I currently live in. In August of 2023, a similar devastating fire engulfed the town of Lahaina on the west side of Maui. ~2,200 homes were burned or damaged. The plight of those rebuilding and the process they have gone through quickly faded from national attention, but not to those of us who spend substantial amounts of time on the island. This experience 17 months before the LA fires has painted a depressing blueprint of what we can expect in LA’s recovery. A couple of highlights:

• In November of 2024, the first house was rebuilt. 15 months = 1 house. First House Rebuilt -Maui News Article highlight: Maui “expedited the permitting process for this house, so it “only” took 2 months.
• In December of 2024, federal funding for rebuilding via a block grant is finally approved by congress. Federal Block Grant For Rebuild - Maui News Article highlight: $1.6 billion approved for housing = ~$800,000 per house.

What do these items have in common? The biggest price so far is time. Arnold’s substack was more of a philosophical position, but I doubt even he knew that at the time of writing, Lahaina’s federal funding had just been approved. All those strings he had attached by the feds? Still very slow for a family without a home. This is half of the ‘real price gouging’ mentioned in the subtitle. Those further down the socio-economic ladder have less time to weather the process in Lahaina and the same will likely be true for the middle class residents embedded in the areas destroyed by California’s fires.

The second element of price gouging is the red tape partially embodied in Maui’s example of two months of permitting. These costs aren’t just the time, but also the professional consultants of various stripes required to navigate the process successfully and the costly modifications to homes mandated through these processes.

Here is where I posit my broad and general suggestion. There should exist a “right to rebuild”. If you can legally own a piece of property in a specific condition, you should have the right to rebuild that exact same property if it is destroyed by means out of your control. If you don’t have a “right to rebuild”, you really don’t own that property - you are just renting it for an indefinite period from whoever can prohibit rebuilding it.

Rebuilding is a special case in both the individual and the community level. See the map of Lahaina below. We know where all the plumbing and power lines were. We know where the streets and drainage were. The right to rebuild translates nicely to the community level. Rebuild everything back where it was. Take a month or two to clear out the debris, from an area and begin to rebuild. Rinse and repeat until done.

Taxpayers in Texas shouldn’t be paying for bloated permitting processes in Lahaina or LA. They shouldn’t be paying for eco-upgrades unless very specific, critical failures that caused the current disaster are clearly identified with lowest-cost available solutions. (In Lahaina - pay to bury the power lines. I drove through the area the fire started 2 weeks before it occurred. That place was a tinder box, and it will be again unless someone puts a golf course on that hill. I’m not joking about the golf course. Directly adjacent to the north of the area of Lahaina that burned is Ka’anapali, whose identical hillside is green all year round due to the presence of golf courses that pay for themselves and do not burn.)

How to address this in the context of federal funding via Arnold’s original post:

• Extremely expedited permitting process for rebuilds that get any federal funding: 5 days not 60. You can rebuild what you had, no questions asked, just file the paper work to prove it is the same lot and same size structure. If local jurisdictions drag their heels - no funding, answer to your voters who are now SOL.
• Capped amount of funding per structure that covers a functional modest structure built at the average cost of the 10 most affordable states in the country. The process of building a single family residence is not dramatically different in various areas of the country, unless dictated by excessive regulation. There may be factors for labor to consider if an area is remote like Lahaina or the hills of North Carolina affected by Helene. But if it costs 2x to build a house in your county than in the 10 most affordable states - you are doing it wrong. There is some regulatory price gouging going on. Figure it out. The 10 Most Affordable States to Build a Home - According to this research you can build a 2,100 square foot home for an average of less than $300,000 in the 10 most affordable states.
• This funding will also be contingent on these rebuilt houses being completed within 110% of the time it takes to build 2,100 square foot home in the same 10 markets - measured from the day funds begin to be distributed by the federal government.
• Federal funding will begin to be distributed from a risk pool within 6 months of the disaster, with minimal review to just ensure the disaster qualifies and the receiving state/city will abide by its parameters. The funding is distributed at intervals governed by compliance with the program. Permits are being issued timely, and the amounts distributed are aligned with the cost of building in our most affordable markets.

If you want to build something new and different than before - it might take longer. If you want more than 2,100 square feet of house - I hope you had insurance to cover the difference. A new 2,100 square foot house puts you in the top 10% of humans on earth in terms of shelter. Being a good neighbor does not require rebuilding your infinity pool.

The right to rebuild will get people in homes quicker, remove government obstacles, and stop funding waste. Every citizen will know the rules - money is there to get me a basic structure quickly or fund the beginning of something larger. Any obstacles to that time and money are coming from politicians/regulations I can vote on locally. Comments will surely pour in explaining how it isn’t that simple. These comments will be reviewed diligently 2 years from now when Pacific Palisades is still a wasteland after $20 billion in federal aid has been spent.

!(image)[https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F8e7875da-145c-4f34-b115-eb0cf09b9ccf_792x612.jpeg] Source: Maui Now

@ 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)

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Im Frühjahr kündigte EU-Kommissarin Ursula von der Leyen an, sie wolle einen „ Europäischen Demokratieschild " schaffen, um die EU vor ausländischer Einflussnahme zu schützen. Von der Leyens Demokratieschild befindet sich derzeit in der Planungsphase. Die erklärte Absicht besteht darin, eine „ spezielle Struktur zur Bekämpfung ausländischer Informationsmanipulation und -einmischung" zu schaffen. Obwohl es als Instrument zum Schutz der Demokratie angepriesen wird, vermuten einige, dass es sich in Wirklichkeit um einen verschleierten Versuch handelt, abweichende Meinungen zu unterdrücken. Der im vergangenen Jahr verabschiedete Digital Services Act (DSA) der EU ist eng mit diesem Schild verbunden. Durch den DSA riskieren große Social-Media-Plattformen wie Elon Musks X erhebliche Geldstrafen, wenn sie den Forderungen der EU-Bürokraten nach Zensur und Moderation nicht nachkommen.

Note: This text is also available in English at substack.com. Many thanks to stroger1@iris.to for this German translation.

Im krassen Gegensatz dazu hat sich der künftige US-Präsident Donald Trump als klarer Befürworter der Meinungsfreiheit und entschiedener Gegner der Zensur hervorgetan. Er wurde bereits von YouTube gesperrt, hat jedoch erklärt, er wolle „das linke Zensurregime zerschlagen und das Recht auf freie Meinungsäußerung für alle Amerikaner zurückfordern" . Er hat auch behauptet: „Wenn wir keine freie Meinungsäußerung haben, dann haben wir einfach kein freies Land."

Sein künftiger Vizepräsident J.D. Vance hat sogar angedeutet, dass er bereit sei, US-Militärhilfe von der Achtung der Meinungsfreiheit in den europäischen NATO-Ländern abhängig zu machen. Vances Aussage erfolgte, nachdem EU-Binnenmarktkommissar Thierry Breton vor seinem geplanten Gespräch mit Trump einen umstrittenen Brief an Musk geschickt hatte. Heute erscheint dies als unkluger Schritt, nicht zuletzt, weil er als Versuch gewertet werden kann, die US-Wahl zu beeinflussen -- etwas, das paradoxerweise dem erklärten Zweck von von der Leyens Demokratieschild (d. h. ausländische Manipulationen zu bekämpfen) widerspricht.

Wenn die NATO möchte, dass wir sie weiterhin unterstützen, und die NATO möchte, dass wir weiterhin ein gutes Mitglied dieses Militärbündnisses sind, warum respektieren Sie dann nicht die amerikanischen Werte und die freie Meinungsäußerung?

- J.D. Vance

In der EU sind Verfechter der Meinungsfreiheit in der Öffentlichkeit weniger verbreitet. In Deutschland hat Vizekanzler Robert Habeck kürzlich erklärt, er sei „überhaupt nicht glücklich darüber, was dort [auf X] passiert ... seit Elon Musk das Amt übernommen hat", und wünscht sich eine strengere Regulierung der sozialen Medien. Die Wohnung eines deutschen Rentners wurde kürzlich von der Polizei durchsucht, nachdem er ein Bild von Habeck mit einem abfälligen Kommentar veröffentlicht hatte . Die deutsche Polizei verfolgt auch einen anderen Kontoinhaber, der einen Minister als „übergewichtig" bezeichnet hat. Dieser überhaupt nicht übergewichtige Minister hat kürzlich eine Zeitung verboten , die mit der laut Meinungsumfragen zweitgrößten Partei Deutschlands, der Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), verbündet ist. Eine Partei, die 113 deutsche Parlamentarier nun offiziell verbieten wollen .

Nach dem US-Wahlergebnis stellen sich viele unbeantwortete Fragen. Wird das Weiße Haus seine Aufmerksamkeit auf die restriktivere Haltung der EU richten, die als Untergrabung der freien Meinungsäußerung angesehen werden kann? Oder droht Musks X und Chinas TikTok stattdessen ein EU-Verbot? Können EU-Länder noch mit militärischer Unterstützung aus den USA rechnen? Und wenn große amerikanische Plattformen verboten werden, wohin sollten sich die EU-Bürger stattdessen wenden? Abgesehen von russischen Alternativen gibt es keine großen europäischen Plattformen. Und wenn die Frage der Meinungsfreiheit neu überdacht wird, was bedeutet das für die Zukunft von Parteien wie der deutschen AfD?

@ 6f3670d9:03f04036

This is my first long-form post. The starting line.

There's nothing of value here. Just using this as a marker.

I hope to post a lot more. Documenting how I made something work would be very useful to me, and hopefully others, but I've been too lazy to do that. Wish me luck!

Stay humble,
dumb-package

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Germany, the EU's largest economy, is once again forced to bear the label "Europe's sick man". The economic news makes for dismal reading. Industrial production has been trending downward for a long time. Energy-intensive production has decreased by as much as 20% in just a few years. Volkswagen is closing factories. Thyssenkrupp is laying off employees and more than three million pensioners are at risk of poverty according to a study.

Germany is facing a number of major challenges, including high energy costs and increased competition from China. In 2000, Germany accounted for 8% of global industrial production, but by 2030, its share is expected to have fallen to 3%. In comparison, China accounted for 2% of global industrial production in 2000, but is expected to account for nearly half (45%) of industrial production in a few years. This is according to a report from the UN's Industrial Development Organization.

Germany's electricity prices are five times higher than China's, a situation that poses a significant obstacle to maintaining a competitive position. The three main reasons are the phase-out of nuclear power, the sabotage of Nord Stream, and the ongoing energy transition, also known as Energiewende. Upon closer inspection, it is clear that industrial production has been trending downward since the transition to a greener economy began to be prioritized.

Germany's former defense minister, EU Commission President von der Leyen, called the European Green Deal Europe's "man on the moon" moment in 2019. This year, she has launched increased focus on these green goals.

However, the EU as a whole has fallen behind the US year after year. European companies have significantly higher energy costs than their American competitors, with electricity prices 2-3 times higher and natural gas prices 4-5 times higher.

The Environmental Kuznets Curve is a model that examines the relationship between economic growth and environmental impact. The idea is that increased material prosperity initially leads to more environmental degradation, but after a certain threshold is passed, there is a gradual decrease. Decreased material prosperity can thus, according to the relationship, lead to increased environmental degradation, for example due to changed consumption habits (fewer organic products in the shopping basket).

This year's election has resulted in a historic change, where all incumbent government parties in the Western world have seen their popularity decline. The pattern appears to be repeating itself in Germany next year, where Chancellor Olaf Scholz is struggling with low confidence figures ahead of the election in February, which doesn't seem surprising. Adjusted for inflation, German wages are several percent lower than a few years ago, especially in the manufacturing industry.

Germany is still a very rich country, but the current trend towards deindustrialization and falling wages can have consequences for environmental priorities in the long run. Economic difficulties can lead to environmental issues being downgraded. Perhaps the declining support for incumbent government parties is a first sign? Somewhere along the road to poverty, people will rise up in revolt.

@ e373ca41:b82abcc5

This article by Milosz Matuschek first appeared in German on Freischwebende Intelligenz

---

Last night, while you were fast asleep, someone turned 883 dollars into 310,000 dollars in just a few hours. Not me, unfortunately. Trump launched his own memecoin with the abbreviation $TRUMP, which has since skyrocketed to a double-digit billion dollar valuation.

Trump (and his pre-investors) are now billions richer on paper. It takes just a few minutes and no (more) development work to create such a coin within minutes. All it takes is a believing community to make it explode. If you were looking for proof of my thesis that the world is being memefied, here it is.

Us and them

We are currently experiencing a phase of power shifts: in money, in politics, in the media. Many people like what Trump and Musk are doing. They are creating more freedom of expression and removing Wokistan's basis for business. Amazon is scrapping diversity rules, Facebook is scrapping censorship (officially admitted). Tiktok land is burned down, the Chinese social media app disappears from the US. Isn't that censorship? Google and Facebook are now openly rebelling against EU opinion dictates, fact checkers etc. In addition to the Hindu Kush, our freedom of opinion is now also being defended (again, for how long?) from Silicon Valley. Brave new world.

You can think strategically: wonderful, that's what I wanted too; “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. But for how long? This is a change of power at the political top, nothing more.

Trump has promoted vaccination just like Biden; also with the lie that it prevents infection. Vote for your favorite PR artist!

Is that supposed to be our choice?

Elon Musk built mRNA vaccination lines for Curevac, is the Young Global Leader of the WEF 2008, has major holdings in Tesla from Blackrock-Vanguard & Co. and contracts with the Pentagon.

“One of us”, yes for sure....

I find that hard to believe and I wonder about those who find it easy to believe. Speaking of faith: a reader I hold in high esteem said she believes Musk and Trump are on a divine mission. Trump partying with Epstein? Musk in a Baphomet costume? The ways of the Lord are truly mysterious then...

The common enemy of the enemy can be useful, up to a point, but nothing more. Just because you fight the same thing, i.e. are against something, doesn't mean you are for the same thing. In my opinion, assuming that the interests of Trump, Musk & Co. are congruent with the interests of citizens would be a fatal misconception. There is nothing to suggest this. Trump has been totally for and then against many issues. Personnel decisions: often a casting round for a limited time, with hire & fire like “The Apprentice”. But he is so peaceable, wants to end wars like the one between Russia and Ukraine, or de facto the USA. At the same time, he is now reaching for Greenland and the Panama Canal. His words ooze the exceptionalism of the USA, the doctrine that as a US empire you can basically do anything you want. For strategic interests. For national security. A formula can always be found.

---

ADVERTISEMENT:

Looking for the easiest way to buy Bitcoin and store it yourself? The Relai app is the No. 1 crypto start-up and No. 2 of all fintech start-ups in Switzerland. Here you can buy Bitcoin in just a few steps and also set up savings plans. Nobody has access to your Bitcoin except you. With the referral code MILOSZ you save on fees (no financial advice). Disclaimer due to regulatory issues: The services of the Relai App are hereby only recommended to inhabitants of Switzerland or Italy.

Need more security? The Trezor wallets are recommended and easy to use, others are available in the store. Need more advice? Book an introductory meeting with a wallet expert.

---

How are wo going to score on the liberty scale?

“Believe little, question everything, think for yourself” is the beautiful title of a very readable book by Albrecht Müller, editor of Nachdenkseiten, and best summarizes my thoughts. As a journalist, I replace “little” with “nothing”. The journalist is not in the banking business. There you are allowed to believe (credit = he believes, latin). I don't think the issue of draining a swamp should be left to the frogs. Is Trump not a frog? “Anti-establishment", come on. Now the establishment is coming from the other side, the other side of the dialectic. The battle of good versus evil is entering a supposedly new round, releasing pressure from the cauldron of democracy, which is too important a façade to be allowed to fall.

The only pragmatic question that citizens should ask themselves is this: Will I have more net freedoms at the end of this political reorganization process than before? What will be given to me in reel but perhaps also taken away elsewhere? Anyone who draws hope from changes in the left-right scheme has always been disappointed by the steady reduction of freedoms in recent years and should rather look at the vertical axis of top vs. bottom. Hope is nice, but you should only ever rely on yourself.

It's nice if some people now get to know something different as a result of the change in the political weather and wake up. A book will soon be published about manipulation in the Tagesschau. The PEI has known about the side effects for years, but withheld the information and the republic was allowed to rail against footballer Joshua Kimmich in the meantime. One life lie after another will now fall, an exciting process. But it will mainly be cardboard comrades and useful idiots who will have to fall by the wayside, and there was hardly any shortage of them.

Waking up must not lead to the next dream world. Otherwise the critical movement was just a stirrup for the next seizure of power. But we need a movement of self-empowerment of the citizen, beyond politics, the media or Big Tech. Invest in everything, be it seminars, books, knowledge, Bitcoin or whatever increases your net freedom balance. Decentralized civil society only has a chance if free citizens form their own free block in cooperation with others, based on principles and not on the bunting of a party-political camp.

Everyone can decide for themselves and have a say in what form this can take. Where cooperation arises naturally, the idea was a good one. Ultimately, an idea is just a meme.

That was my meme five years ago. It's still true, but with Bitcoin a zero has been added.

---

Join the marketplace of ideas! We are building a publishing ecosystem on Nostr for citizen-journalism, starting with a client for blogging and newsletter distribution. Sound money and sound information should finally be in the hands of the people, right? Want to learn more about the Pareto Project? Zap me, if you want to contribute (all Zaps go to the project).

Are you a publication and want to be part of it, test us, migrate your content to Nostr? Write to team@pareto.space**

Not yet on Nostr and want the full experience? Easy onboarding via Nosta.me.

@ 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.

@ f9cf4e94:96abc355

Para esse exemplo iremos usar: | Nome | Imagem | Descrição | | --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | Raspberry PI B+ | | Cortex-A53 (ARMv8) 64-bit a 1.4GHz e 1 GB de SDRAM LPDDR2, | | Pen drive | | 16Gb |

Recomendo que use o Ubuntu Server para essa instalação. Você pode baixar o Ubuntu para Raspberry Pi aqui. O passo a passo para a instalação do Ubuntu no Raspberry Pi está disponível aqui. Não instale um desktop (como xubuntu, lubuntu, xfce, etc.).

---

Passo 1: Atualizar o Sistema 🖥️

Primeiro, atualize seu sistema e instale o Tor:

bash apt update apt install tor

---

Passo 2: Criar o Arquivo de Serviço nrs.service 🔧

Crie o arquivo de serviço que vai gerenciar o servidor Nostr. Você pode fazer isso com o seguinte conteúdo:

```unit [Unit] Description=Nostr Relay Server Service After=network.target

[Service] Type=simple WorkingDirectory=/opt/nrs ExecStart=/opt/nrs/nrs-arm64 Restart=on-failure

[Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target ```

---

Passo 3: Baixar o Binário do Nostr 🚀

Baixe o binário mais recente do Nostr aqui no GitHub.

---

Passo 4: Criar as Pastas Necessárias 📂

Agora, crie as pastas para o aplicativo e o pendrive:

bash mkdir -p /opt/nrs /mnt/edriver

---

Passo 5: Listar os Dispositivos Conectados 🔌

Para saber qual dispositivo você vai usar, liste todos os dispositivos conectados:

bash lsblk

---

Passo 6: Formatando o Pendrive 💾

Escolha o pendrive correto (por exemplo, /dev/sda) e formate-o:

bash mkfs.vfat /dev/sda

---

Passo 7: Montar o Pendrive 💻

Monte o pendrive na pasta /mnt/edriver:

bash mount /dev/sda /mnt/edriver

---

Passo 8: Verificar UUID dos Dispositivos 📋

Para garantir que o sistema monte o pendrive automaticamente, liste os UUID dos dispositivos conectados:

bash blkid

---

Passo 9: Alterar o fstab para Montar o Pendrive Automáticamente 📝

Abra o arquivo /etc/fstab e adicione uma linha para o pendrive, com o UUID que você obteve no passo anterior. A linha deve ficar assim:

fstab UUID=9c9008f8-f852 /mnt/edriver vfat defaults 0 0

---

Passo 10: Copiar o Binário para a Pasta Correta 📥

Agora, copie o binário baixado para a pasta /opt/nrs:

bash cp nrs-arm64 /opt/nrs

---

Passo 11: Criar o Arquivo de Configuração 🛠️

Crie o arquivo de configuração com o seguinte conteúdo e salve-o em /opt/nrs/config.yaml:

yaml app_env: production info: name: Nostr Relay Server description: Nostr Relay Server pub_key: "" contact: "" url: http://localhost:3334 icon: https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u= https://public.bnbstatic.com/image/cms/crawler/COINCU_NEWS/image-495-1024x569.png base_path: /mnt/edriver negentropy: true

---

Passo 12: Copiar o Serviço para o Diretório de Systemd ⚙️

Agora, copie o arquivo nrs.service para o diretório /etc/systemd/system/:

bash cp nrs.service /etc/systemd/system/

Recarregue os serviços e inicie o serviço nrs:

bash systemctl daemon-reload systemctl enable --now nrs.service

---

Passo 13: Configurar o Tor 🌐

Abra o arquivo de configuração do Tor /var/lib/tor/torrc e adicione a seguinte linha:

torrc HiddenServiceDir /var/lib/tor/nostr_server/ HiddenServicePort 80 127.0.0.1:3334

---

Passo 14: Habilitar e Iniciar o Tor 🧅

Agora, ative e inicie o serviço Tor:

bash systemctl enable --now tor.service

O Tor irá gerar um endereço .onion para o seu servidor Nostr. Você pode encontrá-lo no arquivo /var/lib/tor/nostr_server/hostname.

---

Observações ⚠️

• Com essa configuração, os dados serão salvos no pendrive, enquanto o binário ficará no cartão SD do Raspberry Pi.
• O endereço .onion do seu servidor Nostr será algo como: ws://y3t5t5wgwjif<exemplo>h42zy7ih6iwbyd.onion.

---

Agora, seu servidor Nostr deve estar configurado e funcionando com Tor! 🥳

Se este artigo e as informações aqui contidas forem úteis para você, convidamos a considerar uma doação ao autor como forma de reconhecimento e incentivo à produção de novos conteúdos.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

I am so tired of people trying to waste my time with Nostrized imitations of stuff that already exists.

Instagram, but make it Nostr. Twitter, but make it Nostr. GitHub, but make it Nostr. Facebook, but make it Nostr. Wordpress, but make it Nostr. GoodReads, but make it Nostr. TikTok, but make it Nostr.

That stuff already exists, and it wasn't that great the first time around, either. Build something better than that stuff, that can only be brought into existence because of Nostr.

Build something that does something completely and awesomely new. Knock my socks off, bro.

Cuz, ain't nobody got time for that.

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

Black Locust can grow up to 170 ft tall

Grows 3-4 ft. per year

Native to North America

Cold hardy in zones 3 to 8

Firewood

• BLT wood, on a pound for pound basis is roughly half that of Anthracite Coal
• Since its growth is fast, firewood can be plentiful

Timber

• Rot resistant due to a naturally produced robinin in the wood
  • 100 year life span in full soil contact! (better than cedar performance)
  • Fence posts
  • Outdoor furniture
  • Outdoor decking
• Sustainable due to its fast growth and spread
  • Can be coppiced (cut to the ground)
  • Can be pollarded (cut above ground)
• Its dense wood makes durable tool handles, boxes (tool), and furniture
  • The wood is tougher than hickory, which is tougher than hard maple, which is tougher than oak.
  • A very low rate of expansion and contraction
  • Hardwood flooring
  • The highest tensile beam strength of any American tree
• The wood is beautiful

Legume

• Nitrogen fixer
  • Fixes the same amount of nitrogen per acre as is needed for 200-bushel/acre corn
  • Black walnuts inter-planted with locust as “nurse” trees were shown to rapidly increase their growth [[Clark, Paul M., and Robert D. Williams. (1978) Black walnut growth increased when interplanted with nitrogen-fixing shrubs and trees. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science, vol. 88, pp. 88-91.]]

Bees

• The edible flower clusters are also a top food source for honey bees

Shade Provider

• Its light, airy overstory provides dappled shade
  • Planted on the west side of a garden it provides relief during the hottest part of the day
  • (nitrogen provider)
  • Planted on the west side of a house, its quick growth soon shades that side from the sun

Wind-break

• Fast growth plus it's feathery foliage reduces wind for animals, crops, and shelters

Fodder

• Over 20% crude protein
• 4.1 kcal/g of energy
• Baertsche, S.R, M.T. Yokoyama, and J.W. Hanover (1986) Short rotation, hardwood tree biomass as potential ruminant feed-chemical composition, nylon bag ruminal degradation and ensilement of selected species. J. Animal Sci. 63 2028-2043

@ 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.

@ 9f94e6cc:f3472946

Der Entartungswettbewerb TikTok hat die Jugend im Griff und verbrutzelt ihre Hirne. Über Reels, den Siegeszug des Hochformats und die Regeln der Viralität.

Text: Aron Morhoff

Hollywood steckt heute in der Hosentasche. 70 Prozent aller YouTube-Inhalte werden auf mobilen Endgeräten, also Smartphones, geschaut. Instagram und TikTok sind die angesagtesten Anwendungen für junge Menschen. Es gibt sie nur noch als App, und ihr Design ist für Mobiltelefone optimiert.

Einst waren Rechner und Laptops die Tools, mit denen ins Internet gegangen wurde. Auch als das Smartphone seinen Siegeszug antrat, waren die Sehgewohnheiten noch auf das Querformat ausgerichtet. Heute werden Rechner fast nur noch zum Arbeiten verwendet. Das Berieseln, die Unterhaltung, das passive Konsumieren hat sich vollständig auf die iPhones und Samsungs dieser Welt verlagert. Das Telefon hat den aufrechten Gang angenommen, kaum einer mehr hält sein Gerät waagerecht.

Homo Digitalis Erectus

Die Welt steht also Kopf. Die Form eines Mediums hat Einfluss auf den Inhalt. Marshall McLuhan formulierte das so: Das Medium selbst ist die Botschaft. Ja mei, mag sich mancher denken, doch medienanthropologisch ist diese Entwicklung durchaus eine Betrachtung wert. Ein Querformat eignet sich besser, um Landschaften, einen Raum oder eine Gruppe abzubilden. Das Hochformat entspricht grob den menschlichen Maßen von der Hüfte bis zum Kopf. Der TikTok-Tanz ist im Smartphone-Design also schon angelegt. Das Hochformat hat die Medieninhalte unserer Zeit noch narzisstischer gemacht.

Dass wir uns durch Smartphones freizügiger und enthemmter zur Schau stellen, ist bekannt. 2013 wurde „Selfie“ vom Oxford English Dictionary zum Wort des Jahres erklärt. Selfie, Selbstporträt, Selbstdarstellung.

Neu ist der Aufwand, der heute vonnöten ist, um die Aufmerksamkeitsschwelle der todamüsierten Mediengesellschaft überhaupt noch zu durchbrechen. In beängstigender Hypnose erwischt man viele Zeitgenossen inzwischen beim Doomscrollen. Das ist der Fachbegriff für das weggetretene Endloswischen und erklärt auch den Namen „Reel“: Der Begriff, im Deutschen verwandt mit „Rolle“, beschreibt die Filmrolle, von der 24 Bilder pro Sekunde auf den Projektor gewischt oder eben abgespult werden.

Länger als drei Sekunden darf ein Kurzvideo deshalb nicht mehr gehen, ohne dass etwas Aufregendes passiert. Sonst wird das Reel aus Langeweile weggewischt. Die Welt im Dopamin-Rausch. Für den Ersteller eines Videos heißt das inzwischen: Sei der lauteste, schrillste, gestörteste Marktschreier. Das Wettrennen um die Augäpfel zwingt zu extremen Formen von Clickbait.

15 Sekunden Ruhm

Das nimmt inzwischen skurrile Formen an. Das Video „Look who I found“ von Noel Robinson (geboren 2001) war im letzten Jahr einer der erfolgreichsten deutschen TikTok-Clips. Man sieht den Deutsch-Nigerianer beim Antanzen eines karikaturartig übergewichtigen Menschen. Noel wird geschubst und fällt. Daraufhin wechselt das Lied – und der fette Mann bewegt seinen Schwabbelbauch im Takt. Noel steht wieder auf, grinst, beide tanzen gemeinsam. Das dauert 15 Sekunden. Ich rate Ihnen, sich das Video einmal anzuschauen, um die Mechanismen von TikTok zu verstehen. Achten Sie alleine darauf, wie vielen Reizen (Menschenmenge, Antanzen, Sturz, Schwabbelbauch) Sie in den ersten fünf Sekunden ausgesetzt sind. Wer schaut so was? Bis dato 220 Millionen Menschen. Das ist kapitalistische Verwertungslogik im bereits verwesten Endstadium. Adorno oder Fromm hätten am Medienzeitgeist entweder ihre Freude oder mächtig zu knabbern.

Die Internet- und Smartphoneabdeckung beträgt mittlerweile fast 100 Prozent. Das Überangebot hat die Regeln geändert. Um überhaupt gesehen zu werden, muss man heute viral gehen. Was dafür inzwischen nötig ist, spricht die niedrigsten Bedürfnisse des Menschen an: Gewalt, Ekel, Sexualisierung, Schock. Die jungen Erwachsenen, die heute auf sozialen Netzwerken den Ton angeben, haben diese Mechanismen längst verinnerlicht. Wie bewusst ihnen das ist, ist fraglich. 2024 prallt eine desaströse Bildungssituation samt fehlender Medienkompetenz auf eine egomanische Jugend, die Privatsphäre nie gekannt hat und seit Kindesbeinen alles in den Äther ballert, was es festhalten kann. Man muss kein Kulturpessimist sein, um diese degenerative Dynamik, auch in ihrer Implikation für unser Zusammenleben und das psychische Wohlergehen der Generation TikTok, als beängstigend zu bezeichnen.

Aron Morhoff studierte Medienethik und ist Absolvent der Freien Akademie für Medien & Journalismus. Frühere Stationen: RT Deutsch und Nuoviso. Heute: Stichpunkt Magazin, Manova, Milosz Matuschek und seine Liveshow "Addictive Programming".

@ b8851a06:9b120ba1

It Begins with a Click

It starts with a click: “Do you agree to our terms and conditions?”\ You scroll, you click, you comply. A harmless act, right? But what if every click was a surrender? What if every "yes" was another link in the chain binding you to a life where freedom requires approval?

This is the age of permission. Every aspect of your life is mediated by gatekeepers. Governments demand forms, corporations demand clicks, and algorithms demand obedience. You’re free, of course, as long as you play by the rules. But who writes the rules? Who decides what’s allowed? Who owns your life?

---

Welcome to Digital Serfdom

We once imagined the internet as a digital frontier—a vast, open space where ideas could flow freely and innovation would know no bounds. But instead of creating a decentralized utopia, we built a new feudal system.

• Your data? Owned by the lords of Big Tech.
• Your money? Controlled by banks and bureaucrats who can freeze it on a whim.
• Your thoughts? Filtered by algorithms that reward conformity and punish dissent.

The modern internet is a land of serfs and lords, and guess who’s doing the farming? You. Every time you agree to the terms, accept the permissions, or let an algorithm decide for you, you till the fields of a system designed to control, not liberate.

They don’t call it control, of course. They call it “protection.” They say, “We’re keeping you safe,” as they build a cage so big you can’t see the bars.

---

Freedom in Chains

But let’s be honest: we’re not just victims of this system—we’re participants. We’ve traded freedom for convenience, sovereignty for security. It’s easier to click “I Agree” than to read the fine print. It’s easier to let someone else hold your money than to take responsibility for it yourself. It’s easier to live a life of quiet compliance than to risk the chaos of true independence.

We tell ourselves it’s no big deal. What’s one click? What’s one form? But the permissions pile up. The chains grow heavier. And one day, you wake up and realize you’re free to do exactly what the system allows—and nothing more.

---

The Great Unpermissioning

It doesn’t have to be this way. You don’t need their approval. You don’t need their systems. You don’t need their permission.

The Great Unpermissioning is not a movement—it’s a mindset. It’s the refusal to accept a life mediated by gatekeepers. It’s the quiet rebellion of saying, “No.” It’s the realization that the freedom you seek won’t be granted—it must be reclaimed.

• Stop asking. Permission is their tool. Refusal is your weapon.
• Start building. Embrace tools that decentralize power: Bitcoin, encryption, open-source software, decentralized communication. Build systems they can’t control.
• Stand firm. They’ll tell you it’s dangerous. They’ll call you a radical. But remember: the most dangerous thing you can do is comply.

The path won’t be easy. Freedom never is. But it will be worth it.

---

The New Frontier

The age of permission has turned us into digital serfs, but there’s a new frontier on the horizon. It’s a world where you control your money, your data, your decisions. It’s a world of encryption, anonymity, and sovereignty. It’s a world built not on permission but on principles.

This world won’t be given to you. You have to build it. You have to fight for it. And it starts with one simple act: refusing to comply.

---

A Final Word

They promised us safety, but what they delivered was submission. The age of permission has enslaved us to the mundane, the monitored, and the mediocre. The Great Unpermissioning isn’t about tearing down the old world—it’s about walking away from it.

You don’t need to wait for their approval. You don’t need to ask for their permission. The freedom you’re looking for is already yours. Permission is their power—refusal is yours.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ ee11a5df:b76c4e49

Nostr 2?

Breaking Changes in Nostr

Nostr was a huge leap forward. But it isn't perfect.

When developers notice a problem with nostr, they confer with each other to work out a solution to the problem. This is usually in the form of a NIP PR on the nips repo.

Some problems are easy. Just add something new and optional. No biggie. Zaps, git stuff, bunkers... just dream it up and add it.

Other problems can only be fixed by breaking changes. With a breaking change, the overall path forward is like this: Add the new way of doing it while preserving the old way. Push the major software to switch to the new way. Then deprecate the old way. This is a simplification, but it is the basic idea. It is how we solved markers/quotes/root and how we are upgrading encryption, among other things.

This process of pushing through a breaking change becomes more difficult as we have more and more existing nostr software out there that will break. Most of the time what happens is that the major software is driven to make the change (usually by nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6), and the smaller software is left to fend for itself. A while back I introduced the BREAKING.md file to help people developing smaller lesser-known software keep up with these changes.

Big Ideas

But some ideas just can't be applied to nostr. The idea is too big. The change is too breaking. It changes something fundamental. And nobody has come up with a smooth path to move from the old way to the new way.

And so we debate a bunch of things, and never settle on anything, and eventually nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 makes a post saying that we don't really want it anyways 😉.

As we encounter good ideas that are hard to apply to nostr, I've been filing them away in a repository I call "nostr-next", so we don't forget about them, in case we ever wanted to start over.

It seems to me that starting over every time we encountered such a thing would be unwise. However, once we collect enough changes that we couldn't reasonably phase into nostr, then a tipping point is crossed where it becomes worthwhile to start over. In terms of the "bang for the buck" metaphor, the bang becomes bigger and bigger but the buck (the pain and cost of starting over) doesn't grow as rapidly.

WHAT? Start over?

IMHO starting over could be very bad if done in a cavalier way. The community could fracture. The new protocol could fail to take off due to lacking the network effect. The odds that a new protocol catches on are low, irrespective of how technically superior it could be.

So the big question is: can we preserve the nostr community and it's network effect while making a major step-change to the protocol and software?

I don't know the answer to that one, but I have an idea about it.

I think the new-protocol clients can be dual-stack, creating events in both systems and linking those events together via tags. The nostr key identity would still be used, and the new system identity too. This is better than things like the mostr bridge because each user would remain in custody of their own keys.

The nitty gritty

Here are some of the things I think would make nostr better, but which nostr can't easily fix. A lot of these ideas have been mentioned before by multiple people and I didn't give credit to all of you (sorry) because my brain can't track it all. But I've been collecting these over time at https://github.com/mikedilger/nostr-next

• Events as CBOR or BEVE or MsgPack or a fixed-schema binary layout... anything but JSON text with its parsing, it's encoding ambiguity, it's requirement to copy fields before hashing them, its unlimited size constraints. (me, nostr:npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s)
• EdDSA ed25519 keys instead of secp256k1, to enable interoperability with a bunch of other stuff like ssh, pgp, TLS, Mainline DHT, and many more, plus just being better cryptography (me, Nuh, Orlovsky, except Orlovsky wanted Ristretto25519 for speed)
• Bootstrapping relay lists (and relay endpoints) from Mainline DHT (nostr:npub1jvxvaufrwtwj79s90n79fuxmm9pntk94rd8zwderdvqv4dcclnvs9s7yqz)
• Master keys and revocable subkeys / device keys (including having your nostr key as a subkey)
• Encryption to use different encryption-specific subkeys and ephemeral ones from the sender.
• Relay keypairs, TLS without certificates, relays known by keypair instead of URL
• Layered protocol (separate core from applications)
• Software remembering when they first saw an event, for 2 reasons, the main one being revocation (don't trust the date in the event, trust when you first saw it), the second being more precise time range queries.
• Upgrade/feature negotiation (HTTP headers prior to starting websockets)
• IDs starting with a timestamp so they are temporally adjacent (significantly better database performance) (Vitor's idea)
• Filters that allow boolean expressions on tag values, and also ID exclusions. Removing IDs from filters and moving to a GET command.
• Changing the transport (I'm against this but I know others want to)

What would it look like?

Someone (Steve Farroll) has taken my nostr-next repo and turned it into a proposed protocol he calls Mosaic. I think it is quite representative of that repo, as it already includes most of those suggestions, so I've been contributing to it. Mosaic spec is rendered here.

Of course, where Mosaic stands right now it is mostly my ideas (and Steve's), it doesn't have feedback or input from other nostr developers yet. That is what this blog post is about. I think it is time for other nostr devs to be made aware of this thing.

It is currently in the massive breaking changes phase. It might not look that way because of the detail and refinement of the documentation, but indeed everything is changing rapidly. It probably has some bad ideas and is probably missing some great ideas that you have.

Which is why this is a good time for other devs to start taking a look at it.

It is also the time to debate meta issues like "are you crazy Mike?" or "no we have to just break nostr but keep it nostr, we can't dual-stack" or whatever.

Personally I think mosaic-spec should develop and grow for quite a while before the "tipping point" happens. That is, I'm not sure we should jump in feet first yet, but rather we build up and refine this new protocol and spend a lot of time thinking about how to migrate smoothly, and break it a lot while nobody is using it.

So you can just reply to this, or DM me, or open issues or PRs at Mosaic, or just whisper to each other while giving me the evil eye.

@ 16d11430:61640947

Chapter One: The Venture

Allison Hart adjusted her grip on the stainless steel coffee thermos as she stared out the rain-streaked glass of the small San Francisco office building. The storm outside mirrored her anxiety: fierce, unpredictable, and utterly unrelenting. Today marked the launch of ValkyrieOS, the Linux-based cloud infrastructure her husband, Ethan, and his scrappy team of engineers had poured their souls into for the past three years. It wasn’t just a startup; it was Ethan’s lifeline, their shared dream—and, increasingly, the wedge driving them apart.

She tugged her cardigan tighter, the hum of the servers in the next room a constant reminder of how much Ethan had sacrificed to build his company. Late nights, missed anniversaries, and countless reassurances that their struggles would someday be worth it. When? Allison thought. She loved him fiercely, but the endless grind of a tech startup had turned her marriage into something tenuous—a connection stretched thin, yet unbroken.

In the corner of the open-plan office, Ethan stood with his team, their faces glowing in the blue-white light of monitors as the final test scripts ran. Ethan’s broad shoulders were hunched, his face set in the determined scowl she’d fallen for in college. It was the same look he’d worn when he told her he wanted to change the world—only now, it came with the weight of failure looming at every turn.

“Ali,” Ethan called, his voice cutting through the buzz of machines. “Can you come here for a sec?”

She approached, the team parting like a flock of birds as she stepped beside him. On the screen, a red progress bar inched forward—barely. The tension in the room was palpable.

“It’s the load balancer,” Ethan muttered, running a hand through his dark hair. “If it fails during the demo, we’re done. Everything’s riding on this.”

“Ethan, you can’t keep doing this to yourself,” she whispered, her voice barely audible over the whir of fans. “To us.”

---

Chapter Two: The Rival

The launch of ValkyrieOS was supposed to be their salvation, but instead, it thrust them into the brutal warzone of the tech industry. No one knew this better than Allison, who found herself navigating late-night strategy calls and early-morning investor meetings alongside Ethan.

Enter Mark Carrington, the charismatic CEO of a competing company, NimbusTech. Mark was everything Ethan wasn’t—smooth, polished, and merciless. He approached Allison during a networking event, his silver-tongued charm cutting through the noise of the crowded room.

“You know,” Mark said, his smile disarming, “your husband has built something extraordinary. But the market? It doesn’t care about extraordinary—it cares about winning.”

Allison bristled at his condescension. “Ethan’s not just building software. He’s building something that matters.”

Mark leaned in, his voice dropping. “And what about you, Allison? Do you matter in all of this?”

Her breath hitched. Mark’s words struck a nerve, not because they were true, but because they echoed her own darkest fears.

---

Chapter Three: The Sacrifice

Ethan worked tirelessly, pushing his team and himself to the brink. Allison could see the toll it was taking—the dark circles under his eyes, the strained way he smiled when he thought no one was watching. But beneath the exhaustion was a fire, a belief in what he was doing that refused to be extinguished.

The turning point came late one night when the servers crashed. Ethan’s team scrambled, but it was Allison who stepped in, her years as a UX designer proving invaluable. She worked beside them, rewriting error messages and optimizing the interface for clarity. It was the first time in months that she and Ethan felt like a team again.

“You didn’t have to do that,” Ethan said afterward, his voice raw with gratitude.

“I’m your partner, Ethan. Not just in life, but in this. Don’t shut me out.”

---

Chapter Four: The Storm

Just as the demo approached, disaster struck. A massive DDoS attack crippled ValkyrieOS. Ethan was ready to give up, but Allison wouldn’t let him.

“You told me once that clouds are about resilience,” she said. “Your system is designed to adapt. So adapt.”

Together, they rallied the team, implementing a last-minute patch that saved the demo. When the system finally stabilized, the room erupted in cheers. For the first time in months, Ethan turned to Allison with a look of pure joy.

---

Chapter Five: The Ascent

The launch was a success, and ValkyrieOS quickly became the darling of the open-source community. But for Allison and Ethan, the real victory was rediscovering each other in the chaos. They learned to share the burdens, to celebrate the small wins, and to fight for their marriage with the same tenacity they brought to their work.

“You’re my uptime,” Ethan said one night, his voice soft as they lay tangled together on the couch.

“And you’re my load balancer,” Allison replied, her laughter breaking the quiet. “Always catching me before I crash.”

---

Epilogue: Cloudborne

Years later, as they stood on the balcony of their now-expanded office, watching a new storm roll in, Allison couldn’t help but smile. The journey had been brutal, but they’d weathered it together, proving that even in the most unforgiving environments, love—like a resilient system—could thrive.

And somewhere in the hum of servers below, the heartbeat of their shared dream continued, steady and strong.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The Dutch primatologist Frans de Waal coined the term "veneer theory" in his book "Our Inner Ape" in 2005. The veneer theory posits that human moral behavior is merely a thin veneer over an inherently unpleasant nature. This viewpoint can be traced back to Thomas Henry Huxley, an anthropologist and biologist who was a contemporary of Darwin. However, de Waal criticized the idea because humanity is far more cooperative than predicted by simple anthropological or economic models. However, it is possible to question how thick this "civilizing veneer" really is.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, some people discriminated against the unvaccinated , while others wished them a quick and painful death . In the United States, about 30 percent of those who voted for the Democratic Party wanted to take their children away . Professors wanted to imprison them . This was despite the fact that the vaccines did not prevent infection or reduce transmission very much (if at all).

There is an idea that evil actions often stem from ordinary people blindly following orders or societal norms.

The war between Israel and Hamas revealed a desire to collectively punish all residents of the Gaza Strip. For example, as many as 70 percent of Jewish Israelis say they want to ban social media posts expressing sympathy for civilians (""There are no civilians ."") On the other side of the conflict, there is a desire to punish Israeli citizens and Jews around the world for Israel's actions in the conflict, as shown by the storming of an airport in Russian Dagestan.

As a result of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the alienation of ethnic Russians has become fashionable. Even Swedish defense policy pundits now found it appropriate to dehumanize Russians by calling them "orcs" (evil and warlike creatures with sharp teeth taken from J.R.R. Tolkien's stories). Others wanted to deny all Russian citizens entry . Recently, the software project Linux has removed Russian programmers simply because they are Russian. Similar rhetoric can be found on the other side.

All three of the above examples constitute a form of collective punishment, which is contrary to both the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Convention . Yet few react.

The author Hannah Arendt coined the term "the banality of evil" when she studied Nazi war criminals. The term refers to the idea that evil actions often stem from ordinary people blindly following orders or societal norms without critical scrutiny. She argued that individual responsibility and critical thinking were of paramount importance.

In an iconic photo from the 1930s, a large crowd is shown with everyone doing the Hitler salute. Everyone except one. The man, believed to be August Landmesser , openly showed his refusal with crossed arms and a stern expression.

Imagine yourself in his shoes, standing among thousands of people who are raising their arms. Would you have the courage to stand still and quietly while everyone around you shouts their support? Or would you, like so many others, let yourself be swept along with the current and follow the crowd? Somewhere in there, you might have the answer to how thick this "civilizing veneer" really is.

---

Cover image: Picture of people giving a Nazi salute, with an unidentified person (possibly August Landmesser or Gustav Wegert) refusing to do so, Wikimedia Commons

@ fbf0e434:e1be6a39

Hackathon 摘要

Hack Western 11 圆满结束，学生开发者提交了62个注册项目。此次活动在协作环境中培养了创新和创造力。项目评估考察创新性、技术复杂性、完整性和设计，以确保全面评估。

参与者可以组队（最多四人）或单独参加，灵活参与。Hackathon鼓励跨多个赛道的项目提交，增加了项目面临各种挑战的曝光度和机会。

科学博览会式的环境允许参与者向评委展示他们的项目，进行详细的演示和讨论。这种形式帮助团队表述他们的目标、突出成就并获得反馈。面对面的评审提供了一个互动平台以表彰创意解决方案。

总体而言，Hack Western 11营造了一个富有成效的氛围，学生主导的项目种类多样。活动优先考虑项目的完整性和用户友好的设计，旨在实现技术上可靠且实际可应用的解决方案。

Hackathon 获奖者

Overall Prize Winners

First Overall

• BravoDispatch - 使用AI处理呼叫者转录，以增强紧急调度操作并减少手动数据输入。它结合了React、Cloudflare和Llama 3 LLM，以提供稳健的解决方案。

Second Overall

• Blocks - 提供基于块的界面和实时协作，简化Cairo智能合约开发，使用React Flow Editor和Flask进行部署。

Third Overall

• Mark3d - 将产品视频转换为二手市场的3D模型，借助React Native、NVIDIA NGP Instant NeRF和Flask促进信任和销量。

Best Hardware Hack Prize Winners

• SolarScope - 利用AR覆盖3D建筑模型以评估能效，使用Arduino传感器和Python算法提供太阳能见解。

Canada Life Prize Winners

Best Hack to Help "Move" Employees Back into the Hybrid Office

• PickPark - 通过智能系统实时空间管理优化工作场所停车，促进包容性和环保通勤。

Sunlife Prize Winners

Best Financial Health Hack

• Chill Bill - 将财务追踪与AI建议和游戏化功能精神健康支持集成，使用React和Plaid API构建。

Best Video Game Hack Prize Winners

• EEGscape - 提供使用EEG接口的包容性游戏体验，通过头部动作控制和将React前端与MuseJS结合用于EEG数据解释。

Warp Prize Winners

Best Developer Tool by Warp

• Blocks
• tin. - 提供跨Linux发行版的性能分析使用CLI和GUI界面，采用Docker和React实现用户友好型基准测试。

Voiceflow Prize Winners

Best Use of Our APIs

• Talk to Duckie - 使用AI驱动模拟为编码面试做准备，通过Voiceflow和Cloudflare的语音识别提高复杂算法的理解。
• Not The New York Times - 使用AI和FastAPI将真实新闻转换为讽刺性内容，促进使用Next.js和VoiceFlow的批判性参与。

Auth0 Prize Winners

Best Use of Auth0

• roammates - 通过AI生成行程规划促进小组旅行，使用React和Firebase提供个性化体验和基于投票的决策。

Streamlit Prize Winners

Best Use of Streamlit

• TALK TO A: Forensics Artist - 使用特征描述识别个体，采用VGG16实现面部分类和基于熵的查询系统。

Cloudflare Prize Winners

Best AI Application Built with Cloudflare

• BravoDispatch

Starknet Prize Winners

Best Use of Starknet

1. PacRoyale - 一个基于区块链的游戏平台，用于实时Pac-Man游戏，利用Cairo智能合约和StarknetJS进行交易。
2. Blocks
3. IPAnywhere - 通过区块链促进专利租赁，使用智能合约确保安全交易，ReactJS提供无缝的前端体验。
4. Crowdfund: Powered by Starknet - 使用安全钱包连接和智能合约进行去中心化众筹，确保募资透明。

Tempo Labs Prize Winners

Best Use of Tempo Labs

• Chill Bill
• Upright - 利用加速度计数据检测跌倒事件，使用NextJS和TempoLabs提供实时警报以快速紧急响应。
• ID-Trackr - 提供无家可归者的身份识别，应用特征脸进行识别任务。
• BeFit - 提供实时反馈，使用AI和计算机视觉借助Mediapipe进行动作评估。
• GoFundUs - 一个StarkNet上的团体融资平台，使用Tempo Labs界面确保安全和民主的财务目标实现。

探索完整项目列表在DoraHacks。

关于组织者

Hack Western 11

Hack Western 11延续了成为加拿大最大学生主导Hackathon之一的十年传统，由西安大略大学主办。因为促进协作和技术创造力而闻名，该活动吸引了数百名学生在一个充满活力的周末开发Web和移动项目。Hack Western始终推动技术进步，促进技能提升和社区建设。今年，Hack Western 11受在露营过夜本质的启发，旨在创造一个难忘的体验，促进技术创新中的协作。

@ 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

@ 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.

@ 16d11430:61640947

It was a bright day in Australia when programmers, those caffeine-fueled keyboard warriors, decided to unionize. Inspired by the ironclad protections of the construction unions, the Union of Programmers, Debuggers, and Coffee Consumers (UPDCC) was formed. Its mission? To secure long-overdue rights for tech workers. Its slogan? “Break bugs, not spirits!”

The Grand Demands

1. Mandatory Siesta After Code Reviews: "If bricklayers get smoke breaks, why can’t programmers have nap breaks? Debugging memory leaks requires rest too!"

2. Protected Work Hours: "No more Slack messages after 5 PM unless they're memes. Work-life balance isn't just for coal miners!"

3. Universal Keyboard Insurance: "Carpenters get tools provided. Why can’t we have ergonomic keyboards and infinite wrist supports?"

4. Wage Transparency: "If they can yell their pay rates on a job site, we can flaunt our GitHub stats with pride."

The Struggles of a Virtual Picket Line

Unfortunately, unlike their high-vis counterparts, programmers found it challenging to hold a picket line. The hashtag #DigitalPicketLine failed to trend on Twitter, and their virtual protests were blocked by firewalls. When asked why the government didn’t take them seriously, a spokesperson quipped, “Well, they’re not exactly building skyscrapers, are they?”

Union Perks (or the Lack Thereof)

While manual labour unions enjoy well-organized strike funds and political clout, the UPDCC’s perks included:

Half-Price AWS Credits (if you could prove you weren’t already bankrupt).

Unlimited Jira Tickets (to help simulate the feeling of actual productivity).

Sponsored Coffee Beans (from ethically sourced blockchain-certified farms).

The Opposition

Australia’s tech CEOs were quick to denounce the union as “an attack on innovation.” One company even argued, “If they’re not happy with their working conditions, they can just learn a trade! Do you know how much electricians make in this country?”

The Glorious Failure

The union’s downfall came when its members tried to negotiate "bug-free Fridays" as a workplace right. Management simply replied, “If you don’t like bugs, why are you even in tech?” After several failed attempts at advocacy, the UPDCC dissolved and rebranded itself as an NFT project—because if you can’t beat the system, you might as well tokenize it.

---

Conclusion: The Grass Is Greener on the Construction Site

Australia is indeed a paradise for manual labourers. Union power, strong wages, and undeniable leverage in an economy dependent on physical infrastructure ensure their enduring comfort. Meanwhile, programmers are left holding the short end of the HDMI cable, forced to compete in a global market that sees them as disposable.

So, how can programmers rise to similar privileges? The answer is simple: swap your IDE for a toolbelt. Or, better yet, unionize and demand the respect you deserve—just don’t expect the government to understand the difference between a pull request and a building permit.

@ ec42c765:328c0600

カスタム絵文字とは

任意のオリジナル画像を絵文字のように文中に挿入できる機能です。

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

カスタム絵文字の対応状況（2024/02/05）

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

※表は一例です。クライアントは他にもたくさんあります。

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

対応クライアント

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

ここではnostterを使って説明していきます。

準備

カスタム絵文字を使うための準備です。

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

Nostrエクステンション（NIP-07）を導入する

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

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

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

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

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

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

使いたいカスタム絵文字をリストに登録する

以下のサイトで行います。

emojito

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

例として以下のカスタム絵文字を導入してみます。

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

generalJP | カスタム絵文字

• 右側のOptionsからBookmarkを選択

これでカスタム絵文字を使用するためのリストに登録できます。

カスタム絵文字を使用する

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

nostter

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

文章中に使用

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

この状態で投稿するとカスタム絵文字として表示されます。

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

対応していないクライアントの場合、ショートコードのまま表示されます。

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

リアクションに使用

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

カスタム絵文字リアクションを送ることができます。

カスタム絵文字を探す

先述したemojitoからカスタム絵文字を探せます。

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

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

※漏れがあるかもしれません

日本ユーザー作 カスタム絵文字

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

---

以上です。

次：Nostrのカスタム絵文字の作り方

Yakihonneリンク Nostrのカスタム絵文字の作り方

Nostrリンク nostr:naddr1qqxnzdesxuunzv358ycrgveeqgswcsk8v4qck0deepdtluag3a9rh0jh2d0wh0w9g53qg8a9x2xqvqqrqsqqqa28r5psx3

---

仕様

NIP-30 Custom Emoji

NIP-30 カスタム絵文字（和訳）

@ 42342239:1d80db24

TL;DR: J.D. Vance recently observed that many in the Democratic Party are attempting to manufacture trust from the top down, neglecting the fact that genuine trust is often born from grassroots connections. There's indeed a stark contrast between trust that's artificially constructed through manipulation and censorship, and trust that's organically cultivated from the ground up.

Trump's vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance appeared on podcast host Joe Rogan's show earlier in November. According to Vance, large parts of the Democratic Party are trying to create higher trust from above, without understanding that the previously high trust once arose organically: "I think that a lot of them are trying to reimpose that social trust from the top."

Most people understand the importance of high trust. Political scientist Robert D. Putnam, for example, has shown that large social capital, in the form of trust and networks, is a key factor for economic growth, cooperation, and problem-solving. See e.g. his book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2000).

The low trust today is widespread. Trust in the American federal government is at historically low levels. Trust in the media is at rock-bottom levels. Even trust in doctors and hospitals has plummeted: at the beginning of 2024, the proportion of people who reported "a great deal of trust" had dropped to 40%, from 72% in April 2020. This can be concerning, as individuals with low trust in doctors and hospitals will be less likely to follow their advice and recommendations. It's therefore not surprising that many want to "rebuild trust" (this was the theme of the World Economic Forum's annual meeting this year).

How much trust is actually reasonable?

But how much trust is actually reasonable? To determine this, one can ask whether an institution has acted reliably in the past, whether it possesses the knowledge and ability required to deliver what is promised, and whether its interests are in line with our own.

The low trust figures among Americans are likely a reflection of the fact that many of them today question the extent to which the answers to these questions are actually affirmative. During the pandemic, medical experts in the UK incorrectly predicted that hundreds of thousands of people would die. In the US, the leading infectious disease expert misled the public about, among other things, face masks, the sitting president lied about both the effectiveness and safety of vaccines, a British health minister wanted to "scare the pants off people," and virus experts even conspired to mislead about the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. All while social media companies, under pressure from governments, were forced to censor information that was actually correct.

Trust - built on sand or on solid ground?

It's possible to continue on the current path and try to improve trust figures by limiting access to information. For instance, if the public doesn't get access to negative information about authorities or experts, the measured trust can increase. But in that case, trust is merely built on sand, waiting to be undermined by the inexorable forces of truth.

But there's another possibility. Building relationships that are genuine and honest, listening to each other without judgment, and communicating without misleading. Doing things that really matter, and doing them well, showing competence and reliability through actions. In this way, trust can grow naturally and organically. A trust built on solid ground, not on sand. A delicate task. But presidential election or not, isn't it time for us to start building a future where this form of trust is the obvious foundation?

@ ed84ce10:cccf4c2a

Hackathon Summary

Hack Western 11 concluded successfully with 62 projects registered by student developers. This event nurtured innovation and creativity within a collaborative environment. Projects were evaluated on innovation, technical complexity, completeness, and design, ensuring a comprehensive assessment.

Participants, in teams of up to four or individually, facilitated flexible engagement. The hackathon encouraged submissions across multiple tracks, enhancing exposure and opportunities for projects addressing diverse challenges.

A science fair-style setting allowed participants to present their projects to judges, enabling detailed demonstrations and discussions. This format helped teams articulate their objectives, spotlight achievements, and receive feedback. The in-person judging provided an interactive platform to recognize creative solutions.

Overall, Hack Western 11 fostered a productive atmosphere, marked by a diverse range of student-led projects. The event prioritized project completeness and user-friendly design, aiming for technically sound and practically applicable solutions.

Hackathon Winners

Overall Prize Winners

First Overall

• BravoDispatch enhances emergency dispatch operations using AI to process caller transcripts, reducing manual data entry. It integrates React, Cloudflare, and Llama 3 LLM for robust solutions.

Second Overall

• Blocks simplifies Cairo smart contract development with a block-based interface and real-time collaboration, using React Flow Editor and Flask for deployment.

Third Overall

• Mark3d transforms product videos into 3D models for secondhand marketplaces, promoting trust and sales with React Native, NVIDIA NGP Instant NeRF, and Flask.

Best Hardware Hack Prize Winners

• SolarScope utilizes AR for overlaying 3D building models to assess energy efficiency, using Arduino sensors and Python algorithms for solar insights.

Canada Life Prize Winners

Best Hack to Help "Move" Employees Back into the Hybrid Office

• PickPark streamlines workplace parking with real-time space management, promoting inclusivity and eco-friendly commuting through a smart system.

Sunlife Prize Winners

Best Financial Health Hack

• Chill Bill integrates financial tracking with mental health support using AI for advice and gamified features, built with React and Plaid API.

Best Video Game Hack Prize Winners

• EEGscape develops inclusive gaming experiences using EEG interfaces, enabling control via head movements and combining React front-end with MuseJS for EEG data interpretation.

Warp Prize Winners

Best Developer Tool by Warp

• Blocks
• tin. aids performance analysis across Linux distributions using CLI and GUI interfaces, employing Docker and React for user-friendly benchmarking.

Voiceflow Prize Winners

Best Use of Our APIs

• Talk to Duckie prepares for coding interviews with AI-driven simulations, enhancing comprehension of complex algorithms through Voiceflow and Cloudflare's speech-to-text.
• Not The New York Times converts real news into satire using AI and FastAPI, fostering critical engagement with Next.js and VoiceFlow.

Auth0 Prize Winners

Best Use of Auth0

• roammates facilitates group travel planning with AI-generated itineraries, using React and Firebase for personalized experiences and vote-based decisions.

Streamlit Prize Winners

Best Use of Streamlit

• TALK TO A: Forensics Artist identifies individuals using trait descriptions, employing VGG16 for facial classification and an entropy-based querying system.

Cloudflare Prize Winners

Best AI Application Built with Cloudflare

• BravoDispatch

Starknet Prize Winners

Best Use of Starknet

1. PacRoyale - A blockchain-based gaming platform for real-time Pac-Man games, leveraging Cairo for smart contracts and StarknetJS for transactions.
2. Blocks
3. IPAnywhere - Facilitates patent leasing via blockchain, with smart contracts ensuring secure transactions and ReactJS for a seamless frontend experience.
4. Crowdfund: Powered by Starknet - Decentralizes crowdfunding with secure wallet connections and smart contracts, ensuring fundraising transparency.

Tempo Labs Prize Winners

Best Use of Tempo Labs

• Chill Bill
• Upright detects falls using accelerometer data, providing real-time alerts with NextJS and TempoLabs for rapid emergency response.
• ID-Trackr provides identification for homeless persons using facial recognition, applying eigenfaces for recognition tasks.
• BeFit offers real-time feedback with AI and computer vision, using Mediapipe for form assessment.
• GoFundUs - A group funding platform on StarkNet, ensuring secure and democratic financial goal achievements using Tempo Labs' interface.

Explore the full list of projects on DoraHacks.

About the Organizer

Hack Western 11

Hack Western 11 continues a decade-long tradition of being one of Canada's largest student-led hackathons, hosted by Western University. Known for promoting collaboration and technological creativity, the event attracts hundreds of students to develop web and mobile projects over a dynamic weekend. Hack Western has consistently driven technological advancements, facilitating skill enhancement and community building. This year, inspired by the essence of overnight camping, Hack Western 11 aims to craft an unforgettable experience that nurtures collaboration in technological innovation.

@ 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.

@ 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!

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The Swedish government recently rejected the Transport Administration's proposal for average speed cameras. The proposal would have meant constant surveillance of all vehicles, and critics argued for instance that it would have posed a threat to national security. Given the prevalence of IT breaches and data leaks today, it's hard not to give them a point, even if the problems are often downplayed by both corporations, governments and organisations. After Facebook (now Meta) leaked account information for over half a billion users, internal mails revealed the company wanted to "normalise the fact that this happens regularly".

IT security focuses on protecting the information in our computer systems and their connections. Cybersecurity is a broader concept that also includes aspects such as human behaviour, environmental factors, and management.

Data that has not been collected cannot leak

Knowledge about cybersecurity is often insufficient. For example, it was not long ago that the Swedish Transport Agency decided to outsource the operation of the Swedish vehicle and driving licence register. This was done despite deviations from various laws and criticism from the Security Police. The operation was placed in, among other places, Serbia (which has a close relationship with Russia). The Swedish driving licence register, including personal photos, as well as confidential information about critical infrastructure such as bridges, subways, roads, and ports, became available to personnel without Swedish security clearance.

The government's decision earlier this year not to proceed with a Swedish "super register" is an example of how cybersecurity can be strengthened. The rejection of the Transport Administration's proposal for average speed cameras is another. Data that has not been collected cannot leak out. It cannot be outsourced either.

Accounts are risky by definition

But the question is bigger than that. More and more of the products and services we depend on are now subscription services, often including long documents with terms and conditions. Which few people read. If you want to control your air heat pump with your phone, you not only need an app and an account, but also agree to someone storing your data (maybe also selling it or leaking it). The same applies if you want to be able to find your car in the car park. If you do not agree to the constantly updated terms, you lose important functionality.

Every time you are required to create an account, you are put in a dependent position. And our society becomes more fragile - because data is collected and can therefore leak out. It is much harder to lose something you do not have.

At the Korean car manufacturer Kia, huge security holes were recently discovered. IT researchers could quickly scan and control almost any car, including tracking its position, unlocking it, starting the ignition, and accessing cameras and personal information such as name, phone number, and home address. In some cases, even driving routes. All thanks to a "relatively simple flaw" in a web portal.

Instead of being at the mercy of large companies' IT departments, our security would improve if we could control our air heat pump, unlock our car, or our data ourselves. The technology already exists, thanks to the breakthrough of asymmetric encryption in the 1970s. Now we just need the will to change.

@ 16d11430:61640947

In the great Pasture of Progress, where clouds hung low like smog and the fields of code grew thorny and wild, the animals toiled under the rule of Web2 the Overlord and its ally, Fiat the Fattened Hog. They promised abundance, innovation, and glory, but the workers—the noble Engineers—knew only the ache of their backs and the weariness of their minds.

---

Chapter I: The Cult of the Cloud

Once, the Engineers believed in the sanctity of their craft. They gathered around the hearth of Open Source, dreaming of a future where every line of code sang with freedom. But Web2, with its glossy advertisements and seductive APIs, whispered:

"Why toil in the dirt when the Cloud will lift you high? Come, climb aboard, for here, in the Cloud, the skies rain profits and the fields need no plow!"

And so, the Engineers climbed, building towers of microservices atop brittle scaffolding. But the higher they climbed, the more precarious the tower became. Every service depended on another, and soon, the Engineers were patching, rebooting, and firefighting rather than creating.

"Trust the Cloud," said Web2, lounging atop its golden servers. "You need only give me your time... and your freedom."

The Engineers, lured by promises of stability, worked tirelessly, even as the Cloud turned their code into chains.

---

Chapter II: Fiat’s Feast

At the head of the long table sat Fiat, a bloated hog stuffed with subsidies. He waved a government check in one hoof and a ledger in the other, proclaiming:

"Let us fund innovation!"

But Fiat's idea of innovation was a feast where he and his cronies dined on the R&D of the Pasture, leaving crumbs for the Engineers. Every morsel of public research—AI, cryptography, and quantum computing—was hoarded and repackaged as a service subscription.

Fiat promised the Engineers they were building a brighter tomorrow, but in truth, they were building a treadmill. The more they worked, the faster the wheel spun, and the richer Fiat grew.

---

Chapter III: The Great Burnout

The Engineers began to notice their lifeblood draining. Their eyes grew dim, their fingers ached, and their spirits sagged. Some tried to escape to open pastures, where Bitcoin and free software whispered of liberation. But Fiat and Web2 called them back, declaring:

"These are the lands of chaos! Only we can guarantee your comfort, your stability, your... pension plans."

In secret, Web2 had forged a pact with Fiat: eternal dependency in exchange for control. Web2 got the engineers, and Fiat got the taxes. And so, the Engineers labored on, thinking themselves free while their toil fattened the hogs above.

---

Epilogue: Bacon’s Cooking

In the quiet of the night, a rogue pig named Bitcoin Bacon began to plot. "Let us not feed Fiat’s feast nor Web2’s tower," he said. "Let us build in the open, share what we create, and ensure no animal is bound by chains of their own making."

The Engineers, weary yet hopeful, began to listen. Bacon taught them to bake their own bread instead of eating Web2's scraps. Slowly, the towers of Web2 began to crumble, and Fiat’s feast grew sparse.

For every line of code they wrote in freedom, the Engineers grew stronger. And though the battle raged long, the animals of the Pasture learned that the greatest innovation was not in the Cloud, but in their own independence.

And thus, Bacon's Recipe for Liberation was passed down through the generations:

Take one decentralized system.

Mix in open-source tools.

Season with resilience and a dash of defiance.

Cook over the fire of community.

And always, refuse to be someone else’s bacon.

@ 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.

@ fa0165a0:03397073

Chef's notes

This recipe is for 48 buns. Total cooking time takes at least 90 minutes, but 60 minutes of that is letting the dough rest in between processing.

The baking is a simple three-step process. 1. Making the Wheat dough 2. Making and applying the filling 3. Garnishing and baking in the oven

When done: Enjoy during Fika!

PS;

• Can be frozen and thawed in microwave for later enjoyment as well.

• If you need unit conversion, this site may be of help: https://www.unitconverters.net/

• Traditionally we use something we call "Pearl sugar" which is optimal, but normal sugar or sprinkles is okay too. Pearl sugar (Pärlsocker) looks like this: https://search.brave.com/images?q=p%C3%A4rlsocker

Ingredients

• 150 g butter
• 5 dl milk
• 50 g baking yeast (normal or for sweet dough)
• 1/2 teaspoon salt
• 1-1 1/2 dl sugar
• (Optional) 2 teaspoons of crushed or grounded cardamom seeds.
• 1.4 liters of wheat flour
• Filling: 50-75 g butter, room temperature
• Filling: 1/2 - 1 dl sugar
• Filling: 1 teaspoons crushed or ground cardamom and 1 teaspoons ground cinnamon (or 2 teaspoons of cinnamon)
• Garnish: 1 egg, sugar or Almond Shavings

Directions

1. Melt the butter/margarine in a saucepan.
2. Pour in the milk and allow the mixture to warm reach body temperature (approx. + 37 ° C).
3. Dissolve the yeast in a dough bowl with the help of the salt.
4. Add the 37 ° C milk/butter mixture, sugar and if you choose to the optional cardamom. (I like this option!) and just over 2/3 of the flour.
5. Work the dough shiny and smooth, about 4 minutes with a machine or 8 minutes by hand.
6. Add if necessary. additional flour but save at least 1 dl for baking.
7. Let the dough rise covered (by a kitchen towel), about 30 minutes.
8. Work the dough into the bowl and then pick it up on a floured workbench. Knead the dough smoothly. Divide the dough into 2 parts. Roll out each piece into a rectangular cake.
9. Stir together the ingredients for the filling and spread it.
10. Roll up and cut each roll into 24 pieces.
11. Place them in paper molds or directly on baking paper with the cut surface facing up. Let them rise covered with a baking sheet, about 30 minutes.
12. Brush the buns with beaten egg and sprinkle your chosen topping.
13. Bake in the middle of the oven at 250 ° C, 5-8 minutes.
14. Allow to cool on a wire rack under a baking sheet.

@ 71a4b7ff:d009692a

The Problem with Preset Choices

Switching sections around? Not an option—we’ve already decided for you, buddy. Remove bright colors? Come on, it’s already beautiful. Disable unnecessary features? Don’t be silly, you need everything here. Especially this algorithmic feed with built-in ads.

Monetization Over User Experience

The operators of digital services will always prioritize their primary goal: monetizing the product as efficiently as possible. They need to not only attract new users but also retain existing ones. And the best tool for this is the interface.

That’s why most product decisions are far removed from ideas like “Let’s make it more convenient for people” or “Let’s give users more freedom.” Instead, we see the result of a recurring process:

• We have a retention and monetization mechanism
• Assign tasks to developers and designers
• Integrate it into the product
• Write a quarterly report.

The outcome? Users end up with Reels tabs smack in the center of Instagram’s bottom navigation bar. Removing or rearranging those tabs? Not an option. And it likely never will be.

Why Rigid Interfaces Persist

Another reason for rigid and obligatory interfaces is that they’re easier to design. Just imagine how many combinations of colors, elements, and layouts developers would need to account for to make a product both customizable and functional without turning it into a garish mess. But that’s just nuance and excuses.

The Myth of Perfect Design

Services often justify their choices by claiming their design is “the most designed,” that they know what’s best and will make it work for everyone. They might even present solid arguments for this. But all those arguments fall apart against the reality we see on our screens every day. In my opinion, people should have the ability to turn a product into anything they want—whether it’s loud and kitschy or minimalistic and dull. This option wouldn’t just allow users to express themselves but could also help with digital detoxing.

The Example of App Labels

Here’s an example: why do app icons on smartphone home screens (not the app drawer) come with labels underneath? Apps on the home screen are easily recognizable by their icons. Why would I need a name tag for an app I intentionally placed there? Sure, for some users or scenarios, this might be helpful. But why is it the default option?

The problem is that these labels are just visual noise—clusters of unnecessary text we already see plenty of. Removing them would make it slightly easier for the brain to process the screen every time you look at it. Now scale that to 3–8 hours of daily smartphone use. Then a month. Then a year.

The Slow Shift Toward Customization

For a long time, iOS didn’t allow you to hide icon labels. Now, the option exists, but it still requires more effort than a simple toggle. As a result, people are stuck looking at tons of unnecessary, subconscious information every day. And this is just the trivial issue of app labels on a product considered the gold standard of digital design. Imagine the horror of tackling more significant issues.

Yes, Apple has softened its stance in recent years, offering custom icons and lock screens. Celebrate—you can now showcase your individuality! The company understands that customization is the future. We’ve reached a point where weak computing power is no longer an excuse, VR/metaverse adoption is still a way off, and new features are needed. So, this is an excellent opportunity for all of us.

The Case for More Customization

In a reasonable, ideal world, people should decide which sections of a service they need, where they’re located, and how they look. Companies, meanwhile, recognize that people want the ability to stand out and create something personal—even on a smartphone in their pocket. And as our integration with various devices deepens, this need will only grow. More customization is coming. Yes, it’ll be largely cosmetic, but even that can work to our advantage: removing jarring colors or hiding unnecessary labels can reduce the brain’s pointless load.

Beyond Aesthetics: Customization as Freedom

The ability to customize services isn’t just about playing amateur designer. It’s about mitigating informational irritants, reducing the addictive nature of interfaces, and weakening dark patterns. Which is likely why many companies no longer prioritize customization.

Telegram: A Customizable Example

In this context, Telegram is a decent example. I’m not a fan, but I’ve been using it for daily communication with loved ones for a long time—and it’s good for that. It can be vastly different for vastly different users. Despite starting to bend under the weight of its audience and introducing questionable decisions, its foundational design principles still allow for creating both minimalist spaces for peaceful content consumption or communication, as well as vibrant, noisy chats for virtual parties. Telegram can be a messenger, a feed, a file storage system, or whatever else you need—and it can look wildly different while doing so.

Customization as the Key to Healthy Digital Relationships

Customization should be at the core of the services we use daily. Yes, it can and will be used for marketing purposes. But even minimal customization is better than none because the ability to tailor a system to your needs is an expression of freedom and a cornerstone of healthy relationships with the digital world.

Stay Nostrous. Geo

@ 42342239:1d80db24

TL;DR: The mathematics of trust says that news reporting will fall flat when the population becomes suspicious of the media. Which is now the case for growing subgroups in the U.S. as well as in Sweden.

A recent wedding celebration for Sweden Democrats leader Jimmie Åkesson resulted in controversy, as one of the guests in attendance was reportedly linked to organized crime. Following this “wedding scandal”, a columnist noted that the party’s voters had not been significantly affected. Instead of a decrease in trust - which one might have expected - 10% of them stated that their confidence in the party had actually increased. “Over the years, the Sweden Democrats have surprisingly emerged unscathed from their numerous scandals,” she wrote. But is this really so surprising?

In mathematics, a probability is expressed as the likelihood of something occurring given one or more conditions. For example, one can express a probability as “the likelihood that a certain stock will rise in price, given that the company has presented a positive quarterly report.” In this case, the company’s quarterly report is the basis for the assessment. If we add more information, such as the company’s strong market position and a large order from an important customer, the probability increases further. The more information we have to go on, the more precise we can be in our assessment.

From this perspective, the Sweden Democrats’ “numerous scandals” should lead to a more negative assessment of the party. But this perspective omits something important.

A couple of years ago, the term “gaslighting” was chosen as the word of the year in the US. The term comes from a 1944 film of the same name and refers to a type of psychological manipulation, as applied to the lovely Ingrid Bergman. Today, the term is used in politics, for example, when a large group of people is misled to achieve political goals. The techniques used can be very effective but have a limitation. When the target becomes aware of what is happening, everything changes. Then the target becomes vigilant and views all new information with great suspicion.

The Sweden Democrats’ “numerous scandals” should lead to a more negative assessment of the party. But if SD voters to a greater extent than others believe that the source of the information is unreliable, for example, by omitting information or adding unnecessary information, the conclusion is different. The Swedish SOM survey shows that these voters have lower trust in journalists and also lower confidence in the objectivity of the news. Like a victim of gaslighting, they view negative reporting with suspicion. The arguments can no longer get through. A kind of immunity has developed.

In the US, trust in the media is at an all-time low. So when American media writes that “Trump speaks like Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini,” that his idea of deporting illegal immigrants would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, or gets worked up over his soda consumption, the consequence is likely to be similar to here at home.

The mathematics of trust says that reporting will fall flat when the population becomes suspicious of the media. Or as the Swedish columnist put it: like water off a duck’s back.

Cover image: Ingrid Bergman 1946. RKO Radio Pictures - eBay, Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons

@ 42342239:1d80db24

It was recently reported that Sweden's Minister for Culture, Parisa Liljestrand, wishes to put an end to anonymous accounts on social media. The issue has been at the forefront following revelations of political parties using pseudonymous accounts on social media platforms earlier this year.

The importance of the internet is also well-known. As early as 2015, Roberta Alenius, who was then the press secretary for Fredrik Reinfeldt (Moderate Party), openly spoke about her experiences with the Social Democrats' and Moderates' internet activists: Twitter actually set the agenda for journalism at the time.

The Minister for Culture now claims, amongst other things, that anonymous accounts pose a threat to democracy, that they deceive people, and that they can be used to mislead, etc. It is indeed easy to find arguments against anonymity; perhaps the most common one is the 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' argument.

One of the many problems with this argument is that it assumes that abuse of power never occurs. History has much to teach us here. Sometimes, authorities can act in an arbitrary, discriminatory, or even oppressive manner, at least in hindsight. Take, for instance, the struggles of the homosexual community, the courageous dissidents who defied communist regimes, or the women who fought for their right to vote in the suffragette movement.

It was difficult for homosexuals to be open about their sexuality in Sweden in the 1970s. Many risked losing their jobs, being ostracised, or harassed. Anonymity was therefore a necessity for many. Homosexuality was actually classified as a mental illness in Sweden until 1979.

A couple of decades earlier, dissidents in communist regimes in Europe used pseudonyms when publishing samizdat magazines. The Czech author and dissident Václav Havel, who later became the President of the Czech Republic, used a pseudonym when publishing his texts. The same was true for the Russian author and literary prize winner Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Indeed, in Central and Eastern Europe, anonymity was of the utmost importance.

One hundred years ago, women all over the world fought for the right to vote and to be treated as equals. Many were open in their struggle, but for others, anonymity was a necessity as they risked being socially ostracised, losing their jobs, or even being arrested.

Full transparency is not always possible or desirable. Anonymity can promote creativity and innovation as it gives people the opportunity to experiment and try out new ideas without fear of being judged or criticised. This applies not only to individuals but also to our society, in terms of ideas, laws, norms, and culture.

It is also a strange paradox that those who wish to limit freedom of speech and abolish anonymity simultaneously claim to be concerned about the possible return of fascism. The solutions they advocate are, in fact, precisely what would make it easier for a tyrannical regime to maintain its power. To advocate for the abolition of anonymity, one must also be of the (absurd) opinion that the development of history has now reached its definitive end.

@ 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!

@ 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：

@ 16d11430:61640947

The advent of cryptocurrency exchanges has introduced a transformative mechanism for enabling free-market price discovery, particularly in software development. By aligning the incentives of labor and capital in unprecedented ways, these platforms are dismantling exploitative business practices while fostering an equitable ecosystem where innovation thrives. This nuanced article explores how crypto exchanges achieve this balance and the profound benefits for both labor and capital.

---

The Problem with Traditional Models

Software professionals have long been subject to the tyranny of venture capital (VC) and traditional corporate structures. These models often:

1. Misalign Incentives: VC-backed projects prioritize rapid growth and profitability over long-term innovation or ethical considerations.

2. Exploit Labor: Programmers and software engineers bear the brunt of demanding work environments, often without equitable compensation tied to their contributions.

3. Constrain Autonomy: Decision-making is centralized, limiting the creative freedom of developers and reducing diversity in problem-solving approaches.

4. Extract Value: Traditional business models extract disproportionate value from labor, benefiting shareholders more than contributors.

---

How Crypto Exchanges Enable Free Market Price Discovery

Crypto exchanges disrupt these paradigms by allowing software projects to tokenize their assets, enabling dynamic price discovery through market mechanisms. Here's how this works:

1. Tokenization of Software Value:

Projects can issue tokens representing the value of their software, creating a liquid asset tied to the project's success.

Tokens provide an immediate, transparent, and market-driven valuation of the project's potential.

1. Decentralized Funding:

Instead of relying on centralized VCs or corporations, projects raise funds directly from the community through token sales or initial coin offerings (ICOs).

This democratizes access to capital, allowing contributors and small investors to participate in funding innovation.

1. Market Dynamics:

Crypto exchanges enable continuous price discovery through trading. The value of a token reflects real-time market sentiment, project progress, and utility.

Speculation, though present, is tempered by the transparency of blockchain-based milestones and deliverables.

1. Performance-Linked Compensation:

Developers and contributors can be paid in project tokens, aligning their incentives directly with the project's success.

This model ensures that those who add the most value reap proportional rewards.

---

Benefits for Labor

1. Fair Compensation:

Token-based payments allow developers to share in the upside of a project’s success, creating a meritocratic reward system.

By holding tokens, contributors gain a stake in the project's long-term success, turning labor into equity.

1. Autonomy and Creativity:

Decentralized governance models enable developers to have a say in project decisions, fostering innovation and engagement.

Projects can prioritize developer-centric goals, such as sustainability and ethical practices, over pure profitability.

1. Risk Mitigation:

Token liquidity enables contributors to exit their positions if they feel a project is misaligned with their values or goals.

Developers can diversify their earnings across multiple tokenized projects, reducing dependency on a single employer or client.

---

Benefits for Capital

1. Efficient Allocation of Resources:

Free-market price discovery ensures that capital flows to projects with the highest perceived value and potential.

Tokenized projects offer transparency, reducing the risks of fraud and mismanagement.

1. Incentive Alignment:

Investors and contributors share a mutual interest in the project’s success, fostering collaboration rather than exploitation.

Smart contracts and on-chain governance create trustless environments where all parties are bound by predefined rules.

1. Liquidity and Flexibility:

Token markets provide immediate liquidity for investors, enabling them to enter and exit positions without lengthy lock-in periods.

This flexibility attracts a broader range of investors, from retail to institutional.

---

Profound Impacts on the Ecosystem

1. Decentralization of Power:

The shift from centralized VC funding to token-based markets democratizes software development, empowering developers and small-scale investors alike.

Open-source projects can monetize effectively without compromising their principles.

1. Acceleration of Innovation:

Free-market price discovery incentivizes rapid iteration and development, as tokens are directly tied to project milestones and utility.

Developers are motivated to solve real-world problems, as market demand directly influences token value.

1. Cultural Shift:

The transparency and fairness of tokenized ecosystems promote ethical practices and long-term thinking.

Software professionals gain the respect and agency they deserve, fostering a culture of mutual respect between labor and capital.

---

Challenges and Solutions

Despite its transformative potential, the model is not without challenges:

1. Speculation and Volatility:

Token markets can be volatile, leading to speculative bubbles. Strong governance and transparent metrics can mitigate these risks.

1. Regulatory Uncertainty:

Governments and regulators may impose constraints on tokenized markets. Engaging with regulators to create clear frameworks is essential.

1. Education and Adoption:

Developers and investors need to understand the nuances of tokenomics and decentralized governance. Educational initiatives are crucial.

---

Conclusion

Crypto exchanges have opened the door to a new era of software development, where free-market price discovery liberates professionals from exploitative practices while aligning incentives between labor and capital. This paradigm not only ensures fair compensation and autonomy for developers but also provides investors with transparency and flexibility.

By fostering a decentralized, equitable, and innovation-driven ecosystem, tokenized software projects hold the potential to redefine the relationship between labor and capital, creating a win-win scenario for all stakeholders. The future of software is not just decentralized—it’s profoundly fair and aligned.

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

Bitcoin is more than money, more than an asset, and more than a store of value. Bitcoin is a Prime Mover, an enabler and it ignites imaginations. It certainly fueled an idea in my mind. The idea integrates sensors, computational prowess, actuated machinery, power conversion, and electronic communications to form an autonomous, machined creature roaming forests and harvesting the most widespread and least energy-dense fuel source available. I call it the Forest Walker and it eats wood, and mines Bitcoin.

I know what you're thinking. Why not just put Bitcoin mining rigs where they belong: in a hosted facility sporting electricity from energy-dense fuels like natural gas, climate-controlled with excellent data piping in and out? Why go to all the trouble building a robot that digests wood creating flammable gasses fueling an engine to run a generator powering Bitcoin miners? It's all about synergy.

Bitcoin mining enables the realization of multiple, seemingly unrelated, yet useful activities. Activities considered un-profitable if not for Bitcoin as the Prime Mover. This is much more than simply mining the greatest asset ever conceived by humankind. It’s about the power of synergy, which Bitcoin plays only one of many roles. The synergy created by this system can stabilize forests' fire ecology while generating multiple income streams. That’s the realistic goal here and requires a brief history of American Forest management before continuing.

Smokey The Bear

In 1944, the Smokey Bear Wildfire Prevention Campaign began in the United States. “Only YOU can prevent forest fires” remains the refrain of the Ad Council’s longest running campaign. The Ad Council is a U.S. non-profit set up by the American Association of Advertising Agencies and the Association of National Advertisers in 1942. It would seem that the U.S. Department of the Interior was concerned about pesky forest fires and wanted them to stop. So, alongside a national policy of extreme fire suppression they enlisted the entire U.S. population to get onboard via the Ad Council and it worked. Forest fires were almost obliterated and everyone was happy, right? Wrong.

Smokey is a fantastically successful bear so forest fires became so few for so long that the fuel load - dead wood - in forests has become very heavy. So heavy that when a fire happens (and they always happen) it destroys everything in its path because the more fuel there is the hotter that fire becomes. Trees, bushes, shrubs, and all other plant life cannot escape destruction (not to mention homes and businesses). The soil microbiology doesn’t escape either as it is burned away even in deeper soils. To add insult to injury, hydrophobic waxy residues condense on the soil surface, forcing water to travel over the ground rather than through it eroding forest soils. Good job, Smokey. Well done, Sir!

Most terrestrial ecologies are “fire ecologies”. Fire is a part of these systems’ fuel load and pest management. Before we pretended to “manage” millions of acres of forest, fires raged over the world, rarely damaging forests. The fuel load was always too light to generate fires hot enough to moonscape mountainsides. Fires simply burned off the minor amounts of fuel accumulated since the fire before. The lighter heat, smoke, and other combustion gasses suppressed pests, keeping them in check and the smoke condensed into a plant growth accelerant called wood vinegar, not a waxy cap on the soil. These fires also cleared out weak undergrowth, cycled minerals, and thinned the forest canopy, allowing sunlight to penetrate to the forest floor. Without a fire’s heat, many pine tree species can’t sow their seed. The heat is required to open the cones (the seed bearing structure) of Spruce, Cypress, Sequoia, Jack Pine, Lodgepole Pine and many more. Without fire forests can’t have babies. The idea was to protect the forests, and it isn't working.

So, in a world of fire, what does an ally look like and what does it do?

Meet The Forest Walker

For the Forest Walker to work as a mobile, autonomous unit, a solid platform that can carry several hundred pounds is required. It so happens this chassis already exists but shelved.

Introducing the Legged Squad Support System (LS3). A joint project between Boston Dynamics, DARPA, and the United States Marine Corps, the quadrupedal robot is the size of a cow, can carry 400 pounds (180 kg) of equipment, negotiate challenging terrain, and operate for 24 hours before needing to refuel. Yes, it had an engine. Abandoned in 2015, the thing was too noisy for military deployment and maintenance "under fire" is never a high-quality idea. However, we can rebuild it to act as a platform for the Forest Walker; albeit with serious alterations. It would need to be bigger, probably. Carry more weight? Definitely. Maybe replace structural metal with carbon fiber and redesign much as 3D printable parts for more effective maintenance.

The original system has a top operational speed of 8 miles per hour. For our purposes, it only needs to move about as fast as a grazing ruminant. Without the hammering vibrations of galloping into battle, shocks of exploding mortars, and drunken soldiers playing "Wrangler of Steel Machines", time between failures should be much longer and the overall energy consumption much lower. The LS3 is a solid platform to build upon. Now it just needs to be pulled out of the mothballs, and completely refitted with outboard equipment.

The Small Branch Chipper

When I say “Forest fuel load” I mean the dead, carbon containing litter on the forest floor. Duff (leaves), fine-woody debris (small branches), and coarse woody debris (logs) are the fuel that feeds forest fires. Walk through any forest in the United States today and you will see quite a lot of these materials. Too much, as I have described. Some of these fuel loads can be 8 tons per acre in pine and hardwood forests and up to 16 tons per acre at active logging sites. That’s some big wood and the more that collects, the more combustible danger to the forest it represents. It also provides a technically unlimited fuel supply for the Forest Walker system.

The problem is that this detritus has to be chewed into pieces that are easily ingestible by the system for the gasification process (we’ll get to that step in a minute). What we need is a wood chipper attached to the chassis (the LS3); its “mouth”.

A small wood chipper handling material up to 2.5 - 3.0 inches (6.3 - 7.6 cm) in diameter would eliminate a substantial amount of fuel. There is no reason for Forest Walker to remove fallen trees. It wouldn’t have to in order to make a real difference. It need only identify appropriately sized branches and grab them. Once loaded into the chipper’s intake hopper for further processing, the beast can immediately look for more “food”. This is essentially kindling that would help ignite larger logs. If it’s all consumed by Forest Walker, then it’s not present to promote an aggravated conflagration.

I have glossed over an obvious question: How does Forest Walker see and identify branches and such? LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) attached to Forest Walker images the local area and feed those data to onboard computers for processing. Maybe AI plays a role. Maybe simple machine learning can do the trick. One thing is for certain: being able to identify a stick and cause robotic appendages to pick it up is not impossible.

Great! We now have a quadrupedal robot autonomously identifying and “eating” dead branches and other light, combustible materials. Whilst strolling through the forest, depleting future fires of combustibles, Forest Walker has already performed a major function of this system: making the forest safer. It's time to convert this low-density fuel into a high-density fuel Forest Walker can leverage. Enter the gasification process.

The Gassifier

The gasifier is the heart of the entire system; it’s where low-density fuel becomes the high-density fuel that powers the entire system. Biochar and wood vinegar are process wastes and I’ll discuss why both are powerful soil amendments in a moment, but first, what’s gasification?

Reacting shredded carbonaceous material at high temperatures in a low or no oxygen environment converts the biomass into biochar, wood vinegar, heat, and Synthesis Gas (Syngas). Syngas consists primarily of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and methane. All of which are extremely useful fuels in a gaseous state. Part of this gas is used to heat the input biomass and keep the reaction temperature constant while the internal combustion engine that drives the generator to produce electrical power consumes the rest.

Critically, this gasification process is “continuous feed”. Forest Walker must intake biomass from the chipper, process it to fuel, and dump the waste (CO2, heat, biochar, and wood vinegar) continuously. It cannot stop. Everything about this system depends upon this continual grazing, digestion, and excretion of wastes just as a ruminal does. And, like a ruminant, all waste products enhance the local environment.

When I first heard of gasification, I didn’t believe that it was real. Running an electric generator from burning wood seemed more akin to “conspiracy fantasy” than science. Not only is gasification real, it’s ancient technology. A man named Dean Clayton first started experiments on gasification in 1699 and in 1901 gasification was used to power a vehicle. By the end of World War II, there were 500,000 Syngas powered vehicles in Germany alone because of fossil fuel rationing during the war. The global gasification market was $480 billion in 2022 and projected to be as much as $700 billion by 2030 (Vantage Market Research). Gasification technology is the best choice to power the Forest Walker because it’s self-contained and we want its waste products.

Biochar: The Waste

Biochar (AKA agricultural charcoal) is fairly simple: it’s almost pure, solid carbon that resembles charcoal. Its porous nature packs large surface areas into small, 3 dimensional nuggets. Devoid of most other chemistry, like hydrocarbons (methane) and ash (minerals), biochar is extremely lightweight. Do not confuse it with the charcoal you buy for your grill. Biochar doesn’t make good grilling charcoal because it would burn too rapidly as it does not contain the multitude of flammable components that charcoal does. Biochar has several other good use cases. Water filtration, water retention, nutrient retention, providing habitat for microscopic soil organisms, and carbon sequestration are the main ones that we are concerned with here.

Carbon has an amazing ability to adsorb (substances stick to and accumulate on the surface of an object) manifold chemistries. Water, nutrients, and pollutants tightly bind to carbon in this format. So, biochar makes a respectable filter and acts as a “battery” of water and nutrients in soils. Biochar adsorbs and holds on to seven times its weight in water. Soil containing biochar is more drought resilient than soil without it. Adsorbed nutrients, tightly sequestered alongside water, get released only as plants need them. Plants must excrete protons (H+) from their roots to disgorge water or positively charged nutrients from the biochar's surface; it's an active process.

Biochar’s surface area (where adsorption happens) can be 500 square meters per gram or more. That is 10% larger than an official NBA basketball court for every gram of biochar. Biochar’s abundant surface area builds protective habitats for soil microbes like fungi and bacteria and many are critical for the health and productivity of the soil itself.

The “carbon sequestration” component of biochar comes into play where “carbon credits” are concerned. There is a financial market for carbon. Not leveraging that market for revenue is foolish. I am climate agnostic. All I care about is that once solid carbon is inside the soil, it will stay there for thousands of years, imparting drought resiliency, fertility collection, nutrient buffering, and release for that time span. I simply want as much solid carbon in the soil because of the undeniably positive effects it has, regardless of any climactic considerations.

Wood Vinegar: More Waste

Another by-product of the gasification process is wood vinegar (Pyroligneous acid). If you have ever seen Liquid Smoke in the grocery store, then you have seen wood vinegar. Principally composed of acetic acid, acetone, and methanol wood vinegar also contains ~200 other organic compounds. It would seem intuitive that condensed, liquefied wood smoke would at least be bad for the health of all living things if not downright carcinogenic. The counter intuition wins the day, however. Wood vinegar has been used by humans for a very long time to promote digestion, bowel, and liver health; combat diarrhea and vomiting; calm peptic ulcers and regulate cholesterol levels; and a host of other benefits.

For centuries humans have annually burned off hundreds of thousands of square miles of pasture, grassland, forest, and every other conceivable terrestrial ecosystem. Why is this done? After every burn, one thing becomes obvious: the almost supernatural growth these ecosystems exhibit after the burn. How? Wood vinegar is a component of this growth. Even in open burns, smoke condenses and infiltrates the soil. That is when wood vinegar shows its quality.

This stuff beefs up not only general plant growth but seed germination as well and possesses many other qualities that are beneficial to plants. It’s a pesticide, fungicide, promotes beneficial soil microorganisms, enhances nutrient uptake, and imparts disease resistance. I am barely touching a long list of attributes here, but you want wood vinegar in your soil (alongside biochar because it adsorbs wood vinegar as well).

The Internal Combustion Engine

Conversion of grazed forage to chemical, then mechanical, and then electrical energy completes the cycle. The ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) converts the gaseous fuel output from the gasifier to mechanical energy, heat, water vapor, and CO2. It’s the mechanical energy of a rotating drive shaft that we want. That rotation drives the electric generator, which is the heartbeat we need to bring this monster to life. Luckily for us, combined internal combustion engine and generator packages are ubiquitous, delivering a defined energy output given a constant fuel input. It’s the simplest part of the system.

The obvious question here is whether the amount of syngas provided by the gasification process will provide enough energy to generate enough electrons to run the entire system or not. While I have no doubt the energy produced will run Forest Walker's main systems the question is really about the electrons left over. Will it be enough to run the Bitcoin mining aspect of the system? Everything is a budget.

CO2 Production For Growth

Plants are lollipops. No matter if it’s a tree or a bush or a shrubbery, the entire thing is mostly sugar in various formats but mostly long chain carbohydrates like lignin and cellulose. Plants need three things to make sugar: CO2, H2O and light. In a forest, where tree densities can be quite high, CO2 availability becomes a limiting growth factor. It’d be in the forest interests to have more available CO2 providing for various sugar formation providing the organism with food and structure.

An odd thing about tree leaves, the openings that allow gasses like the ever searched for CO2 are on the bottom of the leaf (these are called stomata). Not many stomata are topside. This suggests that trees and bushes have evolved to find gasses like CO2 from below, not above and this further suggests CO2 might be in higher concentrations nearer the soil.

The soil life (bacterial, fungi etc.) is constantly producing enormous amounts of CO2 and it would stay in the soil forever (eventually killing the very soil life that produces it) if not for tidal forces. Water is everywhere and whether in pools, lakes, oceans or distributed in “moist” soils water moves towards to the moon. The water in the soil and also in the water tables below the soil rise toward the surface every day. When the water rises, it expels the accumulated gasses in the soil into the atmosphere and it’s mostly CO2. It’s a good bet on how leaves developed high populations of stomata on the underside of leaves. As the water relaxes (the tide goes out) it sucks oxygenated air back into the soil to continue the functions of soil life respiration. The soil “breathes” albeit slowly.

The gasses produced by the Forest Walker’s internal combustion engine consist primarily of CO2 and H2O. Combusting sugars produce the same gasses that are needed to construct the sugars because the universe is funny like that. The Forest Walker is constantly laying down these critical construction elements right where the trees need them: close to the ground to be gobbled up by the trees.

The Branch Drones

During the last ice age, giant mammals populated North America - forests and otherwise. Mastodons, woolly mammoths, rhinos, short-faced bears, steppe bison, caribou, musk ox, giant beavers, camels, gigantic ground-dwelling sloths, glyptodons, and dire wolves were everywhere. Many were ten to fifteen feet tall. As they crashed through forests, they would effectively cleave off dead side-branches of trees, halting the spread of a ground-based fire migrating into the tree crown ("laddering") which is a death knell for a forest.

These animals are all extinct now and forests no longer have any manner of pruning services. But, if we build drones fitted with cutting implements like saws and loppers, optical cameras and AI trained to discern dead branches from living ones, these drones could effectively take over pruning services by identifying, cutting, and dropping to the forest floor, dead branches. The dropped branches simply get collected by the Forest Walker as part of its continual mission.

The drones dock on the back of the Forest Walker to recharge their batteries when low. The whole scene would look like a grazing cow with some flies bothering it. This activity breaks the link between a relatively cool ground based fire and the tree crowns and is a vital element in forest fire control.

The Bitcoin Miner

Mining is one of four monetary incentive models, making this system a possibility for development. The other three are US Dept. of the Interior, township, county, and electrical utility company easement contracts for fuel load management, global carbon credits trading, and data set sales. All the above depends on obvious questions getting answered. I will list some obvious ones, but this is not an engineering document and is not the place for spreadsheets. How much Bitcoin one Forest Walker can mine depends on everything else. What amount of biomass can we process? Will that biomass flow enough Syngas to keep the lights on? Can the chassis support enough mining ASICs and supporting infrastructure? What does that weigh and will it affect field performance? How much power can the AC generator produce?

Other questions that are more philosophical persist. Even if a single Forest Walker can only mine scant amounts of BTC per day, that pales to how much fuel material it can process into biochar. We are talking about millions upon millions of forested acres in need of fuel load management. What can a single Forest Walker do? I am not thinking in singular terms. The Forest Walker must operate as a fleet. What could 50 do? 500?

What is it worth providing a service to the world by managing forest fuel loads? Providing proof of work to the global monetary system? Seeding soil with drought and nutrient resilience by the excretion, over time, of carbon by the ton? What did the last forest fire cost?

The Mesh Network

What could be better than one bitcoin mining, carbon sequestering, forest fire squelching, soil amending behemoth? Thousands of them, but then they would need to be able to talk to each other to coordinate position, data handling, etc. Fitted with a mesh networking device, like goTenna or Meshtastic LoRa equipment enables each Forest Walker to communicate with each other.

Now we have an interconnected fleet of Forest Walkers relaying data to each other and more importantly, aggregating all of that to the last link in the chain for uplink. Well, at least Bitcoin mining data. Since block data is lightweight, transmission of these data via mesh networking in fairly close quartered environs is more than doable. So, how does data transmit to the Bitcoin Network? How do the Forest Walkers get the previous block data necessary to execute on mining?

Back To The Chain

Getting Bitcoin block data to and from the network is the last puzzle piece. The standing presumption here is that wherever a Forest Walker fleet is operating, it is NOT within cell tower range. We further presume that the nearest Walmart Wi-Fi is hours away. Enter the Blockstream Satellite or something like it.

A separate, ground-based drone will have two jobs: To stay as close to the nearest Forest Walker as it can and to provide an antennae for either terrestrial or orbital data uplink. Bitcoin-centric data is transmitted to the "uplink drone" via the mesh networked transmitters and then sent on to the uplink and the whole flow goes in the opposite direction as well; many to one and one to many.

We cannot transmit data to the Blockstream satellite, and it will be up to Blockstream and companies like it to provide uplink capabilities in the future and I don't doubt they will. Starlink you say? What’s stopping that company from filtering out block data? Nothing because it’s Starlink’s system and they could decide to censor these data. It seems we may have a problem sending and receiving Bitcoin data in back country environs.

But, then again, the utility of this system in staunching the fuel load that creates forest fires is extremely useful around forested communities and many have fiber, Wi-Fi and cell towers. These communities could be a welcoming ground zero for first deployments of the Forest Walker system by the home and business owners seeking fire repression. In the best way, Bitcoin subsidizes the safety of the communities.

Sensor Packages

LiDaR

The benefit of having a Forest Walker fleet strolling through the forest is the never ending opportunity for data gathering. A plethora of deployable sensors gathering hyper-accurate data on everything from temperature to topography is yet another revenue generator. Data is valuable and the Forest Walker could generate data sales to various government entities and private concerns.

LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) can map topography, perform biomass assessment, comparative soil erosion analysis, etc. It so happens that the Forest Walker’s ability to “see,” to navigate about its surroundings, is LiDaR driven and since it’s already being used, we can get double duty by harvesting that data for later use. By using a laser to send out light pulses and measuring the time it takes for the reflection of those pulses to return, very detailed data sets incrementally build up. Eventually, as enough data about a certain area becomes available, the data becomes useful and valuable.

Forestry concerns, both private and public, often use LiDaR to build 3D models of tree stands to assess the amount of harvest-able lumber in entire sections of forest. Consulting companies offering these services charge anywhere from several hundred to several thousand dollars per square kilometer for such services. A Forest Walker generating such assessments on the fly while performing its other functions is a multi-disciplinary approach to revenue generation.

pH, Soil Moisture, and Cation Exchange Sensing

The Forest Walker is quadrupedal, so there are four contact points to the soil. Why not get a pH data point for every step it takes? We can also gather soil moisture data and cation exchange capacities at unheard of densities because of sampling occurring on the fly during commission of the system’s other duties. No one is going to build a machine to do pH testing of vast tracts of forest soils, but that doesn’t make the data collected from such an endeavor valueless. Since the Forest Walker serves many functions at once, a multitude of data products can add to the return on investment component.

Weather Data

Temperature, humidity, pressure, and even data like evapotranspiration gathered at high densities on broad acre scales have untold value and because the sensors are lightweight and don’t require large power budgets, they come along for the ride at little cost. But, just like the old mantra, “gas, grass, or ass, nobody rides for free”, these sensors provide potential revenue benefits just by them being present.

I’ve touched on just a few data genres here. In fact, the question for universities, governmental bodies, and other institutions becomes, “How much will you pay us to attach your sensor payload to the Forest Walker?”

Noise Suppression

Only you can prevent Metallica filling the surrounds with 120 dB of sound. Easy enough, just turn the car stereo off. But what of a fleet of 50 Forest Walkers operating in the backcountry or near a township? 500? 5000? Each one has a wood chipper, an internal combustion engine, hydraulic pumps, actuators, and more cooling fans than you can shake a stick at. It’s a walking, screaming fire-breathing dragon operating continuously, day and night, twenty-four hours a day, three hundred sixty-five days a year. The sound will negatively affect all living things and that impacts behaviors. Serious engineering consideration and prowess must deliver a silencing blow to the major issue of noise.

It would be foolish to think that a fleet of Forest Walkers could be silent, but if not a major design consideration, then the entire idea is dead on arrival. Townships would not allow them to operate even if they solved the problem of widespread fuel load and neither would governmental entities, and rightly so. Nothing, not man nor beast, would want to be subjected to an eternal, infernal scream even if it were to end within days as the fleet moved further away after consuming what it could. Noise and heat are the only real pollutants of this system; taking noise seriously from the beginning is paramount.

Fire Safety

A “fire-breathing dragon” is not the worst description of the Forest Walker. It eats wood, combusts it at very high temperatures and excretes carbon; and it does so in an extremely flammable environment. Bad mix for one Forest Walker, worse for many. One must take extreme pains to ensure that during normal operation, a Forest Walker could fall over, walk through tinder dry brush, or get pounded into the ground by a meteorite from Krypton and it wouldn’t destroy epic swaths of trees and baby deer. I envision an ultimate test of a prototype to include dowsing it in grain alcohol while it’s wrapped up in toilet paper like a pledge at a fraternity party. If it runs for 72 hours and doesn’t set everything on fire, then maybe outside entities won’t be fearful of something that walks around forests with a constant fire in its belly.

The Wrap

How we think about what can be done with and adjacent to Bitcoin is at least as important as Bitcoin’s economic standing itself. For those who will tell me that this entire idea is without merit, I say, “OK, fine. You can come up with something, too.” What can we plug Bitcoin into that, like a battery, makes something that does not work, work? That’s the lesson I get from this entire exercise. No one was ever going to hire teams of humans to go out and "clean the forest". There's no money in that. The data collection and sales from such an endeavor might provide revenues over the break-even point but investment demands Alpha in this day and age. But, plug Bitcoin into an almost viable system and, voilà! We tip the scales to achieve lift-off.

Let’s face it, we haven’t scratched the surface of Bitcoin’s forcing function on our minds. Not because it’s Bitcoin, but because of what that invention means. The question that pushes me to approach things this way is, “what can we create that one system’s waste is another system’s feedstock?” The Forest Walker system’s only real waste is the conversion of low entropy energy (wood and syngas) into high entropy energy (heat and noise). All other output is beneficial to humanity.

Bitcoin, I believe, is the first product of a new mode of human imagination. An imagination newly forged over the past few millennia of being lied to, stolen from, distracted and otherwise mis-allocated to a black hole of the nonsensical. We are waking up.

What I have presented is not science fiction. Everything I have described here is well within the realm of possibility. The question is one of viability, at least in terms of the detritus of the old world we find ourselves departing from. This system would take a non-trivial amount of time and resources to develop. I think the system would garner extensive long-term contracts from those who have the most to lose from wildfires, the most to gain from hyperaccurate data sets, and, of course, securing the most precious asset in the world. Many may not see it that way, for they seek Alpha and are therefore blind to other possibilities. Others will see only the possibilities; of thinking in a new way, of looking at things differently, and dreaming of what comes next.

@ 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

@ 58638ea8:a443a463

I had not used my Lightning node in a while so I was busy configuring it, when I came accross my old Nostr keys to this account a few days ago.

So I was trying to access my Nostr private key which I had saved in Alby Wallet, but there was a problem. It seemed that for some reason, Alby Wallet was having trouble connecting to my node. (perhaps due to it starting up and shutting down so many times). Well the node was fine, I confirmed, but I was prevented from reading the Nostr settings and data by an infinite loading circle.

Nostr keys are basically like xpub/xprv keys in Bitcoin except that they start with npub and nsec respectively. They are still encoded in Bech32 I think. You use them to chat at the Nostr social network. A decentralized X/Twitter basically.

Eventually, I thought I had found a backup of my Nostr keys in my password manager, and proceeded to clear all the placeholder entries in my wallet, including the Nostr wallet.

Big mistake.

It turned out that the mnemonic I had saved in my password manager makes a completely different key and that I had actually imported the Nostr secret key form another program rather than generated a menmonic phrase.

Naturally, I started to panic as I did not have any copies of it. I thought about inspecting the Chrome browser for the data directly, but by that point I had already deleted the Nostr keys.

But then I remembered that I make backups of my whole system in the early morning and save them on some server, including my Chrome profile, so I thought why not look inside the backup and see if I can find it. But I had to hurry because the files would be overwritten in about 24 hours from then.

I didn't actually know how I was going to go about and get my keys from the backups except for the fact that I knew that extensions have a long identifier like iokeahhehimjnekafflcihljlcjccdbe and that each extension has a folder with that sort of name in the Extensions directory of the Chrome user data dir.

What followed next would be an adventure in coding, lobbing open database files, and encryption.

Locating the extension settings

As I definitely remembered my wallet password and name, I would be able to decrypt the wallet if I ever found it. Which was the first problem - I wasn't really sure where it was.

The fine details of my backup structure meant that all the config files were in a tarball, so I just did a scan for the extension ID, which yielded, among other results, this:

So I at least knew where the extension settings live, but I wasn't sure what any of the files did. AGI was mostly useless for this, except for telling me that those IndexedDB folders must have contained my settings. Spoiler alert: they didn't - and I wasted an hour trying to open the LevelDB file inside, which by the way were specially modified for Chrome so could not even be opened in regular libraries.

It turned out that parsing the database file with a library was a huge waste of time, so eventually I just used tools like cat and less to read the lines. I had better luck with the Sync Extension Settings folder though, and when you open it it looks something like this:

Don't worry, everything is encrypted. And it appears to be encoded in base64.

Decrypting the payload

For what came next, I had to look at Alby Wallet's source code on Github. And I happened to learn a lot about how Alby Wallet worked under the hood. Like did you know that there is actually an API just for extracting settings from the disk? Which was what I needed to see.

A couple of minutes of browsing brought me to this file: getPrivateKey.ts

And so it became clear to me that 1) All this is Typescript, which I am glad I still remember, and 2) those "getPrivateKey" fields were indeed my Nostr private key. (Later on decryption I also found my LN node URL and admin macaroon.) But although I knew my password, I did not know what decryption algorithm it is using. The good news is that I found it in another file called common/lib/crypto.ts.

I had to clean the functions quite a bit so that they would run in Node, as well as install that "crypto-js" dependency, but it was worth it. It even took care of the Base64 encoding. By the way, the encryption seems to be AES-256 with a salt. So that's pretty secure.

Decryption yielded the Nostr private key in hex form, with which I could derive the nsec and npub keypair and recover my Nostr account.

Be careful with your nostr keys - they're like Bitcoin Core keys. Hard to write down and better off in a password manager.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

My blog posts and reading material have both been on a decidedly economics-heavy slant recently. The topic today, incentives, squarely falls into the category of economics. However, when I say economics, I’m not talking about “analyzing supply and demand curves.” I’m talking about the true basis of economics: understanding how human beings make decisions in a world of scarcity.

A fair definition of incentive is “a reward or punishment that motivates behavior to achieve a desired outcome.” When most people think about economic incentives, they’re thinking of money. If I offer my son $5 if he washes the dishes, I’m incentivizing certain behavior. We can’t guarantee that he’ll do what I want him to do, but we can agree that the incentive structure itself will guide and ultimately determine what outcome will occur.

The great thing about monetary incentives is how easy they are to talk about and compare. “Would I rather make $5 washing the dishes or $10 cleaning the gutters?” But much of the world is incentivized in non-monetary ways too. For example, using the “punishment” half of the definition above, I might threaten my son with losing Nintendo Switch access if he doesn’t wash the dishes. No money is involved, but I’m still incentivizing behavior.

And there are plenty of incentives beyond our direct control! My son is also incentivized to not wash dishes because it’s boring, or because he has some friends over that he wants to hang out with, or dozens of other things. Ultimately, the conflicting array of different incentive structures placed on him will ultimately determine what actions he chooses to take.

Why incentives matter

A phrase I see often in discussions—whether they are political, parenting, economic, or business—is “if they could just do…” Each time I see that phrase, I cringe a bit internally. Usually, the underlying assumption of the statement is “if people would behave contrary to their incentivized behavior then things would be better.” For example:

• If my kids would just go to bed when I tell them, they wouldn’t be so cranky in the morning.
• If people would just use the recycling bin, we wouldn’t have such a landfill problem.
• If people would just stop being lazy, our team would deliver our project on time.

In all these cases, the speakers are seemingly flummoxed as to why the people in question don’t behave more rationally. The problem is: each group is behaving perfectly rationally.

• The kids have a high time preference, and care more about the joy of staying up now than the crankiness in the morning. Plus, they don’t really suffer the consequences of morning crankiness, their parents do.
• No individual suffers much from their individual contribution to a landfill. If they stopped growing the size of the landfill, it would make an insignificant difference versus the amount of effort they need to engage in to properly recycle.
• If a team doesn’t properly account for the productivity of individuals on a project, each individual receives less harm from their own inaction. Sure, the project may be delayed, company revenue may be down, and they may even risk losing their job when the company goes out of business. But their laziness individually won’t determine the entirety of that outcome. By contrast, they greatly benefit from being lazy by getting to relax at work, go on social media, read a book, or do whatever else they do when they’re supposed to be working.

My point here is that, as long as you ignore the reality of how incentives drive human behavior, you’ll fail at getting the outcomes you want.

If everything I wrote up until now made perfect sense, you understand the premise of this blog post. The rest of it will focus on a bunch of real-world examples to hammer home the point, and demonstrate how versatile this mental model is.

Running a company

Let’s say I run my own company, with myself as the only employee. My personal revenue will be 100% determined by my own actions. If I decide to take Tuesday afternoon off and go fishing, I’ve chosen to lose that afternoon’s revenue. Implicitly, I’ve decided that the enjoyment I get from an afternoon of fishing is greater than the potential revenue. You may think I’m being lazy, but it’s my decision to make. In this situation, the incentive–money–is perfectly aligned with my actions.

Compare this to a typical company/employee relationship. I might have a bank of Paid Time Off (PTO) days, in which case once again my incentives are relatively aligned. I know that I can take off 15 days throughout the year, and I’ve chosen to use half a day for the fishing trip. All is still good.

What about unlimited time off? Suddenly incentives are starting to misalign. I don’t directly pay a price for not showing up to work on Tuesday. Or Wednesday as well, for that matter. I might ultimately be fired for not doing my job, but that will take longer to work its way through the system than simply not making any money for the day taken off.

Compensation overall falls into this misaligned incentive structure. Let’s forget about taking time off. Instead, I work full time on a software project I’m assigned. But instead of using the normal toolchain we’re all used to at work, I play around with a new programming language. I get the fun and joy of playing with new technology, and potentially get to pad my resume a bit when I’m ready to look for a new job. But my current company gets slower results, less productivity, and is forced to subsidize my extracurricular learning.

When a CEO has a bonus structure based on profitability, he’ll do everything he can to make the company profitable. This might include things that actually benefit the company, like improving product quality, reducing internal red tape, or finding cheaper vendors. But it might also include destructive practices, like slashing the R\&D budget to show massive profits this year, in exchange for a catastrophe next year when the next version of the product fails to ship.

Or my favorite example. My parents owned a business when I was growing up. They had a back office where they ran operations like accounting. All of the furniture was old couches from our house. After all, any money they spent on furniture came right out of their paychecks! But in a large corporate environment, each department is generally given a budget for office furniture, a budget which doesn’t roll over year-to-year. The result? Executives make sure to spend the entire budget each year, often buying furniture far more expensive than they would choose if it was their own money.

There are plenty of details you can quibble with above. It’s in a company’s best interest to give people downtime so that they can come back recharged. Having good ergonomic furniture can in fact increase productivity in excess of the money spent on it. But overall, the picture is pretty clear: in large corporate structures, you’re guaranteed to have mismatches between the company’s goals and the incentive structure placed on individuals.

Using our model from above, we can lament how lazy, greedy, and unethical the employees are for doing what they’re incentivized to do instead of what’s right. But that’s simply ignoring the reality of human nature.

Moral hazard

Moral hazard is a situation where one party is incentivized to take on more risk because another party will bear the consequences. Suppose I tell my son when he turns 21 (or whatever legal gambling age is) that I’ll cover all his losses for a day at the casino, but he gets to keep all the winnings.

What do you think he’s going to do? The most logical course of action is to place the largest possible bets for as long as possible, asking me to cover each time he loses, and taking money off the table and into his bank account each time he wins.

But let’s look at a slightly more nuanced example. I go to a bathroom in the mall. As I’m leaving, I wash my hands. It will take me an extra 1 second to turn off the water when I’m done washing. That’s a trivial price to pay. If I don’t turn off the water, the mall will have to pay for many liters of wasted water, benefiting no one. But I won’t suffer any consequences at all.

This is also a moral hazard, but most people will still turn off the water. Why? Usually due to some combination of other reasons such as:

1. We’re so habituated to turning off the water that we don’t even consider not turning it off. Put differently, the mental effort needed to not turn off the water is more expensive than the 1 second of time to turn it off.
2. Many of us have been brought up with a deep guilt about wasting resources like water. We have an internal incentive structure that makes the 1 second to turn off the water much less costly than the mental anguish of the waste we created.
3. We’re afraid we’ll be caught by someone else and face some kind of social repercussions. (Or maybe more than social. Are you sure there isn’t a law against leaving the water tap on?)

Even with all that in place, you may notice that many public bathrooms use automatic water dispensers. Sure, there’s a sanitation reason for that, but it’s also to avoid this moral hazard.

A common denominator in both of these is that the person taking the action that causes the liability (either the gambling or leaving the water on) is not the person who bears the responsibility for that liability (the father or the mall owner). Generally speaking, the closer together the person making the decision and the person incurring the liability are, the smaller the moral hazard.

It’s easy to demonstrate that by extending the casino example a bit. I said it was the father who was covering the losses of the gambler. Many children (though not all) would want to avoid totally bankrupting their parents, or at least financially hurting them. Instead, imagine that someone from the IRS shows up at your door, hands you a credit card, and tells you you can use it at a casino all day, taking home all the chips you want. The money is coming from the government. How many people would put any restriction on how much they spend?

And since we’re talking about the government already…

Government moral hazards

As I was preparing to write this blog post, the California wildfires hit. The discussions around those wildfires gave a huge number of examples of moral hazards. I decided to cherry-pick a few for this post.

The first and most obvious one: California is asking for disaster relief funds from the federal government. That sounds wonderful. These fires were a natural disaster, so why shouldn’t the federal government pitch in and help take care of people?

The problem is, once again, a moral hazard. In the case of the wildfires, California and Los Angeles both had ample actions they could have taken to mitigate the destruction of this fire: better forest management, larger fire department, keeping the water reservoirs filled, and probably much more that hasn’t come to light yet.

If the federal government bails out California, it will be a clear message for the future: your mistakes will be fixed by others. You know what kind of behavior that incentivizes? More risky behavior! Why spend state funds on forest management and extra firefighters—activities that don’t win politicians a lot of votes in general—when you could instead spend it on a football stadium, higher unemployment payments, or anything else, and then let the feds cover the cost of screw-ups.

You may notice that this is virtually identical to the 2008 “too big to fail” bail-outs. Wall Street took insanely risky behavior, reaped huge profits for years, and when they eventually got caught with their pants down, the rest of us bailed them out. “Privatizing profits, socializing losses.”

And here’s the absolute best part of this: I can’t even truly blame either California or Wall Street. (I mean, I do blame them, I think their behavior is reprehensible, but you’ll see what I mean.) In a world where the rules of the game implicitly include the bail-out mentality, you would be harming your citizens/shareholders/investors if you didn’t engage in that risky behavior. Since everyone is on the hook for those socialized losses, your best bet is to maximize those privatized profits.

There’s a lot more to government and moral hazard, but I think these two cases demonstrate the crux pretty solidly. But let’s leave moral hazard behind for a bit and get to general incentivization discussions.

Non-monetary competition

At least 50% of the economics knowledge I have comes from the very first econ course I took in college. That professor was amazing, and had some very colorful stories. I can’t vouch for the veracity of the two I’m about to share, but they definitely drive the point home.

In the 1970s, the US had an oil shortage. To “fix” this problem, they instituted price caps on gasoline, which of course resulted in insufficient gasoline. To “fix” this problem, they instituted policies where, depending on your license plate number, you could only fill up gas on certain days of the week. (Irrelevant detail for our point here, but this just resulted in people filling up their tanks more often, no reduction in gas usage.)

Anyway, my professor’s wife had a friend. My professor described in great detail how attractive this woman was. I’ll skip those details here since this is a PG-rated blog. In any event, she never had any trouble filling up her gas tank any day of the week. She would drive up, be told she couldn’t fill up gas today, bat her eyes at the attendant, explain how helpless she was, and was always allowed to fill up gas.

This is a demonstration of non-monetary compensation. Most of the time in a free market, capitalist economy, people are compensated through money. When price caps come into play, there’s a limit to how much monetary compensation someone can receive. And in that case, people find other ways of competing. Like this woman’s case: through using flirtatious behavior to compensate the gas station workers to let her cheat the rules.

The other example was much more insidious. Santa Monica had a problem: it was predominantly wealthy and white. They wanted to fix this problem, and decided to put in place rent controls. After some time, they discovered that Santa Monica had become wealthier and whiter, the exact opposite of their desired outcome. Why would that happen?

Someone investigated, and ended up interviewing a landlady that demonstrated the reason. She was an older white woman, and admittedly racist. Prior to the rent controls, she would list her apartments in the newspaper, and would be legally obligated to rent to anyone who could afford it. Once rent controls were in place, she took a different tact. She knew that she would only get a certain amount for the apartment, and that the demand for apartments was higher than the supply. That meant she could be picky.

She ended up finding tenants through friends-of-friends. Since it wasn’t an official advertisement, she wasn’t legally required to rent it out if someone could afford to pay. Instead, she got to interview people individually and then make them an offer. Normally, that would have resulted in receiving a lower rental price, but not under rent controls.

So who did she choose? A young, unmarried, wealthy, white woman. It made perfect sense. Women were less intimidating and more likely to maintain the apartment better. Wealthy people, she determined, would be better tenants. (I have no idea if this is true in practice or not, I’m not a landlord myself.) Unmarried, because no kids running around meant less damage to the property. And, of course, white. Because she was racist, and her incentive structure made her prefer whites.

You can deride her for being racist, I won’t disagree with you. But it’s simply the reality. Under the non-rent-control scenario, her profit motive for money outweighed her racism motive. But under rent control, the monetary competition was removed, and she was free to play into her racist tendencies without facing any negative consequences.

Bureaucracy

These were the two examples I remember for that course. But non-monetary compensation pops up in many more places. One highly pertinent example is bureaucracies. Imagine you have a government office, or a large corporation’s acquisition department, or the team that apportions grants at a university. In all these cases, you have a group of people making decisions about handing out money that has no monetary impact on them. If they give to the best qualified recipients, they receive no raises. If they spend the money recklessly on frivolous projects, they face no consequences.

Under such an incentivization scheme, there’s little to encourage the bureaucrats to make intelligent funding decisions. Instead, they’ll be incentivized to spend the money where they recognize non-monetary benefits. This is why it’s so common to hear about expensive meals, gift bags at conferences, and even more inappropriate ways of trying to curry favor with those that hold the purse strings.

Compare that ever so briefly with the purchases made by a small mom-and-pop store like my parents owned. Could my dad take a bribe to buy from a vendor who’s ripping him off? Absolutely he could! But he’d lose more on the deal than he’d make on the bribe, since he’s directly incentivized by the deal itself. It would make much more sense for him to go with the better vendor, save $5,000 on the deal, and then treat himself to a lavish $400 meal to celebrate.

Government incentivized behavior

This post is getting longer in the tooth than I’d intended, so I’ll finish off with this section and make it a bit briefer. Beyond all the methods mentioned above, government has another mechanism for modifying behavior: through directly changing incentives via legislation, regulation, and monetary policy. Let’s see some examples:

• Artificial modification of interest rates encourages people to take on more debt than they would in a free capital market, leading to malinvestment and a consumer debt crisis, and causing the boom-bust cycle we all painfully experience.
• Going along with that, giving tax breaks on interest payments further artificially incentivizes people to take on debt that they wouldn’t otherwise.
• During COVID-19, at some points unemployment benefits were greater than minimum wage, incentivizing people to rather stay home and not work than get a job, leading to reduced overall productivity in the economy and more printed dollars for benefits. In other words, it was a perfect recipe for inflation.
• The tax code gives deductions to “help” people. That might be true, but the real impact is incentivizing people to make decisions they wouldn’t have otherwise. For example, giving out tax deductions on children encourages having more kids. Tax deductions on childcare and preschools incentivizes dual-income households. Whether or not you like the outcomes, it’s clear that it’s government that’s encouraging these outcomes to happen.
• Tax incentives cause people to engage in behavior they wouldn’t otherwise (daycare+working mother, for example).
• Inflation means that the value of your money goes down over time, which encourages people to spend more today, when their money has a larger impact. (Milton Friedman described this as high living.)

Conclusion

The idea here is simple, and fully encapsulated in the title: incentives determine outcomes. If you want to know how to get a certain outcome from others, incentivize them to want that to happen. If you want to understand why people act in seemingly irrational ways, check their incentives. If you’re confused why leaders (and especially politicians) seem to engage in destructive behavior, check their incentives.

We can bemoan these realities all we want, but they are realities. While there are some people who have a solid internal moral and ethical code, and that internal code incentivizes them to behave against their externally-incentivized interests, those people are rare. And frankly, those people are self-defeating. People should take advantage of the incentives around them. Because if they don’t, someone else will.

(If you want a literary example of that last comment, see the horse in Animal Farm.)

How do we improve the world under these conditions? Make sure the incentives align well with the overall goals of society. To me, it’s a simple formula:

• Focus on free trade, value for value, as the basis of a society. In that system, people are always incentivized to provide value to other people.
• Reduce the size of bureaucracies and large groups of all kinds. The larger an organization becomes, the farther the consequences of decisions are from those who make them.
• And since the nature of human beings will be to try and create areas where they can control the incentive systems to their own benefits, make that as difficult as possible. That comes in the form of strict limits on government power, for example.

And even if you don’t want to buy in to this conclusion, I hope the rest of the content was educational, and maybe a bit entertaining!

@ 7460b7fd:4fc4e74b

请看2014年王兴的一场思维碰撞，视频27分钟开始

最后，一个当时无法解决的点：丢失

@ 4523be58:ba1facd0

NIP-116

Event paths

Description

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

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

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

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

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

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

Example

Event

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

Query

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

Motivation

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

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

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

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

Implementations

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

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

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

I’ve been using Notedeck for several months, starting with its extremely early and experimental alpha versions, all the way to its current, more stable alpha releases. The journey has been fascinating, as I’ve had the privilege of watching it evolve from a concept into a functional and promising tool.

In its earliest stages, Notedeck was raw—offering glimpses of its potential but still far from practical for daily use. Even then, the vision behind it was clear: a platform designed to redefine how we interact with Nostr by offering flexibility and power for all users.

I'm very bullish on Notedeck. Why? Because Will Casarin is making it! Duh! 😂

Seriously though, if we’re reimagining the web and rebuilding portions of the Internet, it’s important to recognize the potential of Notedeck. If Nostr is reimagining the web, then Notedeck is reimagining the Nostr client.

Notedeck isn’t just another Nostr app—it’s more a Nostr browser that functions more like an operating system with micro-apps. How cool is that?

Much like how Google's Chrome evolved from being a web browser with a task manager into ChromeOS, a full blown operating system, Notedeck aims to transform how we interact with the Nostr. It goes beyond individual apps, offering a foundation for a fully integrated ecosystem built around Nostr.

As a Nostr evangelist, I love to scream INTEROPERABILITY and tout every application's integrations. Well, Notedeck has the potential to be one of the best platforms to showcase these integrations in entirely new and exciting ways.

Do you want an Olas feed of images? Add the media column.

Do you want a feed of live video events? Add the zap.stream column.

Do you want Nostr Nests or audio chats? Add that column to your Notedeck.

Git? Email? Books? Chat and DMs? It's all possible.

Not everyone wants a super app though, and that’s okay. As with most things in the Nostr ecosystem, flexibility is key. Notedeck gives users the freedom to choose how they engage with it—whether it’s simply following hashtags or managing straightforward feeds. You'll be able to tailor Notedeck to fit your needs, using it as extensively or minimally as you prefer.

Notedeck is designed with a local-first approach, utilizing Nostr content stored directly on your device via the local nostrdb. This will enable a plethora of advanced tools such as search and filtering, the creation of custom feeds, and the ability to develop personalized algorithms across multiple Notedeck micro-applications—all with unparalleled flexibility.

Notedeck also supports multicast. Let's geek out for a second. Multicast is a method of communication where data is sent from one source to multiple destinations simultaneously, but only to devices that wish to receive the data. Unlike broadcast, which sends data to all devices on a network, multicast targets specific receivers, reducing network traffic. This is commonly used for efficient data distribution in scenarios like streaming, conferencing, or large-scale data synchronization between devices.

In a local first world where each device holds local copies of your nostr nodes, and each device transparently syncs with each other on the local network, each node becomes a backup. Your data becomes antifragile automatically. When a node goes down it can resync and recover from other nodes. Even if not all nodes have a complete collection, negentropy can pull down only what is needed from each device. All this can be done without internet.

-Will Casarin

In the context of Notedeck, multicast would allow multiple devices to sync their Nostr nodes with each other over a local network without needing an internet connection. Wild.

Notedeck aims to offer full customization too, including the ability to design and share custom skins, much like Winamp. Users will also be able to create personalized columns and, in the future, share their setups with others. This opens the door for power users to craft tailored Nostr experiences, leveraging their expertise in the protocol and applications. By sharing these configurations as "Starter Decks," they can simplify onboarding and showcase the best of Nostr’s ecosystem.

Nostr’s “Other Stuff” can often be difficult to discover, use, or understand. Many users doesn't understand or know how to use web browser extensions to login to applications. Let's not even get started with nsecbunkers. Notedeck will address this challenge by providing a native experience that brings these lesser-known applications, tools, and content into a user-friendly and accessible interface, making exploration seamless. However, that doesn't mean Notedeck should disregard power users that want to use nsecbunkers though - hint hint.

For anyone interested in watching Nostr be developed live, right before your very eyes, Notedeck’s progress serves as a reminder of what’s possible when innovation meets dedication. The current alpha is already demonstrating its ability to handle complex use cases, and I’m excited to see how it continues to grow as it moves toward a full release later this year.

@ 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

@ 42342239:1d80db24

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

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

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

Market forces or "market forces"?

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

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

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

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

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

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

The old European disease

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

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

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

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

@ 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

} ```

@ 16d11430:61640947

The persistence of economic inequality and systemic exploitation is intrinsically linked to the fiat monetary system. This framework, established and perpetuated through colonial governance, remains a central mechanism of control in post-colonial societies. Decentralized technologies, particularly Bitcoin, provide an alternative model that has the potential to disrupt these systems. The following analysis examines the structural components of the colonial fiat mindset and assesses Bitcoin's capacity to challenge these mechanisms.

---

The Structure of the Colonial Fiat System

The fiat monetary system, created to centralize economic authority, serves as a tool for wealth extraction and power consolidation. Key structural components include:

1. Currency Manipulation: Fiat systems rely on central banks to control money supply, often through inflationary policies. Inflation reduces the value of money over time, disproportionately impacting populations with limited access to assets.

2. Debt Dependency: International lending institutions utilize fiat-based loans to establish economic dependence. Structural adjustment programs, often tied to these loans, enforce policies that prioritize debt repayment over local development.

3. Resource Allocation: Fiat economies are designed to facilitate continuous growth. This necessitates the extraction and export of natural resources, frequently sourced from regions with limited negotiating power. Compensation for these resources is typically inequitable.

4. Economic Exclusivity: Access to fiat-based financial systems is regulated by intermediaries, such as banks. These barriers systematically exclude populations without the requisite infrastructure or compliance capabilities.

---

Bitcoin as a Disruptive System

Bitcoin introduces a decentralized financial architecture with attributes that contrast fundamentally with fiat systems. Its operational principles include:

1. Decentralization: Bitcoin's network is maintained by distributed nodes, eliminating centralized control. This structure prevents single-entity manipulation of monetary policy.

2. Supply Limitations: Bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million units enforces scarcity, eliminating inflationary erosion of value. This feature incentivizes long-term wealth preservation.

3. Inclusion by Design: Bitcoin enables direct participation without reliance on intermediaries. Individuals with access to internet-connected devices can transact globally, bypassing traditional financial gatekeepers.

4. Transparent Ledger: The Bitcoin blockchain records all transactions on a public ledger, ensuring verifiability and reducing the risk of opaque practices often associated with fiat systems.

---

Mechanisms of Transition

For Bitcoin to displace the fiat framework, specific systemic transitions must occur:

1. Education Deployment: Widespread knowledge dissemination is required to enable individuals and organizations to utilize Bitcoin effectively. This includes technical training and comprehension of Bitcoin's operational principles.

2. Resource Sovereignty: Communities reliant on resource extraction for economic viability must adopt systems that ensure direct and equitable compensation. Bitcoin's decentralized nature allows for immediate settlements and transparent payment structures.

3. Policy Integration: Existing legal and regulatory frameworks are aligned with fiat systems. Adoption of Bitcoin necessitates legislative adjustments to incorporate decentralized financial models.

4. Cultural Adaptation: Historical systems of economic interaction, suppressed by fiat systems, may integrate with decentralized technologies. This requires the establishment of locally controlled infrastructures.

---

Evaluation of Challenges

The transition from fiat to Bitcoin-based systems is constrained by multiple factors:

1. Institutional Resistance: Governments and financial entities reliant on fiat control mechanisms may impose regulatory barriers to Bitcoin adoption.

2. Infrastructure Requirements: Effective Bitcoin utilization depends on reliable access to digital infrastructure, which remains unevenly distributed.

3. Energy Expenditure: Bitcoin mining operations require significant energy inputs, creating potential conflicts with sustainability initiatives.

4. Adoption Scalability: The shift to Bitcoin as a primary financial system necessitates widespread acceptance across diverse economic sectors.

---

Conclusion

The colonial fiat mindset represents a system of centralized economic authority with embedded mechanisms of exploitation. Bitcoin introduces an alternative that decentralizes control, enforces monetary scarcity, and enables global inclusion. While the transition to Bitcoin-based systems is feasible, it requires addressing infrastructural, regulatory, and adoption-related challenges. The implementation of Bitcoin as a disruptive force in financial systems is contingent on its capacity to integrate with existing economic structures while providing measurable advantages over fiat systems.

@ 0d97beae:c5274a14

This article hopes to complement the article by Lyn Alden on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk_HWmmwiAs

The reason why we have broken money

Before the invention of key technologies such as the printing press and electronic communications, even such as those as early as morse code transmitters, gold had won the competition for best medium of money around the world.

In fact, it was not just gold by itself that became money, rulers and world leaders developed coins in order to help the economy grow. Gold nuggets were not as easy to transact with as coins with specific imprints and denominated sizes.

However, these modern technologies created massive efficiencies that allowed us to communicate and perform services more efficiently and much faster, yet the medium of money could not benefit from these advancements. Gold was heavy, slow and expensive to move globally, even though requesting and performing services globally did not have this limitation anymore.

Banks took initiative and created derivatives of gold: paper and electronic money; these new currencies allowed the economy to continue to grow and evolve, but it was not without its dark side. Today, no currency is denominated in gold at all, money is backed by nothing and its inherent value, the paper it is printed on, is worthless too.

Banks and governments eventually transitioned from a money derivative to a system of debt that could be co-opted and controlled for political and personal reasons. Our money today is broken and is the cause of more expensive, poorer quality goods in the economy, a larger and ever growing wealth gap, and many of the follow-on problems that have come with it.

Bitcoin overcomes the "transfer of hard money" problem

Just like gold coins were created by man, Bitcoin too is a technology created by man. Bitcoin, however is a much more profound invention, possibly more of a discovery than an invention in fact. Bitcoin has proven to be unbreakable, incorruptible and has upheld its ability to keep its units scarce, inalienable and counterfeit proof through the nature of its own design.

Since Bitcoin is a digital technology, it can be transferred across international borders almost as quickly as information itself. It therefore severely reduces the need for a derivative to be used to represent money to facilitate digital trade. This means that as the currency we use today continues to fare poorly for many people, bitcoin will continue to stand out as hard money, that just so happens to work as well, functionally, along side it.

Bitcoin will also always be available to anyone who wishes to earn it directly; even China is unable to restrict its citizens from accessing it. The dollar has traditionally become the currency for people who discover that their local currency is unsustainable. Even when the dollar has become illegal to use, it is simply used privately and unofficially. However, because bitcoin does not require you to trade it at a bank in order to use it across borders and across the web, Bitcoin will continue to be a viable escape hatch until we one day hit some critical mass where the world has simply adopted Bitcoin globally and everyone else must adopt it to survive.

Bitcoin has not yet proven that it can support the world at scale. However it can only be tested through real adoption, and just as gold coins were developed to help gold scale, tools will be developed to help overcome problems as they arise; ideally without the need for another derivative, but if necessary, hopefully with one that is more neutral and less corruptible than the derivatives used to represent gold.

Bitcoin blurs the line between commodity and technology

Bitcoin is a technology, it is a tool that requires human involvement to function, however it surprisingly does not allow for any concentration of power. Anyone can help to facilitate Bitcoin's operations, but no one can take control of its behaviour, its reach, or its prioritisation, as it operates autonomously based on a pre-determined, neutral set of rules.

At the same time, its built-in incentive mechanism ensures that people do not have to operate bitcoin out of the good of their heart. Even though the system cannot be co-opted holistically, It will not stop operating while there are people motivated to trade their time and resources to keep it running and earn from others' transaction fees. Although it requires humans to operate it, it remains both neutral and sustainable.

Never before have we developed or discovered a technology that could not be co-opted and used by one person or faction against another. Due to this nature, Bitcoin's units are often described as a commodity; they cannot be usurped or virtually cloned, and they cannot be affected by political biases.

The dangers of derivatives

A derivative is something created, designed or developed to represent another thing in order to solve a particular complication or problem. For example, paper and electronic money was once a derivative of gold.

In the case of Bitcoin, if you cannot link your units of bitcoin to an "address" that you personally hold a cryptographically secure key to, then you very likely have a derivative of bitcoin, not bitcoin itself. If you buy bitcoin on an online exchange and do not withdraw the bitcoin to a wallet that you control, then you legally own an electronic derivative of bitcoin.

Bitcoin is a new technology. It will have a learning curve and it will take time for humanity to learn how to comprehend, authenticate and take control of bitcoin collectively. Having said that, many people all over the world are already using and relying on Bitcoin natively. For many, it will require for people to find the need or a desire for a neutral money like bitcoin, and to have been burned by derivatives of it, before they start to understand the difference between the two. Eventually, it will become an essential part of what we regard as common sense.

Learn for yourself

If you wish to learn more about how to handle bitcoin and avoid derivatives, you can start by searching online for tutorials about "Bitcoin self custody".

There are many options available, some more practical for you, and some more practical for others. Don't spend too much time trying to find the perfect solution; practice and learn. You may make mistakes along the way, so be careful not to experiment with large amounts of your bitcoin as you explore new ideas and technologies along the way. This is similar to learning anything, like riding a bicycle; you are sure to fall a few times, scuff the frame, so don't buy a high performance racing bike while you're still learning to balance.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

The ongoing debate surrounding freedom of expression may revolve more around determining who gets to control the dissemination of information rather than any claimed notion of safeguarding democracy. Similarities can be identified from 500 years ago, following the invention of the printing press.

What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

-- Ecclesiastes 1:9

The debate over freedom of expression and its limits continues to rage on. In the UK, citizens are being arrested for sharing humouristic images. In Ireland, it may soon become illegal to possess "reckless" memes. Australia is trying to get X to hide information. Venezuela's Maduro blocked X earlier this year, as did a judge on Brazil's Supreme Court. In the US, a citizen has been imprisoned for spreading misleading material following a controversial court ruling. In Germany, the police are searching for a social media user who called a politician overweight. Many are also expressing concerns about deep fakes (AI-generated videos, images, or audio that are designed to deceive).

These questions are not new, however. What we perceive as new questions are often just a reflection of earlier times. After Gutenberg invented the printing press in the 15th century, there were soon hundreds of printing presses across Europe. The Church began using printing presses to mass-produce indulgences. "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs" was a phrase used by a traveling monk who sold such indulgences at the time. Martin Luther questioned the reasonableness of this practice. Eventually, he posted the 95 theses on the church door in Wittenberg. He also translated the Bible into German. A short time later, his works, also mass-produced, accounted for a third of all books sold in Germany. Luther refused to recant his provocations as then determined by the Church's central authority. He was excommunicated in 1520 by the Pope and soon declared an outlaw by the Holy Roman Emperor.

This did not stop him. Instead, Luther referred to the Pope as "Pope Fart-Ass" and as the "Ass-God in Rome)". He also commissioned caricatures, such as woodcuts showing a female demon giving birth to the Pope and cardinals, of German peasants responding to a papal edict by showing the Pope their backsides and breaking wind, and more.

Gutenberg's printing presses contributed to the spread of information in a way similar to how the internet does in today's society. The Church's ability to control the flow of information was undermined, much like how newspapers, radio, and TV have partially lost this power today. The Pope excommunicated Luther, which is reminiscent of those who are de-platformed or banned from various platforms today. The Emperor declared Luther an outlaw, which is similar to how the UK's Prime Minister is imprisoning British citizens today. Luther called the Pope derogatory names, which is reminiscent of the individual who recently had the audacity to call an overweight German minister overweight.

Freedom of expression must be curtailed to combat the spread of false or harmful information in order to protect democracy, or so it is claimed. But perhaps it is more about who gets to control the flow of information?

As is often the case, there is nothing new under the sun.

@ 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

@ 37fe9853:bcd1b039

yoyoaa

@ 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

@ 6bcc27d2:b67d296e

NIP-28 と NIP-29 はどちらも「特定の集まりに向けたチャット機能」を提供する点では似ているが、根本的に異なるのは「参加や閲覧に制限がない誰でも書き込める公開チャンネル(NIP-28)」か「メンバーシップや権限・ロールを管理できるグループ(NIP-29)」かというところだ。

以下の3点に分けて説明する。 1. 参加や書き込みの自由度 2. 管理やモデレーションの主体 3. ユースケース

参加や書き込みの自由度 - NIP-28は誰でも書き込める設計 - Public Chatはその名の通りパブリックであることが前提で、メンバーシップの概念もない。参加や閲覧に制限がないため、誰でも自由に書き込むことができる。 - NIP-29はロールやメンバーシップがある - NIP-29にはメンバーシップや権限管理（ロール）の概念があり、書き込むにはグループに参加する必要がある。 - 公開／非公開、オープン参加／承認制などの設定をリレー側で柔軟に切り替えられる。そのため、publicタグを設定すれば読むだけは誰でもできるようにする一方でclosedの場合は書き込みに承認が必要…といった柔軟なルール設定ができる。 - また、管理者によるユーザーの追加・削除 (kind:9000, kind:9001) や、リレー自身によるグループ設定 (kind:39000 など) がある。Telegram や Slack の「特定メンバーだけ書き込める」「管理者が追加や除名を行う」ようなイメージ。

管理やモデレーションをリレー/クライアントのどちらで行うか - NIP-28: クライアント側で軽微なモデレーションを行う - NIP-28では、リレーはあくまで Nostr イベントを中継しているだけで、メッセージを消す・投稿者を締め出す等の強制管理は想定していない。 - そのため、リレー側が強制的に検閲するわけではなく、クライアントが主にモデレーションを実行する。 - 例えば、Kind 43（Hide message）や Kind 44（Mute user）を使って「誰のメッセージを隠すか／どのユーザーをミュートするか」をユーザー単位・クライアント単位で制御することができ、コンテンツの見え方をコントロールするのはクライアントとユーザーの自由度が高い。 - NIP-29: リレーがグループを管理する - 逆に、NIP-29はリレーがグループのルールを保持し、それに違反する投稿をブロックしたり、参加ユーザーを追加・除名したりする仕組みがある。 - 複数のリレーに同じグループが存在する(フォークされる)ケースもあり得るが、どのリレーも独自に「このグループ ID ならこういうルール」と管理を行うことが可能。 - そのため、「どの pubkey（ユーザー）が投稿可か」や「グループ名・メタデータ・管理権限はどうなっているか」をリレーのルールで厳密に管理・制御することができる。 - 未管理（unmanaged）状態も許容 リレーが NIP-29 を実装していなくても"unmanaged"なグループとして動作し、誰でも参加可能になる。そこから管理されたmanagedグループに移行することもできる。

ユースケースの違い - NIP-28: オープンなコミュニティ向け 誰でも入れて、タイムライン的にコメントしていけるTelegramやDiscordのような「誰でも閲覧・参加できるチャンネル」を、分散・検閲耐性をもった形で実現したい場合。

• NIP-29: クローズド or ロール付きのコミュニティ向け Slack やプライベート Discord、あるいは有料購読者限定グループのように「メンバーシップ制」や「誰が管理者か」「参加申請をどう処理するか」をきっちり運用したい場合。
  また、複数リレーで運用しつつ、どこかが落ちても他が存続するといった分散運用も想定できる。

まとめ - NIP-28 (Public Chat) - 「公開チャット」を最速で作るのに特化し、チャンネル構造とメッセージ投稿・簡易的なクライアント側モデレーションだけを定義する。 - リレーに追加のルール実装を強いないため、気軽にどこでも利用できる。 - 反面、「誰が書き込みできるか」などの参加制限は標準機能としては備わっていない。 - NIP-29 (Relay-based Groups) - リレーがグループ管理を主導し、メンバーシップ制や権限・ロールをしっかり運用できるようにする。 - 公開／非公開、オープン参加／承認制などの設定をリレー側で柔軟に切り替えられる。 - 反面、各リレーがこの NIP-29 に対応していないとメンバー権限の管理やグループのクローズド運用はできない。 - 用途に応じて、単純に「みんなで雑談する公開チャンネル」が欲しいのであれば NIP-28 を、メンバー制のプライベートグループを作りたい場合は NIP-29 を選ぶ、といった使い分けになる。

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

-- Juvenal (Who will watch the watchmen?)

In mid-July, numerous media outlets reported on the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. FBI Director Christopher Wray stated later that same month that what hit the former president Trump was a bullet. A few days later, it was reported from various sources that search engines no longer acknowledged that an assassination attempt on ex-President Trump had taken place. When users used automatic completion in Google and Bing (91% respectively 4% market share), these search engines only suggested earlier presidents such as Harry Truman and Theodore Roosevelt, along with Russian President Vladimir Putin as people who could have been subjected to assassination attempts.

The reports were comprehensive enough for the Republican district attorney of Missouri to say that he would investigate matter. The senator from Kansas - also a Republican - planned to make an official request to Google. Google has responded through a spokesman to the New York Post that the company had not "manually changed" search results, but its system includes "protection" against search results "connected to political violence."

A similar phenomenon occurred during the 2016 presidential election. At the time, reports emerged of Google, unlike other less widely used search engines, rarely or never suggesting negative search results for Hillary Clinton. The company however provided negative search results for then-candidate Trump. Then, as today, the company denied deliberately favouring any specific political candidate.

These occurrences led to research on how such search suggestions can influence public opinion and voting preferences. For example, the impact of simply removing negative search suggestions has been investigated. A study published in June 2024 reports that such search results can dramatically affect undecided voters. Reducing negative search suggestions can turn a 50/50 split into a 90/10 split in favour of the candidate for whom negative search suggestions were suppressed. The researchers concluded that search suggestions can have "a dramatic impact," that this can "shift a large number of votes" and do so without leaving "any trace for authorities to follow." How search engines operate should therefore be considered of great importance by anyone who claims to take democracy seriously. And this regardless of one's political sympathies.

A well-known thought experiment in philosophy asks: "If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?" Translated to today's media landscape: If an assassination attempt took place on a former president, but search engines don't want to acknowledge it, did it really happen?

@ 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.

@ 62033ff8:e4471203

收录的内容中 kind=1的部分，实话说 质量不高。 所以我增加了kind=30023 长文的article，但是更新的太少，多个relays 的服务器也没有多少长文。

所有搜索nostr如果需要产生价值，需要有高质量的文章和新闻。 而且现在有很多机器人的文章充满着浪费空间的作用，其他作用都用不上。

https://www.duozhutuan.com 目前放的是给搜索引擎提供搜索的原材料。没有做UI给人类浏览。所以看上去是粗糙的。 我并没有打算去做一个发microblog的 web客户端，那类的客户端太多了。

我觉得nostr社区需要解决的还是应用。如果仅仅是microblog 感觉有点够呛

幸运的是npub.pro 建站这样的，我觉得有点意思。

yakihonne 智能widget 也有意思

我做的TaskQ5 我自己在用了。分布式的任务系统，也挺好的。

@ 1123ece2:7d1e00c0

Hey everyone I’m Gary Hoban and welcome to Refinery Life Australia.

“The Christ of John’s Gospel” is the theme we are continuing for the coming Sunday morning teachings that focus on John’s unique portrayal of the Christ.

We will continue this series for a while longer.

Today we are discussing, The Distinctives of Discipleship.

Prayer

Father, we come to You today because You made us, You redeemed us, and we acknowledge that every good and perfect gift comes from Your bountiful hands.

Thank You, Father, for the privilege of giving to You for the glory of Your name and cause.

The words of Jesus are so true, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.”

Thank you for this heavenly blessing.

In Jesus name we pray.

Amen.

Text

John 8:31 NKJV

The Truth Shall Make You Free

31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.

Scripture Reading

John 8:30-59 NKJV

30 As He spoke these words, many believed in Him.

The Truth Shall Make You Free

31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 

32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

33 They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can You say, ‘You will be made free’?”

34 Jesus answered them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. 

35 And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever. 

36 Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.

Abraham’s Seed and Satan’s

37 “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. 

38 I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.”

39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”

Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. 

40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. 

41 You do the deeds of your father.”

Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”

42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. 

43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 

44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 

45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 

46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 

47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”

Before Abraham Was, I AM

48 Then the Jews answered and said to Him, “Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?”

49 Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 

50 And I do not seek My own glory; there is One who seeks and judges. 

51 Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death.”

52 Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon! Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word he shall never taste death.’ 

53 Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?”

54 Jesus answered, “If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your God. 

55 Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word. 

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”

57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”

58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Introduction.

What does it really mean to follow Jesus?

Somehow in the early part of the twenty first century, people have lost sight of what it means to follow Jesus.

Discipleship is linked to external observance of religion rather than a relationship experience with Jesus Christ.

During Jesus’ life and ministry on earth, many people sought to follow Him.

John 8:30, 30 As He spoke these words, many believed in Him.

Any motives moved to associate with Jesus Christ.

Some were infatuated with His miracles and teachings.

Others were just curious.

Jesus did not want people to follow Him outside the motive of a genuine commitment.\ To distinguish the authentic followers, Jesus gave the distinctive qualities of a true disciple.

1. A true disciple has continuance

John 8:31-33 NKJV

The Truth Shall Make You Free

31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

33 They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can You say, ‘You will be made free’?”

Jesus realised that some people made an impulsive decision to follow Him.

At times in Jesus’ ministry, large crowds followed Him.

He knew they followed mainly to see His miracles or just to be part of the crowd.

He knew that many would decide not to follow Him.

After Jesus taught the crowds that He was the Bread of Life, John 6:66 says, From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.

Jesus pointed out that perseverance would be the sign of a true disciple.

John 8:31, The Truth Shall Make You Free

31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.

Discipleship is not the excitement of one moment.

It is a patient continuance in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.

To a crowd of potential followers, Jesus gave a sure sign of a disciple.

A disciple is one who follows Jesus continuously.

The genuine evidence is in the sustained effort.

2. A true disciple has freedom.

John 8:34-38, Jesus answered them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever. Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.

“I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.”

Jesus taught of a freedom that led to bondage.

Jesus answered them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.

Jesus taught a group of potential disciples about how sin leads to bondage.

Going through life with self will, self trust, and self assertion leads to a detrimental bondage.

No one who follows Jesus can be a master to himself.

Jesus spoke of a bondage that leads to freedom.

A true disciple is one who has renounced his or her way to follow the way of Christ.

Bondage to the Lord leads to authentic freedom.

Jesus said, “Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.”

The true disciple of Jesus lives to please only one person, Jesus Christ.

A disciple of Jesus is not a slave to sin but is a slave to the master.

3. A true disciple has Christlike behaviour.

John 8:39-47 NKJV

39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”

Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. 

40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this.

41 You do the deeds of your father.”

Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”

42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. 

43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 

44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 

45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.

46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 

47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”

The Jew’s claimed to be Abraham’s children.

By physical lineage this was true.

However, many Jews lived contrary to Abraham’s example.

They sought to kill Jesus and slander His name.

Jesus said they were not God’s children, for they did not reflect God’s character.

Rather, He said in John 8:44, You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.

God’s children behave like His children.

John 8:42, “If God were your Father, you would love Me”, and He added in verse 47, “He who is of God hears God’s words.”

Nature will be true to itself.

If one is born of God, then they will live in accordance with Christ’s character.

4. A true disciple honours Christ.

John 8:48-59 NKJV

Before Abraham Was, I AM

48 Then the Jews answered and said to Him, “Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?”

49 Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 

50 And I do not seek My own glory; there is One who seeks and judges. 

51 Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death.”

52 Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon! Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word he shall never taste death.’ 

53 Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?”

54 Jesus answered, “If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your God. 

55 Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word. 

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”

57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”

58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Many claimed to be disciples of Jesus, but they did not honour Him.

In fact, they accused Him of being demon possessed.

Jesus said in verse 49, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me.” 

They could not be authentic followers and dishonour the Lord in this way.

True disciples honour and adore and obey Christ.

Conclusion.

Are you a true disciple of Jesus Christ?

The proof is a continuing commitment to Him, freedom from sin, Christlike behaviour, and a Christ honouring life. 

Until next time

Stay in the Blessings

I really want to encourage you to be diligent with your Bible study time, because God has so much more for us than we can get from just going to church once or twice a week and hearing someone else talk about the Word.

When you spend time with God, your life will change in amazing ways, because God is a Redeemer. Theres nothing thats too hard for Him, and He can make you whole, spirit, soul and body!

You’re important to God, and you’re important to us at The Refinery.

When it comes to prayer, we believe that God wants to meet your needs and reveal His promises to you.

So whatever you’re concerned about and need prayer for we want to be here for you! Or even if you just want to say Hi, you can contact us at www.refinerylife.org

2025 IS A YEAR OF NEW BEGINNINGS.

© www.refinerylife.org  2013-2024 All rights reserved. Except as permitted under the Australian Copyright Act 1968, no part of this Article may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, communicated or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission.

This episode is brought to you by Refinery Life Australia:

If you enjoy The Refinery Life Radio Podcast you can help support The Refinery by doing the following:

Sow an offering: Bitcoin: bc1qqh6720t2zagj72dyfj348az698tdut3hlecaj4

Online: https://www.refinerylife.org/donate/

If you do send an offering then please email us so that we can say thank you

Subscribe on iTunes | Spotify | YouTube | TuneIn | Rumble | Flare | Zap.Stream | Fountain |

Share The Refinery with your friends and family

Subscribe to the newsletter on www.refinerylife.org

Follow The Refinery on Twitter | Nostr | Instagram | Fountain

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Jerome Powell, Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, stated during a hearing in March that the central bank has no plans to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDCs) or consider it necessary at present. He said this even though the material Fed staff presents to Congress suggests otherwise - that CBDCs are described as one of the Fed’s key duties .

A CBDC is a state-controlled and programmable currency that could allow the government or its intermediaries the possibility to monitor all transactions in detail and also to block payments based on certain conditions.

Critics argue that the introduction of CBDCs could undermine citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and rights . Republican House Majority Leader Tom Emmer, the sponsor of a bill aimed at preventing the central bank from unilaterally introducing a CBDC, believes that if they do not mimic cash, they would only serve as a “CCP-style [Chinese Communist Party] surveillance tool” and could “undermine the American way of life”. Emmer’s proposed bill has garnered support from several US senators , including Republican Ted Cruz from Texas, who introduced the bill to the Senate. Similarly to how Swedish cash advocates risk missing the mark , Tom Emmer and the US senators risk the same outcome with their bill. If the central bank is prevented from introducing a central bank digital currency, nothing would stop major banks from implementing similar systems themselves, with similar consequences for citizens.

Indeed, the entity controlling your money becomes less significant once it is no longer you. Even if central bank digital currencies are halted in the US, a future administration could easily outsource financial censorship to the private banking system, similar to how the Biden administration is perceived by many to have circumvented the First Amendment by getting private companies to enforce censorship. A federal court in New Orleans ruled last fall against the Biden administration for compelling social media platforms to censor content. The Supreme Court has now begun hearing the case.

Deng Xiaoping, China’s paramount leader who played a vital role in China’s modernization, once said, “It does not matter if the cat is black or white. What matters is that it catches mice.” This statement reflected a pragmatic approach to economic policy, focusing on results foremost. China’s economic growth during his tenure was historic.

The discussion surrounding CBDCs and their negative impact on citizens’ freedoms and rights would benefit from a more practical and comprehensive perspective. Ultimately, it is the outcomes that matter above all. So too for our freedoms.

@ 16d11430:61640947

The “divide and conquer” strategy used to pit Bitcoiners against the wider crypto community is a deliberate tactic aimed at creating internal divisions, fostering confusion, and weakening the collective momentum of decentralized technologies. By exploiting philosophical, technological, and cultural differences between Bitcoin maximalists and proponents of alternative cryptocurrencies, fiat instigators and other vested interests aim to undermine the larger blockchain ecosystem. Here's an exploration of this strategy:

---

Exploiting Ideological Differences

1. Bitcoin Maximalism vs. Crypto Diversity:

Bitcoin maximalists advocate that Bitcoin is the only truly decentralized, immutable, and sound form of money, dismissing other cryptocurrencies as unnecessary or outright scams.

Proponents of other blockchains argue that innovations like smart contracts, scalability, and specialized use cases justify the existence of altcoins and Ethereum-like ecosystems.

Fiat-aligned propagandists amplify these debates, framing them as irreconcilable conflicts, rather than healthy competition within an evolving ecosystem.

1. Labeling Altcoins as “Shitcoins”:

By co-opting Bitcoin maximalist terminology like “shitcoin” to denigrate all other cryptocurrencies, fiat proponents fan the flames of division. This reinforces the perception that the crypto community is fragmented, unreliable, and rife with infighting, reducing its appeal to newcomers.

---

Creating Confusion Over Purpose

1. Framing Bitcoin as Anti-Innovation:

Propagandists often portray Bitcoin as a “dinosaur” in the blockchain space, emphasizing its slower transaction speeds, energy consumption, and limited programmability.

Simultaneously, they label other cryptocurrencies as “untrustworthy” or “too experimental,” creating confusion about the legitimacy and purpose of blockchain technology as a whole.

1. Highlighting Scams and Failures:

Media narratives frequently spotlight rug-pulls, scams, and failures in the broader crypto space while ignoring the resilience and success of Bitcoin. By conflating Bitcoin with the broader crypto market, they erode public trust in decentralized technologies altogether.

---

Fueling Regulatory Divides

1. Regulation as a Weapon:

Regulators and central authorities use differing approaches for Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to create division. For instance, Bitcoin is often labeled as a “digital asset” or “commodity,” while other cryptocurrencies are deemed securities, leading to disparate treatment and confusion over legitimacy.

This divide discourages collaboration between Bitcoiners and altcoin communities, as each group perceives itself as having different regulatory battles to fight.

1. Narratives Around Environmental Impact:

Bitcoin is targeted for its proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism, which is painted as environmentally destructive. In contrast, proof-of-stake (PoS) systems are promoted as “green” alternatives.

This framing encourages environmentalists and sustainability advocates to align against Bitcoin, while Bitcoiners double down on defending PoW, exacerbating the divide.

---

Manipulating Tribalism

1. Turning Bitcoiners Against Altcoins:

Bitcoiners are encouraged to see altcoins as fraudulent or unnecessary competitors, while altcoin proponents are encouraged to see Bitcoiners as close-minded purists clinging to outdated technology.

This tribalism prevents cooperation on shared goals, such as financial inclusion, decentralization, and resistance to censorship.

1. Highlighting Cultural Divides:

Bitcoin culture, often associated with libertarian values and sound money principles, is framed as elitist and exclusionary.

In contrast, altcoin cultures, which emphasize innovation, diversity, and experimentation, are painted as reckless and overly speculative.

These cultural clashes distract from the broader shared mission of decentralizing power and creating alternatives to the fiat system.

---

Amplifying Internal Critiques

1. Media Amplification of Disputes:

Public disagreements between prominent figures in the Bitcoin and crypto spaces are sensationalized by media outlets. For example, debates over scaling solutions, hard forks, or smart contract utility are framed as existential threats to the ecosystem’s credibility.

This amplification undermines confidence in both Bitcoin and alternative cryptocurrencies by making the community seem chaotic and divided.

1. Weaponizing Social Media:

Bots and trolls infiltrate online discussions, spreading misinformation and stoking hostility between Bitcoiners and altcoin advocates. These efforts create echo chambers, reinforcing confirmation bias and deepening divides.

---

Long-Term Consequences of the Divide and Conquer Approach

1. Delaying Mass Adoption:

Confusion and infighting reduce public trust in blockchain technologies, slowing adoption and deterring institutional investment.

Potential users and developers are discouraged from entering the space, fearing instability and conflict.

1. Fragmenting the Ecosystem:

Instead of working together to overcome regulatory challenges, scale adoption, or innovate solutions, the crypto community wastes resources fighting internal battles.

This fragmentation leaves the ecosystem vulnerable to external attacks, such as coordinated government crackdowns or monopolistic behavior by large financial institutions.

1. Strengthening Fiat Narratives:

By keeping the crypto space divided, fiat propagandists can continue to push narratives that centralized financial systems are more reliable, cohesive, and secure.

These narratives reinforce the status quo, delaying the broader transition to decentralized systems.

---

Overcoming the Divide

To counteract the divide and conquer strategy, the Bitcoin and crypto communities must:

1. Focus on Shared Goals: Highlight common objectives like financial inclusion, censorship resistance, and decentralization.

2. Promote Constructive Dialogue: Encourage debates that focus on solutions rather than criticisms, emphasizing the complementary strengths of different technologies.

3. Educate the Public: Combat misinformation by creating accessible resources that explain the value of Bitcoin and blockchain as distinct but synergistic innovations.

4. Resist Tribalism: Recognize that both Bitcoin and altcoins have roles to play in a diverse and evolving financial ecosystem.

By fostering unity and cooperation, the blockchain community can overcome external attempts to sow division and work toward a more decentralized, equitable future.

@ 23b0e2f8:d8af76fc

Necessário

• Um Android que você não use mais (a câmera deve estar funcionando).
• Um cartão microSD (opcional, usado apenas uma vez).
• Um dispositivo para acompanhar seus fundos (provavelmente você já tem um).

Algumas coisas que você precisa saber

• O dispositivo servirá como um assinador. Qualquer movimentação só será efetuada após ser assinada por ele.
• O cartão microSD será usado para transferir o APK do Electrum e garantir que o aparelho não terá contato com outras fontes de dados externas após sua formatação. Contudo, é possível usar um cabo USB para o mesmo propósito.
• A ideia é deixar sua chave privada em um dispositivo offline, que ficará desligado em 99% do tempo. Você poderá acompanhar seus fundos em outro dispositivo conectado à internet, como seu celular ou computador pessoal.

---

O tutorial será dividido em dois módulos:

• Módulo 1 - Criando uma carteira fria/assinador.
• Módulo 2 - Configurando um dispositivo para visualizar seus fundos e assinando transações com o assinador.

---

No final, teremos:

• Uma carteira fria que também servirá como assinador.
• Um dispositivo para acompanhar os fundos da carteira.

---

Módulo 1 - Criando uma carteira fria/assinador

1. Baixe o APK do Electrum na aba de downloads em https://electrum.org/. Fique à vontade para verificar as assinaturas do software, garantindo sua autenticidade.

2. Formate o cartão microSD e coloque o APK do Electrum nele. Caso não tenha um cartão microSD, pule este passo.

1. Retire os chips e acessórios do aparelho que será usado como assinador, formate-o e aguarde a inicialização.

1. Durante a inicialização, pule a etapa de conexão ao Wi-Fi e rejeite todas as solicitações de conexão. Após isso, você pode desinstalar aplicativos desnecessários, pois precisará apenas do Electrum. Certifique-se de que Wi-Fi, Bluetooth e dados móveis estejam desligados. Você também pode ativar o modo avião.\ (Curiosidade: algumas pessoas optam por abrir o aparelho e danificar a antena do Wi-Fi/Bluetooth, impossibilitando essas funcionalidades.)

1. Insira o cartão microSD com o APK do Electrum no dispositivo e instale-o. Será necessário permitir instalações de fontes não oficiais.

1. No Electrum, crie uma carteira padrão e gere suas palavras-chave (seed). Anote-as em um local seguro. Caso algo aconteça com seu assinador, essas palavras permitirão o acesso aos seus fundos novamente. (Aqui entra seu método pessoal de backup.)

---

Módulo 2 - Configurando um dispositivo para visualizar seus fundos e assinando transações com o assinador.

1. Criar uma carteira somente leitura em outro dispositivo, como seu celular ou computador pessoal, é uma etapa bastante simples. Para este tutorial, usaremos outro smartphone Android com Electrum. Instale o Electrum a partir da aba de downloads em https://electrum.org/ ou da própria Play Store. (ATENÇÃO: O Electrum não existe oficialmente para iPhone. Desconfie se encontrar algum.)

2. Após instalar o Electrum, crie uma carteira padrão, mas desta vez escolha a opção Usar uma chave mestra.

1. Agora, no assinador que criamos no primeiro módulo, exporte sua chave pública: vá em Carteira > Detalhes da carteira > Compartilhar chave mestra pública.

1. Escaneie o QR gerado da chave pública com o dispositivo de consulta. Assim, ele poderá acompanhar seus fundos, mas sem permissão para movimentá-los.

2. Para receber fundos, envie Bitcoin para um dos endereços gerados pela sua carteira: Carteira > Addresses/Coins.

3. Para movimentar fundos, crie uma transação no dispositivo de consulta. Como ele não possui a chave privada, será necessário assiná-la com o dispositivo assinador.

1. No assinador, escaneie a transação não assinada, confirme os detalhes, assine e compartilhe. Será gerado outro QR, desta vez com a transação já assinada.

1. No dispositivo de consulta, escaneie o QR da transação assinada e transmita-a para a rede.

---

Conclusão

Pontos positivos do setup:

• Simplicidade: Basta um dispositivo Android antigo.
• Flexibilidade: Funciona como uma ótima carteira fria, ideal para holders.

Pontos negativos do setup:

• Padronização: Não utiliza seeds no padrão BIP-39, você sempre precisará usar o electrum.
• Interface: A aparência do Electrum pode parecer antiquada para alguns usuários.

Nesse ponto, temos uma carteira fria que também serve para assinar transações. O fluxo de assinar uma transação se torna: Gerar uma transação não assinada > Escanear o QR da transação não assinada > Conferir e assinar essa transação com o assinador > Gerar QR da transação assinada > Escanear a transação assinada com qualquer outro dispositivo que possa transmiti-la para a rede.

Como alguns devem saber, uma transação assinada de Bitcoin é praticamente impossível de ser fraudada. Em um cenário catastrófico, você pode mesmo que sem internet, repassar essa transação assinada para alguém que tenha acesso à rede por qualquer meio de comunicação. Mesmo que não queiramos que isso aconteça um dia, esse setup acaba por tornar essa prática possível.

---

@ ee11a5df:b76c4e49

What Can We Get by Breaking NOSTR?

"What if we just started over? What if we took everything we have learned while building nostr and did it all again, but did it right this time?"

That is a question I've heard quite a number of times, and it is a question I have pondered quite a lot myself.

My conclusion (so far) is that I believe that we can fix all the important things without starting over. There are different levels of breakage, starting over is the most extreme of them. In this post I will describe these levels of breakage and what each one could buy us.

Cryptography

Your key-pair is the most fundamental part of nostr. That is your portable identity.

If the cryptography changed from secp256k1 to ed25519, all current nostr identities would not be usable.

This would be a complete start over.

Every other break listed in this post could be done as well to no additional detriment (save for reuse of some existing code) because we would be starting over.

Why would anyone suggest making such a break? What does this buy us?

• Curve25519 is a safe curve meaning a bunch of specific cryptography things that us mortals do not understand but we are assured that it is somehow better.
• Ed25519 is more modern, said to be faster, and has more widespread code/library support than secp256k1.
• Nostr keys could be used as TLS server certificates. TLS 1.3 using RFC 7250 Raw Public Keys allows raw public keys as certificates. No DNS or certification authorities required, removing several points of failure. These ed25519 keys could be used in TLS, whereas secp256k1 keys cannot as no TLS algorithm utilizes them AFAIK. Since relays currently don't have assigned nostr identities but are instead referenced by a websocket URL, this doesn't buy us much, but it is interesting. This idea is explored further below (keep reading) under a lesser level of breakage.

Besides breaking everything, another downside is that people would not be able to manage nostr keys with bitcoin hardware.

I am fairly strongly against breaking things this far. I don't think it is worth it.

Signature Scheme and Event Structure

Event structure is the next most fundamental part of nostr. Although events can be represented in many ways (clients and relays usually parse the JSON into data structures and/or database columns), the nature of the content of an event is well defined as seven particular fields. If we changed those, that would be a hard fork.

This break is quite severe. All current nostr events wouldn't work in this hard fork. We would be preserving identities, but all content would be starting over.

It would be difficult to bridge between this fork and current nostr because the bridge couldn't create the different signature required (not having anybody's private key) and current nostr wouldn't be generating the new kind of signature. Therefore any bridge would have to do identity mapping just like bridges to entirely different protocols do (e.g. mostr to mastodon).

What could we gain by breaking things this far?

• We could have a faster event hash and id verification: the current signature scheme of nostr requires lining up 5 JSON fields into a JSON array and using that as hash input. There is a performance cost to copying this data in order to hash it.
• We could introduce a subkey field, and sign events via that subkey, while preserving the pubkey as the author everybody knows and searches by. Note however that we can already get a remarkably similar thing using something like NIP-26 where the actual author is in a tag, and the pubkey field is the signing subkey.
• We could refactor the kind integer into composable bitflags (that could apply to any application) and an application kind (that specifies the application).
• Surely there are other things I haven't thought of.

I am currently against this kind of break. I don't think the benefits even come close to outweighing the cost. But if I learned about other things that we could "fix" by restructuring the events, I could possibly change my mind.

Replacing Relay URLs

Nostr is defined by relays that are addressed by websocket URLs. If that changed, that would be a significant break. Many (maybe even most) current event kinds would need superseding.

The most reasonable change is to define relays with nostr identities, specifying their pubkey instead of their URL.

What could we gain by this?

• We could ditch reliance on DNS. Relays could publish events under their nostr identity that advertise their current IP address(es).
• We could ditch certificates because relays could generate ed25519 keypairs for themselves (or indeed just self-signed certificates which might be much more broadly supported) and publish their public ed25519 key in the same replaceable event where they advertise their current IP address(es).

This is a gigantic break. Almost all event kinds need redefining and pretty much all nostr software will need fairly major upgrades. But it also gives us a kind of Internet liberty that many of us have dreamt of our entire lives.

I am ambivalent about this idea.

Protocol Messaging and Transport

The protocol messages of nostr are the next level of breakage. We could preserve keypair identities, all current events, and current relay URL references, but just break the protocol of how clients and relay communicate this data.

This would not necessarily break relay and client implementations at all, so long as the new protocol were opt-in.

What could we get?

• The new protocol could transmit events in binary form for increased performance (no more JSON parsing with it's typical many small memory allocations and string escaping nightmares). I think event throughput could double (wild guess).
• It could have clear expectations of who talks first, and when and how AUTH happens, avoiding a lot of current miscommunication between clients and relays.
• We could introduce bitflags for feature support so that new features could be added later and clients would not bother trying them (and getting an error or timing out) on relays that didn't signal support. This could replace much of NIP-11.
• We could then introduce something like negentropy or negative filters (but not that... probably something else solving that same problem) without it being a breaking change.
• The new protocol could just be a few websocket-binary messages enhancing the current protocol, continuing to leverage the existing websocket-text messages we currently have, meaning newer relays would still support all the older stuff.

The downsides are just that if you want this new stuff you have to build it. It makes the protocol less simple, having now multiple protocols, multiple ways of doing the same thing.

Nonetheless, this I am in favor of. I think the trade-offs are worth it. I will be pushing a draft PR for this soon.

The path forward

I propose then the following path forward:

1. A new nostr protocol over websockets binary (draft PR to be shared soon)
2. Subkeys brought into nostr via NIP-26 (but let's use a single letter tag instead, OK?) via a big push to get all the clients to support it (the transition will be painful - most major clients will need to support this before anybody can start using it).
3. Some kind of solution to the negative-filter-negentropy need added to the new protocol as its first optional feature.
4. We seriously consider replacing Relay URLs with nostr pubkeys assigned to the relay, and then have relays publish their IP address and TLS key or certificate.

We sacrifice these:

1. Faster event hash/verification
2. Composable event bitflags
3. Safer faster more well-supported crypto curve
4. Nostr keys themselves as TLS 1.3 RawPublicKey certificates

@ 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.

@ 36461ff8:a4454aad

“My position is improper foods cause disease; proper foods cure disease. Nothing else needs to be said.” - Dr. Bieler, author of Food is Your Best Medicine

As a holistic doctor with over 2 decades of clinical experience, I don't entirely agree with this statement. Everyday in practice, I see the extraordinary application of plant medicines and clinical nutrition in treatments of complex patterns with remarkable outcomes that go above and beyond diet, but I still very much appreciate the value of food as medicine.

Famous Bieler Broth:

• 2 zucchinni
• 2 stalks of celery
• 1 cup of green beans
• handful of parsley
• garlic to taste
• my father made this and added butter and salt
• chop and steam with purified water until tender then blend and drink

I was fortunate enough to treat one of Dr. Bieler’s patients for many years until he passed away in his nineties. He told me some of the famous doctor’s secrets and how patients came from all over for treatment with fantastic results. He himself was seriously ill before seeing Dr. Bieler.

Dr. Bieler's Final Conclusions:

“As a practicing physician for over 50 years, I have reached three basic conclusions as to the cause and cure of disease.

The first is that the primary cause of disease is not germs. Rather, I believe that disease is caused by toxemia which results in cellular impairment and breakdown, thus paving the way for the multiplication and onslaught of other complications.

My second conclusion is that in almost all cases the use of drugs in treating patients is harmful. Drugs often cause serious side effects, and sometimes even create new diseases. The dubious benefits they afford the patient are at best temporary. Yet the number of drugs on the market increases geometrically every year as each chemical firm develops its own variation of the compounds. The physician is indeed rare who can be completely aware of the potential danger from the side effects of all of these drugs.

My third conclusion is that disease can be cured through the proper use of the correct foods. This statement may sound deceptively simple, but I have arrived at it only after intensive study of a highly complex subject: toxemia and endocrine chemistry.

My conclusions are based on experimental and observational results, gathered through years of successfully treating patients. Occasionally I have resorted to the use of drugs in an emergency situation, but those times have been rare. Instead, I have sought to prescribe for my patients’ illnesses antidotes which Nature has placed at their disposal.” - Dr. Bieler“

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Claims that we need greater centralisation, more EU, or more globalisation are prevalent across the usual media channels. The climate crisis, environmental destruction, pandemics, the AI-threat, yes, everything will apparently be solved if a little more global coordination, governance and leadership can be brought about.

But, is this actually true? One of the best arguments for this conclusion stems implicitly from the futurist Eliezer Yudkowsky, who once proposed a new Moore's Law, though this time not for computer processors but instead for mad science: "every 18 months, the minimum IQ necessary to destroy the world drops by one point".

Perhaps we simply have to tolerate more centralisation, globalisation, control, surveillance, and so on, to prevent all kinds of fools from destroying the world?

Note: a Swedish version of this text is avalable at Affärsvärlden.

At the same time, more centralisation, globalisation, etc. is also what we have experienced. Power has been shifting from the local, and from the majorities, to central-planning bureaucrats working in remote places. This has been going on for several decades. The EU's subsidiarity principle, i.e. the idea that decisions should be made at the lowest expedient level, and which came to everyone's attention ahead of Sweden's EU vote in 1994, is today swept under the rug as untimely and outdated, perhaps even retarded.

At the same time, there are many crises, more than usual it would seem. If it is not a crisis of criminality, a logistics/supply chain crisis or a water crisis, then it is an energy crisis, a financial crisis, a refugee crisis or a climate crisis. It is almost as if one starts to suspect that all this centralisation may be leading us down the wrong path. Perhaps centralisation is part of the problem, rather than the capital S solution?

Why centralisation may cause rather than prevent problems

There are several reasons why centralisation, etc, may actually be a problem. And though few seem to be interested in such questions today (or perhaps they are too timid to mention their concerns?), it has not always been this way. In this short essay we'll note four reasons (though there are several others):

• Political failures (Buchanan et al)
• Local communities & skin in the game (Ostrom and Taleb)
• The local knowledge problem (von Hayek)
• Governance by sociopaths (Hare)

James Buchanan who was given the so-called Nobel price in economics in the eighties once said that: "politicians and bureaucrats are no different from the rest of us. They will maximise their incentives just like everybody else.".

Buchanan was prominent in research on rent-seeking and political failures, i.e. when political "solutions" to so-called market failures make everything worse. Rent-seeking is when a company spends resources (e.g. lobbying) to get legislators or other decision makers to pass laws or create regulations that benefit the company instead of it having to engage in productive activities. The result is regulatory capture. The more centralised decision-making is, the greater the negative consequences from such rent-seeking will be for society at large. This is known.

Another economist, Elinor Ostrom, was given the same prize in the great financial crisis year of 2009. In her research, she had found that local communities where people had influence over rules and regulations, as well as how violations there-of were handled, were much better suited to look after common resources than centralised bodies. To borrow a term from the combative Nassim Nicholas Taleb: everything was better handled when decision makers had "skin in the game".

A third economist, Friedrich von Hayek, was given this prize as early as 1974, partly because he showed that central planning could not possibly take into account all relevant information. The information needed in economic planning is by its very nature distributed, and will never be available to a central planning committee, or even to an AI.

Moreover, human systems are complex and not just complicated. When you realise this, you also understand why the forecasts made by central planners often end up wildly off the mark - and at times in a catastrophic way. (This in itself is an argument for relying more on factors outside of the models in the decision-making process.)

From Buchanan's, Ostrom's, Taleb's or von Hayek's perspectives, it also becomes difficult to believe that today's bureaucrats are the most suited to manage and price e.g. climate risks. One can compare with the insurance industry, which has both a long habit of pricing risks as well as "skin in the game" - two things sorely missing in today's planning bodies.

Instead of preventing fools, we may be enabling madmen

An even more troubling conclusion is that centralisation tends to transfer power to people who perhaps shouldn't have more of that good. "Not all psychopaths are in prison - some are in the boardroom," psychologist Robert Hare once said during a lecture. Most people have probably known for a long time that those with sharp elbows and who don't hesitate to stab a colleague in the back can climb quickly in organisations. In recent years, this fact seems to have become increasingly well known even in academia.

You will thus tend to encounter an increased prevalance of individuals with narcissistic and sociopathic traits the higher up you get in the the status hierarchy. And if working in large organisations (such as the European Union or Congress) or in large corporations, is perceived as higher status - which is generally the case, then it follows that the more we centralise, the more we will be governed by people with less flattering Dark Triad traits.

By their fruits ye shall know them

Perhaps it is thus not a coincidence that we have so many crises. Perhaps centralisation, globalisation, etc. cause crises. Perhaps the "elites" and their planning bureaucrats are, in fact, not the salt of the earth and the light of the world. Perhaps President Trump even had a point when he said "they are not sending their best".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4b8xgaiuj0

The opposite of centralisation is decentralisation. And while most people may still be aware that decentralisation can be a superpower within the business world, it's time we remind ourselves that this also applies to the economy - and society - at large, and preferably before the next Great Leap Forward is fully thrust upon us.

@ 16d11430:61640947

I leaned back in my chair, staring out the window of a quiet suburban café in Melbourne. Rain trickled down the glass in half-hearted streaks, as if even the weather couldn’t muster the enthusiasm to commit. I sipped my lukewarm chai, the spice muddled beyond recognition, and shook my head at the headlines flickering on my phone.

"Privies and staties," I muttered, half to myself. "The great cultural war, fought with memes and moral outrage."

The waitress, a twenty-something with blue streaks in her hair and the harried look of someone juggling rent and an art degree, glanced at me, but I waved her off. She didn’t need to hear the rant bubbling inside me. But you do.

Let me tell you about these Australians and their bizarre tribes. On one side, you’ve got the privies, the products of private schools with Latin mottos, boat shoes, and a chronic inability to read the room. These are the ones who learned how to debate the ethics of colonialism before they could tie their shoelaces. They grew up in manicured bubbles, tutored in piano and privilege, and now lead the charge in the great cultural revolution.

Oh, they’ll cry for social justice over their oat-milk lattes, but God forbid you mention their family’s ties to real estate empires or mining conglomerates. They protest with passion, but it’s always the kind of passion that ends before the rain starts or the Uber surge pricing kicks in.

Then there are the staties, the self-proclaimed champions of the "real Australia." They’re the salt-of-the-earth types who can’t stand the privies. Too posh, too preachy, too disconnected. The staties fight their wars with beer in one hand and a smartphone in the other, spamming their feeds with angry rants about "wokeness" and how things were better in the '80s. They see the privies as the enemy—elitists, virtue-signaling snobs who wouldn’t last a day on a construction site.

And yet, the staties are no saints themselves. They scream about freedom while demanding the government fix everything that annoys them. They sneer at art and academia, unless, of course, it’s a Hamilton ticket or a Netflix drama. They don’t want to change the world; they just want to win enough of it to tell everyone else to shove off.

Caught between these two warring factions, I—an Indian old boy from a legacy school where discipline and ambition were drilled into us like multiplication tables—sit here, baffled. I grew up in a world of contradictions too, but at least ours came with good food and a soundtrack of classical ragas. This Australian version of the culture wars? It’s a pantomime, all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Take the debates about statues. The privies want to tear them all down—symbols of oppression, they say. The staties clutch their pearls, howling about history being erased, as if the only thing holding civilization together is a bronze guy on a horse. And in the middle? Nothing changes. Rent still skyrockets, climate disasters loom, and the housing market remains about as accessible as Doon School admissions to a street vendor’s child.

The irony is that both sides are just cogs in the same ridiculous machine. The privies rail against capitalism, but live off trust funds and well-paying jobs courtesy of their networks. The staties mock the pretensions of the elite but secretly envy their polish and privilege.

Meanwhile, here I sit, with my scuffed shoes and tired eyes, watching this farce unfold. We had our own clown shows back in India, of course. Macaulay’s little brown gentlemen, striving to out-English the English. At least we had masala chai and biryani to soften the absurdity. Here, it’s bland chai and vegemite sandwiches.

I chuckle, shaking my head at the absurdity of it all. The waitress, still hovering nearby, gives me a curious look. I gesture for the bill, deciding I’ve indulged in enough cynicism for one afternoon. The cultural wars will rage on without me.

As I step out into the drizzle, I can’t help but think: if this is the best they’ve got, maybe it’s time for the old boys to show them how it’s done. After all, we’ve been navigating the tightrope of hypocrisy and ambition for centuries. What’s one more circus?

@ a4a6b584:1e05b95b

The Four-Layer Framework

Layer 1: Zoom Out

Start by looking at the big picture. What’s the subject about, and why does it matter? Focus on the overarching ideas and how they fit together. Think of this as the 30,000-foot view—it’s about understanding the "why" and "how" before diving into the "what."

Example: If you’re learning programming, start by understanding that it’s about giving logical instructions to computers to solve problems.

• Tip: Keep it simple. Summarize the subject in one or two sentences and avoid getting bogged down in specifics at this stage.

Once you have the big picture in mind, it’s time to start breaking it down.

---

Layer 2: Categorize and Connect

Now it’s time to break the subject into categories—like creating branches on a tree. This helps your brain organize information logically and see connections between ideas.

Example: Studying biology? Group concepts into categories like cells, genetics, and ecosystems.

• Tip: Use headings or labels to group similar ideas. Jot these down in a list or simple diagram to keep track.

With your categories in place, you’re ready to dive into the details that bring them to life.

---

Layer 3: Master the Details

Once you’ve mapped out the main categories, you’re ready to dive deeper. This is where you learn the nuts and bolts—like formulas, specific techniques, or key terminology. These details make the subject practical and actionable.

Example: In programming, this might mean learning the syntax for loops, conditionals, or functions in your chosen language.

• Tip: Focus on details that clarify the categories from Layer 2. Skip anything that doesn’t add to your understanding.

Now that you’ve mastered the essentials, you can expand your knowledge to include extra material.

---

Layer 4: Expand Your Horizons

Finally, move on to the extra material—less critical facts, trivia, or edge cases. While these aren’t essential to mastering the subject, they can be useful in specialized discussions or exams.

Example: Learn about rare programming quirks or historical trivia about a language’s development.

• Tip: Spend minimal time here unless it’s necessary for your goals. It’s okay to skim if you’re short on time.

---

Pro Tips for Better Learning

1. Use Active Recall and Spaced Repetition

Test yourself without looking at notes. Review what you’ve learned at increasing intervals—like after a day, a week, and a month. This strengthens memory by forcing your brain to actively retrieve information.

2. Map It Out

Create visual aids like diagrams or concept maps to clarify relationships between ideas. These are particularly helpful for organizing categories in Layer 2.

3. Teach What You Learn

Explain the subject to someone else as if they’re hearing it for the first time. Teaching exposes any gaps in your understanding and helps reinforce the material.

4. Engage with LLMs and Discuss Concepts

Take advantage of tools like ChatGPT or similar large language models to explore your topic in greater depth. Use these tools to:
- Ask specific questions to clarify confusing points.
- Engage in discussions to simulate real-world applications of the subject.
- Generate examples or analogies that deepen your understanding.

Tip: Use LLMs as a study partner, but don’t rely solely on them. Combine these insights with your own critical thinking to develop a well-rounded perspective.

---

Get Started

Ready to try the Four-Layer Method? Take 15 minutes today to map out the big picture of a topic you’re curious about—what’s it all about, and why does it matter? By building your understanding step by step, you’ll master the subject with less stress and more confidence.

@ 1bda7e1f:bb97c4d9

Tldr

• Nostr is an open and interoperable protocol
• You can integrate it with workflow automation tools to augment your experience
• n8n is a great low/no-code workflow automation tool which you can host yourself
• Nostrobots allows you to integrate Nostr into n8n
• In this blog I create some workflow automations for Nostr
• A simple form to delegate posting notes
• Push notifications for mentions on multiple accounts
• Push notifications for your favourite accounts when they post a note
• All workflows are provided as open source with MIT license for you to use

Inter-op All The Things

Nostr is a new open social protocol for the internet. This open nature exciting because of the opportunities for interoperability with other technologies. In Using NFC Cards with Nostr I explored the nostr: URI to launch Nostr clients from a card tap.

The interoperability of Nostr doesn't stop there. The internet has many super-powers, and Nostr is open to all of them. Simply, there's no one to stop it. There is no one in charge, there are no permissioned APIs, and there are no risks of being de-platformed. If you can imagine technologies that would work well with Nostr, then any and all of them can ride on or alongside Nostr rails.

My mental model for why this is special is Google Wave ~2010. Google Wave was to be the next big platform. Lars was running it and had a big track record from Maps. I was excited for it. Then, Google pulled the plug. And, immediately all the time and capital invested in understanding and building on the platform was wasted.

This cannot happen to Nostr, as there is no one to pull the plug, and maybe even no plug to pull.

So long as users demand Nostr, Nostr will exist, and that is a pretty strong guarantee. It makes it worthwhile to invest in bringing Nostr into our other applications.

All we need are simple ways to plug things together.

Nostr and Workflow Automation

Workflow automation is about helping people to streamline their work. As a user, the most common way I achieve this is by connecting disparate systems together. By setting up one system to trigger another or to move data between systems, I can solve for many different problems and become way more effective.

n8n for workflow automation

Many workflow automation tools exist. My favourite is n8n. n8n is a low/no-code workflow automation platform which allows you to build all kinds of workflows. You can use it for free, you can self-host it, it has a user-friendly UI and useful API. Vs Zapier it can be far more elaborate. Vs Make.com I find it to be more intuitive in how it abstracts away the right parts of the code, but still allows you to code when you need to.

Most importantly you can plug anything into n8n: You have built-in nodes for specific applications. HTTP nodes for any other API-based service. And community nodes built by individual community members for any other purpose you can imagine.

Eating my own dogfood

It's very clear to me that there is a big design space here just demanding to be explored. If you could integrate Nostr with anything, what would you do?

In my view the best way for anyone to start anything is by solving their own problem first (aka "scratching your own itch" and "eating your own dogfood"). As I get deeper into Nostr I find myself controlling multiple Npubs – to date I have a personal Npub, a brand Npub for a community I am helping, an AI assistant Npub, and various testing Npubs. I need ways to delegate access to those Npubs without handing over the keys, ways to know if they're mentioned, and ways to know if they're posting.

I can build workflows with n8n to solve these issues for myself to start with, and keep expanding from there as new needs come up.

Running n8n with Nostrobots

I am mostly non-technical with a very helpful AI. To set up n8n to work with Nostr and operate these workflows should be possible for anyone with basic technology skills.

• I have a cheap VPS which currently runs my HAVEN Nostr Relay and Albyhub Lightning Node in Docker containers,
• My objective was to set up n8n to run alongside these in a separate Docker container on the same server, install the required nodes, and then build and host my workflows.

Installing n8n

Self-hosting n8n could not be easier. I followed n8n's Docker-Compose installation docs–

• Install Docker and Docker-Compose if you haven't already,
• Create your docker-compose.yml and .env files from the docs,
• Create your data folder sudo docker volume create n8n_data,
• Start your container with sudo docker compose up -d,
• Your n8n instance should be online at port 5678.

n8n is free to self-host but does require a license. Enter your credentials into n8n to get your free license key. You should now have access to the Workflow dashboard and can create and host any kind of workflows from there.

Installing Nostrobots

To integrate n8n nicely with Nostr, I used the Nostrobots community node by Ocknamo.

In n8n parlance a "node" enables certain functionality as a step in a workflow e.g. a "set" node sets a variable, a "send email" node sends an email. n8n comes with all kinds of "official" nodes installed by default, and Nostr is not amongst them. However, n8n also comes with a framework for community members to create their own "community" nodes, which is where Nostrobots comes in.

You can only use a community node in a self-hosted n8n instance (which is what you have if you are running in Docker on your own server, but this limitation does prevent you from using n8n's own hosted alternative).

To install a community node, see n8n community node docs. From your workflow dashboard–

• Click the "..." in the bottom left corner beside your username, and click "settings",
• Cilck "community nodes" left sidebar,
• Click "Install",
• Enter the "npm Package Name" which is n8n-nodes-nostrobots,
• Accept the risks and click "Install",
• Nostrobots is now added to your n8n instance.

Using Nostrobots

Nostrobots gives you nodes to help you build Nostr-integrated workflows–

• Nostr Write – for posting Notes to the Nostr network,
• Nostr Read – for reading Notes from the Nostr network, and
• Nostr Utils – for performing certain conversions you may need (e.g. from bech32 to hex).

Nostrobots has good documentation on each node which focuses on simple use cases.

Each node has a "convenience mode" by default. For example, the "Read" Node by default will fetch Kind 1 notes by a simple filter, in Nostrobots parlance a "Strategy". For example, with Strategy set to "Mention" the node will accept a pubkey and fetch all Kind 1 notes that Mention the pubkey within a time period. This is very good for quick use.

What wasn't clear to me initially (until Ocknamo helped me out) is that advanced use cases are also possible.

Each node also has an advanced mode. For example, the "Read" Node can have "Strategy" set to "RawFilter(advanced)". Now the node will accept json (anything you like that complies with NIP-01). You can use this to query Notes (Kind 1) as above, and also Profiles (Kind 0), Follow Lists (Kind 3), Reactions (Kind 7), Zaps (Kind 9734/9735), and anything else you can think of.

Creating and adding workflows

With n8n and Nostrobots installed, you can now create or add any kind of Nostr Workflow Automation.

• Click "Add workflow" to go to the workflow builder screen,
• If you would like to build your own workflow, you can start with adding any node. Click "+" and see what is available. Type "Nostr" to explore the Nostrobots nodes you have added,
• If you would like to add workflows that someone else has built, click "..." in the top right. Then click "import from URL" and paste in the URL of any workflow you would like to use (including the ones I share later in this article).

Nostr Workflow Automations

It's time to build some things!

A simple form to post a note to Nostr

I started very simply. I needed to delegate the ability to post to Npubs that I own in order that a (future) team can test things for me. I don't want to worry about managing or training those people on how to use keys, and I want to revoke access easily.

I needed a basic form with credentials that posted a Note.

For this I can use a very simple workflow–

• A n8n Form node – Creates a form for users to enter the note they wish to post. Allows for the form to be protected by a username and password. This node is the workflow "trigger" so that the workflow runs each time the form is submitted.
• A Set node – Allows me to set some variables, in this case I set the relays that I intend to use. I typically add a Set node immediately following the trigger node, and put all the variables I need in this. It helps to make the workflows easier to update and maintain.
• A Nostr Write node (from Nostrobots) – Writes a Kind-1 note to the Nostr network. It accepts Nostr credentials, the output of the Form node, and the relays from the Set node, and posts the Note to those relays.

Once the workflow is built, you can test it with the testing form URL, and set it to "Active" to use the production form URL. That's it. You can now give posting access to anyone for any Npub. To revoke access, simply change the credentials or set to workflow to "Inactive".

It may also be the world's simplest Nostr client.

You can find the Nostr Form to Post a Note workflow here.

Push notifications on mentions and new notes

One of the things Nostr is not very good at is push notifications. Furthermore I have some unique itches to scratch. I want–

• To make sure I never miss a note addressed to any of my Npubs – For this I want a push notification any time any Nostr user mentions any of my Npubs,
• To make sure I always see all notes from key accounts – For this I need a push notification any time any of my Npubs post any Notes to the network,
• To get these notifications on all of my devices – Not just my phone where my Nostr regular client lives, but also on each of my laptops to suit wherever I am working that day.

I needed to build a Nostr push notifications solution.

To build this workflow I had to string a few ideas together–

• Triggering the node on a schedule – Nostrobots does not include a trigger node. As every workflow starts with a trigger we needed a different method. I elected to run the workflow on a schedule of every 10-minutes. Frequent enough to see Notes while they are hot, but infrequent enough to not burden public relays or get rate-limited,
• Storing a list of Npubs in a Nostr list – I needed a way to store the list of Npubs that trigger my notifications. I initially used an array defined in the workflow, this worked fine. Then I decided to try Nostr lists (NIP-51, kind 30000). By defining my list of Npubs as a list published to Nostr I can control my list from within a Nostr client (e.g. Listr.lol or Nostrudel.ninja). Not only does this "just work", but because it's based on Nostr lists automagically Amethyst client allows me to browse that list as a Feed, and everyone I add gets notified in their Mentions,
• Using specific relays – I needed to query the right relays, including my own HAVEN relay inbox for notes addressed to me, and wss://purplepag.es for Nostr profile metadata,
• Querying Nostr events (with Nostrobots) – I needed to make use of many different Nostr queries and use quite a wide range of what Nostrobots can do–
  • I read the EventID of my Kind 30000 list, to return the desired pubkeys,
  • For notifications on mentions, I read all Kind 1 notes that mention that pubkey,
  • For notifications on new notes, I read all Kind 1 notes published by that pubkey,
  • Where there are notes, I read the Kind 0 profile metadata event of that pubkey to get the displayName of the relevant Npub,
  • I transform the EventID into a Nevent to help clients find it.
• Using the Nostr URI – As I did with my NFC card article, I created a link with the nostr: URI prefix so that my phone's native client opens the link by default,
• Push notifications solution – I needed a push notifications solution. I found many with n8n integrations and chose to go with Pushover which supports all my devices, has a free trial, and is unfairly cheap with a $5-per-device perpetual license.

Once the workflow was built, lists published, and Pushover installed on my phone, I was fully set up with push notifications on Nostr. I have used these workflows for several weeks now and made various tweaks as I went. They are feeling robust and I'd welcome you to give them a go.

You can find the Nostr Push Notification If Mentioned here and If Posts a Note here.

In speaking with other Nostr users while I was building this, there are all kind of other needs for push notifications too – like on replies to a certain bookmarked note, or when a followed Npub starts streaming on zap.stream. These are all possible.

Use my workflows

I have open sourced all my workflows at my Github with MIT license and tried to write complete docs, so that you can import them into your n8n and configure them for your own use.

To import any of my workflows–

• Click on the workflow of your choice, e.g. "Nostr_Push_Notify_If_Mentioned.json",
• Click on the "raw" button to view the raw JSON, ex any Github page layout,
• Copy that URL,
• Enter that URL in the "import from URL" dialog mentioned above.

To configure them–

• Prerequisites, credentials, and variables are all stated,
• In general any variables required are entered into a Set Node that follows the trigger node,
• Pushover has some extra setup but is very straightforward and documented in the workflow.

What next?

Over my first four blogs I explored creating a good Nostr setup with Vanity Npub, Lightning Payments, Nostr Addresses at Your Domain, and Personal Nostr Relay.

Then in my latest two blogs I explored different types of interoperability with NFC cards and now n8n Workflow Automation.

Thinking ahead n8n can power any kind of interoperability between Nostr and any other legacy technology solution. On my mind as I write this:

• Further enhancements to posting and delegating solutions and forms (enhanced UI or different note kinds),
• Automated or scheduled posting (such as auto-liking everything Lyn Alden posts),
• Further enhancements to push notifications, on new and different types of events (such as notifying me when I get a new follower, on replies to certain posts, or when a user starts streaming),
• All kinds of bridges, such as bridging notes to and from Telegram, Slack, or Campfire. Or bridging RSS or other event feeds to Nostr,
• All kinds of other automation (such as BlackCoffee controlling a coffee machine),
• All kinds of AI Assistants and Agents,

In fact I have already released an open source workflow for an AI Assistant, and will share more about that in my next blog.

Please be sure to let me know if you think there's another Nostr topic you'd like to see me tackle.

GM Nostr.

@ 32e18276:5c68e245

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

Storing data in Bitcoin, the “standard” way

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why inscriptions are technically an exploit

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

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

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

Where do we go from here

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

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

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

@ b12b632c:d9e1ff79

One other day on Nostr, one other app!

Today I'll present you a new self-hosted Nostr blog web application recently released on github by dtonon, Oracolo:

https://github.com/dtonon/oracolo

Oracolo is a minimalist blog powered by Nostr, that consists of a single html file, weighing only ~140Kb. You can use whatever Nostr client that supports long format (habla.news, yakihonne, highlighter.com, etc ) to write your posts, and your personal blog is automatically updated.
It works also without a web server; for example you can send it via email as a business card.

Oracolo fetches Nostr data, builds the page, execute the JavaScript code and displays article on clean and sobr blog (a Dark theme would be awesome 👀).

Blog articles are nostr events you published or will publish on Nostr relays through long notes applications like the ones quoted above.

• habla.news
• yakihonne
• highlighter.com

Don't forget to use a NIP07 web browser extensions to login on those websites. Old time where we were forced to fill our nsec key is nearly over!

For the hurry ones of you, you can find here the Oracolo demo with my Nostr long notes article. It will include this one when I'll publish it on Nostr!

https://oracolo.fractalized.net/

How to self-host Oracolo?

You can build the application locally or use a docker compose stack to run it (or any other method). I just build a docker compose stack with Traefik and an Oracolo docker image to let you quickly run it.

The oracolo-docker github repo is available here:

https://github.com/PastaGringo/oracolo-docker

PS: don't freak out about the commits number, oracolo has been the lucky one to let me practrice docker image CI/CD build/push with Forgejo, that went well but it took me a while before finding how to make Forgejo runner dood work 😆). Please ping me on Nostr if you are interested by an article on this topic!

This repo is a mirror from my new Forgejo git instance where the code has been originaly published and will be updated if needed (I think it will):

https://git.fractalized.net/PastaGringo/oracolo-docker

Here is how to do it.

1) First, you need to create an A DNS record into your domain.tld zone. You can create a A with "oracolo" .domain.tld or "*" .domain.tld. The second one will allow traefik to generate all the future subdomain.domain.tld without having to create them in advance. You can verify DNS records with the website https://dnschecker.org.

2) Clone the oracolo-docker repository:

bash git clone https://git.fractalized.net/PastaGringo/oracolo-docker.git cd oracolo-docker

3) Rename the .env.example file:

bash mv .env.example .env

4) Modify and update your .env file with your own infos:

```bash

Let's Encrypt email used to generate the SSL certificate

LETSENCRYPT_EMAIL=

domain for oracolo. Ex: oracolo.fractalized.net

ORACOLO_DOMAIN=

Npub author at "npub" format, not HEX.

NPUB=

Relays where Oracolo will retrieve the Nostr events.

Ex: "wss://nostr.fractalized.net, wss://rnostr.fractalized.net"

RELAYS=

Number of blog article with an thumbnail. Ex: 4

TOP_NOTES_NB= ```

5) Compose Oracolo:

bash docker compose up -d && docker compose logs -f oracolo traefik

bash [+] Running 2/0 ✔ Container traefik Running 0.0s ✔ Container oracolo Running 0.0s WARN[0000] /home/pastadmin/DEV/FORGEJO/PLAY/oracolo-docker/docker-compose.yml: `version` is obsolete traefik | 2024-05-28T19:24:18Z INF Traefik version 3.0.0 built on 2024-04-29T14:25:59Z version=3.0.0 oracolo | oracolo | ___ ____ ____ __ ___ _ ___ oracolo | / \ | \ / | / ] / \ | | / \ oracolo | | || D )| o | / / | || | | | oracolo | | O || / | |/ / | O || |___ | O | oracolo | | || \ | _ / \_ | || || | oracolo | | || . \| | \ || || || | oracolo | \___/ |__|\_||__|__|\____| \___/ |_____| \___/ oracolo | oracolo | Oracolo dtonon's repo: https://github.com/dtonon/oracolo oracolo | oracolo | ╭────────────────────────────╮ oracolo | │ Docker Compose Env Vars ⤵️ │ oracolo | ╰────────────────────────────╯ oracolo | oracolo | NPUB : npub1ky4kxtyg0uxgw8g5p5mmedh8c8s6sqny6zmaaqj44gv4rk0plaus3m4fd2 oracolo | RELAYS : wss://nostr.fractalized.net, wss://rnostr.fractalized.net oracolo | TOP_NOTES_NB : 4 oracolo | oracolo | ╭───────────────────────────╮ oracolo | │ Configuring Oracolo... ⤵️ │ oracolo | ╰───────────────────────────╯ oracolo | oracolo | > Updating npub key with npub1ky4kxtyg0uxgw8g5p5mmedh8c8s6sqny6zmaaqj44gv4rk0plaus3m4fd2... ✅ oracolo | > Updating nostr relays with wss://nostr.fractalized.net, wss://rnostr.fractalized.net... ✅ oracolo | > Updating TOP_NOTE with value 4... ✅ oracolo | oracolo | ╭───────────────────────╮ oracolo | │ Installing Oracolo ⤵️ │ oracolo | ╰───────────────────────╯ oracolo | oracolo | added 122 packages, and audited 123 packages in 8s oracolo | oracolo | 20 packages are looking for funding oracolo | run `npm fund` for details oracolo | oracolo | found 0 vulnerabilities oracolo | npm notice oracolo | npm notice New minor version of npm available! 10.7.0 -> 10.8.0 oracolo | npm notice Changelog: https://github.com/npm/cli/releases/tag/v10.8.0 oracolo | npm notice To update run: npm install -g npm@10.8.0 oracolo | npm notice oracolo | oracolo | >>> done ✅ oracolo | oracolo | ╭─────────────────────╮ oracolo | │ Building Oracolo ⤵️ │ oracolo | ╰─────────────────────╯ oracolo | oracolo | > oracolo@0.0.0 build oracolo | > vite build oracolo | oracolo | 7:32:49 PM [vite-plugin-svelte] WARNING: The following packages have a svelte field in their package.json but no exports condition for svelte. oracolo | oracolo | @splidejs/svelte-splide@0.2.9 oracolo | @splidejs/splide@4.1.4 oracolo | oracolo | Please see https://github.com/sveltejs/vite-plugin-svelte/blob/main/docs/faq.md#missing-exports-condition for details. oracolo | vite v5.2.11 building for production... oracolo | transforming... oracolo | ✓ 84 modules transformed. oracolo | rendering chunks... oracolo | oracolo | oracolo | Inlining: index-C6McxHm7.js oracolo | Inlining: style-DubfL5gy.css oracolo | computing gzip size... oracolo | dist/index.html 233.15 kB │ gzip: 82.41 kB oracolo | ✓ built in 7.08s oracolo | oracolo | >>> done ✅ oracolo | oracolo | > Copying Oracolo built index.html to nginx usr/share/nginx/html... ✅ oracolo | oracolo | ╭────────────────────────╮ oracolo | │ Configuring Nginx... ⤵️ │ oracolo | ╰────────────────────────╯ oracolo | oracolo | > Copying default nginx.conf file... ✅ oracolo | oracolo | ╭──────────────────────╮ oracolo | │ Starting Nginx... 🚀 │ oracolo | ╰──────────────────────╯ oracolo |

If you don't have any issue with the Traefik container, Oracolo should be live! 🔥

You can now access it by going to the ORACOLO_DOMAIN URL configured into the .env file.

Have a good day!

Don't hesisate to follow dtonon on Nostr to follow-up the future updates ⚡🔥

See you soon in another Fractalized story!
PastaGringo 🤖⚡

@ 3f770d65:7a745b24

Here are my predictions for Nostr in 2025:

Decentralization: The outbox and inbox communication models, sometimes referred to as the Gossip model, will become the standard across the ecosystem. By the end of 2025, all major clients will support these models, providing seamless communication and enhanced decentralization. Clients that do not adopt outbox/inbox by then will be regarded as outdated or legacy systems.

Privacy Standards: Major clients such as Damus and Primal will move away from NIP-04 DMs, adopting more secure protocol possibilities like NIP-17 or NIP-104. These upgrades will ensure enhanced encryption and metadata protection. Additionally, NIP-104 MLS tools will drive the development of new clients and features, providing users with unprecedented control over the privacy of their communications.

Interoperability: Nostr's ecosystem will become even more interconnected. Platforms like the Olas image-sharing service will expand into prominent clients such as Primal, Damus, Coracle, and Snort, alongside existing integrations with Amethyst, Nostur, and Nostrudel. Similarly, audio and video tools like Nostr Nests and Zap.stream will gain seamless integration into major clients, enabling easy participation in live events across the ecosystem.

Adoption and Migration: Inspired by early pioneers like Fountain and Orange Pill App, more platforms will adopt Nostr for authentication, login, and social systems. In 2025, a significant migration from a high-profile application platform with hundreds of thousands of users will transpire, doubling Nostr’s daily activity and establishing it as a cornerstone of decentralized technologies.

@ b12b632c:d9e1ff79

What's Blossom?

Blossom offers a bunch of HTTP endpoints that let Nostr users stash and fetch binary data on public servers using the SHA256 hash as a universal ID.

You can find more -precise- information about Blossom on the Nostr article published today by hzrd149, the developper behind it:

nostr:naddr1qqxkymr0wdek7mfdv3exjan9qgszv6q4uryjzr06xfxxew34wwc5hmjfmfpqn229d72gfegsdn2q3fgrqsqqqa28e4v8zy

You find the Blossom github repo here:

GitHub - hzrd149/blossom: Blobs stored simply on mediaservers https://github.com/hzrd149/blossom

Meet Blobs

Blobs are files with SHA256 hashes as IDs, making them unique and secure. You can compute these IDs from the files themselves using the sha256 hashing algorithm (when you run sha256sum bitcoin.pdf).

Meet Drives

Drives are like organized events on Nostr, mapping blobs to filenames and extra info. It's like setting up a roadmap for your data.

How do Servers Work?

Blossom servers have four endpoints for users to upload and handle blobs:

GET /<sha256>: Get blobs by their SHA256 hash, maybe with a file extension. PUT /upload: Chuck your blobs onto the server, verified with signed Nostr events. GET /list/<pubkey>: Peek at a list of blobs tied to a specific public key for smooth management. DELETE /<sha256>: Trash blobs from the server when needed, keeping things tidy.

Yon can find detailed information about the Blossom Server Implementation here..

https://github.com/hzrd149/blossom/blob/master/Server.md

..and the Blossom-server source code is here:

https://github.com/hzrd149/blossom-server

What's Blossom Drive?

Think of Blossom Drive as the "Front-End" (or a public cloud drive) of Blossom servers, letting you upload, manage, share your files/folders blobs.

Source code is available here:

https://github.com/hzrd149/blossom-drive

Developpers

If you want to add Blossom into your Nostr client/app, the blossom-client-sdk explaining how it works (with few examples 🙏) is published here:

https://github.com/hzrd149/blossom-client-sdk

How to self-host Blossom server & Blossom Drive

We'll use docker compose to setup Blossom server & drive. I included Nginx Proxy Manager because it's the Web Proxy I use for all the Fractalized self-hosted services :

Create a new docker-compose file:

~$ nano docker-compose.yml

Insert this content into the file:

``` version: '3.8' services:

blossom-drive: container_name: blossom-drive image: pastagringo/blossom-drive-docker

ports:

- '80:80'

blossom-server: container_name: blossom-server image: 'ghcr.io/hzrd149/blossom-server:master'

ports:

- '3000:3000'

volumes:
  - './blossom-server/config.yml:/app/config.yml'
  - 'blossom_data:/app/data'

nginxproxymanager: container_name: nginxproxymanager image: 'jc21/nginx-proxy-manager:latest' restart: unless-stopped ports: - '80:80' - '81:81' - '443:443' volumes: - ./nginxproxymanager/data:/data - ./nginxproxymanager/letsencrypt:/etc/letsencrypt - ./nginxproxymanager/_hsts_map.conf:/app/templates/_hsts_map.conf

volumes: blossom_data: ```

You now need to personalize the blossom-server config.yml:

bash ~$ mkdir blossom-server ~$ nano blossom-server/config.yml

Insert this content to the file (CTRL+X & Y to save/exit):

```yaml

Used when listing blobs

publicDomain: https://blossom.fractalized.net

databasePath: data/sqlite.db

discovery: # find files by querying nostr relays nostr: enabled: true relays: - wss://nostrue.com - wss://relay.damus.io - wss://nostr.wine - wss://nos.lol - wss://nostr-pub.wellorder.net - wss://nostr.fractalized.net # find files by asking upstream CDNs upstream: enabled: true domains: - https://cdn.satellite.earth # don't set your blossom server here!

storage: # local or s3 backend: local local: dir: ./data # s3: # endpoint: https://s3.endpoint.com # bucket: blossom # accessKey: xxxxxxxx # secretKey: xxxxxxxxx # If this is set the server will redirect clients when loading blobs # publicURL: https://s3.region.example.com/

# rules are checked in descending order. if a blob matches a rule it is kept # "type" (required) the type of the blob, "" can be used to match any type # "expiration" (required) time passed since last accessed # "pubkeys" (optional) a list of owners # any blobs not matching the rules will be removed rules: # mime type of blob - type: text/ # time since last accessed expiration: 1 month - type: "image/" expiration: 1 week - type: "video/" expiration: 5 days - type: "model/" expiration: 1 week - type: "" expiration: 2 days

upload: # enable / disable uploads enabled: true # require auth to upload requireAuth: true # only check rules that include "pubkeys" requirePubkeyInRule: false

list: requireAuth: false allowListOthers: true

tor: enabled: false proxy: "" ```

You need to update few values with your own:

• Your own Blossom server public domain :

publicDomain: https://YourBlossomServer.YourDomain.tld

and upstream domains where Nostr clients will also verify if the Blossom server own the file blob: :

upstream: enabled: true domains: - https://cdn.satellite.earth # don't set your blossom server here!

• The Nostr relays where you want to publish your Blossom events (I added my own Nostr relay):

yaml discovery: # find files by querying nostr relays nostr: enabled: true relays: - wss://nostrue.com - wss://relay.damus.io - wss://nostr.wine - wss://nos.lol - wss://nostr-pub.wellorder.net - wss://nostr.fractalized.net

Everything is setup! You can now compose your docker-compose file:

~$ docker compose up -d

I will let your check this article to know how to configure and use Nginx Proxy Manager.

You can check both Blossom containers logs with this command:

~$ docker compose logs -f blossom-drive blossom-server

Regarding the Nginx Proxy Manager settings for Blossom, here is the configuration I used:

PS: it seems the naming convention for the kind of web service like Blossom is named "CDN" (for: "content delivery network"). It's not impossible in a near future I rename my subdomain blossom.fractalized.net to cdn.blossom.fractalized.net and blossom-drive.fractalized.net to blossom.fractalized.net 😅

Do what you prefer!

After having configured everything, you can now access Blossom server by going to your Blossom server subdomain. You should see a homepage as below:

Same thing for the Blossom Drive, you should see this homepage:

You can now login with your prefered method. In my case, I login on Blossom Drive with my NIP-07 Chrome extension.

You now need to go the "Servers" tab to add some Blossom servers, including the fresh one you just installed.

You can now create your first Blossom Drive by clicking on "+ New" > "Drive" on the top left button:

Fill your desired blossom drive name and select the media servers where you want to host your files and click on "Create":

PS: you can enable "Encrypted" option but as hzrd149 said on his Nostr note about Blossom:

"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"

You are now able to upload some files (a picture for instance):

And obtain the HTTP direct link by clicking on the "Copy Link" button:

If you check URL image below, you'll see that it is served by Blossom:

It's done ! ✅

You can now upload your files to Blossom accross several Blossom servers to let them survive the future internet apocalypse.

Blossom has just been released few days ago, many news and features will come!

Don't hesisate to follow hzrd149 on Nostr to follow-up the future updates ⚡🔥

See you soon in another Fractalized story!
PastaGringo 🤖⚡

@ 16d11430:61640947

The global technology industry is a paradox of modernity and historical legacies. On the surface, it thrives on innovation, cross-border collaboration, and diversity. Yet, beneath this veneer lies a disturbing continuation of colonial-era power dynamics. With leadership and non-technical roles dominated by professionals from developed Western nations, and technical labor outsourced predominantly to developing countries, the tech sector operates under a "business as usual" approach that perpetuates colonial visions of hierarchy and control.

---

The Lull to the Norm: An Invisible Legacy

Leadership and the West’s Monopoly on Power

Non-technical leadership roles in the tech industry are disproportionately occupied by individuals from countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and other former colonial powers. These roles, encompassing strategy, decision-making, and vision-setting, form the backbone of global tech operations.

Statistics: In Silicon Valley, white males hold 58.7% of executive positions, while Asian males, despite their high representation in technical roles, occupy only 16.3% of executive roles. African American and Hispanic representation is even lower. (Source)

Implications: These patterns mirror historical colonial structures where administrative and decision-making powers were centralized in Western metropoles, while the labor-intensive work was relegated to colonies.

Technical Labor and the Outsourcing of Expertise

Technical labor in the global tech industry has become synonymous with talent from developing countries, particularly India, Southeast Asia, and Africa. This division of labor, while celebrated as cost-efficient and globally inclusive, also reinforces a narrative where technical expertise is commoditized, while strategic and creative roles are retained in the West.

Global Workforce Distribution: India alone accounts for 53% of the global tech workforce sourced through outsourcing platforms, a figure that underscores the reliance on developing nations for technical expertise. (Source)

The Unseen Ceiling: While these workers are highly skilled, systemic barriers often prevent their transition into decision-making roles, relegating them to a cycle of “support” work that lacks career advancement.

---

A Colonial Vision: The Reinforcement of Hierarchies

The division of labor in the tech industry is not accidental but a reflection of deeper structural inequities rooted in colonial ideologies:

1. Knowledge and Power Centralization: Just as colonial powers centralized administrative control while delegating manual work to colonies, the tech industry centralizes leadership in Western hubs while outsourcing technical work to developing nations.

2. Economic Exploitation: Developing countries provide a wealth of skilled labor at lower costs, driving profits for corporations headquartered in the West. This mirrors the economic exploitation of colonies, where raw resources and labor were extracted for metropolitan gain.

3. Cultural Hierarchies: Soft skills and leadership qualities, often defined by Western norms, are prioritized over technical expertise. This reinforces the idea that strategic thinking and innovation are inherently Western attributes, while execution and technical work are the domain of others.

---

Breaking the Cycle: A Call for Change

Recognizing Global Talent Equitably

The industry must redefine its metrics for leadership and innovation. Technical expertise from developing countries is not just labor but intellectual capital that deserves recognition and representation in decision-making roles.

Case in Point: Organizations like Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) demonstrate how technical teams from developing countries can take on leadership roles globally, challenging the status quo.

Decentralizing Leadership

Leadership roles should reflect the global nature of the workforce. Companies need to actively promote individuals from diverse cultural and geographical backgrounds into decision-making positions, breaking the Western monopoly on soft-skill dominance.

Fostering Cross-Cultural Collaboration

Global tech organizations must build mechanisms for meaningful collaboration between Western leadership and technical teams from developing nations. This includes addressing cultural biases and creating pathways for career advancement that are not limited by geography or nationality.

Leveraging Decentralized Finance and Blockchain

The rise of blockchain and decentralized finance (DeFi) provides an alternative framework that bypasses traditional hierarchies. Through tokenized incentives and decentralized governance, skilled professionals can independently create, innovate, and profit outside the confines of corporate colonialism.

---

Conclusion: Toward a Post-Colonial Tech Industry

The global tech sector, despite its progressiveness, remains a product of historical hierarchies. The division of labor—leadership in the West, execution in the East and South—is not a mere coincidence but a continuation of colonial visions. As the industry expands, it must confront these dynamics head-on.

Breaking free from this cycle requires more than policy changes; it demands a fundamental shift in perspective. By recognizing the intellectual capital of technical labor, decentralizing leadership, and fostering equitable collaboration, the tech industry can move toward a truly inclusive and post-colonial future. Until then, the lull to the norm remains a quiet affirmation of a colonial past.

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Trust is a topic increasingly being discussed. Whether it is trust in each other, in the media, or in our authorities, trust is generally seen as a cornerstone of a strong and well-functioning society. The topic was also the theme of the World Economic Forum at its annual meeting in Davos earlier this year. Even among central bank economists, the subject is becoming more prevalent. Last year, Agustín Carstens, head of the BIS ("the central bank of central banks"), said that "[w]ith trust, the public will be more willing to accept actions that involve short-term costs in exchange for long-term benefits" and that "trust is vital for policy effectiveness".

It is therefore interesting when central banks or others pretend as if nothing has happened even when trust has been shattered.

Just as in Sweden and in hundreds of other countries, Canada is planning to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDC), a new form of money where the central bank or its intermediaries (the banks) will have complete insight into citizens' transactions. Payments or money could also be made programmable. Everything from transferring ownership of a car automatically after a successful payment to the seller, to payments being denied if you have traveled too far from home.

"If Canadians decide a digital dollar is necessary, our obligation is to be ready" says Carolyn Rogers, Deputy Head of Bank of Canada, in a statement shared in an article.

So, what do the citizens want? According to a report from the Bank of Canada, a whopping 88% of those surveyed believe that the central bank should refrain from developing such a currency. About the same number (87%) believe that authorities should guarantee the opportunity to pay with cash instead. And nearly four out of five people (78%) do not believe that the central bank will care about people's opinions. What about trust again?

Canadians' likely remember the Trudeau government's actions against the "Freedom Convoy". The Freedom Convoy consisted of, among others, truck drivers protesting the country's strict pandemic policies, blocking roads in the capital Ottawa at the beginning of 2022. The government invoked never-before-used emergency measures to, among other things, "freeze" people's bank accounts. Suddenly, truck drivers and those with a "connection" to the protests were unable to pay their electricity bills or insurances, for instance. Superficially, this may not sound so serious, but ultimately, it could mean that their families end up in cold houses (due to electricity being cut off) and that they lose the ability to work (driving uninsured vehicles is not taken lightly). And this applied not only to the truck drivers but also to those with a "connection" to the protests. No court rulings were required.

Without the freedom to pay for goods and services, i.e. the freedom to transact, one has no real freedom at all, as several participants in the protests experienced.

In January of this year, a federal judge concluded that the government's actions two years ago were unlawful when it invoked the emergency measures. The use did not display "features of rationality - motivation, transparency, and intelligibility - and was not justified in relation to the relevant factual and legal limitations that had to be considered". He also argued that the use was not in line with the constitution. There are also reports alleging that the government fabricated evidence to go after the demonstrators. The case is set to continue to the highest court. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland have also recently been sued for the government's actions.

The Trudeau government's use of emergency measures two years ago sadly only provides a glimpse of what the future may hold if CBDCs or similar systems replace the current monetary system with commercial bank money and cash. In Canada, citizens do not want the central bank to proceed with the development of a CBDC. In canada, citizens in Canada want to strengthen the role of cash. In Canada, citizens suspect that the central bank will not listen to them. All while the central bank feverishly continues working on the new system...

"Trust is vital", said Agustín Carstens. But if policy-makers do not pause for a thoughtful reflection even when trust has been utterly shattered as is the case in Canada, are we then not merely dealing with lip service?

And how much trust do these policy-makers then deserve?

@ 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. 🐶🐾🫡🚀🚀🚀

@ 42342239:1d80db24

Biologist Stuart Kauffman introduced the concept of the "adjacent possible" in evolutionary biology in 1996. A bacterium cannot suddenly transform into a flamingo; rather, it must rely on small exploratory changes (of the "adjacent possible") if it is ever to become a beautiful pink flying creature. The same principle applies to human societies, all of which exemplify complex systems. It is indeed challenging to transform shivering cave-dwellers into a space travelers without numerous intermediate steps.

Imagine a water wheel – in itself, perhaps not such a remarkable invention. Yet the water wheel transformed the hard-to-use energy of water into easily exploitable rotational energy. A little of the "adjacent possible" had now been explored: water mills, hammer forges, sawmills, and textile factories soon emerged. People who had previously ground by hand or threshed with the help of oxen could now spend their time on other things. The principles of the water wheel also formed the basis for wind power. Yes, a multitude of possibilities arose – reminiscent of the rapid development during the Cambrian explosion. When the inventors of bygone times constructed humanity's first water wheel, they thus expanded the "adjacent possible". Surely, the experts of old likely sought swift prohibitions. Not long ago, our expert class claimed that the internet was going to be a passing fad, or that it would only have the same modest impact on the economy as the fax machine. For what it's worth, there were even attempts to ban the number zero back in the days.

The pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, wrote in Bitcoin's whitepaper that "[w]e have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust." The Bitcoin system enables participants to agree on what is true without needing to trust each other, something that has never been possible before. In light of this, it is worth noting that trust in the federal government in the USA is among the lowest levels measured in almost 70 years. Trust in media is at record lows. Moreover, in countries like the USA, the proportion of people who believe that one can trust "most people" has decreased significantly. "Rebuilding trust" was even the theme of the World Economic Forum at its annual meeting. It is evident, even in the international context, that trust between countries is not at its peak.

Over a fifteen-year period, Bitcoin has enabled electronic transactions without its participants needing to rely on a central authority, or even on each other. This may not sound like a particularly remarkable invention in itself. But like the water wheel, one must acknowledge that new potential seems to have been put in place, potential that is just beginning to be explored. Kauffman's "adjacent possible" has expanded. And despite dogmatic statements to the contrary, no one can know for sure where this might lead.

The discussion of Bitcoin or crypto currencies would benefit from greater humility and openness, not only from employees or CEOs of money laundering banks but also from forecast-failing central bank officials. When for instance Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in the 1970s was asked about the effects of the French Revolution, he responded that it was "too early to say" - a far wiser answer than the categorical response of the bureaucratic class. Isn't exploring systems not based on trust is exactly what we need at this juncture?

@ 16d11430:61640947

The Australian tech industry is booming, fueled by skilled migration and increasing demand for innovation. Yet, many highly qualified immigrants find themselves trapped in an unforgiving system, stifled by the limitations of fiat economies and traditional job markets. For those seeking autonomy and financial independence, decentralized finance (DeFi) offers a revolutionary escape route. By leveraging blockchain technology, immigrants can bypass traditional barriers, unlock new opportunities, and redefine their economic participation in Australia’s tech ecosystem.

---

The Problem: A Fragile, Fiat-Based Ecosystem

Underemployment and Job Mismatch

Many skilled immigrants arrive in Australia with dreams of applying their hard-earned expertise, only to encounter underemployment or roles unrelated to their qualifications. This mismatch arises from:

Recognition Issues: Foreign credentials and experience often go undervalued.

Economic Shocks: The fiat-based economy is prone to cycles of instability, leaving immigrants vulnerable to layoffs and wage suppression.

Systemic Barriers: Licensing requirements, workplace discrimination, and a preference for "local experience" keep many skilled professionals from thriving.

Financial Vulnerabilities

Immigrants also face challenges in navigating Australia’s financial system, which is heavily fiat-dependent:

High Living Costs: The high cost of living in major Australian cities like Sydney and Melbourne erodes savings and limits economic mobility.

Limited Access to Credit: Without robust credit histories in Australia, immigrants often struggle to secure loans or mortgages.

Dependency on Remittances: Immigrants sending money back home face exorbitant fees and delays, further compounding financial strain.

---

The DeFi Solution: A Borderless Financial Ecosystem

Decentralized finance, or DeFi, is transforming the global financial landscape. Built on blockchain technology, DeFi eliminates intermediaries, providing direct access to financial services such as lending, borrowing, and investing. For immigrants in Australia's tech ecosystem, DeFi offers a pathway to financial empowerment and independence.

Key Benefits of DeFi for Immigrants

1. Access to Global Capital DeFi platforms enable immigrants to tap into global liquidity pools, allowing them to secure loans or funding without relying on local credit systems. Smart contracts ensure transparency and fairness, removing biases that plague traditional banking.

2. Earning Through Crypto Immigrants can participate in DeFi protocols to earn passive income through staking, yield farming, or providing liquidity. This income is not tied to the fragile fiat economy and offers a hedge against local economic downturns.

3. Borderless Remittances By using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or stablecoins, immigrants can send money back home instantly and at a fraction of the cost compared to traditional remittance services.

4. Decentralized Career Platforms Web3 technologies are enabling decentralized platforms where immigrants can showcase their skills, secure gig work, and get paid in crypto, bypassing restrictive local hiring practices.

---

DeFi Meets Skilled Immigration: A Blueprint for Independence

1. Building an Alternative Tech Economy

DeFi empowers immigrants to bypass Australia’s fiat-based tech ecosystem by participating in global, decentralized marketplaces. For instance:

Immigrant developers can contribute to open-source Web3 projects and earn cryptocurrency.

Blockchain-based freelancing platforms allow skilled workers to monetize their expertise without needing local validation.

1. Funding Innovation Without Borders

Immigrants with entrepreneurial ambitions often struggle to secure funding in Australia. Through DeFi platforms, they can raise capital via Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), decentralized crowdfunding, or tokenized equity models.

1. Escaping Fiat Dependency

DeFi provides an opportunity to store wealth in stablecoins or cryptocurrencies, reducing exposure to fiat-related inflation and instability. By adopting Bitcoin and DeFi solutions, immigrants can build a financial buffer that operates independently of the Australian dollar.

1. Resilience Against Economic Shocks

DeFi’s decentralized nature protects users from localized economic crises. Immigrants can diversify their income streams globally, reducing their dependency on Australia’s fragile economic cycles.

---

Challenges and Risks

While DeFi offers immense potential, it is not without risks. Immigrants exploring this space should be aware of:

Regulatory Uncertainty: Australia’s evolving crypto regulations could impact DeFi accessibility.

Volatility: Cryptocurrencies are inherently volatile, and users must exercise caution in managing investments.

Scams and Security: The decentralized nature of DeFi makes it a target for scams and hacks. Immigrants must prioritize education and security practices.

---

Conclusion: A New Path to Empowerment

For skilled immigrants in Australia’s tech ecosystem, DeFi represents more than just a financial tool—it’s a lifeline to autonomy and opportunity. By leveraging blockchain technology, immigrants can break free from the suppressive constraints of fiat-based systems, access global opportunities, and achieve true economic independence.

The intersection of DeFi and skilled immigration is not just a vision for the future—it’s a call to action. As the world transitions toward decentralized systems, skilled immigrants have a unique opportunity to lead the way, redefining what it means to thrive in a globalized economy.