@ b8851a06:9b120ba1

Private property isn’t lines on dirt or fences of steel—it’s the crystallization of human sovereignty. Each boundary drawn is a silent declaration: This is where my will meets yours, where creation clashes against chaos. What we defend as “mine” or “yours” is no mere object but a metaphysical claim, a scaffold for the unfathomable complexity of voluntary exchange.

Markets breathe only when individuals anchor their choices in the inviolable. Without property, there is no negotiation—only force. No trade—only taking. The deed to land, the title to a car, the seed of an idea: these are not static things but frontiers of being, where human responsibility collides with the infinite permutations of value.

Austrian economics whispers what existentialism shouts: existence precedes essence. Property isn’t granted by systems; it’s asserted through action, defended through sacrifice, and sanctified through mutual recognition. A thing becomes “owned” only when a mind declares it so, and others—through reason or respect—refrain from crossing that unseen line.

Bitcoin? The purest ledger of this truth. A string of code, yes—but one that mirrors the unyielding logic of property itself: scarce, auditable, unconquerable. It doesn’t ask permission. It exists because sovereign minds choose it to.

Sigh. #nostr
I love #Bitcoin.

@ 599f67f7:21fb3ea9

¿Qué es Blossom?

nostr:nevent1qqspttj39n6ld4plhn4e2mq3utxpju93u4k7w33l3ehxyf0g9lh3f0qpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsygzenanl0hmkjnrq8fksvdhpt67xzrdh0h8agltwt5znsmvzr7e74ywgmr72

Blossom significa Blobs Simply Stored on Media Servers (Blobs Simplemente Almacenados en Servidores de Medios). Blobs son fragmentos de datos binarios, como archivos pero sin nombres. En lugar de nombres, se identifican por su hash sha256. La ventaja de usar hashes sha256 en lugar de nombres es que los hashes son IDs universales que se pueden calcular a partir del archivo mismo utilizando el algoritmo de hash sha256.

💡 archivo -> sha256 -> hash

Blossom es, por lo tanto, un conjunto de puntos finales HTTP que permiten a los usuarios almacenar y recuperar blobs almacenados en servidores utilizando su identidad nostr.

¿Por qué Blossom?

Como mencionamos hace un momento, al usar claves nostr como su identidad, Blossom permite que los datos sean "propiedad" del usuario. Esto simplifica enormemente la cuestión de "qué es spam" para el alojamiento de servidores. Por ejemplo, en nuestro Blossom solo permitimos cargas por miembros de la comunidad verificados que tengan un NIP-05 con nosotros.

Los usuarios pueden subir en múltiples servidores de blossom, por ejemplo, uno alojado por su comunidad, uno de pago, otro público y gratuito, para establecer redundancia de sus datos. Los blobs pueden ser espejados entre servidores de blossom, de manera similar a cómo los relays nostr pueden transmitir eventos entre sí. Esto mejora la resistencia a la censura de blossom.

A continuación se muestra una breve tabla de comparación entre torrents, Blossom y servidores CDN centralizados. (Suponiendo que hay muchos seeders para torrents y se utilizan múltiples servidores con Blossom).

| | Torrents | Blossom | CDN Centralizado | | --------------------------------------------------------------- | -------- | ------- | ---------------- | | Descentralizado | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | | Resistencia a la censura | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | | ¿Puedo usarlo para publicar fotos de gatitos en redes sociales? | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ |

¿Cómo funciona?

Blossom utiliza varios tipos de eventos nostr para comunicarse con el servidor de medios.

| kind | descripción | BUD | | ----- | ------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | | 24242 | Evento de autorización | BUD01 | | 10063 | Lista de Servidores de Usuarios | BUD03 |

kind:24242 - Autorización

Esto es esencialmente lo que ya describimos al usar claves nostr como IDs de usuario. En el evento, el usuario le dice al servidor que quiere subir o eliminar un archivo y lo firma con sus claves nostr. El servidor realiza algunas verificaciones en este evento y luego ejecuta el comando del usuario si todo parece estar bien.

kind:10063 - Lista de Servidores de Usuarios

Esto es utilizado por el usuario para anunciar a qué servidores de medios está subiendo. De esta manera, cuando el cliente ve esta lista, sabe dónde subir los archivos del usuario. También puede subir en múltiples servidores definidos en la lista para asegurar redundancia. En el lado de recuperación, si por alguna razón uno de los servidores en la lista del usuario está fuera de servicio, o el archivo ya no se puede encontrar allí, el cliente puede usar esta lista para intentar recuperar el archivo de otros servidores en la lista. Dado que los blobs se identifican por sus hashes, el mismo blob tendrá el mismo hash en cualquier servidor de medios. Todo lo que el cliente necesita hacer es cambiar la URL por la de un servidor diferente.

Ahora, además de los conceptos básicos de cómo funciona Blossom, también hay otros tipos de eventos que hacen que Blossom sea aún más interesante.

| kind | descripción | | ----- | --------------------- | | 30563 | Blossom Drives | | 36363 | Listado de Servidores | | 31963 | Reseña de Servidores |

kind:30563 - Blossom Drives

Este tipo de evento facilita la organización de blobs en carpetas, como estamos acostumbrados con los drives (piensa en Google Drive, iCloud, Proton Drive, etc.). El evento contiene información sobre la estructura de carpetas y los metadatos del drive.

kind:36363 y kind:31963 - Listado y Reseña

Estos tipos de eventos permiten a los usuarios descubrir y reseñar servidores de medios a través de nostr. kind:36363 es un listado de servidores que contiene la URL del servidor. kind:31963 es una reseña, donde los usuarios pueden calificar servidores.

¿Cómo lo uso?

Encuentra un servidor

Primero necesitarás elegir un servidor Blossom donde subirás tus archivos. Puedes navegar por los públicos en blossomservers.com. Algunos de ellos son de pago, otros pueden requerir que tus claves nostr estén en una lista blanca.

Luego, puedes ir a la URL de su servidor y probar a subir un archivo pequeño, como una foto. Si estás satisfecho con el servidor (es rápido y aún no te ha fallado), puedes agregarlo a tu Lista de Servidores de Usuarios. Cubriremos brevemente cómo hacer esto en noStrudel y Amethyst (pero solo necesitas hacer esto una vez, una vez que tu lista actualizada esté publicada, los clientes pueden simplemente recuperarla de nostr).

noStrudel

1. Encuentra Relays en la barra lateral, luego elige Servidores de Medios.
2. Agrega un servidor de medios, o mejor aún, varios.
3. Publica tu lista de servidores. ✅

Amethyst

1. En la barra lateral, encuentra Servidores multimedia.
2. Bajo Servidores Blossom, agrega tus servidores de medios.
3. Firma y publica. ✅

Ahora, cuando vayas a hacer una publicación y adjuntar una foto, por ejemplo, se subirá en tu servidor blossom.

⚠️ Ten en cuenta que debes suponer que los archivos que subas serán públicos. Aunque puedes proteger un archivo con contraseña, esto no ha sido auditado.

Blossom Drive

Como mencionamos anteriormente, podemos publicar eventos para organizar nuestros blobs en carpetas. Esto puede ser excelente para compartir archivos con tu equipo, o simplemente para mantener las cosas organizadas.

Para probarlo, ve a blossom.hzrd149.com (o nuestra instancia comunitaria en blossom.bitcointxoko.com) e inicia sesión con tu método preferido.

Puedes crear una nueva unidad y agregar blobs desde allí.

Bouquet

Si usas múltiples servidores para darte redundancia, Bouquet es una buena manera de obtener una visión general de todos tus archivos. Úsalo para subir y navegar por tus medios en diferentes servidores y sincronizar blobs entre ellos.

Cherry Tree

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqfngzhsvjggdlgeycm96x4emzjlwf8dyyzdfg4hefp89zpkdgz99qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcqyp3065hj9zellakecetfflkgudm5n6xcc9dnetfeacnq90y3yxa5z5gk2q6

Cherry Tree te permite dividir un archivo en fragmentos y luego subirlos en múltiples servidores blossom, y más tarde reensamblarlos en otro lugar.

Conclusión

Blossom aún está en desarrollo, pero ya hay muchas cosas interesantes que puedes hacer con él para hacerte a ti y a tu comunidad más soberanos. ¡Pruébalo!

Si deseas mantenerte al día sobre el desarrollo de Blossom, sigue a nostr:nprofile1qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcqyqnxs90qeyssm73jf3kt5dtnk997ujw6ggy6j3t0jjzw2yrv6sy22ysu5ka y dale un gran zap por su excelente trabajo.

Referencias

• hzrd149/blossom en GitHub
• Blossom Drive

@ 29af23a9:842ef0c1

A Indústria Pornográfica se caracteriza pelo investimento pesado de grandes empresários americanos, desde 2014.

Na década de 90, filmes pornográficos eram feitos às coxas. Era basicamente duas pessoas fazendo sexo amador e sendo gravadas. Não tinha roteiro, nem produção, não tinha maquiagem, nada disso. A distribuição era rudimentar, os assinantes tinham que sair de suas casas, ir até a locadora, sofrer todo tipo de constrangimento para assistir a um filme pornô.

No começo dos anos 2000, o serviço de Pay Per View fez o número de vendas de filmes eróticos (filme erótico é bem mais leve) crescer mas nada se compara com os sites de filmes pornográficos por assinatura.

Com o advento dos serviços de Streaming, os sites que vendem filmes por assinatura se estabeleceram no mercado como nunca foi visto na história.

Hoje, os Produtores usam produtos para esticar os vasos sanguíneos do pênis dos atores e dopam as atrizes para que elas aguentem horas de gravação (a Série Black Mirror fez uma crítica a isso no episódio 1 milhão de méritos de forma sutil).

Além de toda a produção em volta das cenas. Que são gravadas em 4K, para focar bem as partes íntimas dos atores. Quadros fechados, iluminação, tudo isso faz essa Indústria ser "Artística" uma vez que tudo ali é falso. Um filme da Produtora Vixen, por exemplo, onde jovens mulheres transam em mansões com seus empresários estimula o esteriótipo da mina padrão que chama seu chefe rico de "daddy" e seduz ele até ele trair a esposa.

Sites como xvídeos, pornHub e outros nada mais são do que sites que salvam filmes dessas produtoras e hospedam as cenas com anúncios e pop-ups. Alguns sites hospedam o filme inteiro "de graça".

Esse tipo de filme estimula qualquer homem heterosexual com menos de 30 anos, que não tem o córtex frontal de seu cérebro totalmente desenvolvido (segundo estudos só é completamente desenvolvido quando o homem chega aos 31 anos).

A arte Pornográfica faz alguns fantasiarem ter relação sexual com uma gostosa americana branquinha, até escraviza-los. Muitos não conseguem sair do vício e preferem a Ficção à sua esposa real. Então pare de se enganar e admita. A Pornografia faz mal para a saúde mental do homem.

Quem sonha em ter uma transa com Lana Rhodes, deve estar nesse estágio. Trata-se de uma atriz (pornstar) que ganhou muito dinheiro vendendo a ilusão da Arte Pornografica, como a Riley Reid que só gravava para grandes Produtoras. Ambas se arrependeram da carreira artística e agora tentam viver suas vidas como uma mulher comum.

As próprias atrizes se consideram artistas, como Mia Malkova, chegou a dizer que Pornografia é a vida dela, que é "Lindo e Sofisticado."

Mia Malkova inclusive faz questão de dizer que a industria não escravisa mulheres jovens. Trata-se de um negócio onde a mulher assina um contrato com uma produtora e recebe um cachê por isso. Diferente do discurso da Mia Khalifa em entrevista para a BBC, onde diz que as mulheres são exploradas por homens poderosos. Vai ela está confundindo o Conglomerado Vixen com a Rede Globo ou com a empresa do Harvey Weinstein.

Enfim, se você é um homem solteiro entre 18 e 40 anos que já consumiu ou que ainda consome pornografia, sabia que sofrerá consequências. Pois trata-se de "produções artísticas" da indústria audiovisual que altera os níveis de dopamina do seu cérebro, mudando a neuroplasticidade e diminuindo a massa cinzenta, deixando o homem com memória fraca, sem foco e com mente nebulosa.

Por que o Estado não proíbe/criminaliza a Pornografia se ela faz mal? E desde quando o Estado quer o nosso bem? Existem grandes empresarios que financiam essa indústria ajudando governos a manterem o povo viciado e assim alienado. É um pão e circo, só que muito mais viciante e maléfico. Eu costume dizer aos meus amigos que existem grandes empresários jvdeus que são donos de grandes Produtoras de filmes pornográficos como o Conglomerado Vixen. Então se eles assistem vídeos pirateados de filmes dessas produtoras, eles estão no colo do Judeu.

@ f4db5270:3c74e0d0

Hi Art lover! 🎨🫂💜 You may not know it yet but all of the following paintings are available in #Bitcoin on my website: https://isolabell.art/#shop

For info and prices write to me in DM and we will find a good deal! 🤝

ON THE ROAD AGAIN 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed January 23, 2025

---

SUN OF JANUARY 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed January 14, 2025

---

THE BLUE HOUR 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed December 14, 2024

---

LIKE A FRAGMENT OF ETERNITY 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed December 01, 2024

---

WHERE WINTER WHISPERS 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed November 07, 2024

---

L'ATTESA DI UN MOMENTO 40x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed October 29, 2024

---

LE COSE CHE PENSANO 40x50cm, Oil on paper Completed October 05, 2024

---

TWILIGHT'S RIVER 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed September 17, 2024

---

GOLD ON THE OCEAN 40x50cm, Oil on paper Completed September 08, 2024

---

SUSSURRI DI CIELO E MARE 50x40cm, Oil on paper Completed September 05, 2024

---

THE END OF A WONDERFUL WEEKEND 40x30cm, Oil on board Completed August 12, 2024

---

FIAMME NEL CIELO 60x35cm, Oil on board Completed July 28, 2024

---

INIZIO D'ESTATE 50x40cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed July 13, 2024

---

OMBRE DELLA SERA 50x40cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed June 16, 2024

---

NEW ZEALAND SUNSET 80x60cm, Oil on canvas board Completed May 28, 2024

---

VENICE 50x40cm, Oil on board Completed May 4, 2024

---

CORNWALL 50x40cm, Oil on board Completed April 26, 2024

---

DOCKS ON SUNSET 40x19,5cm, Oil on board Completed March 14, 2024

---

SOLITUDE 30x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed March 2, 2024

---

LULLING WAVES 40x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed January 14, 2024

---

MULATTIERA IN AUTUNNO 30x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel

---

TRAMONTO A KOS 40x40cm, oil on board canvas

---

HIDDEN SMILE 40x40cm, oil on board

---

INIZIO D'AUTUNNO 40x40cm, oil on canvas

---

BOE NEL LAGO 30x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

BARCHE A RIPOSO 40x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

IL RISVEGLIO 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

LA QUIETE PRIMA DELLA TEMPESTA 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

LAMPIONE SUL LAGO 30x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

DUE NELLA NEVE 60x25cm, oil on board

---

UNA CAREZZA 30x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

REBEL WAVES 44x32cm, oil on canvas board

---

THE SCREAMING WAVE 40x30cm, oil on canvas board

---

"LA DONZELLETTA VIEN DALLA CAMPAGNA..." 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

---

LIGHTHOUSE ON WHITE CLIFF 30x40cm, oil on canvas board

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

---

CHECK OUT at ~ > ramix.minibolt.info < ~

---

Main changes:

• Adapted to Raspberry Pi 5, with the possibility of using internal storage: a PCIe to M.2 adapter + SSD NVMe:

  Connect directly to the board, remove the instability issues with the USB connection, and unlock the ability to enjoy higher transfer speeds**

• Based on Debian 12 (Raspberry Pi OS Bookworm - 64-bit).
• Updated all services that have been tested until now, to the latest version.
• Same as the MiniBolt guide, changed I2P, Fulcrum, and ThunderHub guides, to be part of the core guide.
• All UI & UX improvements in the MiniBolt guide are included.
• Fix some links and wrong command issues.
• Some existing guides have been improved to clarify the following steps.

---

Important notes:

• The RRSS will be the same as the MiniBolt original project (for now) | More info -> HERE <-
• The common resources like the Roadmap or Networkmap have been merged and will be used together | Check -> HERE <-
• The attempt to upgrade from Bullseye to Bookworm (RaspiBolt to RaMiX migration) has failed due to several difficult-to-resolve dependency conflicts, so unfortunately, there will be no dedicated migration guide and only the possibility to start from scratch ☹️

⚠️ Attention‼️-> This guide is in the WIP (work in progress) state and hasn't been completely tested yet. Many steps may be incorrect. Pay special attention to the "Status: Not tested on RaMiX" tag at the beginning of the guides. Be careful and act behind your responsibility.

---

For Raspberry Pi lovers!❤️🍓

Enjoy it RaMiXer!! 💜

---

By ⚡2FakTor⚡ for the plebs with love ❤️🫂

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ eac63075:b4988b48

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

PT-BR version

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

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

1. Introduction to Consensus in Bitcoin

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

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

Evolution of Consensus in Bitcoin

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

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

---

2. Technical Components of Consensus

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

Validation of Blocks and Transactions

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

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

Chain Selection

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

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

Soft Forks vs. Hard Forks

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

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

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

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

---

3. Stakeholders in Bitcoin's Consensus

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

1. Economic Nodes

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

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

2. Investors

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

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

3. Media Influencers

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

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

4. Miners

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

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

5. Protocol Developers

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

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

6. Users and Application Developers

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

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

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

---

4. Mechanisms for Activating Updates in Bitcoin

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

Flag Day

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

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

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

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

BIP34 and BIP9

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BIP8 (LOT=True)

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

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

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

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

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

---

5. Risks and Considerations in Consensus Updates

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

Network Fragility with Alternative Implementations

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

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

Chain Splits and Impact on Stakeholders

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

Each group of stakeholders reacts differently to a chain split:

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

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

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

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

Regulatory Impacts and Institutional Investors

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

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

Security Considerations in Soft Forks and Hard Forks

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

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

Bounty Claim Risks and Attack Scenarios

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

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

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

---

6. Recommendations for the Consensus Process in Bitcoin

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

1. Careful Evaluation of Proposal Maturity

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

2. Extensive Testing in Secure and Compatible Networks

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

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

3. Importance of Stakeholder Engagement

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

4. Key Questions for Evaluating Consensus Proposals

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

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

5. Coordination and Timing in Implementations

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

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

6. Continuous Monitoring and Re-evaluation

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

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

---

7. Conclusion

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

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

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

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

---

8. Links

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

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

@ 1ec45473:d38df139

Preston Pysh posted this event this morning:

Behind the scenes, the nostr event looks like this:

Event = { "id":"a6fa7e1a73ce70c6fb01584a0519fd29788e59d9980402584e7a0af92cf0474a", "pubkey":"85080d3bad70ccdcd7f74c29a44f55bb85cbcd3dd0cbb957da1d215bdb931204", "created_at":1724494504, "kind":1, "tags":[ [ "p", "6c237d8b3b120251c38c230c06d9e48f0d3017657c5b65c8c36112eb15c52aeb", "", "mention" ], [ "p", "77ec966fcd64f901152cad5dc7731c7c831fe22e02e3ae99ff14637e5a48ef9c", "", "mention" ], [ "p", "c1fc7771f5fa418fd3ac49221a18f19b42ccb7a663da8f04cbbf6c08c80d20b1", "", "mention" ], [ "p", "50d94fc2d8580c682b071a542f8b1e31a200b0508bab95a33bef0855df281d63", "", "mention" ], [ "p", "20d88bae0c38e6407279e6a83350a931e714f0135e013ea4a1b14f936b7fead5", "", "mention" ], [ "p", "273e7880d38d39a7fb238efcf8957a1b5b27e819127a8483e975416a0a90f8d2", "", "mention" ], [ "t", "BH2024" ] ], "content":"Awesome Freedom Panel with...", "sig":"2b64e461cd9f5a7aa8abbcbcfd953536f10a334b631a352cd4124e8e187c71aad08be9aefb6a68e5c060e676d06b61c553e821286ea42489f9e7e7107a1bf79a" }

In nostr, all events have this form, so once you become familiar with the nostr event structure, things become pretty easy.

Look at the "tags" key. There are six "p" tags (pubkey) and one "t" tag (hashtag).

The p tags are public keys of people that are mentioned in the note. The t tags are for hashtags in the note.

It is common when working with NOSTR that you have to extract out certain tags. Here are some examples of how to do that with what are called JavaScript Array Methods:

Find the first "p" tag element:

``` Event.tags.find(item => item[0] === 'p')

[ 'p', '6c237d8b3b120251c38c230c06d9e48f0d3017657c5b65c8c36112eb15c52aeb', '', 'mention' ]

```

Same, but just return the pubkey":

``` Event.tags.find(item => item[0] === 'p')[1]

'6c237d8b3b120251c38c230c06d9e48f0d3017657c5b65c8c36112eb15c52aeb'

```

Filter the array so I only get "p" tags:

``` Event.tags.filter(item => item[0] === 'p')

[ [ 'p', '6c237d8b3b120251c38c230c06d9e48f0d3017657c5b65c8c36112eb15c52aeb', '', 'mention' ], [ 'p', '77ec966fcd64f901152cad5dc7731c7c831fe22e02e3ae99ff14637e5a48ef9c', '', 'mention' ], [ 'p', 'c1fc7771f5fa418fd3ac49221a18f19b42ccb7a663da8f04cbbf6c08c80d20b1', '', 'mention' ], [ 'p', '50d94fc2d8580c682b071a542f8b1e31a200b0508bab95a33bef0855df281d63', '', 'mention' ], [ 'p', '20d88bae0c38e6407279e6a83350a931e714f0135e013ea4a1b14f936b7fead5', '', 'mention' ], [ 'p', '273e7880d38d39a7fb238efcf8957a1b5b27e819127a8483e975416a0a90f8d2', '', 'mention' ] ]

```

Return an array with only the pubkeys in the "p" tags:

``` Event.tags.filter(item => item[0] === 'p').map(item => item[1])

[ '6c237d8b3b120251c38c230c06d9e48f0d3017657c5b65c8c36112eb15c52aeb', '77ec966fcd64f901152cad5dc7731c7c831fe22e02e3ae99ff14637e5a48ef9c', 'c1fc7771f5fa418fd3ac49221a18f19b42ccb7a663da8f04cbbf6c08c80d20b1', '50d94fc2d8580c682b071a542f8b1e31a200b0508bab95a33bef0855df281d63', '20d88bae0c38e6407279e6a83350a931e714f0135e013ea4a1b14f936b7fead5', '273e7880d38d39a7fb238efcf8957a1b5b27e819127a8483e975416a0a90f8d2' ]

```

@ 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.

@ 16d11430:61640947

In a world drowning in Monopoly money, where people celebrate government-mandated inflation as "economic growth," it takes a special kind of clarity—nay, cynicism—to rise above the fiat circus. This is your guide to shedding your fiat f**ks and embracing the serene chaos of sound money, all while laughing at the absurdity of a world gone fiat-mad.

---

1. Don’t Feed the Clowns

You know the clowns I’m talking about: central bankers in their tailored suits and smug smirks, wielding "tools" like interest rates and quantitative easing. Their tools are as real as a magician's wand, conjuring trillions of dollars out of thin air to keep their Ponzi economy afloat.

Rule #1: Don’t engage. If a clown offers you a hot take about the "strength of the dollar," smile, nod, and silently wonder how many cups of coffee their paycheck buys this month. Spoiler: fewer than last month.

---

1. Turn Off the Fiat News

Do you really need another breathless headline about the next trillion-dollar deficit? Or the latest clickbait on why you should care about the stock market's emotional rollercoaster? Mainstream media exists to distract you, to keep you tethered to their illusion of importance.

Turn it off. Replace it with something sound, like the Bitcoin whitepaper. Or Nietzsche. At least Nietzsche knew we were doomed.

---

1. Mock Their Inflationary Gospel

Fiat apologists will tell you that inflation is "necessary" and that 2% a year is a "healthy target." Sure, because a little robbery every year keeps society functioning, right? Ask them this: "If 2% is healthy, why not 20%? Why not 200%? Why not Venezuela?"

Fiat logic is like a bad acid trip: entertaining at first, but it quickly spirals into existential horror.

---

1. Celebrate the Fiat Freakshow

Sometimes, the best way to resist the fiat clown show is to revel in its absurdity. Watch politicians print money like teenagers running up a credit card bill at Hot Topic, then watch the economists applaud it as "stimulus." It’s performance art, really. Andy Warhol could never.

---

1. Build in the Chaos

While the fiat world burns, Bitcoiners build. This is the ultimate "not giving a fiat f**k" move: creating a parallel economy, one satoshi at a time. Run your Lightning node, stack sats, and laugh as the fiat circus consumes itself in a flaming pile of its own debt.

Let them argue about who gets to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. You’re busy designing lifeboats.

---

1. Adopt a Fiat-Free Lifestyle

Fiat-free living means minimizing your entanglement with their clown currency. Buy meat, not ETFs. Trade skills, not IOUs. Tip your barber in Bitcoin and ask if your landlord accepts Lightning. If they say no, chuckle and say, “You’ll learn soon enough.”

Every satoshi spent in the real economy is a slap in the face to the fiat overlords.

---

1. Find the Humor in Collapse

Here’s the thing: the fiat system is unsustainable. You know it, I know it, even the clowns know it. The whole charade is destined to collapse under its own weight. When it does, find solace in the absurdity of it all.

Imagine the central bankers explaining hyperinflation to the public: "Turns out we can't print infinity after all." Pure comedy gold.

---

1. Stay Ruthlessly Optimistic

Despite the doom and gloom, there’s hope. Bitcoin is hope. It’s the lifeboat for humanity, the cheat code to escape the fiat matrix. Cynicism doesn’t mean nihilism; it means seeing the rot for what it is and choosing to build something better.

So, don’t just reject the fiat clown show—replace it. Create a world where money is sound, transactions are sovereign, and wealth is measured in energy, not debt.

---

Final Thought: Burn the Tent Down

Aldous Huxley once envisioned a dystopia where people are so distracted by their own hedonistic consumption that they don’t realize they’re enslaved. Sound familiar? The fiat clown show is Brave New World on steroids, a spectacle designed to keep you pacified while your wealth evaporates.

But here’s the punchline: they can only enslave you if you care. By rejecting their system, you strip them of their power. So let them juggle their debts, inflate their bubbles, and print their trillions. You’ve got Bitcoin, and Bitcoin doesn’t give a fiat f**k.

Welcome to the satirical resistance. Now go stack some sats.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

Menschen tun alles, egal wie absurd, \ um ihrer eigenen Seele nicht zu begegnen. \ Carl Gustav Jung

«Extremer Reichtum ist eine Gefahr für die Demokratie», sagen über die Hälfte der knapp 3000 befragten Millionäre aus G20-Staaten laut einer Umfrage der «Patriotic Millionaires». Ferner stellte dieser Zusammenschluss wohlhabender US-Amerikaner fest, dass 63 Prozent jener Millionäre den Einfluss von Superreichen auf US-Präsident Trump als Bedrohung für die globale Stabilität ansehen.

Diese Besorgnis haben 370 Millionäre und Milliardäre am Dienstag auch den in Davos beim WEF konzentrierten Privilegierten aus aller Welt übermittelt. In einem offenen Brief forderten sie die «gewählten Führer» auf, die Superreichen – also sie selbst – zu besteuern, um «die zersetzenden Auswirkungen des extremen Reichtums auf unsere Demokratien und die Gesellschaft zu bekämpfen». Zum Beispiel kontrolliere eine handvoll extrem reicher Menschen die Medien, beeinflusse die Rechtssysteme in unzulässiger Weise und verwandele Recht in Unrecht.

Schon 2019 beanstandete der bekannte Historiker und Schriftsteller Ruthger Bregman an einer WEF-Podiumsdiskussion die Steuervermeidung der Superreichen. Die elitäre Veranstaltung bezeichnete er als «Feuerwehr-Konferenz, bei der man nicht über Löschwasser sprechen darf.» Daraufhin erhielt Bregman keine Einladungen nach Davos mehr. Auf seine Aussagen machte der Schweizer Aktivist Alec Gagneux aufmerksam, der sich seit Jahrzehnten kritisch mit dem WEF befasst. Ihm wurde kürzlich der Zutritt zu einem dreiteiligen Kurs über das WEF an der Volkshochschule Region Brugg verwehrt.

Nun ist die Erkenntnis, dass mit Geld politischer Einfluss einhergeht, alles andere als neu. Und extremer Reichtum macht die Sache nicht wirklich besser. Trotzdem hat man über Initiativen wie Patriotic Millionaires oder Taxmenow bisher eher selten etwas gehört, obwohl es sie schon lange gibt. Auch scheint es kein Problem, wenn ein Herr Gates fast im Alleingang versucht, globale Gesundheits-, Klima-, Ernährungs- oder Bevölkerungspolitik zu betreiben – im Gegenteil. Im Jahr, als der Milliardär Donald Trump zum zweiten Mal ins Weiße Haus einzieht, ist das Echo in den Gesinnungsmedien dagegen enorm – und uniform, wer hätte das gedacht.

Der neue US-Präsident hat jedoch «Davos geerdet», wie Achgut es nannte. In seiner kurzen Rede beim Weltwirtschaftsforum verteidigte er seine Politik und stellte klar, er habe schlicht eine «Revolution des gesunden Menschenverstands» begonnen. Mit deutlichen Worten sprach er unter anderem von ersten Maßnahmen gegen den «Green New Scam», und von einem «Erlass, der jegliche staatliche Zensur beendet»:

«Unsere Regierung wird die Äußerungen unserer eigenen Bürger nicht mehr als Fehlinformation oder Desinformation bezeichnen, was die Lieblingswörter von Zensoren und derer sind, die den freien Austausch von Ideen und, offen gesagt, den Fortschritt verhindern wollen.»

Wie der «Trumpismus» letztlich einzuordnen ist, muss jeder für sich selbst entscheiden. Skepsis ist definitiv angebracht, denn «einer von uns» sind weder der Präsident noch seine auserwählten Teammitglieder. Ob sie irgendeinen Sumpf trockenlegen oder Staatsverbrechen aufdecken werden oder was aus WHO- und Klimaverträgen wird, bleibt abzuwarten.

Das WHO-Dekret fordert jedenfalls die Übertragung der Gelder auf «glaubwürdige Partner», die die Aktivitäten übernehmen könnten. Zufällig scheint mit «Impfguru» Bill Gates ein weiterer Harris-Unterstützer kürzlich das Lager gewechselt zu haben: Nach einem gemeinsamen Abendessen zeigte er sich «beeindruckt» von Trumps Interesse an der globalen Gesundheit.

Mit dem Projekt «Stargate» sind weitere dunkle Wolken am Erwartungshorizont der Fangemeinde aufgezogen. Trump hat dieses Joint Venture zwischen den Konzernen OpenAI, Oracle, und SoftBank als das «größte KI-Infrastrukturprojekt der Geschichte» angekündigt. Der Stein des Anstoßes: Oracle-CEO Larry Ellison, der auch Fan von KI-gestützter Echtzeit-Überwachung ist, sieht einen weiteren potenziellen Einsatz der künstlichen Intelligenz. Sie könne dazu dienen, Krebserkrankungen zu erkennen und individuelle mRNA-«Impfstoffe» zur Behandlung innerhalb von 48 Stunden zu entwickeln.

Warum bitte sollten sich diese superreichen «Eliten» ins eigene Fleisch schneiden und direkt entgegen ihren eigenen Interessen handeln? Weil sie Menschenfreunde, sogenannte Philanthropen sind? Oder vielleicht, weil sie ein schlechtes Gewissen haben und ihre Schuld kompensieren müssen? Deswegen jedenfalls brauchen «Linke» laut Robert Willacker, einem deutschen Politikberater mit brasilianischen Wurzeln, rechte Parteien – ein ebenso überraschender wie humorvoller Erklärungsansatz.

Wenn eine Krähe der anderen kein Auge aushackt, dann tut sie das sich selbst noch weniger an. Dass Millionäre ernsthaft ihre eigene Besteuerung fordern oder Machteliten ihren eigenen Einfluss zugunsten anderer einschränken würden, halte ich für sehr unwahrscheinlich. So etwas glaube ich erst, wenn zum Beispiel die Rüstungsindustrie sich um Friedensverhandlungen bemüht, die Pharmalobby sich gegen institutionalisierte Korruption einsetzt, Zentralbanken ihre CBDC-Pläne für Bitcoin opfern oder der ÖRR die Abschaffung der Rundfunkgebühren fordert.

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ 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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

😱 Did you recently find this signature verification error when you tried to update your MiniBolt repositories with -> sudo apt update? 💥🚨👇

🔧 Don't worry, that's because Tor renewed its signing key since it expired last 07/15, just renew your keyring by following the next steps to solve this problem:

~ > CLICK HERE < ~

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter!💙

@ 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.

@ 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

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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

~ > Available at: https://minibolt.info

---

~> It builds on a personal computer with x86/amd64 architecture processors.

~> It is based on the popular RaspiBolt v3 guide.

---

Those are some of the most relevant changes:

• Changed OS from Raspberry Pi OS Lite (64-bits) to Ubuntu Server LTS (Long term support) 64-bit PC (AMD64).
• Changed binaries and signatures of the programs to adapt them to x86/amd64 architecture.
• Deleted unnecessary tools and steps, and added others according to this case of use.
• Some useful authentication logs and monitoring commands were added in the security section.
• Added some interesting parameters in the settings of some services to activate and take advantage of new features.
• Changed I2P, Fulcrum, and ThunderHub guides, to be part of the core guide.
• Added exclusive optimization section of services for slow devices.

---

~ > Complete release notes of the MiniBolt v1: https://github.com/twofaktor/minibolt/releases/tag/1.0.

~ > Feel free to contribute to the source code on GitHub by opening issues, pull requests or discussions.

---

Created by ⚡2 FakTor⚡

@ 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)

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In diesem Sinne wünsche ich euch allen urige Weihnachtstage!

---

Dieser Beitrag ist letztes Jahr in meiner Denkbar erschienen.

@ a95c6243:d345522c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.

@ dca69ce3:5b1492da

With the rise of protocols like Nostr (popular in the Bitcoin community) and the AT Protocol (popularized by BlueSky), now feels like the perfect time to explore the history of the web and the open philosophy it was built on. As someone involved in the communities and clients using these protocols for the past couple of years, I understand their significance. However, this write-up is my effort to deepen that understanding by examining the emergence and necessity of decentralized protocols.

What I've found is that the history of the open web is a fascinating, intertwined narrative of protocols and the consequences of their creation and adoption. Like many foundational innovations, these technologies often succumb to commercialization and centralization over time. Will this time be different? Only time will tell.

Let's dive in!

The Philosophy of the Early Internet

The early internet was founded on principles of openness, decentralization, and collaboration, reflecting the technologies, governance structures, and culture of its time.

The ARPANET, the precursor to the internet, was designed to ensure communication could endure even in the face of infrastructure loss--resilient to single points of failure. This concept was particularly vital during the Cold War (late 1940s to late 1980s), a period marked by geopolitical tensions where communication disruptions were a constant concern.

Protocols of the Open Web

ARPA and NCP (1969-1980)

The early days of networking saw the creation of NCP (Network Control Protocol), the first protocol used by ARPANET. NCP enabled basic communication between nodes, serving as both a transport and host-to-host communication protocols.

NCP managed communication by establishing and maintaining logical connections between hosts using socket pairs--a local socket number identifying a specific process on the host and a remote socket number identifying the target process on destination host. These socket pairs uniquely identified each logical connection, which supported full-duplex communication, allowing data to flow in both directions simultaneously over the same connection.

While NCP handled host-level communication, low-level packet switching and routing were managed by IMPs (Interface Message Processors). In essence, NCP relied on IMPs to deliver packets between nodes.

Using NCP, ARPANET's earliest nodes--University of California Los Angeles, Stanford Research Institute, University of California Santa Barbara, and the University of Utah--collaborate to share resources and advance computing research. Each institution contributed to the development of the early internet, setting the stage for its evolution into the more modern systems we recognize today.

NCP foundational design enabled use cases still familiar today: remote login, file transfer, time-sharing systems, email, and collaborative tools like document editing. However, its simplicity came with limitations. NCP lacked robust error detection and correction, relying on the underlying network (IMPs) to handle these issues. It also lacked a standardized addressing scheme and error recovery mechanisms, limiting its scalability and reliability. These shortcomings ultimately led to the development of TCP/IP.

FTP (1971)

In 1971, RCF 114, titled "A File Transfer Protocol" by Abhay Bhushan, introduced a standardized method for transferring files between hosts on the ARPANET. Its primary goal was to enable indirect use of remote computers, allowing users to transfer files without the need to log into remote systems directly.

Key features of this early protocol included:

• Indirect File Access: Enabled users to transfer files seamlessly across the ARPANET without requiring direct logins to remote systems.
• Standardized Commands: Defined a consistent set of commands for file operations, including retrieving, storing, deleting, and listing files, ensuring uniform interactions across diverse systems.
• Data Type Specification: Supported the designation of data types and structures to accommodate various file formats, ensuring accurate interpretation during transfers.
• User Identification Mechanism: Introduced basic access control through username and password authentication, enhancing security.
• Error Recovery Procedures: Included mechanisms for error correction and recovery to maintain data integrity and reliability during transfers.

FTP simplified data and software sharing, becoming a cornerstone of collaboration within academic and research communities.

Email: The First Killer App (1971)

Email, the internet’s first “killer app,” emerged during the development of NCP and later TCP/IP. Ray Tomlinson invented email in 1971 while working at BBN, a key player in ARPANET’s creation. Before email, communication on the network primarily relied on file sharing. Seeking a more efficient solution, Tomlinson modified CYPNET to send messages across ARPANET, enabling users to communicate between different computers. This innovation popularized the use of the “@” symbol to separate user names from domains.

In 1982, the creation of SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) standardized email communication and significantly improved upon Tomlinson’s initial implementation. SMTP introduced several key advancements:

• Formalized Communication Rules: Established a standardized protocol for sending emails between servers, which CYPNET lacked.
• Support for Multiple Recipients: Enabled sending emails to multiple recipients and distributing messages to mailing lists, a capability absent in Tomlinson’s system.
• Error Handling: Provided explicit error codes and responses to diagnose and resolve delivery issues, whereas Tomlinson’s implementation offered only rudimentary error handling.
• Structured Message Format: Worked with standards like RFC 822 to define consistent headers (To, From, Subject), replacing the unstructured, ad-hoc metadata of early emails.
• Scalability: Designed to accommodate the growing internet, ensuring email functionality expanded as ARPANET evolved into a global network. Tomlinson’s system was tied to ARPANET’s original constraints.

SMTP transformed email from a groundbreaking experiment into a robust, scalable, and universal communication tool, solidifying its place as a cornerstone of internet communication.

Usenet (1979)

Usenet, created by Tom Truscott and Jim Ellis at Duke University in 1979, was one of the first decentralized systems for sharing messages and fostering online discussions. As a precursor to modern internet forums and social media, Usenet laid the foundation for the social internet as we know it today.

Usenet relied on UUCP (Unix-to-Unix Copy Program) to transfer messages between servers in a peer-to-peer manner, with each server forwarding posts to its neighbors.

Key features and insights from Usenet include:

• Newsgroups: Discussions were organized into categories called newsgroups, with a hierarchical naming system (e.g., comp.sys for computer systems).
• Decentralization: Usenet’s peer-to-peer design required each server to store and propagate messages, eliminating single points of failure and central control. This decentralization, akin to modern protocols like Nostr, aligned with the internet’s ideals of openness and collaboration.
• Self-Governance: Without central authority, Usenet communities were often self-moderated, with users establishing their own norms and moderation practices.

Usenet’s decentralization and community-driven structure embodied the spirit of the early internet. However, its culture faced a significant shift in September 1993, often referred to as “Eternal September.” This marked the influx of new users when AOL (America Online) granted its subscribers access to Usenet. The term “Eternal September” originated from the annual wave of college students who traditionally joined Usenet each September, requiring time to acclimate to its norms. With the massive influx of AOL users, however, this adjustment period became permanent.

This cultural shift introduced challenges such as increased spam, off-topic posts, and conflicts, disrupting the established norms of Usenet. Over time, these issues led to Usenet losing its prominence as a hub for niche, vibrant discussions, marking the beginning of a broader transition from protocols to platforms.

TCP/IP (1981-1983)

TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) and IP (Internet Protocol), developed between 1981 and 1983, replaced NCP as the standard protocol for ARPANET, addressing many of its limitations and paving the way for the modern internet.

TCP ensured reliable communication by breaking data into packets, checking for errors, and retransmitting lost packets. It reassembled data at the destination, ensuring integrity despite packet loss. TCP also introduced flow and congestion control, allowing networks to adapt transmission rates based on conditions. These features resolved NCP’s lack of robust error handling and basic flow management, enabling networks to scale more effectively.

IP provided a unique addressing system (IP addresses) that allowed data to traverse diverse networks. Unlike NCP’s reliance on hardcoded socket pairs, IP made interoperability and routing across heterogeneous networks possible.

The separation of TCP and IP into distinct layers (transport and network) introduced modularity and flexibility, supporting diverse networks and applications. This overcame NCP’s single-layer design, which lacked the versatility needed for the internet’s future growth.

Inter-networking was another significant advancement enabled by TCP/IP, allowing multiple networks to connect and function as one. This shift from NCP’s single homogeneous network (ARPANET) to a universal language of interconnected systems established the foundation of the global, decentralized internet we use today.

DNS (1983)

Introduced in 1983 by Paul Mockapetris, the Domain Name System (DNS) revolutionized how devices on the internet were identified and accessed. It replaced the centralized, cumbersome HOSTS.TXT file system with a distributed, hierarchical structure that could scale alongside the rapidly growing internet.

Before DNS, network administrators relied on a single HOSTS.TXT file to map human-readable hostnames to IP addresses. This file, managed by the NIC (Network Information Center) at Stanford Research Institute, had to be manually updated and distributed to every system on ARPANET. As the network expanded, this centralized system became a bottleneck, with errors and delays in updates causing significant disruptions. By the early 1980s, maintaining a single centralized file was no longer practical, necessitating a more scalable solution.

DNS addressed these challenges by introducing a hierarchical structure for domain names. Names are organized into a tree-like system, with the root at the top and Top-Level Domains (TLDs) such as .com or .org below it. For example, example.com is divided into levels: com (TLD) and example (Second-Level Domain). This delegation of responsibilities allowed for efficient management and scalability.

DNS also employed a network of distributed servers to store and resolve domain names to IP addresses, eliminating reliance on a single central database. Distributed servers improved reliability, performance, and resilience. DNS servers could cache query results, reducing load and speeding up responses for frequently requested domains. Finally, DNS made the internet far more user-friendly: instead of memorizing numeric IP addresses (e.g., 192.0.2.1), users could type intuitive domain names (e.g., example.com).

By solving the limitations of HOSTS.TXT and enhancing usability, DNS became a cornerstone of the modern internet, enabling its global and decentralized nature.

IRC (1988)

Developed by Jarkko Oikarinen in 1988, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) enabled real-time text communication and played a pivotal role in fostering early online communities. IRC’s innovations built upon earlier protocols and technologies, extending their concepts to create a new paradigm for online interaction.

• Extending Telnet: IRC expanded Telnet’s one-to-one communication sessions into multi-user chats within channels, enabling group conversations in real time.
• Decentralization from Usenet: IRC adopted Usenet’s decentralized philosophy, applying it to synchronous messaging. Multiple IRC servers could link together to form networks, distributing load and avoiding reliance on a central server.
• Hierarchical Naming from DNS: Borrowing from DNS, IRC used a hierarchical naming system for chat channels and users. This allowed intuitive organization, with nicknames and channels globally visible across linked servers.
• Command-Response Structure: Inspired by protocols like SMTP and FTP, IRC introduced commands such as /join, /quit, and /msg, simplifying interactions and enabling clients to interpret server messages effectively.
• Influence of MUDs: IRC drew from Multi-User Dungeons (MUDs), text-based multiplayer games popular in the 1980s. While MUDs facilitated real-time interactions within virtual worlds, IRC applied the concept to general communication.

Key innovations of IRC included group channels for interaction, flexible user and server configurations, dynamic moderation, and a lightweight protocol. By combining these features, IRC became a cornerstone of real-time online communication, laying the groundwork for modern chat applications.

HTTP and WWW (1989-1991)

The World Wide Web (WWW) and Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), introduced by Tim Berners-Lee between 1989 and 1991, revolutionized how information was shared and consumed. These innovations built upon prior technologies, creating the foundation of the modern web.

• Built on TCP/IP: HTTP used TCP/IP as its transport layer, ensuring reliable delivery of web content. This interoperability allowed HTTP to function across any device or network supporting TCP/IP, establishing the web as a universal platform.
• Standardized Resource Addressing: The introduction of URLs (Uniform Resource Locators), built on DNS, provided a standardized way to locate web resources. URLs combined the protocol (http://), domain (example.com), and resource path (/index.html), enabling precise identification and retrieval of content.
• Hypertext Implementation: Berners-Lee implemented hypertext using HTML (Hypertext Markup Language), a simple text-based language for creating web pages. HTML’s support of hyperlinks (<a> tags) allowed users to navigate seamlessly between linked resources, turning the web into an interconnected “web” of information. Hypertext, conceptualized by Ted Nelson in the 1960s and seen in systems like NLS and HyperCard, was now available to a global audience.
• Improvement Over FTP: Unlike FTP, which focused on isolated file transfers, HTTP facilitated the retrieval of hyperlinked resources, enabling user-friendly interaction with content and seamless display of linked documents in a browser.
• Decentralized Architecture: Inspired by Usenet, the WWW adopted a decentralized design, allowing anyone with a server to host and link content without reliance on a central authority.
• Structured Metadata: HTTP extended the use of structured metadata, seen previously in email protocols like SMTP. HTTP headers provided contextual information about requests and responses (e.g., Content-Type and Status Code), enabling dynamic, interactive communication between clients (browsers) and servers.

Key Innovations of HTTP and the WWW:

1. Stateless Communication Protocol: HTTP’s stateless design ensured each client-server request was independent, enabling scalability as the web grew.
2. Cross-Platform Compatibility: HTTP and HTML were text-based and platform-agnostic, allowing access from any device or operating system.
3. Interactive Content: The web unified interactive content (e.g., images, text, and links) into a single environment accessible via a browser.

Together, HTTP and the WWW transformed the internet into a user-friendly, decentralized, and universally accessible medium, laying the groundwork for the web’s exponential growth.

The Transition from Protocols to Platforms

The shift from the protocol-driven era of the open web to the platform-driven era marked a profound technological and cultural transformation. Early internet protocols like TCP/IP, DNS, HTTP, SMTP, FTP, and Usenet emphasized decentralization, interoperability, and user empowerment. However, by the mid-1990s, the emergence of proprietary platforms such as AOL, Prodigy, and later Facebook and Google, redefined the internet experience. These platforms offered centralized, user-friendly services but at the cost of openness and decentralization.

The early internet, defined by protocols, empowered individuals and communities to build their own tools and networks. Protocols like TCP/IP and DNS created a universal framework for connectivity, while decentralized services such as Usenet and IRC fostered open, self-managed discussions. Tools like FTP, HTTP, and SMTP enabled users to share files, publish content, and communicate freely, embodying the era’s ethos of openness, collaboration, and innovation.

By contrast, the platform-driven internet that emerged in the mid-1990s offered a polished, accessible alternative that abstracted away the technical complexities of the protocol-driven era. Platforms like AOL, Prodigy, and CompuServe created “walled gardens,” restricting users to content and services within their ecosystems. While this made the internet more accessible to non-technical users, it limited their ability to explore and interact with the broader web. Platforms like Facebook and Google later extended this model, becoming dominant gatekeepers for social interaction and information discovery. These centralized platforms hid the complexities of early internet protocols, offering plug-and-play solutions that attracted a general audience. For instance, instead of setting up an FTP server to share files, users could simply upload them to Dropbox or Google Drive. Similarly, proprietary messaging platforms like Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp replaced interoperable protocols such as IRC, locking users into closed ecosystems.

Cultural shifts accompanied these technological changes. In the protocol-driven era, users often acted as both creators and consumers, whether by writing Usenet posts, hosting personal websites, or managing their own email servers. Platforms, however, encouraged a more passive consumption model, with user-generated content controlled within proprietary systems. Trust in gatekeepers grew, with users relying on platforms to curate and deliver information. Search engines like Google became the primary gateway to content, while social platforms dictated social interactions, often reducing individual agency. The communal culture of early internet communities gave way to corporate-driven interactions, as decentralized discussions on Usenet were replaced by centralized forums governed by platform owners. Moreover, the platform era introduced a surveillance-based business model, monetizing user data to serve targeted advertisements—a stark departure from the user-centric and privacy-conscious ethos of the early web.

Despite the dominance of platforms, the foundational protocols of the open web remain critical. TCP/IP, HTTP, and DNS still underpin the internet’s infrastructure, ensuring its basic interoperability. Furthermore, movements like the fediverse (e.g., Mastodon), blockchain-based platforms, and protocols like Nostr aim to revive the ideals of decentralization, user autonomy, and community-driven governance. These efforts reflect a growing desire to reclaim the open and collaborative spirit that defined the early internet.

The transition from protocols to platforms transformed the internet from a decentralized, user-driven network into a centralized, corporate-controlled ecosystem. While platforms made the internet more accessible, they sacrificed openness, user autonomy, and the collaborative ethos of its early days. Revisiting the foundational principles of protocols is crucial for those working to rebuild a more open, equitable internet.

Closing Thoughts

The evolution from the early decentralized internet to today’s platform-dominated web reflects a shift from protocols that empowered users to systems that prioritize convenience, control, and corporate interests. Early technologies like Usenet, HTTP, and FTP embodied ideals of openness, collaboration, and autonomy, but modern platforms have concentrated power, creating walled gardens and monetizing user data. Yet, the foundational protocols of the internet persist, inspiring new decentralized initiatives like Nostr, Mastodon, and blockchain-based systems. By supporting and adopting applications built on decentralizing protocols, we can reclaim the values of openness, privacy, and user empowerment. Every choice we make—as developers, users, or advocates—shapes the future of the web. Together, we can revive the collaborative spirit of the internet’s origins and help create a more equitable and resilient digital future.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Link to the bonus guide ~ > HERE <~

---

Some notes:

ℹ️ For the moment, this guide will touch only the case of an only testnet mode situation, in the future, we will study adding the case of configuration to enable the parallel/simultaneous mode (mainnet+testnet in the same device) in an extra section in this guide.

ℹ️ The services mentioned in this guide are those that have been tested using testnet configuration and these worked fine. Later, in the next versions of this guide, we will go to adding other processes to adapt other services to the testnet mode.

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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.

@ 4ba8e86d:89d32de4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Modelo de Risco.

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

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

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

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

Modelo de ameaça.

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

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

Procuramos proteger os seguintes contextos de comunicação:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ataques de deturpação.

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

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

•Alice tem um amigo chamado Bob e outro chamado Eve

• Eve descobre que Alice tem um amigo chamado Bob

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

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

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

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

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

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

Um perfil Cwtch.

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

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

Conversões entre duas partes: ponto a ponto

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conversas em Grupo e Comunicação Ponto a Servidor

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

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

Detalhamento do Ecossistema de Componentes

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

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

TAPIR: Uma Visão Detalhada

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

Está dividido em várias camadas:

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

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

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

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

Identidade.

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

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

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

Aplicativos de transcrição.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Criptografia e armazenamento de perfil.

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

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

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

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

Vulnerabilidades Relacionadas a Imagens e Entrada de Dados

Imagens Maliciosas

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

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

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

Riscos de Entrada de Dados

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

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

Servidor Cwtch.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Melhorias na Eficiência e Segurança

Eficiência do Protocolo

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

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

Mitigação de Análise de Metadados

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

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

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

Proteção contra Pares Maliciosos

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

Pacotes de Chaves

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

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

Configuração prévia do aplicativo para ativar o Relé do Cwtch.

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

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

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

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

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

Próximo passo é Criar um perfil.

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

• Selecione um nome de exibição

• Selecione se deseja proteger

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

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

Preencha sua senha e digite-a novamente

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

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

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

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

Contato do FuzzBot: 4y2hxlxqzautabituedksnh2ulcgm2coqbure6wvfpg4gi2ci25ta5ad.

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

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

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

Uma introdução aos perfis Cwtch.

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

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

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

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

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

Backup ou exportação de um perfil.

Na tela de gerenciamento de perfil:

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

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

3. Selecione "Exportar perfil"

4. Escolha um local e um nome de arquivo.

5.confirme.

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

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

Importando um perfil.

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

2. Selecione um arquivo de perfil Cwtch exportado para importar

3. Digite a senha associada ao perfil e confirme.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

https://openprivacy.ca/donate/

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

Link sobre Cwtch

https://cwtch.im/

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

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

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

Baixar #CwtchDev

cwtch.im/download/

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

@ 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.

@ df173277:4ec96708

Maple is an AI chat tool that allows you to have private conversations with a general-purpose AI assistant. Chats are synced automatically between devices so you can pick up where you left off.\ Start chatting for free.

We are excited to announce that Maple AI, our groundbreaking end-to-end encrypted AI chat app built on OpenSecret, is now publicly available. After months of beta testing, we are thrilled to bring this innovative technology to the world.

Maple is an AI chat tool that allows you to have private conversations with a general-purpose AI assistant. It can boost your productivity on work tasks such as writing documentation, creating presentations, and drafting emails. You can also use it for personal items like brainstorming ideas, sorting out life's challenges, and tutoring you on difficult coursework. All your chats are synced automatically in a secure way, so you can start on one device and pick up where you left off on another.

Why Secure and Private AI?

In today's digital landscape, it is increasingly evident that security and privacy are essential for individuals and organizations alike. Unfortunately, the current state of AI tools falls short. A staggering 48% of organizations enter non-public company information into AI apps, according to a recent report by Cisco. This practice poses significant risks to company security and intellectual property.

Another concern is for journalists, who often work with sensitive information in hostile environments. Journalists need verification that their information remains confidential and protected when researching topics and communicating with sources in various languages. They are left to use underpowered local AI or input their data into potentially compromised cloud services.

At OpenSecret, we believe it is possible to have both the benefits of AI and the assurance of security and privacy. That's why we created Maple, an app that combines AI productivity with the protection of end-to-end encryption. Our platform ensures that your conversations with AI remain confidential, even from us. The power of the cloud meets the privacy of local.

#### How Does It Work?

Our server code is open source, and we use confidential computing to provide cryptographic proof that the code running on our servers is the same as the open-source code available for review. This process allows you to verify that your conversations are handled securely and privately without relying on trust. We live by the principle of "Don't trust, verify," and we believe this approach is essential for building in the digital age. You can read a more in-depth write-up on our technology later this week on this site.

How Much Does It Cost?

We are committed to making Maple AI accessible to everyone, so we offer a range of pricing plans to suit different needs and budgets. Our Free plan allows for 10 chats per week, while our Starter plan ($5.99/month) and Pro plan ($20/month) offer more comprehensive solutions for individuals and organizations with heavier workloads. We accept credit cards and Bitcoin (10% discount), allowing you to choose your preferred payment method.

• Free: $0
• Starter: $5.99/month
• Pro: $20/month

Our goal with Maple AI is to create a product that is secure through transparency. By combining open-source code, cryptography, and confidential computing, we can create a new standard for AI conversations - one that prioritizes your security and privacy.

Maple has quickly become a daily tool of productivity for our own work and those of our beta testers. We believe it will bring value to you as well. Sign up now and start chatting privately with AI for free. Your secrets are safe in the open.

#### Are You An App Developer?

You can build an app like Maple. OpenSecret provides secure auth, private key management, encrypted data sync, private AI, and more. Our straightforward API behaves like other backends but automatically adds security and privacy. Use it to secure existing apps or brand-new projects. Protect yourself and your users from the liability of hosting personal data by checking out OpenSecret.

Enjoy private AI Chat 🤘

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Available at: https://minibolt.info

---

Main changes to the version 1:

• The complete guide has been migrated to the new design visual builder web tool platform gitbook.com
• New modern UI (responsive, full width, and better visual items)
• New menu structure for a better user experience
• New visual items to improve the navigation through the web page
• New switch to enable light/dark theme
• Enabled Cloudflare Proxy for maximum protection against attacks and better management of the domain

---

Other changes:

• New MiniBolt Linktr forked of the alternative FOSS project proposed by Gzuuus
• Changed MiniBolt from a personal project to an organization so that the project has its own identity
• New email contact address hello@minibolt.info to receive proposals and give support
• New resources folder with the current MiniBolt roadmap, network map diagrams, and others

---

ℹ️ More info:

• The new version is available with the known domain: minibolt.info but from now on links associated with the new v2 version were shared using the v2.minibolt.info subdomain due to a GitBook limitation
• The old and deprecated v1 will be still available at a time in the subdomain v1.minibolt.info, but is in the roadmap delete it definitely in the future, take note ASAP of all that you need of that version before this happens
• Contributors and collaborators will be able to continue doing PR through code programming or using the design block builder gitbook.com

---

GitHub release

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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.

@ 7e538978:a5987ab6

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

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

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

Overview of Chain Duel

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

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

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

How LNbits is Used in Chain Duel

Seamless Integration with LNbits

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

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

Lightning Tournaments

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

Splitting Payments

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

Nostr Integration

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

Game and Payment Synchronization

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

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

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

LNBits facilitating Education and Adoption

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

Tools for Developers

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

Extensible Architecture for Customization

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

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

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

Developer-Friendly Customization

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

Flexible Funding Source Management

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

A Lean Core System for Maximum Efficiency

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

Find out more

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

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

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

The router reserves the IP address of the device for a time after going out, but if the device goes out some time, the next time that the device starts, the router could assign a different IP and you could lose access to your node. To avoid this, you need to set a static IP to your MiniBolt.

~ > In addition, you can customize your DNS servers to improve your privacy, normally your ISP, gives you the router with its own DNS servers set by default, and this does that you expose all of your navigation trackings to your ISP, affecting seriously your privacy.

~ > This bonus guide includes all of the necessary steps to get this and is available ~ > HERE < ~

---

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Link to the bonus guide ~ > HERE < ~

---

Some sections of the guide:

• Generate SSH keys
• Import SSH pubkey
• Connect to the MiniBolt node using SSH keys
• Disable password login
• Disable admin password request

---

Some shortcuts to the Extra sections:

• Disable password login: click ~ > HERE < ~
• Disable admin password request: click ~ > HERE < ~

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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

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!

@ 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

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Link to the bonus guide ~ > HERE < ~

---

⏰ Recently added an update that includes a new section How to detect Ordinals transactions and verify Ordisrespector filter works to verify that Ordispector is filtering and burning Ordinals correctly 🔥

---

Fuck Ordinals🤡🔫 and enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Some sections inside of the guide:

• Set up Dynamic DNS
• Wireguard VPN server & client side configurations
• Install & configure the WireGuard VPN Client on a mobile phone
• Configure additional servers & clients
• Use your router’s DDNS preconfigured provider
• Port forwarding on NAT/PAT router

---

Link to the bonus guide HERE

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 2f4550b0:95f20096

My family and I are wrapping up a relocation from Phoenix, AZ to Austin, TX. I went ahead to get keys to our rental house, meet the movers with our household goods, and generally get as many things ready on the Austin side as possible. My husband stayed behind with our boys to wrap up the AZ house and settle things there. Our experiences over the past few weeks have got me thinking about partnership, project management, and big life changes.

This move would not have been possible without the full partnership that my husband and I have in our marriage. Division of labor is real, and in the context of a relocation it’s vital to get everything done. We trust each other to divide and conquer the myriad tasks and responsibilities necessary. He supervised packers and movers to work on the AZ house; I met them when they arrived in Austin and supervised the move-in. He managed the property management requirements at the AZ rental house; I got the keys and have managed the property management procedures and move-in for Austin. He’s taking care of our current vehicle and handling the road trip from Phoenix to Austin; I bought a second vehicle that I can use to commute. I scheduled the cleaners, landscapers, and carpet cleaning for the AZ house; he supervised the work when the crews arrived. This kind of partnership not only takes care of all the duties, it edifies the relationship we have in our marriage. The care and trust we both show means so much to both of us!

Relocation is also a project, “a series of structured tasks, activities, and deliverables that are carefully executed to achieve a desired outcome” with a specific start and end. Managing this move has been marked by two long to-do lists of tasks for me and my husband and a series of important milestones that we’ve celebrated along the way. We used our calendar to map out the timelines for each phase of the work, we assigned roles and tasks, and we identified risks and dependencies. We enlisted vendor support for many of the tasks, and supervised their efforts while we completed our own. We never got as far as creating a true Gantt chart for the project, but I certainly thought of the phases of our move in that framework.

This move marks the start of a new phase in our family life, which has been marked by a series of big life changes. Since our marriage, these have included living in a number of places, the births of our two sons, and job changes. With this relocation, we get to experience life in a new part of the world and set up our boys for their launch into adulthood. This is exciting, and also a bit daunting. But I’m proud of our efforts to start 2025 off with a bang!

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

In the dynamic world of cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin stands as a pioneering force, a digital currency that has revolutionized the concept of money. Central to its operation and success is a term often heard but not always fully understood: the Bitcoin hashrate. This metric is much more than a technical jargon; it's the heartbeat of the Bitcoin network, powering its transactions, securing its blockchain, and influencing its standing in the market. In this exploration, we delve into the depths of the Bitcoin hashrate, unraveling its complexities and revealing its profound impact on the cryptocurrency market. The hashrate is a window into the soul of Bitcoin, offering insights into its health, efficiency, and future potential. It's a story that intertwines technology, economics, and community, painting a vivid picture of Bitcoin's place in the digital age.

Table Of Content

• Understanding Bitcoin Hashrate

• The Role of Hashrate in Network Security

• Hashrate and Decentralization

• Economic Implications for Miners

• Impact on Bitcoin's Market Value

• The Future of Bitcoin's Hashrate

• Conclusion

• FAQs

Understanding Bitcoin Hashrate

The Bitcoin hashrate is the powerhouse of the Bitcoin network, a measure of the collective computational effort used to mine and process transactions. It's akin to the horsepower of an engine, driving the network forward. Each hash is a solution to a cryptographic puzzle, and the hashrate signifies the speed at which these puzzles are solved. As Bitcoin's popularity soars, so does the hashrate, reflecting an ever-increasing number of miners vying to validate transactions and create new blocks. This growth is not just a testament to Bitcoin's popularity but also a marker of its robustness and resilience in the face of challenges. The hashrate is a dynamic indicator, fluctuating with the ebb and flow of the network's activity, mirroring the collective effort of thousands of miners around the globe. It's a testament to the decentralized nature of Bitcoin, where no single entity controls the network, but rather a collective effort secures it.

The Role of Hashrate in Network Security

Bitcoin's security is its cornerstone, and the hashrate is its shield. In the realm of digital currencies, security threats like the 51% attack loom large, where an entity could potentially take control of the network. However, a high hashrate acts as a formidable barrier, making such attacks not just difficult but economically unfeasible. It's a game of numbers; the higher the hashrate, the more distributed the computational power, and the safer the network. This security is not static but a dynamic force that evolves with the network's growth, adapting to new challenges and fortifying Bitcoin's position as a secure digital asset. The hashrate is a beacon of trust, assuring users and investors alike that the network is robust and resistant to manipulation. It's a critical factor in maintaining the integrity of the blockchain, ensuring that transactions are processed securely and reliably.

Hashrate and Decentralization

Decentralization is the soul of Bitcoin, and the hashrate is a reflection of this principle. A decentralized network is less prone to manipulation and control by any single entity, and a high hashrate is indicative of a broad, diverse miner base. This diversity is not just a matter of numbers but a testament to the egalitarian ethos of Bitcoin, where anyone, anywhere, can contribute to the network's upkeep. As the hashrate grows, it weaves a stronger web of participants, each adding to the network's resilience and ensuring its democratic nature. The hashrate is a symbol of the power of the collective, a force that transcends geographical and political boundaries, uniting people under the banner of a decentralized financial system. It's a testament to the vision of Bitcoin's creators, a network that is not just secure and efficient but also open and inclusive.

Economic Implications for Miners

For miners, the hashrate is a beacon guiding their economic journey. It's a delicate balance of power, cost, and reward. As the hashrate climbs, so does the difficulty of mining, a self-regulating mechanism ensuring the network's stability. Miners must constantly adapt, balancing the costs of advanced hardware and energy against the potential rewards of new Bitcoins and transaction fees. This ever-shifting landscape is not just a challenge but an opportunity for innovation, driving miners to seek more efficient and sustainable ways to contribute to the network. The hashrate is a measure of opportunity and challenge, a dance of economics and technology where miners play a crucial role. It's a dynamic ecosystem where the fittest survive, adapting to the ever-changing landscape of Bitcoin mining.

Impact on Bitcoin's Market Value

The hashrate's influence extends beyond the technical realm into the market. While it doesn't directly dictate Bitcoin's price, it's a barometer of network health and investor confidence. A robust hashrate signals a thriving, secure network, attracting investors and bolstering Bitcoin's market position. It's a subtle yet powerful force, shaping perceptions and influencing decisions in the cryptocurrency market. As Bitcoin continues to evolve, the hashrate stands as a key indicator of its vitality and appeal to the market. The hashrate and market value are intertwined in a complex dance, where the health of the network reflects and influences investor sentiment. It's a symbiotic relationship, where each aspect feeds into and strengthens the other.

The Future of Bitcoin's Hashrate

As we look to the future, the Bitcoin hashrate remains a critical aspect of the cryptocurrency's journey. It's not just a measure of computational power but a symbol of the network's evolution, a testament to its strength and a predictor of its potential. The hashrate's trajectory mirrors Bitcoin's own path: ever upward, facing challenges, adapting, and growing stronger. It's a journey not just of technology but of community, innovation, and the relentless pursuit of a decentralized financial future. The hashrate is a narrative of progress, a story of how a decentralized network can grow, adapt, and thrive in the ever-changing landscape of digital currencies. It's a beacon of hope and a testament to the power of collective effort in shaping the future of finance.

Conclusion

The Bitcoin hashrate is more than a technical metric; it's the lifeblood of the Bitcoin ecosystem. It encapsulates the network's security, decentralization, economic dynamics, and market influence. As Bitcoin continues to navigate the complex landscape of digital currencies, its hashrate will remain a key indicator of its health and success. It's a story of collective effort, technological innovation, and the relentless pursuit of a decentralized, secure financial future. The hashrate is not just a number; it's the pulse of Bitcoin, beating strongly as it leads the charge in the ever-evolving world of cryptocurrencies. It's a symbol of resilience, a testament to the enduring power of a decentralized network, and a beacon of hope for a future where financial systems are open, secure, and accessible to all.

FAQs

What is Bitcoin hashrate? The Bitcoin hashrate is the total computational power used to mine and process transactions on the Bitcoin network, measured in hashes per second.

Why is the Bitcoin hashrate important? It's crucial for network security, indicating the difficulty of performing a 51% attack, and reflects the network's decentralization and health.

How does the hashrate affect Bitcoin miners? A higher hashrate increases the difficulty of mining, impacting the profitability and efficiency of mining operations.

Does the Bitcoin hashrate influence its market value? While not directly affecting the price, a strong hashrate can boost investor confidence, potentially influencing Bitcoin's market value.

Can the Bitcoin hashrate predict the future of the cryptocurrency? The hashrate is a key indicator of Bitcoin's health and can provide insights into its future potential and stability.

That's all for today

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

NOSTR: croxroad@getalby.com

X: @croxroadnews.co

Instagram: @croxroadnews.co

Youtube: @croxroadnews

Store: https://croxroad.store

Subscribe to CROX ROAD Bitcoin Only Daily Newsletter

https://www.croxroad.co/subscribe

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

@ 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

@ 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!

@ 94321ee8:8957f43d

Nostr Writer

Estoy probando Nostr Writer, el plugin que permite publicar desde Obsidian.md. Esta es una publicación de prueba, para ver ==como reacciona Nostr== con los códigos Markdown.

@ 37fe9853:bcd1b039

yoyoaa

@ 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

@ 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。

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Do you want to use a different disk to store data (blockchain and other databases) independently of the disk of the system?

A step-by-step guide using a secondary disk to store the data (blockchain and other databases) independently of the disk of the system and using the Ubuntu Server guided installation.

---

What's changed

• Rebuilt the Ubuntu Server installation guide based on this bonus guide added.
• Added GIFs to improve the illustration of the steps to follow.
• Case 1: during the Ubuntu server guided installation.
• Case 2: build it after system installation (by command line).

---

~ > Link to the bonus guide HERE

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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.

---

@ 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

@ c3b2802b:4850599c

Dear sisters and brothers, I have been born in a country without any religion. As a young adult I understood that a life without spirituality does not make sense. Today, 50 years later, I am convinced that the family of creation consists of divine beings with the potential to unfold endless love - independently of the controversies between singular religions.

Each of us human beings is full of divine sparks which may strengthen each moment during our life the fire of love and compassion toward all living beings in the universe. These divine sparks may feed the eternal dance of creation.

Religion and science have converged during the last centuries: Divine spirit is the driving force of all happenings in our universe. Buddha, Plato, Jesus Christ, Kabir, Guru Nanak, Albert Schweitzer and recently many Nobel Price winning physicists have expressed the same conviction:

We are divine creators of the paradise resulting from genesis on this planet within the living universe. Looking around the world these days, however, we observe harm, hunger, dissence, struggle and war.

How does this coexist – the potential to create the paradise on the one hand – and the destructive forces leading to a multitude of catastrophes? May be you like the following way to interprete what is going on actually:

We are born to be tested in a learning adventure of evolution within the cosmos. The life of each of us is an examination checking whether we are ripe for creating the paradise.

Each generation of human beings has the chance to reach the tipping point. Possibly todays generation, all of us sitting here, might overcome the centennial struggle on details of diverse religions and worldviews. If we today conjointly remember our potential as divine beings to create a peaceful and well balanced world - then we can make the next step of cosmic evolution – charcterized by love, peace and respect for all forms of life:

We may give now birth to a new chapter in the process of evolution. The time might be ripe these days. Let me give some illustrations for my optimism based on my work of the past 30 years in Germany: 30 years ago in my country most of all fuels for electricity and heating were imported. All German villages depended existially from international trusts supplying nuclear and fossil energy. The great majority of Germans relied on imported fossile or nuclear fuels. Today, 30 years later, we count 200 villages with own energy production based on regional ressources which were initiated by teams of german universities, where I have been active.

During the same time the number of similar activities aiming at a regionally organized society all over the world exploded. In many countries many local initiatives were founded organizing food production, local trade, water supply and many other fields of human needs on a regional base in fair and clean ways, without any international activities of global players like MacDonald or Monsanto.

Another world is possible – and even better, the regional society is blossoming already since decades worldwide.

A second source for my optimism is my scientific work. Humans dispose of spiritual potentials enabling us to connect with the holy spirit surrounding us since eternal times. Individuals unfolding this potential and behaving respectfully toward other beings report higher well-being as compared to other people. That empirical pattern has been found in hundreds of scientific studies all over the world. These results feed our trust, that we are on the right way with our regional initiatives like Kirpal Sagar in India, the new energy villages in Germany, the clean and fair agriculture initiatives worldwide, the open seeds movement and the many further initiatives.

Remembering Mahatma Gandhi, the great indian philosopher and politician: We do not need to fight against the players of the old world, against psychopathic people in international trusts and organizations who plan a world all of us dislike. This old structure will break down by itself.

Meanwhile we build the society we prefere: Ethically grounded communities like Kirpal Sagar, based on grace, fairness and respect between all living beings. My congratulation to the golden jubilee of this wonderful project, which may serve as a model for the whole world.

Let´s shake our hands, connect our hearts and let´s bring our souls in harmony within the cosmic concert of love!

Peter Schmuck, psychologist and regional society activist, Germany, february 5 2024.

First published at the German platform for future communities

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Link to the bonus guide ~> HERE < ~

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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

@ e6817453:b0ac3c39

The Rise of Graph RAGs and the Quest for Data Quality

As we enter a new year, it’s impossible to ignore the boom of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems, particularly those leveraging graph-based approaches. The previous year saw a surge in advancements and discussions about Graph RAGs, driven by their potential to enhance large language models (LLMs), reduce hallucinations, and deliver more reliable outputs. Let’s dive into the trends, challenges, and strategies for making the most of Graph RAGs in artificial intelligence.

Booming Interest in Graph RAGs

Graph RAGs have dominated the conversation in AI circles. With new research papers and innovations emerging weekly, it’s clear that this approach is reshaping the landscape. These systems, especially those developed by tech giants like Microsoft, demonstrate how graphs can:

• Enhance LLM Outputs: By grounding responses in structured knowledge, graphs significantly reduce hallucinations.
• Support Complex Queries: Graphs excel at managing linked and connected data, making them ideal for intricate problem-solving.

Conferences on linked and connected data have increasingly focused on Graph RAGs, underscoring their central role in modern AI systems. However, the excitement around this technology has brought critical questions to the forefront: How do we ensure the quality of the graphs we’re building, and are they genuinely aligned with our needs?

Data Quality: The Foundation of Effective Graphs

A high-quality graph is the backbone of any successful RAG system. Constructing these graphs from unstructured data requires attention to detail and rigorous processes. Here’s why:

• Richness of Entities: Effective retrieval depends on graphs populated with rich, detailed entities.
• Freedom from Hallucinations: Poorly constructed graphs amplify inaccuracies rather than mitigating them.

Without robust data quality, even the most sophisticated Graph RAGs become ineffective. As a result, the focus must shift to refining the graph construction process. Improving data strategy and ensuring meticulous data preparation is essential to unlock the full potential of Graph RAGs.

Hybrid Graph RAGs and Variations

While standard Graph RAGs are already transformative, hybrid models offer additional flexibility and power. Hybrid RAGs combine structured graph data with other retrieval mechanisms, creating systems that:

• Handle diverse data sources with ease.
• Offer improved adaptability to complex queries.

Exploring these variations can open new avenues for AI systems, particularly in domains requiring structured and unstructured data processing.

Ontology: The Key to Graph Construction Quality

Ontology — defining how concepts relate within a knowledge domain — is critical for building effective graphs. While this might sound abstract, it’s a well-established field blending philosophy, engineering, and art. Ontology engineering provides the framework for:

• Defining Relationships: Clarifying how concepts connect within a domain.
• Validating Graph Structures: Ensuring constructed graphs are logically sound and align with domain-specific realities.

Traditionally, ontologists — experts in this discipline — have been integral to large enterprises and research teams. However, not every team has access to dedicated ontologists, leading to a significant challenge: How can teams without such expertise ensure the quality of their graphs?

How to Build Ontology Expertise in a Startup Team

For startups and smaller teams, developing ontology expertise may seem daunting, but it is achievable with the right approach:

1. Assign a Knowledge Champion: Identify a team member with a strong analytical mindset and give them time and resources to learn ontology engineering.
2. Provide Training: Invest in courses, workshops, or certifications in knowledge graph and ontology creation.
3. Leverage Partnerships: Collaborate with academic institutions, domain experts, or consultants to build initial frameworks.
4. Utilize Tools: Introduce ontology development tools like Protégé, OWL, or SHACL to simplify the creation and validation process.
5. Iterate with Feedback: Continuously refine ontologies through collaboration with domain experts and iterative testing.

So, it is not always affordable for a startup to have a dedicated oncologist or knowledge engineer in a team, but you could involve consulters or build barefoot experts.

You could read about barefoot experts in my article :

Even startups can achieve robust and domain-specific ontology frameworks by fostering in-house expertise.

How to Find or Create Ontologies

For teams venturing into Graph RAGs, several strategies can help address the ontology gap:

1. Leverage Existing Ontologies: Many industries and domains already have open ontologies. For instance:

2. Public Knowledge Graphs: Resources like Wikipedia’s graph offer a wealth of structured knowledge.

3. Industry Standards: Enterprises such as Siemens have invested in creating and sharing ontologies specific to their fields.

4. Business Framework Ontology (BFO): A valuable resource for enterprises looking to define business processes and structures.

5. Build In-House Expertise: If budgets allow, consider hiring knowledge engineers or providing team members with the resources and time to develop expertise in ontology creation.

6. Utilize LLMs for Ontology Construction: Interestingly, LLMs themselves can act as a starting point for ontology development:

7. Prompt-Based Extraction: LLMs can generate draft ontologies by leveraging their extensive training on graph data.

8. Domain Expert Refinement: Combine LLM-generated structures with insights from domain experts to create tailored ontologies.

Parallel Ontology and Graph Extraction

An emerging approach involves extracting ontologies and graphs in parallel. While this can streamline the process, it presents challenges such as:

• Detecting Hallucinations: Differentiating between genuine insights and AI-generated inaccuracies.
• Ensuring Completeness: Ensuring no critical concepts are overlooked during extraction.

Teams must carefully validate outputs to ensure reliability and accuracy when employing this parallel method.

LLMs as Ontologists

While traditionally dependent on human expertise, ontology creation is increasingly supported by LLMs. These models, trained on vast amounts of data, possess inherent knowledge of many open ontologies and taxonomies. Teams can use LLMs to:

• Generate Skeleton Ontologies: Prompt LLMs with domain-specific information to draft initial ontology structures.
• Validate and Refine Ontologies: Collaborate with domain experts to refine these drafts, ensuring accuracy and relevance.

However, for validation and graph construction, formal tools such as OWL, SHACL, and RDF should be prioritized over LLMs to minimize hallucinations and ensure robust outcomes.

Final Thoughts: Unlocking the Power of Graph RAGs

The rise of Graph RAGs underscores a simple but crucial correlation: improving graph construction and data quality directly enhances retrieval systems. To truly harness this power, teams must invest in understanding ontologies, building quality graphs, and leveraging both human expertise and advanced AI tools.

As we move forward, the interplay between Graph RAGs and ontology engineering will continue to shape the future of AI. Whether through adopting existing frameworks or exploring innovative uses of LLMs, the path to success lies in a deep commitment to data quality and domain understanding.

Have you explored these technologies in your work? Share your experiences and insights — and stay tuned for more discussions on ontology extraction and its role in AI advancements. Cheers to a year of innovation!

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

The past 26 August, Tor introduced officially a proof-of-work (PoW) defense for onion services designed to prioritize verified network traffic as a deterrent against denial of service (DoS) attacks.

~ > This feature at the moment, is deactivate by default, so you need to follow these steps to activate this on a MiniBolt node:

• Make sure you have the latest version of Tor installed, at the time of writing this post, which is v0.4.8.6. Check your current version by typing

tor --version

Example of expected output:

Tor version 0.4.8.6. This build of Tor is covered by the GNU General Public License (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html) Tor is running on Linux with Libevent 2.1.12-stable, OpenSSL 3.0.9, Zlib 1.2.13, Liblzma 5.4.1, Libzstd N/A and Glibc 2.36 as libc. Tor compiled with GCC version 12.2.0

~ > If you have v0.4.8.X, you are OK, if not, type sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade and confirm to update.

• Basic PoW support can be checked by running this command:

tor --list-modules

Expected output:

relay: yes dirauth: yes dircache: yes pow: **yes**

~ > If you have pow: yes, you are OK

• Now go to the torrc file of your MiniBolt and add the parameter to enable PoW for each hidden service added

sudo nano /etc/tor/torrc

Example:

```

Hidden Service BTC RPC Explorer

HiddenServiceDir /var/lib/tor/hidden_service_btcrpcexplorer/ HiddenServiceVersion 3 HiddenServicePoWDefensesEnabled 1 HiddenServicePort 80 127.0.0.1:3002 ```

~ > Bitcoin Core and LND use the Tor control port to automatically create the hidden service, requiring no action from the user. We have submitted a feature request in the official GitHub repositories to explore the need for the integration of Tor's PoW defense into the automatic creation process of the hidden service. You can follow them at the following links:

• Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/issues/8002
• LND: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28499

---

More info:

• https://blog.torproject.org/introducing-proof-of-work-defense-for-onion-services/
• https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/onion-services/onion-support/-/wikis/Documentation/PoW-FAQ

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ da0b9bc3:4e30a4a9

Hello Stackers!

Welcome on into the ~Music Corner of the Saloon!

A place where we Talk Music. Share Tracks. Zap Sats.

So stay a while and listen.

🚨Don't forget to check out the pinned items in the territory homepage! You can always find the latest weeklies there!🚨

🚨Subscribe to the territory to ensure you never miss a post! 🚨

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/867409

@ 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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

It turns out that Ubuntu Linux installations of Ubuntu 23.04, 22.04.3 LTS, and installs done since April 2023 that accepted the Snap version update haven't been following Ubuntu's own recommended security best practices for their security pocket configuration for packages.

A new Subiquity release was issued to fix this problem while those on affected Ubuntu systems already installed are recommended to manually edit their /etc/apt/sources.list file.

If you didn't install MiniBolt recently, you are affected by this bug, and we need to fix that manually if not we want to install all since cero. Anyway, if you installed Minibolt recently, we recommend you review that.

Follow these easy steps to review and fix this:

• Edit the sources-list file:

sudo nano /etc/apt/sources.list

• Search now for every line that includes '-security' (without quotes) (normally at the end of the file) and change the URL to --> http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu

~ > For example, from http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu (or the extension corresponding to your country) to --> http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu

~> Real case, Spain location, before fix:

``` deb http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

```

After fix:

``` deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security main restricted

deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security universe

deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

deb-src http://es.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy-security multiverse

```

Save and exit

Note: If you have already these lines changed, you are not affected by this bug, and is not necessary to do anything. Simply exit the editor by doing Ctrl-X

• Finally, type the next command to refresh the repository pointers:

sudo apt update

• And optionally take the opportunity to update the system by doing:

sudo apt full-upgrade

More context:

• https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/FAQ#What_repositories_and_pockets_should_I_use_to_make_sure_my_systems_are_up_to_date.3F
• https://bugs.launchpad.net/subiquity/+bug/2033977
• https://www.phoronix.com/news/Ubuntu-Security-Pocket-Issue

@ 0463223a:3b14d673

I still don’t have much of an idea how it all works, even after all these years. I scroll around the web looking for connection and often don’t find it. Building on the theme I wrote before, how some folks are very sure of themselves. I still don’t get it. A critique people had of me in the past was a lack of confidence. That’s a hard thing to deal with as a man. The statement is really saying you’re low status and if only this that and a third, you’d be a decent human. Cheers!

I’m a recluse. There’s been periods of life I’ve been non verbal and I’ve avoided social interaction a lot. On the flip, I got quite good at wiggling records about to make funny noises and this enabled me to involve myself in music in various was, despite never being a ‘proper musician’, you know, like someone who plays a guitar or piano etc. Over a very long time frame I’ve found myself around music makers that I share common interest with, be that Dub, Hip Hop, weird noises etc. It’s funny, I now know some pretty serious players within those genres and count as few as good friends. It’s fucking mental to be honest. I’ve ticked off a number of childhood heroes, probably people you don’t know, some you would’ve definitely heard on radio but wouldn’t know their names.

I like to think I’m quite good at what I do but the confidence thing is still difficult. Had I moved to London in my youth I could've earned a lot more money, especially in the 90s when there was actually a functioning music industry but I know I can’t deal with that level of hectic so I’ve remained in small places by the sea both in the UK and abroad.

I’ve been working on an album for the best part of a year and have 4 tracks I feel happy with, at least I feel they’re a good representation of my abilities and I’ve been very lucky to have a world class player contribute bass on a couple of tracks. I don’t share the talents of my compardres but as one well known musician I toured with said to me, “I know you’re for the band”. A simple statement but that’s what mattered to him. He liked that I gave a shit about how they sounded, despite beating myself up because I often felt I was fucking their sound up big time (I didn’t let on, with the exception of one gig where EVERYTHING went wrong. I went straight to the dressing room after and flung myself at the mercy of the band apologising!).

After many years I’ve found my groove. Now I’m on this protocol called Nostr. It’s a strange place. It’s very niche, made up of money obsessed nutters. I share some of their beliefs but not all. It’s very American (is anywhere online not?) but it’s cool. I’m finding myself there more and more. I quit all major platforms in 2019. I’d learned too much nasty shit to contribute to making the companies richer. It’s weird, many people don’t seem to realise, you can stop using these platforms and they disappear. That’s the only thing giving these people power. Maybe people enjoy being milked for data? Do cows like having their teets clamped for milking? I’ve never got an answer from one…

Prior to that I found some weird internet money thing which is also becoming more popular, even the President of the USA has some (I think, he also has some other funny tokens and appears to be scamming people big time, yet people still really dig him for some reason).

This funny money has given me something I’ve not really had before, at least since I was maybe 10. A sense of security. It’s remarkable how much more mentally stable it can make you. When I lost my last living place (usual landlord BS) I moved in with my now wife and built a shed, filled it with noise making stuff. That wouldn’t have been possible without my anger towards the banks and how our governments gave them a free pass after they fucked us all. Some deep shit happened but that’s a whole other story. This thing internet money seems to be catching on...

Now I watch higher status folks stake their claim on the world. I try to zone them out as best I can, at least when they’re telling me how successful they are for reasons and playing their status games online. I’m much more interested in learning, mostly via audio, I’ve spent more hours listening to people I disagree with online than I can keep track of. I learn what I can from them and do my best to disregard the noise and try to maintain an awareness of my biases.

I don’t want to agree with everyone here. The moment I do, I know I’m doing something wrong.

They’ll be someone reading this, maybe you, thinking this is utter cringe. Fair enough, I’m not here for you, I’m looking for cool noise makers and weird people to hang with. Clearly this is self indulgent bollocks but fuck it, I’ll put it on this Nostr thing anyway.

@ 16d11430:61640947

The Millennial generation stands at a unique crossroads in history. Born into a world where traditional systems of economic and social power were firmly entrenched, they have matured in an era where those very systems are showing cracks. Nowhere is this more evident than in the rise of Bitcoin—a financial and cultural phenomenon that reflects not only technological progress but also the profound sociopsychological struggles of a generation attempting to wrest autonomy from the aging custodians of power.

Prolonged Adolescence and the Deferred Quest for Autonomy

Millennials, often caricatured as perpetual adolescents, have endured an extended transition into adulthood. Saddled with unprecedented student debt, stagnant wages, and skyrocketing living costs, this generation has been systematically delayed in achieving the milestones traditionally associated with maturity—home ownership, financial independence, and generational leadership. Their prolonged adolescence was not born of laziness or indulgence but of structural barriers, many of which were crafted and perpetuated by the Baby Boomer generation.

Bitcoin represents a symbolic and literal breaking away from these constraints. The decentralized cryptocurrency is, in essence, a rejection of the financial institutions that Millennials perceive as oppressive. It offers an alternative to a system that has kept them financially infantilized, tethered to debt, and locked out of wealth-building opportunities. Embracing Bitcoin is not merely an economic act—it is a psychological declaration of independence.

The Boomer Legacy and the Daunting Task of Succession

The Baby Boomers, who rose to dominance in an era of postwar economic growth, have remained the gatekeepers of wealth and power well into their senior years. This has created an intergenerational bottleneck: Millennials find themselves poised to inherit a world that is increasingly unsustainable, while also confronting the inertia of a generation reluctant to relinquish control. The sociopsychological impact of this dynamic is profound. For Millennials, the act of "growing up" has become synonymous with the Herculean task of dismantling or reforming entrenched systems.

Bitcoin’s narrative of decentralization, transparency, and individual sovereignty resonates deeply with Millennials because it offers a vision of empowerment. It provides a means of bypassing the gatekeepers—of creating value and financial freedom outside the confines of legacy institutions. Psychologically, this represents a vital step in the developmental journey: the move from dependency to self-reliance, from frustration to agency.

Weaning from the Teat: Financial and Emotional Independence

The metaphor of weaning is particularly apt for understanding the Millennial relationship with Bitcoin and the broader financial landscape. For much of their lives, Millennials have been financially dependent—on parents, on government programs, on an economic system that rewards conformity and punishes risk. Bitcoin is the ultimate tool for "weaning" this generation off the teat of dependency. It demands financial literacy, discipline, and a willingness to embrace uncertainty—all hallmarks of psychological maturity.

However, this journey is not without its challenges. The volatility of cryptocurrency markets mirrors the emotional turbulence of late adulthood, where the quest for independence often involves trial, error, and occasional failure. Millennials are learning, through Bitcoin, the hard truths of self-governance: that freedom is inseparable from responsibility, and that control cannot be wrested from others without first mastering oneself.

The Psychology of Late Adulthood in a Transitional World

Late adulthood, for Millennials, is marked by a dual psychological burden: the need to create a new world while still living in the shadow of the old. This is not merely a financial or technological challenge—it is a deeply existential one. Bitcoin, as both a tool and a symbol, encapsulates the struggle to bridge these worlds. It offers hope, but it also demands courage.

The generational shift from Boomers to Millennials is not just a passing of the torch; it is a seismic cultural shift. Millennials are redefining the very meaning of adulthood in the 21st century, and Bitcoin is a cornerstone of this redefinition. By rejecting the centralized systems of their predecessors, they are building a future that prioritizes autonomy, equity, and resilience.

Conclusion: Bitcoin as the Rite of Passage

In clinical terms, rites of passage are critical for psychological growth. They mark the transition from one stage of life to another, providing both challenge and transformation. For Millennials, Bitcoin is not just a financial instrument; it is a rite of passage. It is the means by which they assert their adulthood, reclaim their autonomy, and begin to dismantle the structures that have held them back.

In the broader context of human development, the rise of Bitcoin may be seen as a pivotal moment in the collective psyche—a moment when a generation, long delayed in its coming-of-age, finally steps into its power. The journey is fraught with uncertainty, but it is also rich with possibility. And as with all rites of passage, the true transformation lies not in the destination but in the courage to undertake the journey.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

What's changed

• New method for Bitcoin Core signature check, click ~ >HERE< ~
• GitHub repo of Bitcoin Core release attestations (Guix), click ~ >HERE< ~

---

History:

~ > PR that caused the broken and obsolescence of the old signature verification process, click ~ >HERE< ~

~ > New GitHub folder of Bitcoin Core repo that stores the signatures, click ~ >HERE< ~

---

Thanks to nostr:npub1gzuushllat7pet0ccv9yuhygvc8ldeyhrgxuwg744dn5khnpk3gs3ea5ds for building the command that made magic possible 🧙‍♂️🧡

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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.

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

TASK: Provide three solutions to one of the problems (non-technical) observed during the UX audit in Kenya.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ht9cy4ZOUw

This call was after the Bitcoin UX Bootcamp which was held in Africa at the ABC conference in 2024. 10 UX designers were selected and completed a 2 day bootcamp as well as a pre-learning phase. During the bootcamp itself they were each project leads for an open-source African bitcoin wallet. They did a UX analysis and usability testing of the wallet to understand how the user experience could be improved. Now after understanding the problem space this call was focussed on how to move from the problem space to the solution space in terms of design. A step by step process was outlined and shared with the participants.

We would greatly appreciate your feedback on these design solutions. Please feel free to share comments, suggestions, or point out any oversights in the comments below or directly on the following figma files (Figma account required, you can create a dummy one, no KYC required).

---

PRODUCT: TANDO TEAM MEMBERS: @thetimileyin. @Loïc Kassamoto Figma Link: https://www.figma.com/design/LEbxbCBb2WnuneJAL5GFs7/Tando-UX-Audit?node-id=225-987&t=eePmVu0Fx8ibFaEm-4

---

PRODUCT: BITSACCO TEAM MEMBERS: @afolabioluwatobiloba. @Osatuyi Figma link: https://www.figma.com/design/LYxCZLbq17vxbPNU9FTZ6d/UX-Bootcamp-group-file-(BITSACCO)?node-id=60-61&t=IEnTauLGib3SHA7T-4

---

We look forward to hearing from you. Thank you!

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/867378

@ 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.

@ f9cf4e94:96abc355

Na era das grandes navegações, piratas ingleses eram autorizados pelo governo para roubar navios.

A única coisa que diferenciava um pirata comum de um corsário é que o último possuía a “Carta do Corso”, que funcionava como um “Alvará para o roubo”, onde o governo Inglês legitimava o roubo de navios por parte dos corsários. É claro, que em troca ele exigia uma parte da espoliação.

Bastante similar com a maneira que a Receita Federal atua, não? Na verdade, o caso é ainda pior, pois o governo fica com toda a riqueza espoliada, e apenas repassa um mísero salário para os corsários modernos, os agentes da receita federal.

Porém eles “justificam” esse roubo ao chamá-lo de imposto, e isso parece acalmar os ânimos de grande parte da população, mas não de nós. Não é por acaso que 'imposto' é o particípio passado do verbo 'impor'. Ou seja, é aquilo que resulta do cumprimento obrigatório -- e não voluntário -- de todos os cidadãos. Se não for 'imposto' ninguém paga. Nem mesmo seus defensores. Isso mostra o quanto as pessoas realmente apreciam os serviços do estado.

Apenas volte um pouco na história: os primeiros pagadores de impostos eram fazendeiros cujos territórios foram invadidos por nômades que pastoreavam seu gado. Esses invasores nômades forçavam os fazendeiros a lhes pagar uma fatia de sua renda em troca de "proteção". O fazendeiro que não concordasse era assassinado.

Os nômades perceberam que era muito mais interessante e confortável apenas cobrar uma taxa de proteção em vez de matar o fazendeiro e assumir suas posses. Cobrando uma taxa, eles obtinham o que necessitavam. Já se matassem os fazendeiros, eles teriam de gerenciar por conta própria toda a produção da fazenda. Daí eles entenderam que, ao não assassinarem todos os fazendeiros que encontrassem pelo caminho, poderiam fazer desta prática um modo de vida.

Assim nasceu o governo.

Não assassinar pessoas foi o primeiro serviço que o governo forneceu. Como temos sorte em ter à nossa disposição esta instituição!

Assim, não deixa de ser curioso que algumas pessoas digam que os impostos são pagos basicamente para impedir que aconteça exatamente aquilo que originou a existência do governo. O governo nasceu da extorsão. Os fazendeiros tinham de pagar um "arrego" para seu governo. Caso contrário, eram assassinados. Quem era a real ameaça? O governo. A máfia faz a mesma coisa.

Mas existe uma forma de se proteger desses corsários modernos. Atualmente, existe uma propriedade privada que NINGUÉM pode tirar de você, ela é sua até mesmo depois da morte. É claro que estamos falando do Bitcoin. Fazendo as configurações certas, é impossível saber que você tem bitcoin. Nem mesmo o governo americano consegue saber.

brasil #bitcoinbrasil #nostrbrasil #grownostr #bitcoin

@ 57d1a264:69f1fee1

About the role In this role, you will work on the product design of umbrelOS, some of our umbrelOS apps, and the umbrel.com website.

What are you looking for in candidates? Talent, passion, genuine love for your craft, and the desire to do meaningful work. What we’re not looking for: credentials and degrees. When you really love what you do, work feels like play. And when work feels like play, you become the best at it. That’s what we’re looking for.

We hope you: - Like to spend your days staring at artboards in Figma - Are obsessed with creating delightful micro-interactions and animations - Are willing to throw away ideas if they're not great, and optimistic enough to keep hunting for new ones - Care about the details, maybe a bit too much (a pixel off ruins your sleep) - Are excited to collaborate with everyone on the team: engineers, customer facing folks, etc—you believe inspiration can come from anywhere - Have good judgement of when to ship - Like to level up your design skills continually - Put yourselves in the shoes of our users to craft a great experience - Enjoy being a generalist and are not tied down to a specific design, trend, or tools

Benefits - 🚑 Health insurance - 💻 New work equipment - 🌎 Work from anywhere in the world - 💆‍♀️ Complete autonomy at work - 📚 Learning and development stipend - 🏝 Minimum 2-weeks of paid time off - ❤️ Most importantly — doing meaningful work that can change the world

Apply at https://app.withrapha.com/job/692

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/867248

@ 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.

@ 3ae7fdae:f8d4b19d

Lifting the Curtain on Power and Scandal

The Illusion of Power and TrustIn the modern world, the line between trust and skepticism is razor-thin, especially when it comes to powerful figures and organizations. They present polished facades, dazzling us with promises of stability, innovation, or in Disney’s case, enchantment. Yet, the revelations surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s network reminded us that power is often far more complex than it appears. This scandal became a litmus test for public trust and fueled questions about who, or what, might be entwined in hidden truths.

When Epstein's crimes were exposed, they revealed not just the horrifying details of exploitation, but also the unsettling reach of his influence. As the media peeled back the layers of his associations, public attention naturally shifted to recognizable names and institutions, including Disney. How could a company that represented childhood innocence, with castles and fairy tales, find itself whispered about in the same breath as Epstein’s infamous circle? This segment examines the roots of that question and the facts that illuminate its plausibility or dismiss it.

Epstein: A Man Who Mastered Access to PowerJeffrey Epstein was more than just a financier—he was a gatekeeper to influence. His lifestyle and operations were an entangled web of charm, manipulation, and wealth, meticulously designed to secure him a place among the powerful. Investigative articles by The Guardian and The New York Times depict Epstein as a social engineer, curating relationships that ranged from politicians and royalty to scientists and celebrities.

Court documents and deposition testimonies during Epstein’s trial confirmed that his homes and private jet were hubs for connecting with influential figures. This access did not come without consequence; it cemented him as both a source of curiosity and, later, fear. Public records, such as those scrutinized in The Washington Post, indicated his involvement with many high-profile individuals. Yet, the details of these relationships varied—some guests were casual acquaintances, others, confidants.

The Infamous Flight LogsThe flight logs of Epstein’s private jet, colloquially known as the "Lolita Express," became a centerpiece for public scrutiny. Released through court orders and accessed by journalists, these logs listed names that triggered a cascade of questions. Guests ranged from prominent business executives to entertainment figures, sparking a debate over whether mere association implied complicity or deeper connections. This fueled the narrative that Epstein’s reach was far more extensive than previously understood, implicating industries where entertainment, power, and trust intersected.

The Role of Speculation in Public DiscourseAs soon as these flight logs surfaced, discussions surged online and across media platforms. The presence of any entertainment figure in Epstein’s orbit raised an eyebrow and, in many cases, invited a leap of logic: if influential media personalities were tied to him, could companies known for entertainment and global reach, like Disney, have hidden associations as well? This hypothesis, though lacking concrete evidence, found fertile ground among those predisposed to distrust large, seemingly untouchable institutions.

It’s crucial to dissect why Disney, specifically, became a subject of speculation. On one hand, its status as an omnipresent media empire makes it an easy target for conspiracy theories that thrive on the juxtaposition of light (Disney’s brand) and darkness (Epstein’s crimes). On the other, it speaks to a larger societal impulse to find cracks in the foundations of those we consider infallible. The idea that even the most beloved entities might harbor hidden truths appeals to a deep-seated desire for transparency and accountability.

The Catalyst of Public CuriosityThe timing of Epstein’s exposure was a critical factor. His arrest and subsequent death in 2019 coincided with a period marked by rising distrust in institutions, fueled by political and social upheavals globally. Social media platforms amplified this distrust, creating echo chambers where half-truths and speculative narratives merged seamlessly with confirmed facts.

It is here that Disney’s name began to surface not as an accused, but as a speculative point in discussions. The reasoning often pointed to a "guilt by association" logic: if the powerful dined, flew, or partied with Epstein, then it was worth questioning the circles in which those powerful entities moved, even without direct evidence. This leap from speculation to assumption reflects a pattern that sociologists recognize as part of conspiracy theory psychology—where a lack of clear answers invites the mind to fill in gaps, often with what feels most compelling.

Reframing the Public’s QuestionsThe real question becomes: why does this speculation hold such sway, even when evidence is scarce? Part of the answer lies in precedent. History is replete with instances where institutions that seemed above reproach were later implicated in hidden misdeeds, from financial frauds to abuse scandals within trusted organizations. This collective memory primes the public to believe that beneath any glittering surface could lie a dark, concealed underbelly.

Disney’s position as an icon of childhood and innocence adds another layer to this narrative. To imagine that such a symbol could be tainted by proximity to someone like Epstein is not just shocking—it’s fascinating. It strikes at the core of what we hold sacred, making it an irresistible topic of conversation and investigation.

Why This MattersUnderstanding why names like Disney are brought into these discussions without verified evidence is essential. It helps differentiate between warranted inquiry and unsupported speculation, allowing us to approach these narratives critically. Addressing this head-on does not only clear the air but strengthens the foundation upon which valid criticism and accountability are built.

A Note on EvidenceAs we move deeper into this exploration, it’s critical to emphasize that while Epstein’s connections to high-profile figures are thoroughly documented, there remains no evidence tying Disney, as an organization, to his operations. Still, the fascination with the “what-ifs” continues, driven by our collective quest for understanding power, secrecy, and the thin line between public and private lives.

The next segment will dive into Epstein’s proven network, unraveling the extent of his influence and why it has been the breeding ground for questions involving the world’s most trusted corporations.

Epstein’s Documented Network

The Web of Power: A Portrait of InfluenceJeffrey Epstein’s network was not merely a collection of acquaintances; it was a curated gallery of the world’s most influential figures, built on calculated relationships and strategic connections. Epstein wielded this network with the precision of a skilled operator, bridging disparate realms of society—politics, academia, business, and media. Investigative reporting by sources such as The New York Times and The Guardian exposed how Epstein maintained access to individuals who shaped policy, managed wealth, and crafted the narratives of popular culture.

Court records, testimonies, and detailed analyses of his interactions revealed that Epstein was adept at placing himself at the center of elite circles. His estates, from Manhattan townhouses to private islands, hosted events that blurred the lines between social gatherings and strategic networking. This chapter delves into the proven extent of Epstein’s reach and why it sparked questions about connections to corporations and public institutions, including Disney.

Flight Logs: The Proof and the SparkThe flight logs from Epstein’s private jet, the infamous "Lolita Express," were among the most illuminating pieces of evidence in mapping his connections. These logs, legally obtained and examined by journalists, painted a picture of Epstein’s influence stretching across industries. High-profile figures were listed, including financiers, political leaders, and entertainment personalities. The presence of notable names triggered waves of speculation—if Epstein had access to such power players, how many more remained unnamed but entangled?

The Guardian and The Washington Post reported that these flights were not just transportation but often involved visits to Epstein’s various properties, known for their opulence and the dark rumors surrounding them. While these logs confirmed that many public figures knew Epstein, the depth and nature of their associations varied widely, from casual acquaintance to deeper involvement.

The Limits of the KnownDespite the breadth of documented connections, there was no verifiable evidence linking Disney as an entity to Epstein’s circle. What the flight logs and guest lists revealed was a man deeply embedded in networks of power, yet even within these proven associations, context was crucial. For instance, some guests, confirmed by court records and investigative articles, were shown to have attended public events or engaged in business unrelated to Epstein’s criminal activities.

The distinction between documented presence and complicity is where the narrative often splinters. The leap from association to implication fueled public debate and conspiracy theories. This was especially true when figures from media and entertainment, sectors known for influencing public sentiment and childhood memories, appeared on the periphery of Epstein’s activities.

Epstein’s Parties and Gatherings: The Elite’s Shadowed StageEpstein’s parties were legendary, drawing attendees from the highest echelons of influence. These gatherings were not casual mixers but orchestrated showcases of power. Reports from court depositions and firsthand accounts highlighted how Epstein leveraged these events to cement alliances and reinforce his status as a gatekeeper to the elite. Some testimonies even described how these events served as platforms for discussing investments, politics, and global initiatives, reinforcing Epstein’s perceived omnipotence.

High-Profile Confirmations and Their ImplicationsSeveral prominent individuals were indeed verified as having ties to Epstein, raising legitimate questions about the extent of their knowledge or involvement. These names included politicians, royalty, and entertainment figures. The ambiguity surrounding these associations allowed theories to flourish. The sheer presence of influential names on Epstein’s guest lists raised the question: If these individuals were implicated, what about the institutions they represented or the circles they moved within?

This was a turning point for public speculation. The logic extended: if an individual from a major media company or entertainment empire like Disney was even remotely connected, could that implicate the company itself? The answer, according to existing court records and credible investigations, remained no. Yet, the absence of direct evidence did not stop speculation; in many cases, it intensified it.

Why Disney Was Brought Into the ConversationDisney’s reputation as a family-friendly giant contrasted starkly with the dark nature of Epstein’s activities, making it an unlikely yet intriguing topic for public discourse. While some entertainment figures appeared on Epstein’s flight logs or were rumored to have interacted with him, investigations have not yielded any proof of corporate-level involvement. However, public fascination persisted, bolstered by the broader questions Epstein’s connections evoked.

It’s worth noting that corporations like Disney, with their vast reach and unparalleled influence, naturally become focal points when discussions of hidden truths arise. The mere idea that such an iconic entity could be associated with real-world shadows captures the imagination and fuels stories that, while lacking proof, thrive on the “what-ifs” that echo through media and online forums.

How Public Perception Shapes the NarrativeSociologists studying the psychology of conspiracy theories point out that the human mind tends to fill gaps in knowledge with what feels most plausible or compelling. When figures from reputable media or entertainment companies are tied, even tangentially, to a scandal as vast as Epstein’s, it challenges the boundaries of trust. This is exacerbated when concrete answers remain elusive, leading to a cycle where suspicion feeds speculation.

The public’s thirst for accountability, especially in the wake of uncovered scandals involving powerful institutions, is both a force for truth and a catalyst for assumptions. In Epstein’s case, the proven reach of his influence and the confirmed involvement of significant figures were enough to trigger the question of how many untold stories lay beneath.

What We Know vs. What We ImagineThe narrative surrounding Epstein’s documented network shows us that while connections can be verified and associations noted, the leap to implicating entire organizations like Disney requires more than names on a list or rumors. It requires evidence that has, thus far, not been presented in any court or investigation. The proven facts are compelling enough: Epstein’s influence was extensive, his ties to power irrefutable. Yet, without direct links, the conversations about specific corporate involvement remain speculative.

In the next segment, we will explore why Disney’s reputation makes it a prime target for such speculation and how its historical handling of public crises plays into these narratives.

Disney – The Symbol of Trust and Target of Suspicion

Why Disney? The Paradox of a Trusted InstitutionDisney’s legacy is built on a foundation of storytelling, dreams, and the belief in happy endings. For nearly a century, the company has woven itself into the fabric of childhoods, becoming synonymous with innocence and magic. This legacy, however, has a dual edge. As the public's trust in institutions erodes and hidden truths are revealed in other sectors, Disney’s position as an untouchable cultural icon makes it both a beacon of light and a potential target for suspicion.

The Symbolism of Disney’s BrandDisney represents more than just a company; it embodies an idea—a refuge where imagination and wonder reign. But this same image that has made Disney a household name also contributes to the paradox of suspicion it faces. When an organization is seen as larger than life, transcending generations and continents, the notion that it could have skeletons in its closet becomes a tantalizing thought. The juxtaposition of innocence with possible shadows creates a narrative that is compelling and worth exploring, even if it remains speculative.

This paradox of Disney as both a trusted symbol and a target for scandal reflects a broader trend. Major corporations that hold influence in our everyday lives—particularly those that shape childhood memories and societal values—are natural focal points when scandals involving power, influence, and exploitation arise. The idea that a company with as much reach as Disney could be connected, however tangentially, to figures like Epstein feeds into this pattern.

Documented Misconduct and Public ReactionsThere have been verified cases involving Disney employees engaging in misconduct, which have been reported by media outlets such as NBC News and local news channels. These incidents, though not systemic and unrelated to Epstein’s network, show how the actions of a few can impact public perception of an entire organization. Examples include arrests for crimes involving minors or inappropriate behavior, isolated events that Disney has publicly addressed through statements and cooperation with law enforcement.

However, these incidents were sufficient to plant seeds of doubt in some minds. Even when addressed swiftly and in line with corporate protocols, such cases reveal a vulnerability: the company’s image can be tarnished not just by its policies, but by the misdeeds of individuals who wear its badge.

The Fuel for SpeculationThe Epstein case acted as a catalyst for looking beyond the obvious, particularly in the context of powerful organizations. If political leaders, financiers, and cultural icons could be connected to Epstein’s circle, why not wonder about the involvement of a company with as vast a presence as Disney? While investigations by trusted outlets have shown no direct corporate link, the sheer scope of Epstein’s influence suggested that any entity known for associating with the powerful could be implicated.

This speculation was not helped by Disney’s approach to public relations. The company’s PR strategies, while sophisticated and generally effective, often prioritize message control over transparency. In a world where silence can be seen as complicity, this strategy sometimes backfires, leading to more questions than answers.

Public Distrust and Historical ContextThe public’s fascination with uncovering hidden truths within major institutions is not unfounded. History is replete with cases where seemingly trustworthy organizations were later found to have concealed scandals. From corporate frauds to abuses within religious institutions, these stories have taught the public that innocence is not immune to corruption. This backdrop primes society to believe that even the most beloved entities, like Disney, could harbor secrets.

Sociologists and media analysts argue that this distrust is a byproduct of what they term the “betrayal effect”—where past disappointments with trusted institutions lower the threshold for believing that betrayal could be lurking everywhere. Disney, with its spotless public image and vast influence, becomes an especially juicy target for such theories. The leap from real cases of employee misconduct to more systemic accusations, however, is where evidence often falls short.

The Role of Social Media and Echo ChambersThe digital age has amplified how speculation morphs into perceived truth. Platforms like Twitter, Reddit, and Facebook allow theories to spread quickly, often outpacing fact-checking and nuanced analysis. Discussions that might once have been confined to fringe circles now gain mainstream attention, especially when they involve powerful figures or beloved brands.

In the context of Epstein’s exposure, this meant that any high-profile connection or name could become part of a broader narrative of guilt by association. The fact that Disney, as a corporation, appeared in speculative discussions alongside verified names from Epstein’s logs was enough for some to draw connections, even without direct evidence.

Reputation Management and PerceptionDisney’s approach to crises and controversies has long involved careful reputation management. From its response to legal issues to how it handles employee-related incidents, the company employs sophisticated PR strategies to mitigate damage and maintain its standing. This is standard practice for global brands; however, the public’s interpretation can be different. Strategic silence or tightly controlled statements can come across as evasive, fueling theories that there is something more to hide.

For a company like Disney, which operates at the intersection of family values and global corporate power, the stakes are high. The expectation isn’t just for entertainment but for upholding the moral high ground. When speculation links Disney to scandals, no matter how peripherally, it chips away at this carefully crafted image.

Why Address This Now?The speculation around Disney and Epstein underscores a crucial point about the nature of public inquiry and corporate reputation. It is not enough for companies to rely solely on public relations strategies that worked in the past. The demand for transparency is greater than ever, and silence, even when warranted, can erode trust.

Disney’s role in the public consciousness means that even baseless theories need addressing. By understanding why these narratives gain traction, both companies and the public can engage in more meaningful dialogues about accountability, proof, and trust.

The next segment will delve into how the public navigates between confirmed facts and conspiratorial whispers, exploring why certain theories stick and what it means for how we view powerful organizations.

Separating Fact from Conspiracy

The Thin Line Between Evidence and Speculation In the age of information, where facts are readily available yet often overshadowed by conjecture, separating truth from conspiracy is both an art and a necessity. When powerful entities like Disney find themselves drawn into discussions of hidden networks and scandals involving figures such as Jeffrey Epstein, it highlights a broader societal challenge: how do we differentiate between what is proven and what is assumed? This segment dissects the interplay of evidence, theory, and the psychological factors that drive our need to seek connections.

The Basis of Public Suspicion Public trust in large institutions has waned over decades, driven by a series of high-profile betrayals. From corporate frauds that shattered economies to scandals involving trusted religious or educational institutions, society has learned that power often conceals flaws and, in some cases, criminal actions. According to research published in the Journal of Communication, this erosion of trust leads to a phenomenon known as confirmation bias—the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or suspicions.

The Epstein case provided fertile ground for such biases. The verified details of Epstein’s operations—the private jet, the exclusive parties, the high-profile guests—were enough to prompt a collective re-examination of how far his reach extended. While many of his associations were proven to be casual or professional in nature, the public’s hunger for deeper revelations ensured that speculation would thrive in areas where clarity was lacking.

The Role of Real Connections Epstein’s documented network included figures from politics, academia, finance, and media. The release of flight logs and court documents revealed that powerful individuals attended his events and interacted within his sphere. This factual basis, verified by investigative reporting from The New York Times, The Guardian, and other reputable sources, provided legitimacy to the idea that Epstein’s influence was pervasive. However, the extent to which these relationships were innocent or complicit was not uniformly clear.

This ambiguity created a vacuum where speculation could flourish. Public attention shifted from individuals named in the logs to the institutions and industries they represented. It was here that major corporations, including Disney, entered the discourse—not because of documented ties, but because of their visibility and influence.

The Psychology Behind Linking Power and Scandal To understand why theories about Disney’s potential involvement in Epstein’s network persist, it is essential to examine the psychology of conspiracy. Sociological and psychological studies indicate that people are naturally inclined to question narratives when they feel that the truth is being withheld. The more powerful or untouchable an institution seems, the more likely it is to be suspected of hiding something significant.

Disney’s image as a global giant that molds childhoods and shapes culture makes it an appealing target for such theories. The company’s public persona as a bastion of family values and innocence stands in stark contrast to any whispers of scandal or misconduct. This contrast alone provides fertile ground for stories to grow, even in the absence of solid proof.

Confirmed Misconduct vs. Conspiracy It is important to acknowledge that Disney, like any large corporation, has faced incidents involving employee misconduct. News reports from outlets such as NBC News have documented cases where employees were arrested for inappropriate conduct involving minors. These cases, while serious and handled with appropriate legal responses, were isolated incidents. No evidence points to these cases being part of a larger, systemic issue within the company or connected to external figures like Epstein.

However, the very existence of these incidents is often enough to keep theories alive. Public perception does not always differentiate between an individual’s actions and the culture of the organization they work for. When these incidents coincide with broader conversations about power and secrecy, they feed into narratives that imply guilt by association.

The Amplifying Power of Social Media The role of social media in shaping and amplifying conspiracy theories cannot be overstated. Platforms like Twitter and Reddit have created spaces where facts, opinions, and theories coexist with little separation. When the Epstein scandal broke, social media was flooded with discussions, many of which featured a mix of verifiable information and speculative connections. The absence of direct evidence linking companies like Disney to Epstein did not deter users from proposing connections based on circumstantial evidence and “what-if” scenarios.

This phenomenon, described by media analysts as the “echo chamber effect,” allows theories to gain credibility through repetition rather than proof. As theories are shared, retweeted, and commented on, they accumulate a sense of legitimacy that belies their origins.

Why Certain Theories Stick Certain theories persist because they tap into deep-seated fears and the knowledge that the powerful often operate beyond the reach of conventional accountability. High-profile scandals involving powerful figures—whether in business, politics, or entertainment—reinforce the belief that more may be hidden just out of reach. Epstein’s network was confirmed to include names that were once considered untouchable, which validated the idea that hidden truths could surface anywhere.

Disney’s name appearing in speculative discussions highlights the intersection of innocence and power. It reflects a societal expectation that if one pillar of influence is shown to be compromised, others may be as well. This expectation, however, must be tempered with critical thinking and an examination of evidence.

The Need for Discernment Understanding the difference between fact and theory is crucial for informed dialogue. Public scrutiny is essential for accountability, but it must be balanced with discernment. While Epstein’s known associations spanned many sectors, and while individuals from the entertainment industry were involved in his circle, the leap to implicating entire organizations like Disney has not been supported by verified investigations.

The Reality Check Here’s what we know:

Documented Facts: Epstein’s network included influential figures, confirmed by court records and journalistic investigations. Disney’s Position: While Disney has faced isolated cases of employee misconduct, no substantial evidence ties the company as an institution to Epstein’s criminal activities. Public Perception: Theories are fueled by a combination of legitimate distrust in powerful institutions and the psychological need to connect the dots, even when the evidence does not support it. In the next segment, we will explore how media control and the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) contribute to the public’s perception of secrecy and whether this perception is warranted.

Media Control and NDAs – Protecting Power or Ensuring Silence?

The Strategy of Silence in Crisis Management When powerful organizations face potential scandal or crises, the first line of defense is often control—control over the narrative, control over information, and control over public perception. This strategy, while effective in mitigating immediate damage, can backfire by fostering an aura of secrecy that leads to suspicion. Disney, like many other global corporations, has historically employed these tactics, particularly through the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and strategic public relations (PR) campaigns. But do these measures protect legitimate corporate interests, or do they simply fuel theories that there is more being hidden?

Understanding the Role of NDAs NDAs are legal tools designed to maintain confidentiality and protect business interests. In most cases, their use is standard practice, whether to protect trade secrets, secure settlements, or manage sensitive internal matters. However, when NDAs intersect with scandals involving powerful individuals or organizations, they can become symbols of enforced silence. A report from the Harvard Business Review highlights that while NDAs are often employed for legitimate purposes, their misuse—especially when used to silence allegations of misconduct—has cast a shadow over their intent.

Disney has used NDAs in its corporate dealings, as have many in the media and entertainment sectors. This is not in itself suspicious; however, the mere presence of NDAs in a company’s arsenal can contribute to a narrative of secrecy, especially when paired with limited transparency during controversies.

The Case of High-Profile Secrecy The Epstein scandal showed how the use of NDAs and strategic silence could be perceived in a different light. When influential figures and companies were linked to his circle, silence from those implicated was interpreted by many as an attempt to avoid deeper inquiry. While Disney has not been tied to Epstein’s activities through verified evidence, its use of NDAs in unrelated circumstances and its approach to handling public controversies have made it a recurring subject in theories about hidden truths.

For example, Disney’s meticulous control over its brand image means that it often handles internal issues privately, releasing carefully crafted statements that address public concerns without divulging specifics. This approach, while protective, sometimes has the unintended consequence of making the public wonder what is not being said.

The Intersection of PR and Public Perception Public relations are designed to safeguard a company’s image, ensuring that responses to any negative news are swift and tightly managed. Disney’s PR machine is among the most sophisticated, capable of steering narratives and maintaining its reputation as an entertainment titan. This strategic control has allowed Disney to weather crises that might have permanently damaged lesser brands. However, in the context of a scandal as sprawling and notorious as Epstein’s, such control is perceived differently.

When the Epstein story broke and high-profile connections came to light, companies with any tenuous ties activated their crisis management protocols. For some, this meant issuing vague statements or refusing to comment altogether. To the public, this read as silence—a strategic choice that seemed suspicious when paired with known instances of NDAs being used to keep serious allegations quiet in other industries. The #MeToo movement, for instance, revealed how NDAs were used by some media companies to shield powerful perpetrators of harassment, showing that these tools can sometimes contribute to a culture of concealment.

Silence as Complicity? For a company like Disney, known for its polished public image, silence during times of widespread speculation can amplify suspicions. The question becomes: Is silence an act of protection or complicity? While NDAs are often used to manage settlements or protect internal processes, the fact that they prevent full transparency can make even innocent parties appear as if they have something to hide.

Experts in crisis communication argue that silence may protect the brand short-term but can erode trust long-term. Disney’s approach to handling public perception, from managing employee misconduct cases to addressing larger social controversies, often involves strategic responses that give the public enough information to stay satisfied but not enough to quell the more skeptical voices. This is standard practice but becomes contentious when the public is searching for accountability.

The Impact of Strategic Silence on Public Trust Media and communication studies have shown that transparency is increasingly becoming a measure of trustworthiness for corporations. In an era where the public demands answers and alternative media thrive on filling in gaps left by corporate PR, the stakes for maintaining trust are higher than ever. The use of NDAs and controlled statements can protect a company’s interests, but it also contributes to a perception of secrecy that feeds public doubt.

Disney’s balancing act—protecting its brand while managing incidents behind closed doors—reflects a broader industry trend. Corporations that prioritize narrative control must now reckon with an environment where even a hint of concealment can lead to damaging speculation. The Epstein case amplified this issue, putting the spotlight on how major organizations handle proximity to scandal, even if only by association.

Navigating the Perception The real challenge for Disney and similar companies lies in navigating the fine line between protecting their interests and fostering trust. Complete transparency can be risky, but strategic silence risks becoming complicit silence in the eyes of the public. This duality—where necessary protection measures are perceived as proof of hidden wrongdoing—is why entities like Disney find themselves caught up in discussions about figures like Epstein, despite the absence of concrete evidence.

The Takeaway for Institutions and the Public Understanding the role of NDAs and PR in managing public crises helps frame why powerful companies might become targets of suspicion. While the use of these tools is standard and often justified, their impact on public perception can’t be ignored. For the public, recognizing the difference between warranted inquiry and overreach is key to maintaining productive scrutiny without falling into the trap of baseless theories.

The next segment will focus on what these perceptions mean for society as a whole and why the pursuit of transparency and trust must be a collective endeavor.

Beyond the Shadows – A Call to Unity

The Complex Path to UnderstandingIn an age where trust in powerful institutions is fraying, and access to information is both a blessing and a burden, our approach to truth becomes more critical than ever. The discussions surrounding figures like Jeffrey Epstein and corporations like Disney are not just about scandal; they are about how we, as a society, confront power, secrecy, and transparency. This segment is a call to unite in the pursuit of truth—not through a divisive lens, but with collective discernment and an unwavering commitment to evidence and integrity.

The Lessons from HistoryHistory teaches us that institutions once seen as untouchable can harbor hidden truths. The exposure of corporate frauds, systemic abuses, and cover-ups within trusted sectors has shaped a society that questions everything. The Epstein scandal underscored this, revealing a network of power that reached further than many dared to imagine. Yet, while it validated the public’s instinct to question, it also highlighted a key challenge: differentiating between grounded inquiry and baseless theory.

Disney’s name appearing in speculative discussions about Epstein points to a broader pattern—our collective desire to ensure that those who hold power are not above scrutiny. But as we demand accountability, we must also unite in the practice of informed skepticism. The leap from isolated cases of misconduct or association to implicating entire organizations requires evidence, not just conjecture. This distinction is where we, as a society, must find common ground.

The Role of TransparencyTransparency has become the cornerstone of public trust. Organizations that handle controversies behind closed doors risk damaging their credibility. For companies like Disney, known for protecting their brand with meticulous care, the challenge is clear: find a balance between safeguarding legitimate interests and providing enough transparency to maintain public trust.

The use of NDAs, strategic silence, and controlled narratives may shield brands in the short term, but they can erode trust in the long run. Studies in crisis communication emphasize that openness, even when it exposes vulnerabilities, can reinforce loyalty and confidence among stakeholders. In the context of Epstein and the persistent whispers about powerful corporations, this lesson is especially relevant.

A Collective Call to ClarityThe pursuit of truth is not just the responsibility of journalists, whistleblowers, or industry watchdogs—it is a collective endeavor. The public plays a crucial role in this, but so do the corporations that hold sway over cultural and economic landscapes. When Disney’s name enters speculative discussions, it reflects a deep-seated desire for transparency from those we trust. This desire should be met not with fear of the unknown but with a commitment to clarity.

This segment is a call for unity in approaching these conversations. The balance between healthy skepticism and conspiracy theory is delicate but essential. We must ask hard questions and hold power accountable without losing sight of what separates substantiated fact from assumption.

Why Unity MattersIn times where speculation can divide and misinformation can spread faster than verified facts, unity in the pursuit of truth is vital. When we allow fear and uncertainty to fracture our approach, we weaken our collective power to bring genuine issues to light. Epstein’s case showed that hidden wrongs do exist and can involve the most influential figures. It also showed that uncovering the full scope of such wrongs takes a community committed to patience, evidence, and shared purpose.

Public scrutiny is essential for democracy and social justice, but so is discernment. When theories about organizations like Disney arise without evidence, they risk diverting attention from real, proven issues that demand action. Unity in seeking truth means supporting real investigations, demanding transparency, and recognizing the power of evidence-based inquiry.

Building a Culture of Informed AccountabilityThe goal is not to silence questions but to elevate them, ensuring that they are grounded in reality. This approach not only empowers the public but also sets a standard for institutions. If Disney and other corporations prioritize transparency, they can reinforce the public trust that sustains their brands. Similarly, when the public insists on evidence and integrity in its discussions, it strengthens the very fabric of accountability.

Reflections for the Road AheadAs we move forward, let us commit to being a society that seeks truth not for scandal’s sake but for justice and integrity. Let us stand together in holding power to account, using facts as our foundation and unity as our strength. The story of Epstein and the questions it raises about power, influence, and hidden truths are reminders that transparency and trust are not just corporate responsibilities—they are collective ones.

This call to unity is a reminder that we all play a part in shaping how these stories unfold. When we seek, question, and demand clarity together, we create a society that values truth over rumor, evidence over assumption, and justice over division.

As we conclude this exploration, may we carry forward the lessons learned: the importance of questioning with integrity, seeking truth with diligence, and facing the unknown not as individuals, but as a united community.

@ 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.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Important notice to MiniBolt node runners:

~ > It turns out that the I2P devs have opened an issue on the Bitcoin Core GitHub repo commenting that because they gave the option to enable the notransit=true parameter in the official documentation:

[...] If you prefer not to relay any public I2P traffic and only allow I2P traffic from programs connecting through the SAM proxy, e.g. Bitcoin Core, you can set the no transit option to true [...] are having a heavy load on the I2P network since last December 19. Also comment that it is advisable to share as much bandwidth and transit tunnels as we can, to increase anonymity with coverage traffic, by contributing more to the I2p network than we consume.

So they ask that we deactivate that option that you use activated. With all this, he already updated the "Privacy" section by removing that setting.

The steps to delete this configuration once we have already configured it, are the following:

• With the "admin" user, stop i2pd:

sudo systemctl stop i2pd

• Comment line 93 with "#" at the beginning of it (notransit = true), save and exit

sudo nano /var/lib/i2pd/i2pd.conf --line numbers

• Start i2pd again:

sudo systemctl start i2pd

• And that's it, you could take a look at Bitcoin Core to see that it has detected i2pd running again after the reboot with:

tail --lines 500 -f /home/bitcoin/.bitcoin/debug.log

~ > If you don't see that I2P is up in Bitcoin Core after the restart, sudo systemctl restart bitcoind and look again at the logs of the same.

---

More info in the rollback commit, see ~> HERE < ~

@ 16d11430:61640947

For centuries, financial markets have been shackled by an archaic mindset rooted in Newtonian physics: "What goes up must come down." This belief has dominated the thinking of old-school fiat economists, who view the rise and fall of markets as a natural cycle of gravity-bound economics. But Bitcoin, the digital phoenix, was designed to defy this outdated paradigm. It isn't just an asset class or a currency—it's a revolution in financial physics, unshackling value from centralized control and rewriting the rules of money.

The Fiat Fallacy: Gravity Economics

Fiat systems are inherently cyclical, prone to inflation, manipulation, and collapse. Central banks print money endlessly, causing value to "come down" as purchasing power erodes. For fiat thinkers, this is unavoidable—a gravitational force they accept as immutable. Yet this mindset ignores Bitcoin’s game-changing properties: its hard cap of 21 million coins, decentralized consensus, and permissionless architecture.

Bitcoin is fundamentally non-Newtonian. It doesn’t adhere to traditional financial laws because it isn't bound by the same forces of supply and control. Instead, it operates in a new paradigm: deflationary, transparent, and immune to political meddling.

Bitcoin's Escape Velocity

Bitcoin's dominance lies in its ability to achieve escape velocity. Unlike fiat currencies, which are constantly being pulled back by inflationary policies, Bitcoin is propelled by its scarcity, adoption, and network effects. Every halving event tightens the supply, creating an upward pressure that fiat systems can't replicate. And as global trust in traditional systems erodes, Bitcoin's gravitational pull grows stronger.

This phenomenon is evident in the adoption curve. Institutions, governments, and individuals worldwide are recognizing Bitcoin as a superior store of value, an inflation hedge, and the ultimate form of financial sovereignty. The more participants enter the network, the more its value compounds, creating a virtuous cycle of exponential growth.

Humiliating the Old Guard

The fiat establishment—steeped in centuries of centralized control—has long dismissed Bitcoin as a bubble, a fad, or even a Ponzi scheme. Yet, year after year, Bitcoin rises from the ashes of their predictions. Its resilience, transparency, and provable scarcity expose the fragility and corruption of fiat systems.

The ultimate humiliation for fiat thinkers is Bitcoin's ability to thrive in crises. Where traditional systems falter—be it through hyperinflation, bank failures, or geopolitical instability—Bitcoin becomes a lifeboat. It doesn’t just resist gravity; it flips the entire script. Fiat currencies are revealed as infinite-print illusions, while Bitcoin’s immutable ledger stands as the ultimate arbiter of truth and value.

A New Financial Paradigm

Bitcoin’s ascent is not merely about price; it’s about domination. It represents a shift from centralized control to individual empowerment, from opaque systems to transparent protocols, from inflationary theft to deflationary savings. It’s a financial singularity, an escape from the gravitational pull of outdated thinking.

As Bitcoin continues its trajectory, the old world of "what goes up must come down" will look increasingly absurd. In its place, a new principle will reign: what’s decentralized cannot be stopped. Bitcoin isn’t just leaving Earth’s orbit; it’s becoming the financial universe’s North Star.

So buckle up, because Bitcoin isn’t just going up—it’s transcending. And as it does, it will leave the Newtonian thinkers in the dust, staring in disbelief at the rocket that left them behind.

@ ae6ce958:d0f02c7d

In a world dominated by overhyped tech and broken promises, DamageBDD stands apart as a Bitcoin-first revolution for developers, QA teams, and enterprises. Built on the belief that resilience, transparency, and accountability are not optional, this innovation is more than just another BDD platform—it's a tool designed to harness the unstoppable power of Bitcoin and the Lightning Network to redefine software quality and team productivity. Here's why DamageBDD will light up the Lightning Network like never before:

1. Lightning-Powered Incentives for Development

Imagine a world where developers are rewarded in sats the moment their code passes a milestone. With DamageBDD, that’s no longer a dream. We use Lightning-based escrow payments tied to milestone completions, ensuring every contributor gets instant, trustless payouts for verified work. This isn’t just about payments—this is about transforming the economics of collaboration and incentivizing excellence.

2. Real-Time Transparency Meets Bitcoin Immutability

Every BDD test, every passing milestone, and every failure is immutably recorded, showcasing the evolution of a project with a timestamped on-chain timeline. By anchoring progress to Bitcoin’s ultimate ledger of truth, DamageBDD creates a level of transparency that ensures trust—whether you're a developer, a manager, or an investor.

3. Immediate Liquidity Without Compromise

The Lightning Network enables participants to exit their locked funds through near-instant buybacks—no risk of long-term lock-ins or centralized interference. Developers and stakeholders can convert their contributions back to Bitcoin at market-close rates, minus nominal fees. This system protects value while keeping all incentives aligned with delivering quality software.

4. A Bitcoin Economy for BDD

Why settle for fiat-denominated payments or centralized intermediaries when you can build directly on Bitcoin? DamageBDD’s ecosystem ensures that every satoshi stays true to the ethos of decentralization, enabling organizations to manage projects in a way that’s fair, transparent, and resilient.

5. Scalable Adoption of High-Performance Teams

The Lightning Network isn’t just a payments rail—it’s a bridge for building relationships across borders. DamageBDD allows distributed teams to thrive, making trustless collaboration possible while fostering high-performance, Bitcoin-powered workflows.

6. Redefining ROI for Investors

Investors can now lock funds into milestone-driven escrows, ensuring ROI is directly tied to results. With DamageBDD’s Lightning-enabled payouts, there’s no waiting for endless revisions or missed deadlines—just real-time accountability, measured and delivered on a timeline that’s verifiable and immutable.

---

Bitcoiners, this is the spark.

While the fiat world struggles with inefficiency, corruption, and misaligned incentives, DamageBDD fuels the future with a Bitcoin-powered toolkit that transforms how teams work, get paid, and build trust. This isn’t just about better software—it’s about building an unstoppable Bitcoin economy where transparency reigns, quality wins, and the Lightning Network becomes the default rail for human collaboration.

DamageBDD isn’t here to gamble on hype—it’s here to build the future. Let’s light up the Lightning Network and show the world what Bitcoin-backed innovation can achieve. Are you ready to join the revolution?

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Your MiniBolt is on a home local network, you want to expose it on the public Internet (clearnet) without exposing your public IP, without Firewall rules, without NAT port forwarding, without risk, easy and cheap?

---

Go to the bonus guide by clicking ~ >HERE <~

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 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. 🐶🐾🫡🚀🚀🚀

@ 16d11430:61640947

At the intersection of philosophy, theology, physics, biology, and finance lies a terrifying truth: the fiat monetary system, in its current form, is not just an economic framework but a silent, relentless force actively working against humanity's survival. It isn't simply a failed financial model—it is a systemic engine of destruction, both externally and within the very core of our biological existence.

The Philosophical Void of Fiat

Philosophy has long questioned the nature of value and the meaning of human existence. From Socrates to Kant, thinkers have pondered the pursuit of truth, beauty, and virtue. But in the modern age, the fiat system has hijacked this discourse. The notion of "value" in a fiat world is no longer rooted in human potential or natural resources—it is abstracted, manipulated, and controlled by central authorities with the sole purpose of perpetuating their own power. The currency is not a reflection of society’s labor or resources; it is a representation of faith in an authority that, more often than not, breaks that faith with reckless monetary policies and hidden inflation.

The fiat system has created a kind of ontological nihilism, where the idea of true value, rooted in work, creativity, and family, is replaced with speculative gambling and short-term gains. This betrayal of human purpose at the systemic level feeds into a philosophical despair: the relentless devaluation of effort, the erosion of trust, and the abandonment of shared human values. In this nihilistic economy, purpose and meaning become increasingly difficult to find, leaving millions to question the very foundation of their existence.

Theological Implications: Fiat and the Collapse of the Sacred

Religious traditions have long linked moral integrity with the stewardship of resources and the preservation of life. Fiat currency, however, corrupts these foundational beliefs. In the theological narrative of creation, humans are given dominion over the Earth, tasked with nurturing and protecting it for future generations. But the fiat system promotes the exact opposite: it commodifies everything—land, labor, and life—treating them as mere transactions on a ledger.

This disrespect for creation is an affront to the divine. In many theologies, creation is meant to be sustained, a delicate balance that mirrors the harmony of the divine order. Fiat systems—by continuously printing money and driving inflation—treat nature and humanity as expendable resources to be exploited for short-term gains, leading to environmental degradation and societal collapse. The creation narrative, in which humans are called to be stewards, is inverted. The fiat system, through its unholy alliance with unrestrained growth and unsustainable debt, is destroying the very creation it should protect.

Furthermore, the fiat system drives idolatry of power and wealth. The central banks and corporations that control the money supply have become modern-day gods, their decrees shaping the lives of billions, while the masses are enslaved by debt and inflation. This form of worship isn't overt, but it is profound. It leads to a world where people place their faith not in God or their families, but in the abstract promises of institutions that serve their own interests.

Physics and the Infinite Growth Paradox

Physics teaches us that the universe is finite—resources, energy, and space are all limited. Yet, the fiat system operates under the delusion of infinite growth. Central banks print money without concern for natural limits, encouraging an economy that assumes unending expansion. This is not only an economic fallacy; it is a physical impossibility.

In thermodynamics, the Second Law states that entropy (disorder) increases over time in any closed system. The fiat system operates as if the Earth were an infinite resource pool, perpetually able to expand without consequence. The real world, however, does not bend to these abstract concepts of infinite growth. Resources are finite, ecosystems are fragile, and human capacity is limited. Fiat currency, by promoting unsustainable consumption and growth, accelerates the depletion of resources and the degradation of natural systems that support life itself.

Even the financial “growth” driven by fiat policies leads to unsustainable bubbles—inflated stock markets, real estate, and speculative assets that burst and leave ruin in their wake. These crashes aren’t just economic—they have profound biological consequences. The cycles of boom and bust undermine communities, erode social stability, and increase anxiety and depression, all of which affect human health at a biological level.

Biology: The Fiat System and the Destruction of Human Health

Biologically, the fiat system is a cancerous growth on human society. The constant chase for growth and the devaluation of work leads to chronic stress, which is one of the leading causes of disease in modern society. The strain of living in a system that values speculation over well-being results in a biological feedback loop: rising anxiety, poor mental health, physical diseases like cardiovascular disorders, and a shortening of lifespans.

Moreover, the focus on profit and short-term returns creates a biological disconnect between humans and the planet. The fiat system fuels industries that destroy ecosystems, increase pollution, and deplete resources at unsustainable rates. These actions are not just environmentally harmful; they directly harm human biology. The degradation of the environment—whether through toxic chemicals, pollution, or resource extraction—has profound biological effects on human health, causing respiratory diseases, cancers, and neurological disorders.

The biological cost of the fiat system is not a distant theory; it is being paid every day by millions in the form of increased health risks, diseases linked to stress, and the growing burden of mental health disorders. The constant uncertainty of an inflation-driven economy exacerbates these conditions, creating a society of individuals whose bodies and minds are under constant strain. We are witnessing a systemic biological unraveling, one in which the very act of living is increasingly fraught with pain, instability, and the looming threat of collapse.

Finance as the Final Illusion

At the core of the fiat system is a fundamental illusion—that financial growth can occur without any real connection to tangible value. The abstraction of currency, the manipulation of interest rates, and the constant creation of new money hide the underlying truth: the system is built on nothing but faith. When that faith falters, the entire system collapses.

This illusion has become so deeply embedded that it now defines the human experience. Work no longer connects to production or creation—it is reduced to a transaction on a spreadsheet, a means to acquire more fiat currency in a world where value is ephemeral and increasingly disconnected from human reality.

As we pursue ever-expanding wealth, the fundamental truths of biology—interdependence, sustainability, and balance—are ignored. The fiat system’s abstract financial models serve to disconnect us from the basic realities of life: that we are part of an interconnected world where every action has a reaction, where resources are finite, and where human health, both mental and physical, depends on the stability of our environment and our social systems.

The Ultimate Extermination

In the end, the fiat system is not just an economic issue; it is a biological, philosophical, theological, and existential threat to the very survival of humanity. It is a force that devalues human effort, encourages environmental destruction, fosters inequality, and creates pain at the core of the human biological condition. It is an economic framework that leads not to prosperity, but to extermination—not just of species, but of the very essence of human well-being.

To continue on this path is to accept the slow death of our species, one based not on natural forces, but on our own choice to worship the abstract over the real, the speculative over the tangible. The fiat system isn't just a threat; it is the ultimate self-inflicted wound, a cultural and financial cancer that, if left unchecked, will destroy humanity’s chance for survival and peace.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Build your nostr relay step by step on your MiniBolt node! (easily adaptable to other environment) No need to trust anyone else! Be sovereign!

~> Go to the bonus guide by clicking ~> HERE< ~

~> This guide includes a complete extra section to cover the different processes for using nostr as a user and relay operator.

---

PS: The MiniBolt project has its FREE relay, be free to connect by adding to your favorite client the next address: wss://relay.minibolt.info

~> Let a review on noStrudel or Coracle of your experience using it.

---

Remember, Nostr is freedom! Stay resilient! 💜 🛡️💪

@ cb43dde2:ef277171

HODL has been defined by many as an acronym for “Hold on for Dear Life.” Many my age were taught to earn money and save it for the future as conventional wisdom. That wisdom would have you holding something designed to degrade in value at a rate of 2% annually. If all “goes to plan,” the purchasing power (value) of your savings in 35 years will be half that of today. In 2022 the US dollar value degraded a total of 8%. At this rate, your savings’ value will cut in half in less than nine years. Not quite the retirement plan one would hope for, but happens to be what my generation was taught in school. Thankfully there is a solution: become a HODLer of assets.

Every investor is a collector of assets. They all have their own thesis about the assets they collect and how the collection will transport their monetary value across space and time. My thesis is that when you hold assets (the practice of HODLing) you hold the superposition in the market and can make better decisions against the overall economic tide. I like to hold a diverse portfolio across asset types, themes, and tax treatments, so that I am always in a superposition when liquidity is needed for the next opportunity. In the words of Charles Darwin, “it is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.”

The Superposition of Markets

A superposition is a phenomenon observed in nature where something is in one of two antithetical positions, both equally likely, and is only defined when observed or measured. Most have heard of the Schrödinger’s Cat thought experiment; this is an example of superposition (references below). The financial markets act as a measuring tool identifying the next entangled pair of buyer and seller. Therefore, as a HODLer you remain in a superposition within the market until either your buy price or sell price is realized, instantaneously identifying your entangled counterpart within the market. To hold assets puts the HODLer in a superposition within the markets in which they HODL.

Making a Market: It Only Takes Two

A market is made when two parties, a buyer and a seller, come to an agreement to transfer personal property between each other. Without an agreement, there is no market activity and therefore no market. There are many more participants that help to facilitate markets like stock exchanges, store fronts, and Craigslist to name a few. This infrastructure has not changed the necessities to make a market but instead acts as a courier of information, often referred to as data. Knowing what a group of sellers are willing to take in exchange for their property, and knowing what a group of buyers are willing to pay, allows for the mapping of the market’s superpositions (known as an order book). HODLers remain in a superposition except at the moment when a market is made, identifying the two parties involved and the respective roles each will play out.

HODLers are Not Market Participants

They have in fact shown to be previous market participants and willing to fill at least one side of the transaction. However, if you’re HODLing, you are neither a seller nor a buyer and thus not in the market. Rather, you are both a buyer and a seller that has not been realized yet. We all have our buy price and our sell price of the assets we own. However, the market may have not dropped to the point where you are willing to buy again, nor has it risen to the level in which you are prepared to sell. You are but a ‘HODLer-in-waiting’ with two potential states; you are a potential buyer and a potential seller, waiting to be measured, thus identifying and filling your market role as dictated by the market and your need for access to liquidity.

HODLing: An Investment Strategy Built Upon Superpositions

Due to many market forces, successful investors do not simply stack cash for retirement, they are buying assets. As Robert Kiyosaki explains in his book, Rich Dad Poor Dad, “An asset is something that puts money in my pocket. A liability is something that takes money out of my pocket.” Investors are buying assets in hopes that their portfolio will ferry their purchasing power, today’s monetary value, across space and time. Why HODL something that is planned to lose value for any longer than necessary?

HODLing can feel like a rollercoaster at times with the need to “hold on for dear life.” Markets are unpredictable and (as an ex-manager of mine used to say) they will always do what f@&ks the most amount of people. Combat this with conviction in your purchase decisions. Conviction on where you think the price of the asset will go and in how much time. If you start by finding and choosing your long-term savings vehicle, many will call this money, asset purchases on your way to retirement become easier as you are not battling inflation, aka planned degradation of your hard-earned dollars. What you HODL matters.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Chef's notes

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

Details

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

Ingredients

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

Directions

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

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

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

Bold text work!

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

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

🐶🐾🤯🤯🤯🫂💜

@ a367f9eb:0633efea

I’ll admit that I was wrong about Bitcoin. Perhaps in 2013. Definitely 2017. Probably in 2018-2019. And maybe even today.

Being wrong about Bitcoin is part of finally understanding it. It will test you, make you question everything, and in the words of BTC educator and privacy advocate Matt Odell, “Bitcoin will humble you”.

I’ve had my own stumbles on the way.

In a very public fashion in 2017, after years of using Bitcoin, trying to start a company with it, using it as my primary exchange vehicle between currencies, and generally being annoying about it at parties, I let out the bear.

In an article published in my own literary magazine Devolution Review in September 2017, I had a breaking point. The article was titled “Going Bearish on Bitcoin: Cryptocurrencies are the tulip mania of the 21st century”.

It was later republished in Huffington Post and across dozens of financial and crypto blogs at the time with another, more appropriate title: “Bitcoin Has Become About The Payday, Not Its Potential”.

As I laid out, my newfound bearishness had little to do with the technology itself or the promise of Bitcoin, and more to do with the cynical industry forming around it:

In the beginning, Bitcoin was something of a revolution to me. The digital currency represented everything from my rebellious youth.

It was a decentralized, denationalized, and digital currency operating outside the traditional banking and governmental system. It used tools of cryptography and connected buyers and sellers across national borders at minimal transaction costs.

…

The 21st-century version (of Tulip mania) has welcomed a plethora of slick consultants, hazy schemes dressed up as investor possibilities, and too much wishy-washy language for anything to really make sense to anyone who wants to use a digital currency to make purchases.

While I called out Bitcoin by name at the time, on reflection, I was really talking about the ICO craze, the wishy-washy consultants, and the altcoin ponzis.

What I was articulating — without knowing it — was the frame of NgU, or “numbers go up”. Rather than advocating for Bitcoin because of its uncensorability, proof-of-work, or immutability, the common mentality among newbies and the dollar-obsessed was that Bitcoin mattered because its price was a rocket ship.

And because Bitcoin was gaining in price, affinity tokens and projects that were imperfect forks of Bitcoin took off as well.

The price alone — rather than its qualities — were the reasons why you’d hear Uber drivers, finance bros, or your gym buddy mention Bitcoin. As someone who came to Bitcoin for philosophical reasons, that just sat wrong with me.

Maybe I had too many projects thrown in my face, or maybe I was too frustrated with the UX of Bitcoin apps and sites at the time. No matter what, I’ve since learned something.

I was at least somewhat wrong.

My own journey began in early 2011. One of my favorite radio programs, Free Talk Live, began interviewing guests and having discussions on the potential of Bitcoin. They tied it directly to a libertarian vision of the world: free markets, free people, and free banking. That was me, and I was in. Bitcoin was at about $5 back then (NgU).

I followed every article I could, talked about it with guests on my college radio show, and became a devoted redditor on r/Bitcoin. At that time, at least to my knowledge, there was no possible way to buy Bitcoin where I was living. Very weak.

I was probably wrong. And very wrong for not trying to acquire by mining or otherwise.

The next year, after moving to Florida, Bitcoin was a heavy topic with a friend of mine who shared the same vision (and still does, according to the Celsius bankruptcy documents). We talked about it with passionate leftists at Occupy Tampa in 2012, all the while trying to explain the ills of Keynesian central banking, and figuring out how to use Coinbase.

I began writing more about Bitcoin in 2013, writing a guide on “How to Avoid Bank Fees Using Bitcoin,” discussing its potential legalization in Germany, and interviewing Jeremy Hansen, one of the first political candidates in the U.S. to accept Bitcoin donations.

Even up until that point, I thought Bitcoin was an interesting protocol for sending and receiving money quickly, and converting it into fiat. The global connectedness of it, plus this cypherpunk mentality divorced from government control was both useful and attractive. I thought it was the perfect go-between.

But I was wrong.

When I gave my first public speech on Bitcoin in Vienna, Austria in December 2013, I had grown obsessed with Bitcoin’s adoption on dark net markets like Silk Road.

My theory, at the time, was the number and price were irrelevant. The tech was interesting, and a novel attempt. It was unlike anything before. But what was happening on the dark net markets, which I viewed as the true free market powered by Bitcoin, was even more interesting. I thought these markets would grow exponentially and anonymous commerce via BTC would become the norm.

While the price was irrelevant, it was all about buying and selling goods without permission or license.

Now I understand I was wrong.

Just because Bitcoin was this revolutionary technology that embraced pseudonymity did not mean that all commerce would decentralize as well. It did not mean that anonymous markets were intended to be the most powerful layer in the Bitcoin stack.

What I did not even anticipate is something articulated very well by noted Bitcoin OG Pierre Rochard: Bitcoin as a savings technology.

The ability to maintain long-term savings, practice self-discipline while stacking stats, and embrace a low-time preference was just not something on the mind of the Bitcoiners I knew at the time.

Perhaps I was reading into the hype while outwardly opposing it. Or perhaps I wasn’t humble enough to understand the true value proposition that many of us have learned years later.

In the years that followed, I bought and sold more times than I can count, and I did everything to integrate it into passion projects. I tried to set up a company using Bitcoin while at my university in Prague.

My business model depended on university students being technologically advanced enough to have a mobile wallet, own their keys, and be able to make transactions on a consistent basis. Even though I was surrounded by philosophically aligned people, those who would advance that to actually put Bitcoin into practice were sparse.

This is what led me to proclaim that “Technological Literacy is Doomed” in 2016.

And I was wrong again.

Indeed, since that time, the UX of Bitcoin-only applications, wallets, and supporting tech has vastly improved and onboarded millions more people than anyone thought possible. The entrepreneurship, coding excellence, and vision offered by Bitcoiners of all stripes have renewed a sense in me that this project is something built for us all — friends and enemies alike.

While many of us were likely distracted by flashy and pumpy altcoins over the years (me too, champs), most of us have returned to the Bitcoin stable.

Fast forward to today, there are entire ecosystems of creators, activists, and developers who are wholly reliant on the magic of Bitcoin’s protocol for their life and livelihood. The options are endless. The FUD is still present, but real proof of work stands powerfully against those forces.

In addition, there are now dozens of ways to use Bitcoin privately — still without custodians or intermediaries — that make it one of the most important assets for global humanity, especially in dictatorships.

This is all toward a positive arc of innovation, freedom, and pure independence. Did I see that coming? Absolutely not.

Of course, there are probably other shots you’ve missed on Bitcoin. Price predictions (ouch), the short-term inflation hedge, or the amount of institutional investment. While all of these may be erroneous predictions in the short term, we have to realize that Bitcoin is a long arc. It will outlive all of us on the planet, and it will continue in its present form for the next generation.

Being wrong about the evolution of Bitcoin is no fault, and is indeed part of the learning curve to finally understanding it all.

When your family or friends ask you about Bitcoin after your endless sessions explaining market dynamics, nodes, how mining works, and the genius of cryptographic signatures, try to accept that there is still so much we have to learn about this decentralized digital cash.

There are still some things you’ve gotten wrong about Bitcoin, and plenty more you’ll underestimate or get wrong in the future. That’s what makes it a beautiful journey. It’s a long road, but one that remains worth it.

@ b17fccdf:b7211155

What's changed

A bonus guide to get a quick overview of the system status with the most relevant data about the services on the main guide.

---

➕Additional extra sections (optional) to:

• Show on login
• Get the channel.db size of an old LND bbolt database backend
• Use MobaXterm compatibility version

🔧 GitHub PR related: https://github.com/minibolt-guide/minibolt/pull/97

Σ Dedicated GitHub repository: https://github.com/minibolt-guide/system_overview

---

🫂Acknowledgments

This is a fork of the minibolt_info repository, the main developer of this project is rmnscb, a member of the MiniBolt community, all the merits go to him. Thank you for your contribution 🧡🫂

---

-> CLICK HERE <- to go to the bonus guide

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ fa0165a0:03397073

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

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

What is a browser plugin?

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

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

How to build a browser plugin

Step 0: Basics

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

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

Step 1: manifest.json

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

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

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

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

Step 2: hello.js

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

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

Step 3: Load and launch your plugin

Firefox

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

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

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

Chrome

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

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

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

---

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

@ 16d11430:61640947

Gather ‘round, corporate overlords, bloated bureaucracies, and self-appointed tech deities. @DamageBDD is here to show you what happens when your castles of sand face a tsunami of irrefutable logic. Your empire of spaghetti code and buzzword bingo won't hold against the relentless precision of code as truth.

Let’s set the stage. For years, you've been huddling in glass towers, touting innovation while running on fumes of mediocrity. Your agile "transformations"? A PowerPoint deck. Your tech stack? A monument to vendor lock-in and weekend duct tape. And let’s not forget the compliance theater, where fake audits masquerade as accountability. Enter DamageBDD, where logic doesn’t lie, blockchain doesn’t forget, and BS dies a swift death.

Code Is the Law (But Better) You’ve heard it before: "Code is law." But we’re not here for slogans—we’re here for receipts. DamageBDD doesn’t trust your claims of success; it verifies them on-chain. Deliver your milestones or don’t—there’s no fudging it here. Your failed builds and broken promises are exposed in broad daylight, immutable as your shame.

BDD: The Guillotine of Bad Engineering Oh, how the giants hate being held accountable. They thrive on opacity, on a system where results are obscured by layers of corporate doublespeak. DamageBDD flips the table: if it can be defined, it can be verified. That MVP you promised? We’ll test it. That sprint you boasted about? We’ll see it on-chain. In this world, the only thing that ships is the truth. Everything else is noise.

"Move Fast and Break Things"? Nah, Try Building Things That Last Let’s talk about your cult of "disruption," where moving fast and breaking things conveniently excludes fixing them. DamageBDD doesn’t move fast—it moves right. Every behavior-driven test is a brick in a foundation that lasts, unlike your latest "pivot" designed to dazzle VCs while hiding the rot underneath.

Cypherpunk Cynicism, Powered by Bitcoin Here’s where we really shine. While you’re busy worshiping at the altar of fiat, we’re running Damage Token on Bitcoin and Aeternity—systems you can’t co-opt, corrupt, or inflate away. Your centralized control schemes crumble when faced with a network that doesn’t care about your boardroom games. DamageBDD doesn’t just bypass gatekeepers; it renders them obsolete.

The Era of Verifiable Integrity You’ve built a world where accountability is optional and profits trump principles. DamageBDD brings receipts to the revolution. Imagine a world where every claim you make is tested, verified, and recorded immutably. No more hiding behind marketing fluff or burying failures in red tape. DamageBDD strips away the facade and says, "Let’s see what you’re really made of."

We’re Not Here to Compete. We’re Here to Outlast. You can’t kill an idea whose time has come. DamageBDD is more than a tool—it’s a movement, a manifesto in code. While you scramble to protect your crumbling monopolies, we’re building something that doesn’t need your approval, your funding, or your permission. DamageBDD will humble you not with arrogance, but with truth, written in lines of immutable logic that your PR spin can’t erase.

So, keep clinging to your illusions of control. DamageBDD is patient. It’s inevitable. And when the dust settles, your legacy will be nothing more than a footnote in a system designed to be better, faster, and ungovernable by the likes of you.

You’ve been warned. Verification > Authority. Always.

@ 5579d5c0:db104ded

"Chris, what do you tell your clients to do?"

This is a question I get asked regularly, and the answer is not simple.

The truth is, every person’s health journey is unique.

There are no 'one size fits all' solutions, no rigid plans that guarantee results for everyone.

That’s why, as a health coach, my role isn’t to hand out answers or impose rules. It’s to guide you toward uncovering your own.

---

Bruce Lee on being a teacher.

Your health, your truth

Bruce Lee was right, you already hold the answers to your health challenges.

Your body is constantly giving you signals about what works and what doesn’t.

My role is to help you listen to those signals to cut through the noise of diets, trends, and quick fixes.

Together we focus on what aligns with your unique biology and lifestyle.

This isn’t about creating a rigid plan or forcing you into a pre-made program. 

It’s about asking the right questions, giving you tools to explore, and helping you build the confidence to make decisions that work for you.

Health is deeply personal, and lasting change comes from understanding yourself.

---

Rigid oatmeal diet plan.

A coach who adapts to you

One of the most important aspects of my approach is meeting you where you are.

Your life, your habits, and your why are the foundation.

Together, we adapt strategies to fit your needs.

Health coaching isn’t about me telling you what to do.

It’s about empowering you to take ownership of your journey.

Sometimes that means learning to tune out the latest biohacking tool or Instagram diet trend, I'm looking at you 'Oatmeal diet for weight loss'.

Sometimes it means starting small, with manageable steps that build momentum.

Whatever it looks like, my focus is on helping you create sustainable habits that work for life, not just for the next few weeks.

---

Health information overload.

Protecting you from the noise

The world of health advice is noisy.

There’s always a new diet, a miracle supplement, or a "hack" promising results.

But more information doesn’t always mean better decisions, it often leads to overwhelm.

My role as your coach is to help you tune out the noise.

Together, we’ll focus on the basics that always work:

• Sunlight

• Circadian alignment

• Eating real nutrient dense local and seasonal food

• Moving regularly

• Targeted training

• Sleeping well

• Dealing with stress in the right way

You don’t need the latest trends, you need a clear path that’s grounded in what’s proven and tailored to you.

---

Exploring, not imposing

The beauty of health coaching is that it’s not about giving you a checklist or medical guideline telling you "do this, not that."

It’s about exploration. What makes you feel your best? What habits energise you? What changes feel sustainable?

Together, we experiment, reflect, and adjust.

This process isn’t about finding the "right" way, it’s about finding your way.

I’m here to guide, support, and challenge you, but ultimately, the answers come from within.

As a coach, I see your potential even when you don’t. My job is to help you see it too.

Health isn’t a destination, it’s a journey. And the most powerful changes happen when you take ownership of that journey.

You already hold the answers. I just help you uncover them.

- Chris

If you're ready to explore your potential, let’s talk.

Click https://calendly.com/hello-chrispatrick to book a free discovery call with me.

@ ec42c765:328c0600

てすと

nostr:nevent1qqst3uqlls4yr9vys4dza2sgjle3ly37trck7jgdmtr23uuz52usjrqqqnjgr

nostr:nevent1qqsdvchy5d27zt3z05rr3q6vvmzgslslxwu0p4dfkvxwhmvxldn9djguvagp2

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

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

@ c7e300eb:e94ebe38

How many people have you successfully orange-pilled? What's your success rate? I'm going to guess it's way worse than you wish it was. I'd like to share 3 different stories from people I've talked to about Bitcoin and the varying degrees of "success" in each of them. Maybe you can relate to one (or all) of them...\ \ Bob (Person 1)

This first person we will call Bob. Ironically, Bob was stacking sats long before I ever took an interest in Bitcoin. He's a pretty financially savvy person, loves history, and is a bit of a prepper. Bob views Bitcoin as a nice-to-have and certainly understands the NGU math that comes with a fixed supply asset and money printing; unfortunately, that's largely where his interest ends. He's not stacking anymore and doesn't seem moved to ever resume, despite his understanding of how fragile our financial system is. If/when hyper-bitcoinization happens, he's "got enough". \ \ I've been able to get him out of shitcoins entirely and he seems content hodling, which is a pretty big win in my book. At the same time, it can be disheartening to see someone sitting near the edge of the rabbit hole and parking the bus right there...\ \ Alice (Person 2)

Person 2 will be Alice. This person is much more motivated by social topics than economical ones, which always made me approach our Bitcoin conversations in a unique way. She inspired me to see through a different lens than I was normally comfortable with, which ultimately expanded my own interest in how Bitcoin, both as a money and a network, could positively impact people all over the world.

Alice, in my observation, grew to appreciate the way I saw Bitcoin. She understood the Cantillon Effect, fractional reserve lending, why censorship resistance is important, etc. Hell, she even managed to (sorta) orange-pill someone else! She was effectively as orange-pilled as one could get without actually owning sats. \ \ Through our many talks about money and personal finance, she greatly leveled up her game compared to when we first met. She now uses budgeting software, has a high-yield savings account, an investment account, and is building credit. For some reason though, she never got the desire to start stacking sats...

\ Mary (Person 3)

Mary is the least financially-literate of our 3 persons of interest. Just not wired that way at all. She's never had dedicated savings or tracked her spending. Getting her to set up direct deposit at her place of employment was a daunting task. \ \ Saving and investing have never been part of her vocabulary either. A few days ago, however, she asked if I could help her begin this process. For someone taking that first big step, I felt like stacking sats would be a bit daunting. We talked about automatically sending X% to a high-yield savings account. When we got to "investing" though, something interesting happened: she said she would rather start buying Bitcoin because "nobody can take it from me, right?" This was fascinating to me, as I had never heard a normal person express concerns about a bank actually not having their money (despite how many people I have told this to, including Alice and Bob). We agreed on the same X% into Bitcoin as into her HYS. Starting with her next paycheck, Mary will officially begin stacking sats.

If I had to make a chart of all the people in my life and rate how likely they'd be to adopt Bitcoin, Mary would be near the bottom. After so many failed attempts, I still don't quite understand how this specific case ended up being my first success in getting someone to enter the rabbit hole. We'll see how far she ends up going, but I am committed to helping her with every step.

Conclusion

So, what have I taken away from these 3 example cases? For starters, I learned that orange-pilling can take more than one form: Bob got rid of shitcoins and committed to hodling, but won't stack any more; Alice groks the problems Bitcoin will fix, but won't stack at all; Mary hardly even knows about Bitcoin, yet she understands the importance of having control over her own savings enough to take the leap. Each one of these examples has helped me refine my approach to orange-pilling, while also teaching me that it is no science. It's as much a choice and a willingness on their end as it is how you approach the conversation. You cannot force someone to take the pill or jump down the hole. Just stay humble and keep stacking sats. Cheers!

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Test Bounty Note

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Intro

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

Requirements

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

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

Installation

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

Prepare and verify

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

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

Create folders & download NWC

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

Creating the Docker image

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

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

Creating docker-compose.yml and necessary data directories

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

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

Starting and testing

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

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

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

Updating

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

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

@ 592295cf:413a0db9

Week 02-11

• Nsite zap by hzrd149 Support page

Content creator want more users. They can go to Bluesky.

Great that Nostr is a Echo Chambers. As stated by Rabble during NostRiga, Nostr is a bitcoin meetup. And it is very difficult as said several times, to subvert this fact. It seems that many bitcoiners don't like this, but they can't do anything, leave Nostr and migrate to other lids.

I'm reading Nostr adventar calendar of Japanese Nostr users.

The first two Don and Jun speak of a Mahjong game and the other of how possibly to count the followers of a given account, countfollowed. - Adventar calendar continue until Christmas 🎅

• Even Bluesky is looking at MLS , is not a soccer league, is a protocol for message by groups, "circles" Post on Bluesky

• Relays chakany is introduce sunday. link

I've never seen such dead animals as in Nostr. Something reminds me facebook. The carnivore folks

Hivemind podcast by Max, the kilometric comment on fountain under the podcast is the most appetizing thing of all. Just one comment, little one.

He interviewed Kagi's and searched for a brownie pill, perhaps caused a little headache. ( Brownie pill is orange plus purple)

---

Loss dog on Nostr this week 😔😔 Pam and Derek family dog

conspiracy theory: Fiatjaf was the reply guy!!!

I tried to download voyage, from zapstore but nothing does not work even the 17.1 does not go. Too bad.

I hear so much about notedeck that I want to make a notedeck do it yourself.

Cherry tree, stuck hzrd149 is making an app a day, Chunked blobs on blossom.

A like is used to send your writing Relays

Announcement of a possible wallet in Damus, this could make things better, zap and whatnot.

---

• Or I'm posting a song here, a musical interlude. song on wavlake

---

There seems to be a good buzz on Nostr, maybe it's already a Christmassy atmosphere.

• Backup di Bluesky cool things Bluesky post

---

On another rssfeed thing.

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq9h35qgq6n8ll0xyyv8gurjzjrx9sjwp4hry6ejnlks8cqcmzp6tqqs93j2remdw2pxnctasa9vlsaerrrsl7p5csx5wj88kk0yq977rtdqxt7glp

It's the same thing as following a cross de bridge, but if they do 3 bridge, I say something is wrong. A bot is attached to a Relay. The Relay goes down and so much greetings, then I can look for RSS feeds in my computer without need of Nostr. I can share a particular opml file on Nostr, but I don't know how to do it I asked Fiatjaf but didn't answer it was taken by dichotomie.

Nip19 really Easy to do filter query.

You have events_id pubkey Relay Instead with Nostr:note you only have the event_id.

• Sebastix says he has to implement it in his library, discover the latest weekly report. nostr-php-helper-library

---

Oh no Pablo has become super Saiyan 🤣

There is a way to make a podcast starting from a long text, blog. With artificial intelligence. But then I thought, but if one does not have time could not have the text of the article summarized, perhaps we like generating content. It can be an option, either you read or you listen. But if you do not have time perhaps it is better to just summarize, dear chatgpt summarize this text, done. Essential points and make a thread for the social network and do what you want.

• Homemade Traditional Boozy Mincemeat, I didn't even know that existed 🤙 link to shopstr

Hodlbod news on bunker burrow

nostr:nevent1qqs84na25g6mdelvl0408nnq8m29j5070dm9mvjrzxyc6yrx2udjyuczyztuwzjyxe4x2dwpgken87tna2rdlhpd02

• In case you don't see the note burrow on github

Once you have the email what do you do with your encrypted key? No Enterprise user maybe. Rember the article of Hodlbod in "Is Always a political move". ✅

List of artists on Nostr nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4xqpzqfngzhsvjggdlgeycm96x4emzjlwf8dyyzdfg4hefp89zpkdgz99qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcqp9qku6tdv96x7unng9grdr

• An article for food recipe on Nostr Article link

I don't know if they'll ever be there. You can write a recipe book. Or to put recipes on wiki, there doesn't seem to be that attention or that desire. One more relay is always better

• Olas has a website 🥊 Olas app

Oh i see cool Hodlbod bot A summary bot

nostr:nevent1qqs0v88uc2u3he3lm3mpm5h3gr8cuht5wv9g0tk0x9hzvamgvpdjwvspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgq3qjlrs53pkdfjnts29kveljul2sm0actt6n8dxrrzqcersttvcuv3qu0ltyv

That's all!!

@ 3bf0c63f:aefa459d

início

"Vocês vêem? Vêem a história? Vêem alguma coisa? Me parece que estou tentando lhes contar um sonho -- fazendo uma tentativa inútil, porque nenhum relato de sonho pode transmitir a sensação de sonho, aquela mistura de absurdo, surpresa e espanto numa excitação de revolta tentando se impôr, aquela noção de ser tomado pelo incompreensível que é da própria essência dos sonhos..."

Ele ficou em silêncio por alguns instantes.

"... Não, é impossível; é impossível transmitir a sensação viva de qualquer época determinada de nossa existência -- aquela que constitui a sua verdade, o seu significado, a sua essência sutil e contundente. É impossível. Vivemos, como sonhamos -- sozinhos..."

• Livros mencionados por Olavo de Carvalho
• Antiga homepage Olavo de Carvalho
• Bitcoin explicado de um jeito correto e inteligível
• Reclamações

---

• Nostr
• Bitcoin
• How IPFS is broken
• Programming quibbles
• Economics
• Open-source software

---

Nostr GitHub Telegram code

@ ece53feb:1edf277e

@ 378562cd:a6fc6773

In the ever-evolving cryptocurrency space, few assets have attracted as much attention—and controversy—as XRP. Marketed as a tool for revolutionizing cross-border payments, XRP has been at the center of debates about its legitimacy, legal entanglements, and centralization. In contrast, Bitcoin remains the gold standard of decentralization, embodying the original ideals of cryptocurrency as a secure, censorship-resistant, and community-driven digital asset.

The Ripple-SEC Legal Battle: A Dark Cloud Over XRP

XRP's legal troubles began in December 2020 when the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs, alleging the company had conducted an unregistered securities offering. The lawsuit hinged on whether XRP, the token Ripple uses for its cross-border payment solutions, qualifies as a security under U.S. law.

Ripple Labs and its executives, including CEO Brad Garlinghouse, argued that XRP should not be classified as a security. They claimed it was a digital currency akin to Bitcoin or Ethereum, which the SEC had already deemed non-securities. Despite Ripple scoring partial victories in court—such as a judge's ruling that XRP sales to retail investors did not constitute securities transactions—the company was ordered to pay a $125 million fine. While Ripple touted the outcome as a victory, the SEC’s ongoing appeal means uncertainty lingers over XRP's regulatory future.

These legal uncertainties have had significant implications for XRP’s adoption. After the lawsuit, major U.S. exchanges delisted XRP, temporarily causing its price to plummet. Although some platforms have since reintroduced XRP trading, its reputation remains tarnished in some circles.

Centralization Concerns: Is XRP Truly a Cryptocurrency?

A key critique of XRP lies in its centralized structure. Unlike Bitcoin’s decentralized proof-of-work (PoW) system, which relies on a distributed network of miners to validate transactions, XRP operates on a consensus protocol managed by a limited number of validators. This has led to accusations that Ripple Labs wields too much control over the network, undermining the core principle of decentralization that defines cryptocurrencies.

Adding to these concerns is Ripple Labs’ significant ownership of XRP tokens. Ripple initially held 80 billion of the 100 billion XRP tokens ever created, and as of 2024, it still holds a substantial portion in escrow. Critics argue that this concentration of ownership allows Ripple to manipulate XRP’s price and limits the asset’s independence.

Bitcoin: The Decentralized Gold Standard

In stark contrast to XRP, Bitcoin remains the archetype of decentralization. Introduced in 2009 by the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin operates on a PoW system that ensures no single entity can control the network. Its open-source code, coupled with a vast network of miners and nodes distributed globally, makes Bitcoin nearly immune to censorship and manipulation.

Bitcoin's decentralized nature is a cornerstone of its value. Unlike XRP, which is closely tied to Ripple Labs and its business interests, Bitcoin is not controlled by any organization or individual. This decentralization ensures transparency, security, and trust among its users, reinforcing its status as a digital alternative to gold.

Moreover, Bitcoin’s capped supply of 21 million coins enhances its appeal as a store of value. In a world where inflation and monetary policy can erode the value of fiat currencies, Bitcoin’s scarcity offers a hedge against economic uncertainty.

Adoption and Market Perception: Bitcoin vs. XRP

Despite its controversies, XRP has gained traction among financial institutions for its speed and low transaction costs in cross-border payments. Ripple’s partnerships with major banks and remittance providers have bolstered its utility, even as skepticism around its centralization persists.

Bitcoin, on the other hand, has achieved mainstream acceptance as both an investment asset and a medium of exchange. From institutional investors adding Bitcoin to their balance sheets to countries like El Salvador adopting it as legal tender, Bitcoin's adoption is steadily growing. Its resilience in the face of regulatory scrutiny and market volatility further cements its position as the most trusted cryptocurrency.

What XRP's Journey Teaches Us About Cryptocurrency Values

The contrasting narratives of XRP and Bitcoin highlight a fundamental tension in the cryptocurrency world: the trade-off between utility and decentralization. While XRP offers practical solutions for specific use cases, its centralized nature and reliance on Ripple Labs compromise its alignment with the ideals of cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin, by comparison, stays true to the vision of a decentralized financial system free from intermediaries. Its robust network, transparency, and immutability make it not just a cryptocurrency but a symbol of financial freedom.

Conclusion: Bitcoin’s Enduring Legacy

As the legal and market drama around XRP continues to unfold, one thing remains clear: decentralization is at the heart of what makes cryptocurrencies revolutionary. Bitcoin exemplifies this ideal, serving as a reliable store of value and a hedge against centralized control. While XRP may have its place in specific financial ecosystems, it cannot claim to uphold the principles that Bitcoin has come to represent.

For investors and enthusiasts alike, understanding these differences is crucial. In a rapidly evolving market, Bitcoin’s true value lies not just in its price but in its unwavering commitment to decentralization—a principle that defines the future of financial freedom.

@ d2e97f73:ea9a4d1b

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 82341f88:fbfbe6a2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ 6bae33c8:607272e8

I was rooting for the Eagles in the NFC because I want Saquon Barkley to win Super Bowl MVP, and on the first play from scrimmage he took a 60-yard run to the house. Unfortunately he got banged up on the play and was used sparingly for the rest of the game, but no matter. Another 118 yards and three TDs later, he’s got his chance in the Super Bowl. 

The Killer Redskins are pretty good — they don’t stop coming at you, and Jayden Daniels should be a star for the next decade. But three lost fumbles destroyed any hopes they had. Fumbles and penalties are the worst part of the NFL — like getting Sorry’ed in the game of Sorry, they reverse whatever is happening on the field seismically. 

• The KRs are close. They could use an offensive line upgrade, maybe one more pass rusher and another explosive skill player, but with Daniels around, they’ll be contenders again. 

• Terry McLaurin didn’t have a big role, but he showed how fast and explosive he is on the 36-yard TD catch and run. He’s also big (210 lbs) for a speed receiver, but turns 30 in September. 

• Jalen Hurts made some nice downfield throws to A.J. Brown which is a good sign. If the Eagles are going to beat the Chiefs, they’ll need to make some plays in the passing game. 

• Jake Elliott missed a long FG and has been shaky all year. People don’t care about kickers, but I wouldn’t want to trust him with the game on the line. 

• In both games there were penalties on a TD that resulted in teams opting for the 1-yard 2-point conversion, and both failed. The Bills even took a successful PAT off the board. 

• I know there was controversy on the Chiefs’ fourth quarter. 4th-down stop, down 1 (and also the spot on the preceding 3rd-down play that made it 4th down.) But the Chiefs still had to drive for the touchdown and subsequent FG after the Bills tied it, stop them on defense one more time and then convert that last third down to seal it. In other words, it looked like two bad spots, but even if that was “cheating,” the game was won on the field. The Chiefs also lost a fumble on a botched snap, and the Bills recovered all of theirs. 

• Kareem Hunt is such a tough runner, he’s basically a healthy Isiah Pacheco at this point. Pacheco himself doesn’t look 100 percent. 

• Travis Kelce had a surprisingly minor role, but Xavier Worthy had a good game, and Patrick Mahomes spread the ball around. It was almost as if they had played it vanilla on purpose in earlier weeks and broke out a more aggressive passing game when they needed it. 

• Mahomes will now have appeared in five of the last six Super Bowls, with only Joe Burrow and the Bengals interrupting his streak. If he wins a fourth this year, he’ll have a chance to do the unthinkable which is to catch Tom Brady’s seven. Three more is still a lot though, and that’s only IF he wins against the Eagles. 

• Josh Allen played well on the road against one of the league’s best defenses. The Bills offense wasn’t as efficient as Buffalo’s, though, and they’re really missing a go-to playmaking receiver. Amari Cooper never seemed to integrate fully into the offense. 

• The AFC is loaded with QB talent that will never see a Super Bowl so long as Andy Reid and Mahomes are in the league. Allen, Lamar Jackson, Justin Herbert, Burrow (again) or maybe C.J. Stroud will break through one of these years, but it’s likely at least two of them won’t. 

@ 7ecd3fe6:6b52f30d

I went to bed last night at 96k, thinking we'd have another day of sideways consolidation, maybe if we're lucky a bump on the head at 99k before the 100k dumpers come in to "take profits"

But little did I know what was waiting for me when I opened up my crusty eyes, I checked the chart as one days after their morning wee and nearly wet the entire bathroom, 102k, must be a mistake, let's check Coingecko, let's check the local exchanges, let's check social media, and it was confirmed like 6 blocks in baby, there's no going back!

Ladies and gentlemen, grab your laser-eye NFTs and dust off those 2017 memes - we've finally arrived! Bitcoin has transcended the mythical $100,000 price point that HODLers have been hallucinating about since the Obama administration.

We have succesfully meme'd the dream into a reality, can anything stop us now? The Banana zone hath arrived

---

---

Why the big break?

Is it unrest in France with the government collapsing, is it South Korean uncertainty with their president declaring Martial law, is it Putin coming out to admit you can't ban Bitcoin?

Is it countries trying to find a hedge against Trumps' proposed tariffs?

Who knows?

To me it's just another day of sellers exhausted and buyers are eating through the order book like hungry-hungry hippos

Bottom of the bear to getting some serious air time

If you've been here for one full cycle, and stayed the course it's been a wild ride, we saw Terra Luna, FTX, Celsius, BlockFi blow up and a massive draining of liquidity from the market.

The dream was dead and we hit rock bottom in November 2022, at 15k, to those who nailed that absolute bottom, I salute you.

Anyhoo, it's been a slow grind upwards, the crab market of choppy consolidation normally is, but you psychos continued to hold steady and deploy capital even when number continue to go down!

The meme, the dream and now the cream

The bitcoin maximalists who've been sporting perpetual laser-eye Twitter and nostr profiles can now collectively exhale.

Those same folks who've been predicting "$100K by EOY" every single year since 2017 can now do a victory lap, wearing their tinfoil-lined Gucci tracksuits.

You were wrong many times, only to be proven right eventually!

Remember when explaining Bitcoin's potential value used to involve complex blockchain narratives and decentralization lectures?

Call up the cry babies

When Bitcoin looked down and out there were no shortage of doom and gloomers writing another failed obituary, Dan Pena, Charlie Munger, Warren Buffer, Peter Schiff and Peter Zeihan all had to yap and we listened and laughed

Let's hear what mama has to say on the subject of Bitcoin?

Keep dreaming. Bitcoin is never going to hit $100,000!

— Peter Schiff (@PeterSchiff) November 8, 2019

Now it's just: "Told ya so" - accompanied by shitcoiners and nocoiners are angry coz of dey enlarged medulla oblongata

---

Times like this, I often think of the wise and eloquent words of MSTR Gigachad Saylor

Put money into Bitcoin and wait for number to go up biggly, if number go down put more money in and wait for number to go up bigglier - Michael Saylor

---

Setting up base camp for the march up Mount Milli-manjaro

The journey to $1 million feels eerily similar. We'll witness another brain-melting crypto pilgrimage - let's call it Mount Milli-manjaro - where every Reddit thread and Twitter space will sound like a combination of economic prophecy and sci-fi fever dream.

Pro tip for newcomers: Pack extra copium, a sense of humor, and maybe some popcorn.

This ride is just getting started.

To the moon? 🚀🤡₿ Looks likely bar a massive black swan, 2025, looks like this thing is going to run with big Usain Bolt strides as we enjoy a year of price discovery, speculation and all the scams that will fester as retail comes piling in to make their overnight fortunes.

I know it's fun to hand out I told you so's and you should enjoy it, take the victory lap but even that gets old, while it's hard to do, try to stay humble and enjoy stack the perpetual top!

@ e83b66a8:b0526c2b

When we had the Gold standard, gold only backed assets.

Now we are approaching the Bitcoin Standard, what will happen if Bitcoin is used to back debt?

$MSTR is the Alpha release

Trumps USA will be the Beta release.

If it works, the world has $315T of debt. That will be the full release V1.0

In comparison, the world has $454T of assets.

Can it be done?

What happens when you back a negative debt with a positive asset?

Has it ever been tried?

Is it possible?

The problem with the debt is it isn't "owed" to anyone.

If I lend you $10 you owe me $10.

To explain further:

If you lend me $10 worth of gold, then I can pay you back $10 of money if it's backed with gold - the gold standard.

If you lend me $10 worth of gold, and I pay you back with unbacked fiat, the repayment is arbitrary.

Like for like you can back any backed money with any asset.

Without a backed money, you can only repay an asset with an asset, otherwise paying with fiat, the global books don't balance.

In the current fiat world, if the US government print $10 and sells it to the market for $10 + interest, their is no creditor. You are simply diluting all other dollars.

When they have to pay back the debt to the “creditor”, they can't return the original $10 because that's been spent and they haven't generated any wealth (they are a government, not a company), so everything they return (the original lent $10 + interest) is printed again.

This is monetary recursion and destroys all fiat systems eventually.

So what happens when you insert a hard asset into the equation? Do you destroy or weaken that asset, you certainly don't strengthen it.

Does this turn Bitcoin into an inflationary currency despite its inherent deflationary properties.

After all, the U.S. had to come off the gold standard, because they didn't have enough gold to pay back.

I think best case scenario is Bitcoin repeats what happened to gold. It weakens Bitcoin until it makes it flacid, at which time the government will be forced to leave the Bitcoin Standard and Bitcoin will be a shadow of its potential.

Why?

Currency can be created and destroyed.

Money (the measure of wealth) is absolute.

I think this is the fundamental flaw, we believe money can be created and destroyed simply because we are used to printing or burning government fiat and have copied that model for Crypto currencies like Ethereum or Tether, which are mined or burned.

So money (invent better word) cannot be printed or destroyed, it is a measure of wealth and if you increase or decrease the supply you change the unit measurement, not the money.

So what are the potential end point valuations of Bitcoin?

Can Bitcoin approach a $21M coin valuation? i.e. 21M Coins at $21M?

If Bitcoin only backs assets, then it can't exceed, or even approach the total value of world wealth, currently $454T

At $21M for 21M coins, this approaches world wealth.

If Bitcoin is used to back debt, then you can add a further $315T of value, so if we assume $100T (about 1/4) of asset value + $300T of debt value, then we approach $21M per coin.

Another potential way of projecting the eventual stable price of Bitcoin:

If world wealth is currently around $454T

And world debt is currently around $315T

then can we consider it like a company and consider the profit to be $454T - $315T = $139T

Would that be a good expectation for final Bitcoin price?

i.e. $139T / 21M = $6.6M per BTC

However, I'm not certain Bitcoin can survive being used to back debt.

Gold never did that.