@ b17fccdf:b7211155

Next new resources about the MiniBolt guide have been released:

---

• 🆕 Roadmap: LINK
• 🆕 Dynamic Network map: LINK
• 🆕 Nostr community: LINK < ~ REMOVE the "[]" symbols from the URL (naddr...) to access
• 🆕 Linktr FOSS (UC) by Gzuuus: LINK
• 🆕 Donate webpage: 🚾 Clearnet LINK || 🧅 Onion LINK
• 🆕 Contact email: hello@minibolt.info

---

Enjoy it MiniBolter! 💙

@ 2fb77d26:c47a6ee1

In H. G. Wells’ Roman Die Zeitmaschine und den diversen Verfilmungen werden sie als »ausschweifend, langsam und naiv« dargestellt. Von »untermenschlicher Intelligenz« gezeichnet. Für Dan Simmons sind sie »faul, ungebildet und unkultiviert«. Die Eloi. Die als Nahrungsquelle der Morlocks gehaltenen Nachfahren des Homo sapiens. »Sie entwickeln sich rückläufig und verlernen Jahrtausende von Kultur, Denken und Vernunft, bis sie sich mit dem Vergnügen des bloßen Daseins zufrieden geben«. Ertönt das Schlüsselsignal, auf das sie von ihren Züchtern konditioniert wurden – eine umgebaute Zivilschutzsirene – trotten sie freiwillig und in hypnotischer Apathie zur Schlachtbank.

Ein ähnlichen Eindruck hatten viele Maßnahmenkritiker von den Unterstützern der mittlerweile in allen Punkten widerlegten Covid-Propaganda. Zurecht. Das Gefolge von Drosten, Lauterbach und Co. war blind für Fakten und ist ins offene Messer gelaufen. Bedauerlicherweise verhalten sich viele Maßnahmenkritiker aber nun in weiten Teilen genauso. Sie haben Idole gefunden. Wollen glauben. Sie ignorieren Informationen, Fakten und Daten und werden Opfer einer neu justierten, gut geölten Propagandamaschine. Nur, um die in ihre neuen Helden gesetzten Hoffnungen nicht aufgeben und der wenig erbaulichen Realität nicht ins Auge blicken zu müssen.

Sie glauben an Donald Trump, Javier Milei, Alice Weidel, Peter Thiel und vor allem Elon Musk. Daran, dass der supranationale Nachhaltigkeitskorporatismus am Ende sei, das Finanzsystem gerettet und Gerechtigkeit hergestellt wird. Die Widerständler von gestern sind die »Schlafschafe« von heute. Sie scheinen vergessen zu haben, wie Propaganda funktioniert. Aus diesem Grund – und weil es ein so schön griffiges Wort ist, bei dem man nur einen Buchstaben verändern muss, um daraus den Vornamen eines vermeintlichen Heilsbringers zu basteln – erlaube ich mir, die Anhänger des MAGA-Kults im Zuge der folgenden Seiten mokant als Eloi zu bezeichnen. Ein bisschen Spaß muss sein.

Kurskorrektur mit Ansage

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, in der finanzoligarchischen Hackordnung mindestens eine Ebene über BlackRock und Co. anzusiedeln, kündigte den aktuellen Narrativwechsel bereits am 30. August 2023 an, als sie bei Bloomberg sagte, der Begriff »ESG gehöre in die Tonne«. Er sei verbrannt. Auch BlackRock-CEO Larry Fink, der Marktteilnehmer zur Unterstützung von ESG »zwingen« wollte, teilte seinen Investoren bereits am 26. März 2023 mit, das in Verruf gekommene Label ESG durch den Begriff »Energiepragmatismus« zu ersetzen.

Sowohl Rothschild als auch Fink räumten aber gleichzeitig ein, dass sich die übergeordnete Agenda nicht ändern und man die »Green Economy« weiter vorantreiben werde, man diese aber besser vermarkten müsse, um konservative Kreise nicht weiter gegen sich aufzubringen. Ein simpler Marketing-Trick. Wenig überraschend also, dass sowohl BlackRock als auch sechs amerikanische Großbanken Anfang 2025 die Net Zero Initiative verließen. Zum »perfekten Zeitpunkt«, wie die New York Post bemerkt, um nicht von der negativen, anti-woken Berichterstattung rund um die verheerenden Feuersbrünste in Los Angeles tangiert zu werden.

Es scheint, als hätten die Eloi bereits wieder verdrängt, dass die WEF-Meetings 2021 und 2024 unter Arbeitstiteln wie »The Great Narrative« und »Rebuilding Trust« liefen. Artikuliertes Ziel der Davoser PR-Abteilung für Globalisierungsfragen war nämlich, sich den zunehmend echauffierten, misstrauischen Pöbel vom Hals zu halten. Durch neue Narrative und vertrauensbildende Maßnahmen. Und das hat, zumindest vorerst, ausgezeichnet funktioniert.

In den USA stieg das Vertrauen in ordnungsgemäß durchgeführte Präsidentschaftswahlen 2024 zum ersten Mal seit Jahren wieder etwas an. In Europa macht sich ebenfalls Zuversicht breit. Schließlich haben die sogenannten »Rechtspopulisten« nicht mehr nur in Italien und Ungarn, sondern auch in Finnland, der Slowakei und den Niederlanden Oberwasser. Von den Erfolgen der AFD ganz zu schweigen. Diese führen, wie zuletzt in Thüringen, trotz klarem Wählervotum zwar nicht zur Regierungsbeteiligung, weil »demokratische Prozesse« und »Brandmauern« das zu verhindern wissen – aber dabei sein ist ja bekanntlich alles. Dass Friedenstreiberin Alice Weidel den bundesdeutschen Rüstungsetat auf knapp 200 Milliarden verdoppeln will, scheint die euphorisierten Kritiker dunkelgrüner Militarisierung auch nicht auszubremsen. Hauptsache nicht grün. Oder woke.

Überstaatliche Sphären

Dabei scheint Euphorie in Anbetracht der Tatsachen alles andere als angebracht. So hat Milei nach Angaben von Global Finance zwar das argentinische »Staatsdefizit nach 123 Jahren beendet«, dafür leben heute 53 Prozent der 45 Millionen Argentinier in Armut. Der höchste Wert seit 20 Jahren. Ende 2023 waren es noch 41,7 Prozent. Daran ändert auch semantische Schützenhilfe von libertären Denkfabriken wie der Hoover Institution nichts. Die radikalen Privatisierungsfeldzüge von »El Loco« haben einen hohen Preis. Ob Aerolineas Argentinas, die staatliche Fluglinie, der Stahlproduzent IMPSA oder das Transportunternehmen Trenes Argentinos Cargas, das 7.800 Kilometer Bahnstrecke betreibt – das Volksvermögen wird an die Meistbietenden verscherbelt. Wer das ist, kann sich wohl jeder ausmalen. Denn sein Schlachtruf »Afuera!« (Raus hier!) gilt augenscheinlich nicht für BlackRock und Co. – schließlich sei Argentinien »ziemlich billig« zu haben, wie es Rick Rieder, Top-Bond-Manager des Unternehmens schon 2019 formulierte.

Man muss allerdings nicht in die Ferne schweifen, um sich der realen Gefahren für die Freiheit bewusst zu werden. Jener Gefahren, die von Personalien gänzlich unberührt bleiben. So arbeitet die Europäische Union weiter an der eID, der Grundlage des technokratisch-totalitären Kontroll-Grids. Ihre Einführung ist beschlossene Sache. Offen ist lediglich, ab wann sie zum Obligatorium wird. Auch das persönliche CO2-Budget ist auf Kurs. Mit ETS2 (EU Emissions Trading System) nimmt die EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) seit dem 1. Januar 2025 nach der Konzernwirtschaft nun kleine und mittlere Unternehmen in den Fokus und verpflichtet diese, CO2-Kompensationsabgaben auf ihren Gas-, Benzin- und Mineralölverbrauch zu entrichten. Das dürfte Heiz-, Fracht- und folglich die Lebenshaltungskosten des Bürgers in neue Höhen treiben. Bis der Sonntagsausflug mit dem Familienauto nicht mehr nur Zeit, Benzin und Nerven, sondern auch CO2-Gebühren kostet, dauert es also wohl nicht mehr allzu lange.

Dieser überparteilichen, supranational koordinierten Überwachungs- und Enteignungsagenda ist weder durch die Wahl des geringeren Übels noch durch Auswandern zu entkommen. Denn wie sich der Internetpräsenz des »Global Governance Forum« (GGF) entnehmen lässt, wird bereits eifrig an »Global Government« gearbeitet. Die UN-nahe Nichtregierungsorganisation hat sich nämlich zum Ziel gesetzt, die Charta der Vereinten Nationen bis 2028 zu aktualisieren und den allseits bekannten »Herausforderungen unserer Zeit« anzupassen. Pünktlich ab 2030 soll das neue Vertragswerk ratifiziert werden und neben neuen Befugnissen für den Internationalen Gerichtshof sowie einer UN-Streitmacht auch eine Regierungsstruktur analog der Europäischen Union ermöglichen. Sprich, eine Weltregierung. Ganz demokratisch selbstverständlich.  

Neben eID und CO2-Budget sind natürlich auch die Ausweispflicht fürs Internet und die automatisierte Zensur unliebsamer Inhalte weiter auf Kurs. Nachdem die Vereinten Nationen im September 2024 bereits dem totalitären »Pakt für die Zukunft« zustimmten, wurde am Heiligabend 2024 noch rasch die neue »Konvention gegen Onlineverbrechen« durchgewunken. Und seit Januar 2025 treibt die UN die Umsetzung eines noch weitreichenderen Abkommens namens »Global Digital Compact« voran. Ein Papier, vor dem ich bereits im Juli 2023 gewarnt habe. Was all das für den Bürger bedeutet, zeigt sich in Griechenland, wo die Regierung seit Anfang des Jahres Social-Media-Konten mit Steuer-Identifikationsnummern verknüpft, um eine Alterskontrolle fürs Internet einzuführen. Damit folgt die von der EU in Kreditsklaverei gehaltene Regierung in Athen dem Vorbild Australiens, wo der Zugang so Social-Media-Plattformen künftig erst ab einem Alter von 16 Jahren erlaubt werden soll – wofür man schlussendlich jeden Nutzer kontrollieren muss, der online geht.

Auch das von vielen noch immer als Mythos abgetane Geoengineering wird derweil munter weitergeführt. Obwohl Berichte des US-Kongress und mittlerweile sogar wissenschaftliche Berater der EU-Kommission vor großflächigem Solar Radiation Management warnen. Im Rahmen eines offiziellen, 54 Seiten umfassenden Reports an die EU-Kommission sowie eines Artikels des britischen Guardian vom 9. Dezember 2024 verwies das siebenköpfige Forscherteam auf die unabschätzbaren Konsequenzen solcher Eingriffe und forderte ein EU-weites Moratorium.

Wie genau Trump, Musk, Milei, Meloni, Weidel und Co. die Welt vor diesem Sammelsurium an totalitären Übergriffigkeiten retten wollen, konnte mir bislang keiner der Eloi sagen.

DJ Trump

Warum die in Donald Trump, den »Vater der Impfung«, und sein zionistisches Kriegstreiberkabinett gesetzten Hoffnungen bald bitterer Enttäuschung weichen dürften, habe ich bereits am 14. November 2024 ausführlich beschrieben. Dass auch die beiden Hauptargumente seiner Befürworter – dass er die mRNA-Kampagne mittlerweile bereue und in seiner ersten Amtsperiode Friedenspolitik betrieben habe – schlichtweg falsch sind, ebenfalls. Denn anhand der nackten Zahlen lässt sich eindeutig belegen, dass Trump »der kriegslüsternste Präsident der jüngeren Geschichte« war. Und wie stolz er auf »Operation Warp Speed« ist, die unzählige Amerikaner Gesundheit oder Leben kostete, ließ er die Welt zuletzt am 17. November 2024 auf seinem Social-Media-Netzwerk Truth Social wissen.

Trumps Interesse gilt nicht Frieden und Freiheit, sondern Donald Trump. So war es sein ganzes Leben lang. Wenn sich »The Donald« jemandem verpflichtet fühlt, ist es vielleicht Wilbur Ross, der ehemalige Chef von Rothschild Inc. Bankruptcy Advising. Denn wie das Forbes Magazine am 8. Dezember 2016 korrekt erläuterte, rette das Bankhaus vor gut 30 Jahren nicht nur Trumps bankrotte Casinos, sondern damit auch seine ganze Karriere. Nicht weil man in Trumps Geschäften und Immobilien einen besonderen Wert sah, sondern weil man die Person Donald Trump als »Anlage« betrachtete. Trotzdem ist es sicher nur Zufall, dass Ross von 2017 bis 2021 Handelsminister der Vereinigten Staaten war.

Elon Musk

Auch über den PayPal-Mafioso, CIA-Handlanger und Bilderberg-Executive Peter Thiel, dessen Protegé JD Vance nun US-Vizepräsident ist, habe ich bereits im September 2024 einen ausführlichen Artikel geschrieben. Gleiches gilt für Elon Musk, dessen trügerisches Image als Genius, Erfinder und Entrepreneur ich sogar schon im Oktober 2022 durchleuchtet habe. Zitat:

»Dass Elon Musk nicht rein zufällig zur liberal-coolen Ikone avancierte, legt ein Blick in seine Anfangsjahre als Unternehmer nahe. Denn während im sagenumwobenen Silicon Valley Ende der 1990er-Jahre eine Vielzahl an erfolgreicheren Tech-Entrepreneuren existierte, war es ausgerechnet Elon Musk, der für einen absolut inhaltsleeren Gastauftritt bei CNN gefilmt wurde, sodass zum ersten Mal eine breitere Öffentlichkeit von ihm Notiz nehmen musste. Dabei war sein erstes Unternehmen – Zip2 –, das er im Jahre 1995 mit seinem Bruder sowie einem weiteren Partner gegründet und im Februar 1999 für circa 300 Millionen US-Dollar an Compaq veräußert hatte, nicht das revolutionärste Unterfangen im kalifornischen IT-Mekka dieser Tage. Es handelte sich um ein simples Telefonbuch fürs Internet. Wenig mehr als eine Datenbank, in die sich Unternehmen eintragen konnten, um ihre Adresse im Netz zu hinterlegen.«

Meine fast zweieinhalb Jahre alte Analyse bedarf allerdings dringend einer Aktualisierung. Denn was Musk in der Zwischenzeit trieb – und für die Zukunft plant – hat so gar nichts mit dem zu tun, was seine geradezu fanatisierten Anhänger in ihm sehen wollen.

Fangen wir der Vollständigkeit halber aber noch mal vorne an: Elon Musk hat weder PayPal gegründet noch den Tesla erfunden. Auch wenn er das gerne so darstellt. Dafür fertigte Tesla unter seiner Ägide dann aber »RNA Mikrofabriken« für das deutsche Unternehmen CureVac, das zusammen mit Bayer mRNA-Injektionen gegen Corona auf den Markt brachte. Und während Musk gegenüber der New York Post am 30. September 2020 sagte, sich nicht gegen Covid impfen lassen zu wollen, erklärte er dem TIME Magazine am 13. Dezember 2021, bereits geimpft zu sein. Zeitgeistig flexibel ist er also. Wer behauptet, Musk hätte seine Meinung zur mRNA-Technologie seit dem Covid-Fiasko signifikant geändert und sehe das Produkt nun kritisch, ist schlecht informiert. Noch am 12. April 2023 erklärte er bei Twitter, dass er mRNA für eine »medizinische Revolution« hält. Vergleichbar mit dem Schritt »von analog zu digital«.

Was Musk mit digitaler Revolution meint, zeigte sich 2017 mit Hurricane Irma. Damals gab das Unternehmen für Besitzer von Fahrzeugen mit 75 kWh ein Softwareupdate heraus, das die Reichweite von 338 auf 400 Kilometer steigerte – was im Umkehrschluss bedeutet, dass Tesla-Besitzer um eine eigentlich abrufbare Leistung ihres eigenen Fahrzeugs betrogen werden, wenn gerade keine Naturkatastrophe wütet. Dass Tesla-Kunden darüber hinaus permanent überwacht werden, zeigte sich unlängst im Rahmen der Explosion eines Cybertrucks in Las Vegas. Augenbewegungen, Mimik, Geschlecht, Hautfarbe, Körpertemperatur, Gepäckanordnung, Route, Ladestopps, Bezahlvorgänge, Telefonbuch, Musik-Playlist, Online-Abos, et cetera. Was von Sensoren und Verbindungen zu erfassen ist, wird erfasst, wie eine Untersuchung von Mozilla im Herbst 2023 feststellte. Das gilt im Übrigen nicht nur für Tesla, sondern für praktisch alle modernen Autos. Ein Tesla hat es dabei nur am leichtesten. Die gesammelten Daten werden entweder zum Schleuderpreis verkauft und/oder gegen uns verwendet.

Doch zurück zu Musk, der Twitter nicht übernahm, um Meinungsfreiheit herzustellen, sondern um die Plattform zur »Alles-App« zu machen. Sein erklärtes Vorbild: die chinesische Spionage-App WeChat. Deswegen will er alle Nutzer »als echte Menschen identifizieren«. Biometrisch versteht sich. Dafür arbeitet man bei Twitter bevorzugt mit israelischen Unternehmen zusammen, die von ehemaligen Mossad-Agenten gegründet wurden. Vielleicht stellte ja Doppelagent Jeffrey Epstein den Kontakt zum Mossad her, nachdem er Musk als regelmäßigen Teilnehmer seiner Edge-Foundation Seminare zum Thema Nudging schätzen gelernt hatte. Epstein war nämlich der einzige nennenswerte Sponsor von Edge.

Twitter kaufte Musk übrigens nicht von seinem eigenen Geld, sondern mit Hilfe von 94 Investoren, deren Namen ein US-Bundesrichter erst im August 2024 veröffentlichte, weil Jacob Silverman (Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) sie einklagte. Die Liste umfasst so illustre Namen wie Fidelity Investments, Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, Bandera Fund, Binance Capital Management, Sean Combs (alias Diddy) Capital, Jack Dorsey (Twitter Gründer), Baron Opportunity Fund oder Prinz Alwaleed bin Talal al Saud von der saudischen Königsfamilie. Da wird also offenbar »der Sumpf« mit mehr Sumpf »trockengelegt«. Von der Nominierung des WEF Executive Chair Linda Yaccarino als neuer Twitter-CEO und »Freedom of Speech« versus »Freedom of Reach« mal ganz abgesehen.

Auch die von den Eloi als sensationelle Enthüllung gefeierten Twitter Files sind leider nicht ernst zu nehmen. Denn sie offenbarten nichts, was man nicht schon wusste. Zudem ist bis heute unklar, woher die veröffentlichten Informationen kamen, wer den Zugriff darauf gesteuert hat, was dort noch gespeichert war, warum praktisch nur ein von Elon ausgewählter Journalist Zugriff darauf hatte und dieser nur Screenshots, anstelle ganzer Dokumente veröffentlichen durfte. Ein echter Leak besteht aus einem Archiv, das man selbst durchsuchen kann – nicht aus ein paar handverlesenen Screenshots.

Fehlt noch Space X. Ein Unternehmen, das Musk zwar selbst gegründet hat, dessen Erfolge aber in weiten Teilen anderen Umständen zu verdanken sind. So schreibt beispielsweise inside Tesla am 22. März 2022: 

»Schon Anfang der 2000er-Jahre hatte die NASA erkannt, dass ihr bald die Möglichkeit fehlen würde, selbst Astronauten und Material ins All und zur ISS zu bringen. Man machte sich also auf die Suche nach Partnern aus der Privatwirtschaft und wurde unter anderem bei Elon Musks Space X fündig. Bereits 2006, also noch in der Entwicklungsphase der Falcon 1, erhielt Musks Unternehmen fast 400 Millionen US-Dollar Startfinanzierung unter dem COTS-Programm.«

Space X war von Beginn an als verlängerte Werkbank der NASA gedacht, weil der US-Weltraumbehörde immer mehr Mittel gestrichen wurden. Die Öffentlichkeit hatte nämlich das Interesse an ziviler Raumfahrt verloren. Daher setzte man in Washington immer öfter den Rotstift an. Doch seit Musk die Menschen öffentlichkeitswirksam zum Mars befördern will – »let’s build Marsian Technocracy« – steigt das Interesse wieder. Leider muss ich die Vorfreude auf eine planetare Kolonie aber etwas dämpfen. Denn Space X wird nicht betrieben, um Menschen auf den Mars zu bringen, sondern um das »weltgrösste Netzwerk an Spionagesatelliten aufzubauen«.

Musks Weltraumagentur ist Handlanger des militärisch-industriellen Komplexes und einer der wichtigsten Vertragspartner des Pentagon. Das konnte man 2017 schon im Observer nachlesen. Oder am 9. Januar 2018 bei CNBC, die vom (missglückten) Transport eines streng geheimen US-Spionagesatelliten berichtete. Am 15. April 2022 kommentierte Tech Unwrapped zwei weitere Spionagesatelliten des US-Militärs, die Space X in die Umlaufbahn beförderte. Seit Jahren erhält das Unternehmen Milliarden von US-Regierung und Geheimdiensten. Siehe Los Angeles Times vom 30. Mai 2015: 4,9 Milliarden. Oder ein Artikel des Wall Street Journal vom 23. Februar 2024: 1,8 Milliarden. Oder eine lange Liste von staatlichen Zuwendungen, die Business Insider am 15. Dezember 2021 veröffentlichte. Damit basiert der Erfolg von Space X nicht primär auf Musks genialem Unternehmergeist, sondern auf Subventionen. Auf Steuergeldern.

Nicht zu vergessen: Starlink. Das von Space X betriebene, weltumspannende Satellitennetzwerk. Es mag den Vorteil haben, dass damit auch Menschen in entlegenen Regionen des Planeten oder Katastrophengebieten Zugriff auf das Internet haben. Dabei sollte allerdings nicht unterschlagen werden, dass Starlink in seiner finalen Ausbaustufe circa 42.000 Satelliten umfassen und damit ein permanentes Strahlungsfeld erzeugen wird. Gesundheitliche Risiken für den Homo sapiens: unklar. Darüber hinaus haben die Orbiter Zugriff auf das NORAD-Datenbanksystem, um Weltraumschrott ausweichen zu können. Sprich, sie sind permanent mit Systemen des US-Militär verbunden. Aus diesem Grund ermöglicht Starlink auch die Steuerung von Kampfdrohnen – siehe Ukraine-Konflikt – sowie 30 mal schnelleres Senden von Daten an und von US-Kampfflugzeugen. Während die Öffentlichkeit Musks Satellitennetzwerk vor allem als ziviles Produkt betrachtet, ist Starlink primär von militärischem Interesse. Nicht umsonst wird parallel Starshield aufgebaut, das dem geheimdienstlich-militärischen Komplex unter anderem die diskrete Echtzeitüberwachung der ganzen Welt erlaubt. Auch von DEW-Fähigkeiten (Directed Energy Weapon) ist die Rede. Ende 2024 befanden sich bereits 98 solcher Satelliten in erdnaher Umlaufbahn.

In Anbetracht dieser Informationen ist es also kaum verwunderlich, dass Musk seit Jahren offen für Technokratie wirbt. Für ein zentralistisches, faschistoides Herrschaftsmodell, das schon sein Großvater Joshua Haldemann als führender Kopf in den USA und Kanada vertrat. Der Familientradition folgend empfiehlt Musk eine CO2-Steuer zum Kampf gegen den Klimawandel, ein universelles Grundeinkommen, um die von der KI ausgelösten Disruptionen abzufangen und sein Neuralink Gehirnimplantat, um dem drohenden Transhumanismus etwas Transhumanismus entgegenzusetzen.

Futurum Technologicus

Für Kunden, denen Chips im Kopf irgendwie zu altbacken sind, entwickelt Musks Unternehmen in Zusammenarbeit mit iota Biosciences natürlich ein zeitgemäßeres Premiumprodukt: Neural Dust. Intelligente Nanopartikel in Staubkorngröße, die sich im Gehirn anreichern. Die lassen sich dann wahrscheinlich – wie die in Indien bereits zugelassene Nasal-Impfung gegen Covid – durch die Nase ziehen. Oder durch Luftschächte öffentlicher Gebäude pumpen. Man kann die neue Freiheit also förmlich riechen.

Ganz wie es der 44 Seiten starke »National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan« (NNI Plan) des Weißen Hauses im Oktober 2021 vorsah: »Die Öffentlichkeit einbeziehen und Mitarbeiterzahlen im Bereich Nanotechnologie erhöhen«. Nicht umsonst hat Donald Trump der entsprechenden Behörde in seiner ersten Amtszeit zusätzliche Mittel genehmigt. Genau wie Joe Biden nach ihm.

Das von der Technokratie-Bewegung vor fast einem Jahrhundert definierte nordamerikanische Technate – sprich, der amerikanische Verantwortungsbereich einer weltweiten Technokratie – sieht der von Trump und Musk reanimierten Vision einer »nordamerikanischen Union« übrigens verblüffend ähnlich. Wen interessiert bei all der Make-Great-Euphorie schon noch, dass Imperialismus scheisse, Dänemark ein souveräner Staat und der Panamakanal ein strategisches Nadelöhr der internationalen Handelsschifffahrt ist. Oder, dass die »nordamerikanische Union« nicht nur bei Trump-Cheerleadern wie Alex Jones vor ein paar Jahren noch als »böser Globalisten-Plan« galt.

Schauen wir nach vorne. In Richtung »goldenes Zeitalter«, wie Trump es nennt. Dieses dürfte für den Normalbürger nämlich sehr ungemütlich werden. Denn es wird dominiert von Algorithmen. Von Künstlicher Intelligenz. Für die Eloi also primär von Grok, dem auf Twitter (und Teslas) integrierten Chatbot. Dieser basiert auf Technologie des Unternehmens xAI – laut Wikipedia gegründet von Elon Musk im März 2023. Das mag zwar so im Handelsregister stehen, ist wohl aber nur die halbe Wahrheit. Denn xAI dürfte die Fortführung eines DARPA-Projekts darstellen, das bereits 2015 unter dem Titel »Explainable Artificial Intelligence« (XAI) gestartet wurde und 2021 auslief. Als die Finanzierung seitens DARPA eingestellt wurde, machte XAI die Forschungsergebnisse auf einem Server zugänglich. Circa 18 Monate Jahre später engagierte Elon Musk Igor Babuschkin als Chefingenieur für xAI. Babuschkin hatte zuvor acht Jahre lang für Googles DeepMind-Projekt gearbeitet und nutzte aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach die DARPA-Ergebnisse um xAI, beziehungsweise Grok zu entwickeln.

Im Juli 2023 verkündete Musk, xAI sei im Gegensatz zu den Konkurrenzprodukten von Google, Microsoft und OpenAI eine »gute« KI. Erstaunlich, wenn die gleichen Ingenieure am Werk sind und die KI auf Basis eines Militärprojekts entsteht. Zudem sprechen auch die Top-Sponsoren von xAI nicht unbedingt für das »Gute«. Denn unter den größten Geldgebern der letzten Finanzierungsrunde vom 23. Dezember 2024 befinden sich so illustre Namen wie BlackRock, AMD, Nvidia und Fidelity, die zusammen weitere sechs Milliarden Dollar für Musks KI-Unternehmen zur Verfügung stellten.

Genug Liquidität, um xAI für die »Alles-App« weiterzuentwickeln, wo Grok seit einer Weile automatisch Kurzbeschreibungen für Profile erstellt, die man weder abschalten noch ändern kann. Twitter-Nutzer müssen nun also nicht mehr selbst das Profil eines Accounts durchstöbern, um sich einen ersten Eindruck von der Person zu machen, sondern bekommen diesen von Elon Musks KI geliefert. Vorurteil auf Knopfdruck sozusagen. Vergleichbar mit einem Sozialkreditsystem. Denn die täglich neu generierte Zusammenfassung basiert auf dem Nutzerverhalten.

»Die neuen, KI-generierten Grok-Kurzprofile unter jedem X-Nutzerprofil SIND de facto ein Social Credit System nach chinesischem Vorbild für den Westen. Das Profil jedes Nutzers wird tagesaktuell neu berechnet. Äußert man sich zu verschiedenen Themen, nennt die KI das schnell mal »verheddern«. Grok gibt zu, das Profil wird erstellt aus dem eigenen Nutzerverhalten des Tages, seinen eigenen Berechnungen und nicht näher definierten Anweisungen«,  kommentierte Journalistin Aya Velázquez die Neuerung am 14. Januar 2025.

Andere Nutzer werden als »leicht erregbar« beschrieben, »verzetteln« sich oder »glauben an Wettermanipulation zur Klimakontrolle«. Offener wird ein Debattenraum dank solcher Adjektive und Zusammenfassungen sicher nicht. Wer möchte schon das Profil von leicht erregbaren Chemtrail-Gläubigen anschauen oder gar mit diesen assoziiert werden. Gegen solch eine automatisierte, herablassend daherkommende Einordnung durch intransparent operierende KI war die Faktencheck-Industrie geradezu harmlos. Wer also annimmt, die Abschaffung der Faktenchecker bei Facebook und Co. bedeute ein Ende der Zensur, irrt. Sie wird im Gegenteil deutlich raffinierter und weitreichender werden.

Details zum persönlichen Punktestand im Grok-Sozialkreditsystem oder Information über das Zustandekommen der Bewertung erhält man auf Anfrage natürlich nicht. Twitter wird die daraus entstehende Hierarchie aber mit Sicherheit für Reichweitensteuerung, Nudging-Kampagnen und weitere sozialarchitektonische Funktionen nutzen. Vor allem, wenn 2025 das Bezahlsystem »X Money« eingeführt wird. Dann werden die Eloi bald nicht mehr nur um Reichweite, Follower und Re-Tweets buhlen, sondern auch um Geld – das als Folge unliebsamer Postings zu Genozid X, Krieg Y oder Person Z künftig schneller eingefroren werden dürfte als jedes Bankkonto. De-Banking der nächsten Generation. Und irgendwann trifft das jeden. Außer, man schwimmt immer mit dem Strom.

Doch damit nicht genug. Am 13. Dezember 2024 gab das wohl den wenigsten bekannte Unternehmen WISeSat bekannt, künftig mit Space X zusammenzuarbeiten, um »verschiedene Produkte und Systeme zu kombinieren«. Die WISeSat AG ist eine Tochterfirma der in Genf (Schweiz) ansässigen WISeKey International Holding AG, die im Bereich Cybersicherheit, KI und IoT (Internet of Things) tätig ist. Die Ankündigung dieser Kollaboration ließ die WISeKey-Aktie kurzfristig um 107,73 Prozent steigen. Ein erster gemeinsamer Start zum Transport sogenannter Picosatelliten fand am 14. Januar 2025 von der Vandenberg Space Force Base in Kalifornien statt.

Aber was genau macht WISeSat? Einer Presseerklärung des Unternehmens vom 15. September 2023 lässt sich entnehmen:

»WISeSAT AG zeichnet sich dank ihrer Konstellation von ultra-sicheren Picosatelliten und Infrastruktur durch sichere und effektive Kommunikationsstrategien für vernetzte Geräte aus. Die Expertise des Unternehmens in kryptografischer Technologie und sicherem Datenmanagement hat die sichere IoT-Implementierung in zahlreichen Bereichen neu definiert, von städtischen Innovationen in Smart Cities bis hin zu modernster industrieller Automatisierung. (…) WISeSAT steht an vorderster Front bei der Entwicklung von ultra-sicheren Picosatelliten-Lösungen in Zusammenarbeit mit ihrem Verbündeten FOSSA Systems. Es setzt sich für sichere IoT-Kommunikation über raumbasierte Netzwerke ein und nutzt die neuesten kryptografischen Innovationen, um sichere und sofortige Datenaustausche in verschiedenen Bereichen zu gewährleisten (…).«

Im Klartext: WISeSat bringt Satelliten von der Größe einer Tupperdose ins All. Diese Mini-Orbiter umkreisen den Planeten in niedrigen Umlaufbahnen und etablieren dort ein Netzwerk für kryptografierte Echtzeitdatenübertragung. Fliegende 5G-Masten sozusagen. Oder WLAN-Router. Nur viel schneller. Für das Internet der Dinge – und Smart Cities.

»In dieser Woche startet WISeSat einen Satelliten der neuen Generation und markiert damit einen wichtigen Meilenstein in der Entwicklung einer globalen Satellitenkonstellation, die eine umfassende Erdabdeckung mit ultraniedriger Latenzzeit ermöglicht. Entwickelt, um Billionen von IoT-Geräten in Echtzeit zu verfolgen und aufzuspüren.« (Carlos Creus Moreira, WISeKEy CEO, 12. Januar 2025)

Welche Datenträger dieses Picosatelliten-Netzwerk künftig verfolgen und aufspüren soll, zeigt sich bei einem Blick auf das Produktportfolio der Holding-Gesellschaft WISeKey – einem »weltweit führenden Anbieter von Cybersicherheit, digitaler Identität und Internet der Dinge (IoT) Lösungen«. Denn die Holding existiert seit 24 Jahren, besteht aus fünf Unternehmen, hat mehr als eineinhalb Milliarden Chips und über fünf Milliarden »Roots of Trust« installiert, residiert an sechs internationalen Standorten und hat gut 3.000 Kunden in Staat und Wirtschaft beglückt. Einen Wikipedia-Eintrag gibt es für das bei NASDAQ und SIX gelistete Unternehmen erstaunlicherweise trotzdem nicht.

Dafür aber für den seit Mai 2021 amtierenden »Chief Digital Transformation Officer« Pierre Maudet. Der war ab Juni 2012 Mitglied des Genfer Staatsrats, 2013 bei den Young Global Leaders des Weltwirtschaftsforums und 2015 bei der Bilderberger Konferenz in Telfs-Buchen (Österreich). Nachdem er im Februar 2021 vom Genfer Polizeigericht wegen Vorteilsnahme verurteilt wurde, trat er als Staatsrat zurück – und drei Monate später bei WISeKey an. Am 30. April 2023 wurde er, ungeachtet seiner kriminellen Vergangenheit, zusätzlich wieder in den Genfer Staatsrat gewählt. Wie praktisch. Solch eine schamlose Unverfrorenheit scheint Maudet perfekt für das zu qualifizieren, was bei WISeKey unter dem Deckmantel der »Quantensicherheit« entwickelt wird – ein raumbasiertes eID-Ökosystem.

»Quantensicherheit nutzt Prinzipien der Quantenmechanik, um den Datenschutz und die sichere Informationsübertragung zu revolutionieren. Kernstück ist die Quantenschlüsselverteilung (Quantum Key Distribution, QKD), eine Spitzentechnologie, die mithilfe der Quantenmechanik vernetzte Teilchen für den sicheren Austausch von Verschlüsselungskennwerten erzeugt.«

Ob digitale Identität, Unterschrift, Cloud oder Software – von der Know-Your-Customer-Biometrie bis hin zur Unternehmenslösung für die Mitarbeiteridentifikation. WISeKey hilft. Anmelden kann sich jeder. Während die Produktpalette für den privaten Sektor noch nach Lieferketten-Management, Sendungsverfolgung, Login-Lösung für eBanking oder Face ID auf dem Smartphone klingt – aber deutlich weitreichender ist, schauen sie sich die Homepage an – sprechen die WISeKey-Angebote im Bereich Regierungen eine ganz andere Sprache. Denn unter diesem Menüpunkt bewirbt der diskret operierende Konzern seine »CertifyID Trust Center Platform«:

»Die CertifyID Trust Center Platform ist eine industrialisierte eID-Verwaltungslösung für Bürger, die Benutzer und ihre Anmeldeinformationen verwaltet, insbesondere digitale IDs und digitale Zertifikate für groß angelegte Anwendungen wie landesweite E-Government-Dienste. Es handelt sich um eine vollständige industrielle Public Key Infrastruktur- und ID-Verwaltungslösung, die Regierungsdienste rund um die Uhr unterstützt.

Die CertifyID Trust Center Plattform wird in einer Reihe von Anwendungen der Regierung und des öffentlichen Sektors verwendet, zum Beispiel: Personalausweis, ePassport (ICAO-konform), Führerschein, Gesundheit, Wahlen/Abstimmen.

Die CertifyID Plattform wurde unter Verwendung der Sicherheits- und Public Key Infrastruktur-Expertise von WISeKey entwickelt und kann vollständig in E-Government-Frameworks, kommerzielle Frameworks (…) und in das Bereitstellungsframework für E-Government-Dienste eines Landes integriert werden.«

Da passt es doch wunderbar ins Bild, dass WISeKey am 13. Oktober 2022 eine »Partnerschaftsvereinbarung zur Zusammenarbeit bei der Entwicklung weltraumbezogener Aktivitäten« mit der Schweizer Armee bekannt gab – schließlich residieren in der Alpenrepublik nicht nur UN, GAVI, WEF, Club of Rome und jede Menge NGOs, sondern auch die Bank für Internationalen Zahlungsausgleich (BIZ), die ganz sicher Verwendung für ein quantengesichertes Echtzeit-Picosatellitennetzwerk findet, wenn ihr »Unified Ledger« (Zentrales Hauptbuch) für das Blockchain-Weltfinanzsystem von morgen zum Einsatz kommt. In Anbetracht der »allumfassenden Marktblase« (D. Webb, 2024) ist damit wohl in absehbarer Zeit zu rechnen.

Das also sind die Projekte, Pläne und neuen Partner von Elon. Auf mich machen ja speziell die korrupten Genfer Quantenspezialisten mit ihren Picosatelliten und schlüsselfertigen eID-Lösungen nicht unbedingt den Eindruck von Freiheitskämpfern. Und auch die am 22. Januar 2024 bei einer Pressekonferenz im Weißen Haus angekündigten »personalisierten mRNA-Injektionen gegen Krebs« lassen mich eher skeptisch zurück.

Genau wie der Umstand, dass diese binnen 48 Stunden »personalisierte mRNA« durch die Rechenleistung von OpenAI ermöglicht werden soll. Denn das von Elon Musk mitgegründete Unternehmen des WEF- und Bilderberg-affinen Sam Altman steht im berechtigten Verdacht, für den Tod eines Whistleblowers im Dezember 2024 verantwortlich zu sein. Während Polizei und Medien den Tod des OpenAI-Forschers Suchir Balaji als Selbstmord deklarieren, sprechen sowohl die Umstände am Fundort seiner Leiche als auch Balajis Eltern von »eiskaltem Mord«. Nicht zu vergessen, dass Altman von seiner eigenen Schwester des jahrelangen Missbrauchs beschuldigt wird und sich dafür demnächst vor Gericht verantworten muss. Selbst The Economist räumte am 10. Dezember 2024 ein, dass »die PayPal Mafia die amerikanische Regierung übernimmt«. Und das mit der »Mafia« scheint man in Washington mittlerweile wörtlich zu nehmen.

Aber die von einigen aus der Hüfte geschossenen Präsidialdekreten euphorisierten Eloi werden sicher Gründe finden, das alles zu ihren Gunsten auszulegen. Immerhin hat Trump ein paar Leute begnadigt und will aus der WHO austreten. Wie seine Fanbase es bewerkstelligt, auszublenden, dass »The Donald« schon in seiner ersten Amtszeit aus der WHO austreten wollte und es unterließ, erschließt sich mir aber leider nicht. Genau wie die Begeisterung für ein Gespräch zwischen Musk und Weidel. Man stelle sich nur mal vor, George Soros, Bill Gates oder Eric Schmitt konferierten mit deutschen Politikern. Oder bekämen Sendezeit im ÖRR. Nicht auszudenken.

Wie heißt es so schön: »Eine schmerzliche Wahrheit ist besser als eine Lüge« (Thomas Mann). Stimmt. Nur fällt es relativ schwer, eine Lüge einzugestehen, wenn der, dem man sie beichten muss, der Lügner ist.

So bleibt nur zu hoffen, dass möglichst viele Eloi diesen Schritt trotzdem möglichst bald hinter sich bringen. Im eigenen Interesse. Denn wie schon Ernst Freiherr von Feuchtersleben feststellte, ist »Reue der Verstand, der zu spät kommt«. Und das kann in diesen Tagen verheerende Folgen haben.

@ fc2470ed:17d9ee27

by Hynek Fencl, July 2024

The way to Liberland is easy but not simple. Technically speaking, it’s just a short bike ride away from the nearest village on a comfortable bike path through a stunning forest known as the “Amazon of Europe”. On one side, one senses the presence of the mighty Danube River beyond the tall trees, and on the other stretch the farmlands of north-eastern Croatia. Then you take a left turn to a straight forest path, ride all the way to the end, and after a few bends on the track, you will have entered “the promised land”.

The part that is not simple is that Croatia both does and does not consider Gornja Siga (the local name for the area we now refer to as Liberland) to be its territory – depending on who you ask. This means that along the picturesque bike path, you will almost certainly encounter a border police patrol car, and, depending on whether you seem to them like you’re affiliated with Liberland, they will tell you to stop and hand over your ID. They run it through their system and, if you’re lucky enough to be a citizen of the EU, they let you pass. If you’re not and you give them a non-EU passport, they will ask you to come to the station with them to “determine the circumstances of your stay in Croatia.” You will then be issued with paperwork telling you to leave the country within the next 7 days, banning you from re-entering in the next 1-3 months. The official reasoning they’ll give for this is their reasonable suspicion that you have not come to Croatia as a tourist but with the intent to either do paid work (for which you would have to get a business/work visa) or to break the law (such as camping outside designated camping grounds or starting a fire in the forest).

All of this is part of a big game of chess that is being played out between Croatia and the Liberlanders. Croatia is in a tricky spot. They cannot properly administer the territory of Liberland and enforce its law in it – lest it would create an indication that the Croatian state officially claims it as its territory. However, they cannot not administer it either, since it’s on “their” side of the river, and it is risky for a rogue, unpredictable operation (from their perspective) like the establishment and growth of Liberland to just be left to its own devices right on their doorstep. This is, then, how we arrive at the status quo, with Croatia relating to Liberland in some way while being careful about the international perception of its action in another way. The resulting practice is a persistent harassment campaign toward the Liberlanders, with the apparent intent to create uncertainty and lower the appetite of potential Liberland settlers for this kind of adventure.

How to establish a new country

Liberland was born from an anomaly – a historical border dispute between Croatia and Serbia. The dispute involves the definition of where the border stands in relation to the Danube and goes back to 1947. Then, both lands along the river belonged to a single country – Yugoslavia – but the dispute arose with respect to the boundaries of its constituent states. It remained unresolved during the communist era and became an issue of international borders after the breakup of Yugoslavia.

Serbia claims that the border runs down the middle of the Danube, with the eastern bank being Serbian and the western bank Croatian. Croatia, on the other hand, claims that the border is set by historical borders marked by cadastral municipalities surrounding the Danube.

These municipality borders run along a different path because they were set before the course of the Danube was straightened during the 19th Century to allow for easier shipping. This results in disputed “pockets” of land on both sides of the river. The pockets on the eastern bank have a combined area of around 130 km2, while those on the western bank only amount to less than 10 km2. Not surprisingly, then, both countries claim that the border runs in a way where they get the >90% of land and the other country only gets the small remaining areas. However, this means that, by implication, since both countries are claiming the large areas, neither of them is claiming the smaller ones. These areas were, then, so-called terra nullius.

Under international law, there is no issue with any state claiming unowned and unclaimed land for themselves. And that is exactly what Czech businessman, politician, and activist Vít Jedlička did in 2015 when he proclaimed into existence the newly created Free Republic of Liberland on the largest, 7 km2 piece of the unclaimed areas between Croatia and Serbia.

It's one thing to announce a new country to the world. It’s an entirely different thing to make this country legitimate. Under the Montevideo Convention, a proper country needs to have 1) a permanent population, 2) a defined territory, 3) government, and 4) capacity to enter into relations with other states. Now, 9 years after the birth of Liberland, it clearly has three of those. As to a permanent population, the Liberlanders would argue that it definitely exists, even though Liberland’s now over 1200 registered citizens have had to largely live in “exile” ever since.

Nevertheless, despite the Convention, there’s one thing that makes something a country more than anything else – whether other countries see you as a country. The more diplomatic recognition an entity has, the more country-like it becomes. This is especially relevant for breakaway governments, governments in exile, or, most importantly in this case, startup countries like Liberland.

Very much aware of this, along with other members of Liberland’s startup government, Jedlička has been on a worldwide mission to legitimize Liberland in the eyes of other countries. Though there have been many amiable meetings and even some measure of support in some cases, no official recognition by any UN member has been achieved as of mid-2024. Liberland now has representatives and offices in multiple countries in the further pursuit of this goal. Though the effectiveness of this strategy has been questioned by many for the lack of decisive results so far, one thing remains unambiguously true: if recognized by even one or two UN members, Liberland would instantly gain an amazing amount of legitimacy and gravitas in the eyes of the world.

The quest for territory

Establishing international relations with countries anywhere in the world is not the only strategy that the Liberlanders have been employing in making the country more real and legitimate. This includes liaising and negotiating with the neighboring Serbia and Croatia. These relations are by far the most important and impactful ones. If both of Liberland’s neighboring countries were to either outright recognize the startup micro-state, or even just adopted an approach of non-interference, Liberland would be free to start actually developing and to find its own long-term position in the world.

As for Serbia, its Ministry of Foreign Affairs let itself be heard that, in their view, Liberland’s claims are a “trivial matter” but, in any case, they do not infringe upon the sovereignty of Serbia. One can imagine that Serbia might actually be secretly quite pleased with Liberland’s activities, since now Croatia has an issue to deal with on “their” side of the river, which, if they are not careful, could contribute to the legitimization of Serbia’s claim to the larger pieces of territory claimed by both countries.

With Croatia, things get quite a bit more complicated. In an official statement, the country rejected the claim that Gornja Siga is terra nullius, arguing instead that the land belongs to one of the two neighboring countries – the only question is to which one, which will be answered at some point in the future. Croatia also said it would stop any threatening and provocative activities on the territory even by force if necessary.

Ever since Liberland’s birth in 2015, the Liberlanders have been trying to make a mark on the territory. For a long time, even just entering Liberland wasn’t really possible. Under a deal between the Croatian and Serbian police that was put in place during the European migration crisis, Croatian authorities may enter Liberland and patrol it for security reasons (preventing illegal migration) even though they do not officially claim the territory as theirs. In addition, the border police have a near-permanent presence on the Danube River, preventing people from crossing into Liberland by boat.

As a result, anyone who would try to come to Liberland in any way would always be promptly arrested by the Croatians, essentially for entering a prohibited area.

After years of this status quo, a rather unexpected thing happened that made things suddenly move forward in a positive direction for the Liberlanders. In April 2023, during Liberland’s 8th anniversary celebrations, a famous YouTuber with a significant following decided to try to enter Liberland. After a few unsuccessful attempts due to heavy police presence and monitoring, he and his team hired jet skis and rode them all the way from Hungary down the Danube. When they got close to Liberland, they encountered the police boats again, but their jet skis were faster than the boats, so they managed to land at Liberland’s Liberty Island and plant a flag there. A few moments later, the police caught up to them and an aggressive policeman took out their handheld cameras before assaulting them and then kicking them on the ground, as can be clearly seen from drone footage of the incident.

As they had broken no laws, they were ultimately let go after the incident and free to leave the island without being arrested. However, the heavy-handed and illegal conduct of the Croatian police had been clearly documented and became part of the video that was published in July 2023.

The video promptly went viral, gaining almost 10 million views on YouTube. By comparison, the total population of Croatia is just under 4 million. When the news spread even to the Croatian press and TV stations, Croatia had a serious PR problem on their hands. The police had been clearly in the wrong, conducting themselves in a seriously improper way to the point of using physical force against peaceful people who had broken no laws nor engaged in any violence or hostilities themselves.

Something had to change. So, following this incident, the Croatian police adopted a different unofficial policy – from now on, they would let people enter Liberland if they wished to do so, in a controlled way. Since early August 2023, if you wish to enter Liberland, you can go on foot or by bike, take the access road down the forest, and show your documents to the Croatian police, just as you would at a border crossing. In a typical grand fashion of Liberland’s media team, Liberland made an announcement that an official border crossing had been opened between Croatia and Liberland (Croatia had obviously never made an official announcement like this, but for Liberland, that was the de facto situation on the ground).

In the weeks following the “opening of the border”, many enthusiastic settlers started coming to Liberland to finally begin making their mark on the territory of “the promised land.” They started constructing simple wooden houses, a bathroom, an open-air restaurant, and the related power and water infrastructure on Liberland’s mainland beach opposite Liberty Island in a settlement named Mateos Marina.

On September 7th, 2023, a troop of about 50 policemen and forestry workers, including a demolition crew, raided the settlement. The raid was officially dubbed a “cleanup operation” by Hrvatske šume, Croatia’s state forestry service. With the assistance of the police, they tore down all the wooden houses and structures using chainsaws and stole equipment as well as personal possessions of the Liberlanders on site. Several Liberlanders were arrested for “failure to comply with a lawful order”.

One might ask, if Liberland is not officially part of Croatia, what authority does Croatia have to come in to steal and destroy? Staying true to their claim that Liberland is not part of Croatia, the Croatians had announced to Serbia that they would be conducting the “cleanup” on Serbia’s territory, to keep it clean on their behalf.

We may only speculate about the reasons for carrying out this operation in such a heavy-handed, destructive way. One possibility is that allowing people to enter Liberland in the first place was a way for Croatia to lure some people to Liberland, become comfortable, and then come in and destroy everything to show everyone what would happen if they got involved in the project. Or perhaps it was the unexpected level of life, community-building, and construction going on in such a short period of time after the “opening of the border” that the Croatian police felt like they had to put a stop to it before things got so big they could not be easily destroyed anymore.

No matter the reasons, the raid had a chilling effect on prospective Liberlanders. Though there is plenty of video documentation of the operation, no one made a viral video about it this time. Though some media did pick up the news, it did not become a big story. Consequently, the PR fallout from this for Croatia was not unmanageable.

Liberlanders soon returned to the territory. However, the level of enthusiasm, energy, and external support was not as great as it had been before the raid. From then on, settlement efforts focused mainly on Liberty Island, unreachable by trucks and impossible for forestry workers to get to without a large boat which they seem not to have. Though perhaps a more strategic place to set up camp, Liberty Island is also much more prone to flooding than the rest of Liberland.

In the following few months, several makeshift houses were constructed using a combination of wood and sandbags. During this time, Liberland even hosted a first wedding on the island. The settlement was kept alive during winter as well, with Liberland enthusiasts staying mostly in houseboats whenever it was impossible to camp on site.

In the meantime, an enthusiastic settler couple bought a sizeable house with a courtyard in the village closest to Liberland – Zmajevac – which they have transformed into a base of operations for settlers. This is now called Liberbase and it is where visits to Liberland start, with bikes, supplies, and construction materials being gathered before going on the 40-minute bike ride.

In the spring of 2024, work started on the reconstruction of a former hunting lodge at a central location on Liberland’s mainland – Jefferson Square. The building was demolished a few years ago but the foundations, including a cellar, were left in place. The site was cleared, the foundations refreshed, and new walls for the future governmental building have sprung up from the ground. A professional construction crew was hired to speed up the re-building of this base, using large concrete bricks, to a standard that will make it logistically and practically difficult for the Croatian police and forestry workers to try to destroy.

The battle for legitimacy

The ongoing construction in Liberland is rather slow. It is difficult to bring construction materials to Liberland. It is prohibited to drive motor vehicles on the bike path leading to Liberland, which means that everything has to be manually hauled from Liberbase on cargo bikes. In addition, from time to time, bikes get stolen by the police or forestry workers. Despite these difficulties, the determination of the settlers is unwavering and they are working every day to move construction forward.

Is it possible to bring materials by boat? How did they get sandbags and other materials to Liberty Island?

The importance of such a commitment should not be underestimated. The continuous presence of settlers is incredibly important for Liberland. It shows the seriousness of the project. It shows that Liberland is a genuine community and a fledgling nation rather than, as some accusations tend to go, just an elaborate publicity stunt.

Practical difficulties with the Croatian authorities are not limited to construction-related issues. Even staying and camping in Liberland comes with its quirks. If you’re staying on Jefferson Square, you should be prepared for several police visits every day. These check-ups are usually nothing dramatic. The police usually show up, ask a couple of questions, and perhaps tell the settlers that they are not allowed to camp there or start a fire, but they don’t actually do anything more than that and just go about their day.

It seems that the Croatian police are rather shy about enforcing Croatian law in a territory that is not officially considered part of Croatia. International law often takes into account the de facto situation of the matter in any dispute. If Croatia enforced their law in Liberland, this would therefore be an indication that they do, in fact, consider the territory to be theirs in practice, despite the official stance of the state. It would play into the hands of Serbia, reinforcing their claims to the large parcels of land on the other side of the Danube.

In addition, Liberlanders on the ground report that the majority of Croatian police officers generally behave quite fairly and respectfully toward them – only a minority appear to hold a personal grudge against Liberland, being abusive and sometimes even violent instead. It seems highly likely that the police in general are just doing their job, following orders from above. Most of them don’t actually take it as a personal commitment to make life more difficult for the Liberlanders.

This is rather important from a big-picture perspective, because the settlers, by contrast, are often heavily personally invested in the project and see it as their mission to see Liberland develop into a proper country. This disparity in energy and determination is strong and perhaps this is what will, in the end, cause Liberland to prevail in this drawn-out dispute.

The dispute with Hrvatske šume is quite different. As of mid-2024, the forestry workers tend to turn up at Jefferson Square about every fortnight. Unlike the police, they do not limit themselves to words but tend to steal everything that is not bolted down – including tools, materials, tents, bikes, and personal possessions of the settlers camping there. The justification remains the same – to “clean the forest of any waste.” In their encounters with the police as well as the forestry workers, Liberlanders are of course meticulous in their video documentation of any illegal actions by the authorities.

The Liberlanders’ difficulties, however, do not just stay local. As previously mentioned, upon trying to enter Liberland from Croatia, people who do not have EU citizenship are promptly issued a one-to-three-month ban on entering Croatia, with 7 days to leave the country. This is done under legislation relating to citizenship and tourism.

However, things can escalate even further. Since last year, several key Liberland settlers and organizers, including Liberland’s President Vít Jedlička himself, have seen “heavier guns” used against them. They have been banned from entering Croatia for 5 years under anti-terrorism legislation, where the authorities argue that these Liberlanders are something akin to a threat to national security.

The Liberlanders have mounted a legal defense against this, in addition to challenging Croatia on other legal fronts. They have had some successes so far – in particular, it should now be clear that the Liberlanders do not need any building permits to construct buildings on their territory. Unfortunately, other issues – including the 5-year bans from Croatia – still remain unresolved.

Most Liberlanders remain hopeful nonetheless. They have seen their situation move forward significantly over the last year. A year ago, they were not even able to enter Liberland without being chased and/or arrested. Now, even some construction is possible, albeit in a limited way.

The road ahead

The long-term vision, of course, remains to build a full-fledged, internationally respected and recognized city-state. Liberland’s leaders often speak of a “Balkan Monaco”, referring to the amazing development possibilities that a freedom-oriented country in the middle of Europe could offer. Liberland has already hosted an urbanist/architectural contest, and there are concrete plans for the first hotel as well as a riverside real estate development. What is more, Liberland’s land is actually more than three times the size of Monaco.

Nevertheless, Liberland cannot move forward in a meaningful way toward these visions and aspirations under the status quo. The Liberlanders need to be able to build at scale and be free from harassment, both by the police and the forestry workers. Some kind of political deal is necessary as the next step toward proper development of Liberland.

Such a deal could take multiple forms, but all of them involve the Croatian authorities changing their attitude toward Liberland away from a policy of unrelenting obstruction – not necessarily toward outright recognition, but at least toward accepting Liberland as a neighborly project that will move forward and develop in some way.

One option could be to allow motor vehicles on the bike path toward Liberland, with a deal that could include charging Liberlanders some fair tolls to pay for the wear and tear of the pavement. An alternative would be to simply allow river crossing into Liberland from Serbia on the Danube. Since Croatia does not officially consider Liberland its territory, their current interference with this traffic is illegal anyway. Simply stopping this illegal conduct would help Liberland significantly without Croatia facilitating Liberland’s development in any active way.

Regardless of these options, the first and most notable step would be to stop banning non-EU citizens from re-entering Croatia as well as lift the existing (entirely unjustified and unreasonable) 5-year bans on Jedlička and the others.

It is easy to see why Croatia is wary and suspicious of Liberland’s development. One can understand the worries of a state in whose immediate proximity there is a new and unknown state growing and taking root. Nevertheless, Croatia actually has a lot to gain from making some kind of deal with Liberland.

First: currently there are perhaps a dozen policemen on patrol around Liberland at all times. This includes police vehicles and boats. This is a significant expense for the police force – an expense which is rather unsubstantiated, given that Liberlanders have clearly proven to be peaceful people who do not wish to pose any threat to Croatia, its people, or its law enforcement officers. Making a deal would mean that this large expense is not needed anymore.

Second: Liberland borders an area of Croatia that has been rather “left behind”, is underdeveloped, and suffers from a lack of jobs and investment. Consequently, younger people are leaving the area and the current population is growing older. If Liberland was growing and open for business nearby, it would provide the region exactly with the job opportunities, large investment, and overall development that it desperately needs.

Third: Croatia could use Liberland as an opportunity to actually gain an advantage in the ongoing border dispute with Serbia. As previously mentioned, Croatia cannot openly and properly administer the territory, as it would be an indication in the eyes of international law that they consider the territory to be theirs. On the other hand, it Liberland is located on “their” side of the Danube, so Croatia does have an interest in making sure the area is under their control somehow. Striking a deal with Liberland could involve Liberland agreeing to some obligations related to the administration of the territory which correspond to Croatia’s priorities. In this way, Croatia would have an active say in what happens on this land, effectively “outsourcing” its administration without officially claiming it as part of Croatia.

In addition to all these advantages being present, Liberland is very much open to cooperation with Croatia and is keenly looking forward to welcoming any future productive relations with Croatian authorities. There will be no grudges held on Liberland’s side, and if a mutually beneficial deal or solution were to be found, no one would look behind at any historical quibbles or difficulties. Liberland would be an excellent and friendly neighbor to Croatia, not just causing any issues but actively helping the overall development of the surrounding region.

Time will tell how things will develop. At the present, the momentum, energy, and enthusiasm is definitely on the side of Liberland. There seems to be very little actual interest from the Croatian side to cause issues for Liberland and to continue to prevent the fledgling state from developing further. All that is left are the bureaucratic hurdles of a state that is being overly conservative about its approach to the important issues of the day. Things might take time, but seeing the determination of the settlers and the willingness of all Liberlanders to be unrelenting in their fight for the cause, it is not difficult to argue that we might be seeing the dawn of Liberland as the world’s next proper city-state as we speak.

@ 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.

@ 83279ad2:bd49240d

備忘録として書きます。意外と時間がかかりました。全体で1時間くらいかかるので気長にやりましょう。 仮想通貨取引所(販売所ではないので、玄人が使えばお得らしい）かつBitcoinの送金手数料が無料(全ての取引所が無料ではない、例えばbitbankは0.0006bitcoinかかる)なので送金元はGMOコインを使います。(注意:GMOコインは0.02ビットコイン以下は全額送金になってしまいます) 今回はカストディアルウォレットのWallet of Satoshiに送金します。 以下手順 1. GMOコインでbitcoinを買います。 2. GMOコインの左のタブから入出金 暗号資産を選択します。 3. 送付のタブを開いて、+新しい宛先を追加するを選択します。 4. 送付先:GMOコイン以外、送付先ウォレット：プライベートウォレット(MetaMaskなど)、受取人：ご本人さま　を選んで宛先情報の登録を選ぶと次の画面になります。
5. 宛先名称にwallet of satoshi(これはなんでも良いです わかりやすい名称にしましょう)　wallet of satoshiを開いて、受信→Bitcoin On-Chainからアドレスをコピーして、ビットコインアドレスに貼り付けます。
6. 登録するを押します。これで送金先の登録ができました。GMOコインの審査がありますがすぐ終わると思います。 7. ここから送金をします。送付のタブから登録したビットコインの宛先リストwallet of satoshiを選択し、送付数量と送付目的を選択して、2段階認証をします。
8. 実行を押せば終わりです。もうあなたがやることはありません。送金が終わるのを40分くらい眺めるだけです。
8. 取引履歴のタブから今の送金のステータスが見れます。
9. 15分くらい待つとステータスが受付に変わります。
10. 20分くらい待つとトランザクションIDが表示されます。


この時点からwallet of satoshiにも送金されていることが表示されます。(まだ完了はしていない)

11. ステータスが完了になったら送金終わりです。

wallet of satoshiにも反映されます。

---

お疲れ様でした！

@ 1cb14ab3:95d52462

Welcome to the first installment of my ‘Nostr Spotlight’, a series where I explore various Nostr clients (which I will refer to as apps for simplicity sake), review their features, and share tips on how to use them effectively.

For the first installment, I’m diving into npub.pro, an incredible service that lets anyone on Nostr create a fully functional website using their already-published notes.

---

What is npub.pro?

npub.pro is a simple—yet powerful— tool that takes your Nostr content and turns it into a website instantly. By filtering through hashtags or keywords, or hand-selecting which notes to feature, you can curate what appears on your site.

This allows for highly customizable and dynamic websites that anyone on Nostr can deploy. Whether you’re a blogger, photographer, journalist, artist—or just want to organize your notes into a cleanly setup website—this service opens up endless possibilities for showcasing your notes.

---

Who Should Use npub.pro?

This service is ideal for:

✅ Writers and bloggers who want a frictionless way to publish content.

✅ Artists and photographers looking to showcase their work.

✅ Journalists and researchers who need an easy way to organize articles.

✅ Anyone who wants a personal website without dealing with hosting or technical setups.

---

Why I Love npub.pro

I’ve personally deployed several websites using npub.pro, each serving a different purpose:

HesArt – My personal art portfolio.

https://image.nostr.build/6a7030a24a9c5d4a9e3a0854020e08740241e870e46083b6b326ca36d5dc681f.png

Hes – My main long-form writing site, featuring artist statements, travel guides, photo series, tech reviews, and economic essays.

https://image.nostr.build/7d088829dd2ec0f9702430f115e29d368da85a78227cf6524f8773216f6a102e.png

HesCooks – A collection of curated recipes.

https://image.nostr.build/840ffdc74ac618ddf9534d4ab77a09d02aee45eee8c332a6733bcea5b80a3d2a.png

HesCreates – A categorized and searchable archive of my notes.

https://image.nostr.build/4663c91f3c77ad59f0f291813c672395f8cc20c6806ca2afffb3e3d65b6c6f37.png

The ability to filter my Nostr content and instantly publish it as a website has made organizing my notes seamless and efficient. The opportunities are endless and I have several ideas for other websites I plan on deploying.

---

How to Get Started

1.Visit npub.pro.

2.Enter your Nostr private key (nsec) using an extension of bunker.

3.Choose your filters (hashtags, keywords, etc.) to curate what appears and select a pre-made theme.

4.Publish instantly – no extra setup needed!

It’s that simple.

---

Final Verdict:

5/5 Stars ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

npub.pro is an outstanding tool that makes publishing on the web effortless for Nostr users. It’s intuitive, versatile, and packed with potential use cases. Whether you need a blog, portfolio, or curated archive, this app delivers.

Highly recommended!

---

More from Hes

Full Portfolio

Online Store

Artist Statements

Travel Guides

Photography

Writings

---

Note: This spotlight is not sponsored. I thoroughly enjoy the service and have received outstanding customer service from the team at npub.pro!

Stay tuned for more Nostr App Spotlights as I explore the best apps in the ecosystem!

@ cffd7b79:dd8ca91f

Introductory

That right folks, it is called Satlantis. An upcoming game that is based on Minecraft. It uses a game engine called Launti/Minetest that has been in development since 2023, but it is unclear when it will be released. It is small team of bitcoin enthusiasts of 3-5 game developers.

Their Origin Story

It started out as a Minecraft server around 2018. It was prosperous with many players up to 100 players for just a SMP Server. Then on 2023, Mojang Studios contacted the owner of the server to shut it down due to have a play-to-earn function.

Their Discord Server

In their discord server, you can now earn their own currency called joules which can be earned by playing Counter Strike 2, Fortnite or Dead by Daylight. The joules then can be exchange for sats. If you wanna invest your sats into it, you can buy ASICs through the auction which is fueled by joules which gives you sats in return by the hour.

In Conclusion

From Minecraft to Minetest, it has great potential for such a game nowadays since not only its through some dApp currency scheme, but its straightforward process. if you want to see their site it is at Satlantis.net.

I am Chrissy Sage and I am out!

@ 1cb14ab3:95d52462

Chef's notes

Credit to The Yummy Life. Go show them love below: https://www.theyummylife.com/Pickled_Jalapeno_Peppers

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 1 hour
• 🍳 Cook time: 20 mins
• 🍽️ Servings: 4 mason jars (pint)

Ingredients

• 2 lbs. jalapenos
• 2-1/4 cups vinegar (white distilled, apple cider, or a combination of the two)
• 2-1/4 cups water
• 2 tablespoons sugar or honey (optional)
• ADD TO EACH PINT JAR
• 1/2 teaspoon kosher salt
• 1/2 teaspoon whole black pepper corns
• 1/4 teaspoon whole cumin seeds
• 1/4 teaspoon whole coriander seeds
• 1 bay leaf
• 1 whole garlic clove, peeled
• 1/8 teaspoon Pickle Crisp granules (optional)

Directions

1. Slice 1/2 pound jalapenos into 1/8" rounds, discarding stem ends.
2. Prepare the jars: Wash 4 pint jars and lids in hot sudsy water, then keep them warm.
3. Prepare the pickling liquid: Combine 1/2 cup plus 1 tablespoon vinegar, 1/2 cup plus 1 tablespoon water, and 1-1/2 teaspoons sugar or honey (optional) in a 2 quart pan, heating until just before boiling.
4. Fill the jars: Add jalapeno slices to each jar, pressing them down and packing them in compactly, then pour the hot pickling liquid into each jar, leaving 1/2" head space.
5. Process and store: Allow jars to cool to room temperature, then store them in the refrigerator or can them using standard USDA water process canning procedures, following storage guidelines for refrigerator or canned pickled peppers.

@ 1cb14ab3:95d52462

Chef's notes

Classic beef n' broccoli. Easy to make and dank to eat.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20 mins
• 🍳 Cook time: 10 mins.

Ingredients

• 1 lb top sirloin steak, thinly sliced
• ¼ cup low sodium soy sauce
• 2 teaspoons cornstarch
• 1 tablespoon dark brown sugar
• 2 tablespoons fresh ginger, minced
• 1 tablespoon oil
• 1 head broccoli, cut into 1-inch (2 ½ cm) florets
• ½ cup water
• 3 cloves garlic, minced
• ¼ teaspoon red pepper flakes, optional
• 1 teaspoon toasted sesame oil

Directions

1. In a medium bowl, mix together the sirloin steak, soy sauce, cornstarch, brown sugar, and ginger until the meat is evenly covered in the marinade. Set aside to marinate for 20 minutes.
2. Heat the oil in a large skillet or wok over medium-high heat. Dump in the meat and marinade and sear each side until golden brown. Transfer the meat to a clean bowl and set aside.
3. Place the broccoli into the hot skillet and sauté until the broccoli has just started to brown, about 1 minute. Pour the water into the skillet and immediately cover with a lid. Let it steam for 2 minutes, until the broccoli has softened.
4. Remove the lid and toss in the garlic, red pepper flakes, and sesame oil. Sauté until the garlic becomes fragrant, about 30 seconds.
5. Add the steak back into the pan and stir to combine. Remove from heat and serve on a bed of brown rice.

@ 21ffd29c:518a8ff5

• What Are Homestead Chickens?
  Homestead chickens are domesticated fowl kept by homeowners to provide eggs and companionship. They play a vital role in the homestead ecosystem.

Why Water is Essential in Cold Weather - Hydration Basics:
Chickens don't drink much water naturally but need it for hydration, especially during cold weather when metabolic rates increase. - Environmental Factors:
Cold weather can lead to ice buildup on water sources. Chickens benefit from having access to fresh water year-round.

Maintaining Accessible Water Sources - Shallow Troughs:
Use shallow troughs instead of deep containers to minimize ice formation and ensure constant water supply. - Automatic Feeders:
Consider installing automatic feeders for convenience, especially in unpredictable weather conditions. - Multiple Water Sources:
Provide multiple water sources to prevent competition and ensure all chickens have access.

Preventing Ice Buildup - Floating Shallow Troughs:
Opt for troughs that sit above the ground to avoid ice buildup. Ensure they're placed where they can't freeze completely. - Regular Checks:
Inspect water sources regularly to remove ice and debris, maintaining accessibility for chickens.

Best Practices for Watering Chickens - Waterers Designed for Cold Weather:
Use waterers made of stainless steel or plastic that can withstand cold temperatures. - Seasonal Adjustments:
During extreme cold spells, supplement with a small amount of fresh water to aid in drinking.

Conclusion - Key Takeaways:
Providing proper water is crucial for the health and well-being of homestead chickens during cold weather. Maintaining accessible, shallow water sources prevents issues like ice buildup and ensures hydration.

Final Thoughts - Sustainability Considerations:
While chickens don't drink much, ensuring they have water supports their overall health and sustainability efforts. - Environmental Impact:
Thoughtful water management can reduce water usage, promoting eco-friendly practices on the homestead.

@ b83e6f82:73c27758

Citrine 0.7.1

• Add the restore follows button back
• Show notification when backing up database
• Listen for pokey broadcasts

Download it with zap.store, Obtainium, f-droid or download it directly in the releases page

If you like my work consider making a donation

Verifying the release

In order to verify the release, you'll need to have gpg or gpg2 installed on your system. Once you've obtained a copy (and hopefully verified that as well), you'll first need to import the keys that have signed this release if you haven't done so already:

bash gpg --keyserver hkps://keys.openpgp.org --recv-keys 44F0AAEB77F373747E3D5444885822EED3A26A6D

Once you have his PGP key you can verify the release (assuming manifest-v0.7.1.txt and manifest-v0.7.1.txt.sig are in the current directory) with:

bash gpg --verify manifest-v0.7.1.txt.sig manifest-v0.7.1.txt

You should see the following if the verification was successful:

bash gpg: Signature made Fri 13 Sep 2024 08:06:52 AM -03 gpg: using RSA key 44F0AAEB77F373747E3D5444885822EED3A26A6D gpg: Good signature from "greenart7c3 <greenart7c3@proton.me>"

That will verify the signature on the main manifest page which ensures integrity and authenticity of the binaries you've downloaded locally. Next, depending on your operating system you should then re-calculate the sha256 sum of the binary, and compare that with the following hashes:

bash cat manifest-v0.7.1.txt

One can use the shasum -a 256 <file name here> tool in order to re-compute the sha256 hash of the target binary for your operating system. The produced hash should be compared with the hashes listed above and they should match exactly.

@ 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 ❤️🫂

@ 378562cd:a6fc6773

Chef's notes

I'm only testing this out right now. I will update the recipe as well as add my own image soon after making this dish again.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20 minutes
• 🍳 Cook time: 1 hour
• 🍽️ Servings: 4

Ingredients

• 4 to 6 potatoes (size depending)
• 1 lb ground beef
• seasonings
• 2 cans chili beans
• 1 onion
• katsup
• shredded cheese of some kind

Directions

1. saute onion and add ground beef to skillet. Season to liking.
2. peel if you like and thin slice potatoes
3. in a rectangle baking dish, layer potatoes, beans, meat and cheese (like a lasagna) until you have used all your ingredients. Try and make at least 2 or 3 layers with extra cheese on top.
4. Bake at 350 for one hour. Serve and enjoy!

@ a10260a2:caa23e3e

Last Updated: January 18, 2025

First off, big shoutout to Coinos for having support for adding a memo to BOLT12 offers. This provides a solid alternative for the pleb who wants to support mining decentralization but doesn’t want to set up a CLN node and pay thousands of sats for a channel only to get little rewards. This is the case for most of us who only have a miner or two (e.g. a Bitaxe and/or an S9).

Before we get into setting up Lightning payouts, you’ll want to have your miner configured to mine with OCEAN of course. You’ll also want to make sure that the bitcoin address you use is from a wallet that supports signing messages.

These are the ones listed in the OCEAN docs:

• Bitcoin Knots/Bitcoin Core
• Coldcard
• Electrum
• LND (Command Line)
• Seedsigner
• Sparrow
• Specter
• Trezor

I checked one of my favorite, user-friendly wallets — Blue Wallet — and it happens to support signing messages as well.

Just tap the three dots on the upper right and you’ll see the “Sign/Verify Message” button at the bottom.

Update [January 18]: You can now use Coinos to sign by going to https://coinos.io/sign

The trick here is to not refresh the page. In other words, when you're logged in to your Coinos account, go to the URL and use the legacy address (starts with a "1") that's displayed to configure your miner(s). If you refresh the page, you're going to get a new address which will cause the signing to fail later on. Remember, keep the tab open and don't refresh the page.

Whichever wallet you choose, generate a receive address to use when configuring your miner (it’ll also be your OCEAN username).

Here’s how it looks on the Bitaxe (AxeOS)…

And the Antminer S9 (Braiins OS).

NOTE: There’s a slight difference in the URL format between the two apps. Other than that, the username will be your bitcoin address followed by the optional “.” + the nickname for your machine.

You can find more details on OCEAN’s get started page.

---

Alright, now that your miner is pointed at OCEAN. Let’s configure Lightning payouts!

Generating the BOLT12 Offer

In the Coinos app, go to Receive > Bolt 12.

Tap “Set memo” and set it to “OCEAN Payouts for [insert your bitcoin address]” (this text is case-sensitive). Use the same bitcoin address you used above to configure your miner(s).

After tapping OK, copy the BOLT12 offer (it should start with “lno”) and proceed to the next step.

Generating the Configuration Message

Navigate to the My Stats page by searching for your OCEAN Bitcoin address.

The click the Configuration link next to Next Block to access the configuration form.

Paste the BOLT12 offer here, update the block height to latest, click GENERATE, and copy the generated unsigned message.

Signing the Configuration Message

To sign the generated message, go back to Blue Wallet and use the signing function. Paste the configuration message in the Message field, tap Sign, and copy the signed message that’s generated.

If you're using Coinos to sign, return to the page that you kept open (and didn't refresh) and do the same. Paste the configuration message, click submit, and copy the signed message.

Submitting the Signed Message

Once signed, copy the signature, paste it in the OCEAN configuration form, and click CONFIRM.

If all goes well, you should see a confirmation that the configuration was successful. Congrats! 🎉

All you gotta do now is sit back, relax, and wait for a block to be found…

Or you can look into setting up DATUM. 😎

@ 378562cd:a6fc6773

Chef's notes

I'm only testing this out right now. I will update the recipe as well as add my own image soon after making this dish again.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20 minutes
• 🍳 Cook time: 1 hour
• 🍽️ Servings: 4

Ingredients

• 4 to 6 potatoes (size depending)
• 1 lb ground beef
• seasonings
• 2 cans chili beans
• 1 onion
• katsup
• shredded cheese of some kind

Directions

1. saute onion and add ground beef to skillet. Season to liking.
2. peel if you like and thin slice potatoes
3. in a rectangle baking dish, layer potatoes, beans, meat and cheese (like a lasagna) until you have used all your ingredients. Try and make at least 2 or 3 layers with extra cheese on top.
4. Bake at 350 for one hour. Serve and enjoy!

@ 2fb77d26:c47a6ee1

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,

wenn wir an Schlachtfelder denken, sehen wir vor unserem inneren Auge düstere Bilder von verkohlten Wracks, von Einschlagkratern, schreienden Verwundeten, Leichen und dichten Rauchschwaden, die am Horizont über verbrannter Erde wabern.

Vergleichbare Assoziationen drängen sich auf, versucht man in Bilder zu fassen, in was für einer Gesellschaft wir mittlerweile leben. Intellektuelle Wracks, mediales Flächenbombardement, stumme Schreie von Pharmaopfern und hungernden Kindern, weggescrollt von Smartphone-Zombies, deren letzter Hauch Empathie am Rande ihres dissoziativen Wahrnehmungshorizontes verblasst. Zivilisatorische Transformation als Kriegsfilm.

Früher verliefen die Frontlinien von Klassenkampf und Propagandakrieg durch die Auslagen der Zeitungskioske, durch Rundfunkredaktionen und über die nach Sendeschluss flimmernden Bildschirme der Mattscheibe. Heute durch den Kopf.

Sprichwörtlich. Denn die »Vierte Industrielle Revolution« begegnet zunehmendem Desinteresse an Erziehungsfunk und aufkeimender Renitenz mit Dopamin-Shots, Implantaten und Nanotechnologie. Das erklärte Ziel der Herrschaftskaste ist nicht mehr die Manipulation, sondern die Fernsteuerung der Steuersklaven. Das »Hive Mind«.

Sendeschluss gibt es nicht mehr. Und der Newsfeed ist unerschöpflich, ist Manifestation dessen, was Aufmerksamkeitsökonomie für uns bedeutet: Den Verlust wertvoller Lebenszeit an neonbunte Sinnlosigkeit. Das Smartphone dient nicht der Evolution, sondern der Degeneration der Spezies Mensch. Es ist kein Werkzeug, sondern eine Waffe. Aber das Handy lässt sich — wie das TV-Gerät — abschalten. Oder abschaffen. Das birgt Risiken — denn nur Lufthoheit über dem Debattenraum garantiert dem postmodernen Feudalismus Machterhalt. Dementsprechend setzen seine Vertreter nun alles daran, invasive Technologien ins Feld zu führen, um sich unserer Gedanken bemächtigen zu können.

Der Kriegsfilm spielt sich also nicht mehr nur als dunkles Phantasma vor unserem inneren Auge ab, er handelt nicht von irgendeinem fernen Land — das zu erobernde Terrain, das primäre Schlachtfeld der biodigitalen Konvergenz liegt unmittelbar hinter dem Sehnerv. Kriegsziel: Die Verschmelzung von Mensch und Maschine. Transhumanismus. Und bei so manchem Zeitgenossen scheint bereits eine gewisse Konträrfaszination am eigenen Untergang Einzug zu halten. Die Résistance des Mediazän verteidigt demnach nicht nur das Recht auf Meinungsfreiheit, sie kämpft um den Erhalt des freien Willens. Um Menschlichkeit. Um das Fortbestehen unserer Spezies.

Vor diesem Hintergrund beschäftigt sich die dritte GEGENDRUCK mit dem »Schlachtfeld Gehirn«. Mit dem zerebralen Status quo. Die Autoren analysieren und dokumentieren den Stand von Forschung, Angriffswellen, Waffenarsenal und Verteidigungsmechanismen. Denn unser Leben ist das Produkt unserer Gedanken. Unserer Erinnerungen. Sie sind die Basis unserer Freiheit, unserer Geschichte und Zukunft. Wir müssen sie schützen. Mit allen Mitteln.

Denn »ein Kopf ohne Gedächtnis ist eine Festung ohne Besatzung« (Napoleon).

Im Namen des gesamten Teams,

Tom-Oliver Regenauer

Printausgabe bestellen unter: www.gegendruck.de

@ 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.

@ 1cb14ab3:95d52462

What is it?

I stumbled upon the Elgato Stream Deck while aimlessly browsing the web, and I was instantly intrigued. But one question kept nagging me—how would I use this, and why do I even need it?

I don’t stream.

At first glance, it seemed like just another gadget to clutter my already cramped desk in my tiny Shanghai apartment. But curiosity got the best of me. After some research, I decided to give it a shot and see what all the hype was about.

And wow—was that hype justified.

This isn’t a deep-dive review covering every feature (there are plenty of those online). Instead, I want to share some of the workflows I’ve set up and hopefully get you thinking about the endless possibilities you could create with a Stream Deck.

If you’re someone who loves making computer tasks easier but struggles to remember keyboard shortcuts beyond Ctrl + V, this little device might just change the way you work.

---

Launching Apps and Websites

I won’t lie—my favorite use for the Stream Deck is the sheer convenience of pressing a button and instantly launching what I need.

Want to watch YouTube? Button.

Open Photoshop? Button.

Play a game? Button.

Check Bitcoin prices? Those are always on the display.

Sure, it’s a small thing, but the speed and ease of launching apps or navigating to websites make a surprising difference. What used to be a few clicks and keystrokes is now a single tap.

After using the Stream Deck for a while, my laptop feels... clunky. I’ve genuinely noticed an increase in my productivity and focus.

---

Custom Application Profiles

One of the most powerful features of the Stream Deck is its ability to switch profiles based on the application you’re using.

This means that every time you switch programs, the buttons automatically adjust to show relevant shortcuts and commands. It’s a game-changer for software with hundreds of keyboard shortcuts, making multitasking seamless.

I’ll admit—setting up custom profiles can be a bit time-consuming. The good news? You don’t have to start from scratch. There are tons of downloadable third-party profiles for popular programs like Illustrator, Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, DaVinci Resolve, Microsoft Office, and Ableton.

If your favorite app doesn’t have a pre-made profile, you can always build your own. It takes some effort, but once it's set up, the workflow improvements are worth it.

---

Music and Audio Control

I use an audio interface for lossless wired playback and external microphone support. The Stream Deck makes switching between my computer’s default mic and my studio mic effortless—no more digging through system preferences.

Even if you don’t use external audio gear, the Stream Deck still has plenty of value for music lovers.

It integrates with Apple Music and Spotify, letting you control playback, skip tracks, like songs, and add them to playlists—all without switching apps. Elgato is constantly adding new third-party integrations, which gives the device even more longevity.

---

Lighting and Smart Home Control

If you have smart home devices, the Stream Deck can act as a command center. It integrates with platforms like Philips Hue, LIFX, Nanoleaf, and IFTTT, letting you control lights, scenes, and colors with a single tap.

Want to set the mood for gaming, reading, or watching a movie? Done.

You can even use it to trigger other smart devices, like cameras, thermostats, or speakers, using IFTTT applets. The possibilities here are endless.

---

Finder and Document Shortcuts

One of the most unexpectedly useful features for me has been quick access to folders and files.

I’ve set up buttons for my most frequently used folders—Downloads, Desktop, and Documents—so I can access them instantly. I’ve also created buttons for specific files like spreadsheets and PDFs, so I don’t have to dig through folders to find them.

It sounds simple, but when juggling multiple projects, these little time-savers add up fast.

---

Final Thoughts

The Elgato Stream Deck is a surprisingly versatile tool that enhances productivity, creativity, and entertainment. Whether you’re launching apps, controlling music, managing smart devices, or creating complex workflows, it streamlines everyday tasks in a way that’s hard to go back from.

At first, I thought it was just for streamers. Now? I can’t imagine working without it.

I hope this post gives you some ideas on how to make the most of a Stream Deck. If you have any questions or thoughts, drop a comment below.

Thanks for reading!

---

Feel free to support me by grabbing one through my affiliate link below:

Purchase a Stream Deck

---

More from Hes

Full Portfolio

Online Store

Artist Statements

Travel Guides

Photography

Writings

---

Originally published in 2022. All images are credit of Hes, but you are free to download and use for any purpose. If you find joy from my art, please feel free to send a zap. Enjoy life on a Bitcoin standard.

@ 1e566682:60493eed

بازار ارزهای دیجیتال به‌زودی شاهد یک تغییر مهم خواهد بود. طبق گزارش اخیر منتشرشده در فوربز، بیت‌کوین و سایر ارزهای دیجیتال در آستانه یک "زلزله قیمتی" قرار دارند که به دلیل تغییرات نظارتی و تصمیمات کلان اقتصادی در ایالات متحده شکل می‌گیرد. کارشناسان پیش‌بینی می‌کنند که این تغییرات می‌توانند نوسانات شدیدی در ارزش دارایی‌های دیجیتال ایجاد کنند و بازار را تحت تأثیر قرار دهند.

دلایل اصلی این زلزله قیمتی

1. سیاست‌های جدید نظارتی و قانونی

دولت آمریکا به دنبال وضع مقررات سخت‌گیرانه‌تری برای نظارت بر ارزهای دیجیتال است. کمیسیون بورس و اوراق بهادار ایالات متحده و سایر نهادهای نظارتی در حال بررسی اقداماتی برای محدود کردن برخی فعالیت‌های مرتبط با ارزهای دیجیتال هستند. این مقررات می‌تواند شامل نظارت دقیق‌تر بر صرافی‌های ارز دیجیتال، سخت‌گیری در فرآیندهای ضدپولشویی و احراز هویت مشتریان باشد.

1. تغییرات مالیاتی و تأثیر آن بر سرمایه‌گذاران

دولت ایالات متحده در حال بررسی اصلاحات مالیاتی است که می‌تواند تأثیر قابل‌توجهی بر سرمایه‌گذاران ارزهای دیجیتال بگذارد. مالیات بر سود حاصل از معاملات ارزهای دیجیتال می‌تواند افزایش یابد و سرمایه‌گذاران را به اتخاذ استراتژی‌های جدید معاملاتی وادار کند. این مسئله ممکن است موجب کاهش حجم معاملات و افزایش نوسانات قیمتی شود.

1. سیاست‌های پولی فدرال رزرو

فدرال رزرو (بانک مرکزی آمریکا) نقش مهمی در تعیین نرخ بهره و سیاست‌های مالی دارد. اگر نرخ بهره افزایش یابد، سرمایه‌گذاران ممکن است تمایل بیشتری به سرمایه‌گذاری در دارایی‌های کم‌ریسک مانند اوراق قرضه دولتی داشته باشند و سرمایه‌های خود را از بازار ارزهای دیجیتال خارج کنند. این امر می‌تواند منجر به کاهش قیمت بیت‌کوین و سایر رمزارزها شود.

1. افزایش پذیرش سازمانی و واکنش بازار

در حالی که قوانین سخت‌گیرانه می‌توانند فشار نزولی بر قیمت‌ها وارد کنند، افزایش پذیرش بیت‌کوین توسط شرکت‌های بزرگ و موسسات مالی می‌تواند از کاهش شدید قیمت‌ها جلوگیری کند. بسیاری از شرکت‌ها همچنان به پذیرش رمزارزها به‌عنوان یک روش پرداخت ادامه می‌دهند و برخی بانک‌های بزرگ نیز وارد بازار رمزارز شده‌اند که این موضوع می‌تواند روند کلی بازار را تغییر دهد.

تأثیرات احتمالی بر قیمت بیت‌کوین و سایر ارزهای دیجیتال

با در نظر گرفتن این عوامل، دو سناریوی اصلی برای آینده قیمت بیت‌کوین و بازار رمزارزها وجود دارد:

• سناریوی نزولی: اگر مقررات سخت‌گیرانه اجرایی شوند و نرخ بهره افزایش یابد، ممکن است بیت‌کوین و سایر رمزارزها با کاهش قیمت مواجه شوند. در این شرایط، سرمایه‌گذاران خرد و سازمانی ممکن است با خروج از بازار، نوسانات شدیدتری را رقم بزنند.

• سناریوی صعودی: در صورتی که افزایش پذیرش بیت‌کوین در میان موسسات مالی ادامه یابد و قوانین به‌طور متعادل اجرا شوند، احتمال دارد که بیت‌کوین بتواند سطح حمایتی خود را حفظ کرده و در بلندمدت به رشد خود ادامه دهد.

جمع‌بندی: سرمایه‌گذاران باید چه کار کنند؟

با توجه به این شرایط، سرمایه‌گذاران ارزهای دیجیتال باید با دقت تحولات نظارتی و اقتصادی را دنبال کنند. مدیریت ریسک، تنوع‌بخشی به سبد سرمایه‌گذاری و در نظر گرفتن چشم‌انداز بلندمدت می‌تواند از ضررهای احتمالی جلوگیری کند.

این زلزله قیمتی ممکن است بازار رمزارزها را به شدت متزلزل کند، اما همان‌طور که در گذشته نیز دیده‌ایم، بازار ارزهای دیجیتال بارها از بحران‌های مشابه عبور کرده و به رشد خود ادامه داده است. باید دید که در نهایت این تغییرات چگونه شکل خواهند گرفت و چه تأثیری بر آینده بیت‌کوین و سایر ارزهای دیجیتال خواهند گذاشت.

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

There was a slight dust up recently over a website someone runs removing a listing for an app someone built based on entirely arbitrary criteria. I'm not to going to attempt to speak for either wounded party, but I would like to share my own personal definition for what constitutes a "nostr app" in an effort to help clarify what might be an otherwise confusing and opaque purity test.

In this post, I will be committing the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, in which I start with the most liberal definition I can come up with, and gradually refine it until all that is left is the purest, gleamingest, most imaginary and unattainable nostr app imaginable. As I write this, I wonder if anything built yet will actually qualify. In any case, here we go.

It uses nostr

The lowest bar for what a "nostr app" might be is an app ("application" - i.e. software, not necessarily a native app of any kind) that has some nostr-specific code in it, but which doesn't take any advantage of what makes nostr distinctive as a protocol.

Examples might include a scraper of some kind which fulfills its charter by fetching data from relays (regardless of whether it validates or retains signatures). Another might be a regular web 2.0 app which provides an option to "log in with nostr" by requesting and storing the user's public key.

In either case, the fact that nostr is involved is entirely neutral. A scraper can scrape html, pdfs, jsonl, whatever data source - nostr relays are just another target. Likewise, a user's key in this scenario is treated merely as an opaque identifier, with no appreciation for the super powers it brings along.

In most cases, this kind of app only exists as a marketing ploy, or less cynically, because it wants to get in on the hype of being a "nostr app", without the developer quite understanding what that means, or having the budget to execute properly on the claim.

It leverages nostr

Some of you might be wondering, "isn't 'leverage' a synonym for 'use'?" And you would be right, but for one connotative difference. It's possible to "use" something improperly, but by definition leverage gives you a mechanical advantage that you wouldn't otherwise have. This is the second category of "nostr app".

This kind of app gets some benefit out of the nostr protocol and network, but in an entirely selfish fashion. The intention of this kind of app is not to augment the nostr network, but to augment its own UX by borrowing some nifty thing from the protocol without really contributing anything back.

Some examples might include:

• Using nostr signers to encrypt or sign data, and then store that data on a proprietary server.
• Using nostr relays as a kind of low-code backend, but using proprietary event payloads.
• Using nostr event kinds to represent data (why), but not leveraging the trustlessness that buys you.

An application in this category might even communicate to its users via nostr DMs - but this doesn't make it a "nostr app" any more than a website that emails you hot deals on herbal supplements is an "email app". These apps are purely parasitic on the nostr ecosystem.

In the long-term, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Email's ubiquity is self-reinforcing. But in the short term, this kind of "nostr app" can actually do damage to nostr's reputation by over-promising and under-delivering.

It complements nostr

Next up, we have apps that get some benefit out of nostr as above, but give back by providing a unique value proposition to nostr users as nostr users. This is a bit of a fine distinction, but for me this category is for apps which focus on solving problems that nostr isn't good at solving, leaving the nostr integration in a secondary or supporting role.

One example of this kind of app was Mutiny (RIP), which not only allowed users to sign in with nostr, but also pulled those users' social graphs so that users could send money to people they knew and trusted. Mutiny was doing a great job of leveraging nostr, as well as providing value to users with nostr identities - but it was still primarily a bitcoin wallet, not a "nostr app" in the purest sense.

Other examples are things like Nostr Nests and Zap.stream, whose core value proposition is streaming video or audio content. Both make great use of nostr identities, data formats, and relays, but they're primarily streaming apps. A good litmus test for things like this is: if you got rid of nostr, would it be the same product (even if inferior in certain ways)?

A similar category is infrastructure providers that benefit nostr by their existence (and may in fact be targeted explicitly at nostr users), but do things in a centralized, old-web way; for example: media hosts, DNS registrars, hosting providers, and CDNs.

To be clear here, I'm not casting aspersions (I don't even know what those are, or where to buy them). All the apps mentioned above use nostr to great effect, and are a real benefit to nostr users. But they are not True Scotsmen.

It embodies nostr

Ok, here we go. This is the crème de la crème, the top du top, the meilleur du meilleur, the bee's knees. The purest, holiest, most chaste category of nostr app out there. The apps which are, indeed, nostr indigitate.

This category of nostr app (see, no quotes this time) can be defined by the converse of the previous category. If nostr was removed from this type of application, would it be impossible to create the same product?

To tease this apart a bit, apps that leverage the technical aspects of nostr are dependent on nostr the protocol, while apps that benefit nostr exclusively via network effect are integrated into nostr the network. An app that does both things is working in symbiosis with nostr as a whole.

An app that embraces both nostr's protocol and its network becomes an organic extension of every other nostr app out there, multiplying both its competitive moat and its contribution to the ecosystem:

• In contrast to apps that only borrow from nostr on the technical level but continue to operate in their own silos, an application integrated into the nostr network comes pre-packaged with existing users, and is able to provide more value to those users because of other nostr products. On nostr, it's a good thing to advertise your competitors.
• In contrast to apps that only market themselves to nostr users without building out a deep integration on the protocol level, a deeply integrated app becomes an asset to every other nostr app by becoming an organic extension of them through interoperability. This results in increased traffic to the app as other developers and users refer people to it instead of solving their problem on their own. This is the "micro-apps" utopia we've all been waiting for.

Credible exit doesn't matter if there aren't alternative services. Interoperability is pointless if other applications don't offer something your app doesn't. Marketing to nostr users doesn't matter if you don't augment their agency as nostr users.

If I had to choose a single NIP that represents the mindset behind this kind of app, it would be NIP 89 A.K.A. "Recommended Application Handlers", which states:

Nostr's discoverability and transparent event interaction is one of its most interesting/novel mechanics. This NIP provides a simple way for clients to discover applications that handle events of a specific kind to ensure smooth cross-client and cross-kind interactions.

These handlers are the glue that holds nostr apps together. A single event, signed by the developer of an application (or by the application's own account) tells anyone who wants to know 1. what event kinds the app supports, 2. how to link to the app (if it's a client), and (if the pubkey also publishes a kind 10002), 3. which relays the app prefers.

As a sidenote, NIP 89 is currently focused more on clients, leaving DVMs, relays, signers, etc somewhat out in the cold. Updating 89 to include tailored listings for each kind of supporting app would be a huge improvement to the protocol. This, plus a good front end for navigating these listings (sorry nostrapp.link, close but no cigar) would obviate the evil centralized websites that curate apps based on arbitrary criteria.

Examples of this kind of app obviously include many kind 1 clients, as well as clients that attempt to bring the benefits of the nostr protocol and network to new use cases - whether long form content, video, image posts, music, emojis, recipes, project management, or any other "content type".

To drill down into one example, let's think for a moment about forms. What's so great about a forms app that is built on nostr? Well,

• There is a spec for forms and responses, which means that...
• Multiple clients can implement the same data format, allowing for credible exit and user choice, even of...
• Other products not focused on forms, which can still view, respond to, or embed forms, and which can send their users via NIP 89 to a client that does...
• Cryptographically sign forms and responses, which means they are self-authenticating and can be sent to...
• Multiple relays, which reduces the amount of trust necessary to be confident results haven't been deliberately "lost".

Show me a forms product that does all of those things, and isn't built on nostr. You can't, because it doesn't exist. Meanwhile, there are plenty of image hosts with APIs, streaming services, and bitcoin wallets which have basically the same levels of censorship resistance, interoperability, and network effect as if they weren't built on nostr.

It supports nostr

Notice I haven't said anything about whether relays, signers, blossom servers, software libraries, DVMs, and the accumulated addenda of the nostr ecosystem are nostr apps. Well, they are (usually).

This is the category of nostr app that gets none of the credit for doing all of the work. There's no question that they qualify as beautiful nostrcorns, because their value propositions are entirely meaningless outside of the context of nostr. Who needs a signer if you don't have a cryptographic identity you need to protect? DVMs are literally impossible to use without relays. How are you going to find the blossom server that will serve a given hash if you don't know which servers the publishing user has selected to store their content?

In addition to being entirely contextualized by nostr architecture, this type of nostr app is valuable because it does things "the nostr way". By that I mean that they don't simply try to replicate existing internet functionality into a nostr context; instead, they create entirely new ways of putting the basic building blocks of the internet back together.

A great example of this is how Nostr Connect, Nostr Wallet Connect, and DVMs all use relays as brokers, which allows service providers to avoid having to accept incoming network connections. This opens up really interesting possibilities all on its own.

So while I might hesitate to call many of these things "apps", they are certainly "nostr".

Appendix: it smells like a NINO

So, let's say you've created an app, but when you show it to people they politely smile, nod, and call it a NINO (Nostr In Name Only). What's a hacker to do? Well, here's your handy-dandy guide on how to wash that NINO stench off and Become a Nostr.

You app might be a NINO if:

• There's no NIP for your data format (or you're abusing NIP 78, 32, etc by inventing a sub-protocol inside an existing event kind)
• There's a NIP, but no one knows about it because it's in a text file on your hard drive (or buried in your project's repository)
• Your NIP imposes an incompatible/centralized/legacy web paradigm onto nostr
• Your NIP relies on trusted third (or first) parties
• There's only one implementation of your NIP (yours)
• Your core value proposition doesn't depend on relays, events, or nostr identities
• One or more relay urls are hard-coded into the source code
• Your app depends on a specific relay implementation to work (ahem, relay29)
• You don't validate event signatures
• You don't publish events to relays you don't control
• You don't read events from relays you don't control
• You use legacy web services to solve problems, rather than nostr-native solutions
• You use nostr-native solutions, but you've hardcoded their pubkeys or URLs into your app
• You don't use NIP 89 to discover clients and services
• You haven't published a NIP 89 listing for your app
• You don't leverage your users' web of trust for filtering out spam
• You don't respect your users' mute lists
• You try to "own" your users' data

Now let me just re-iterate - it's ok to be a NINO. We need NINOs, because nostr can't (and shouldn't) tackle every problem. You just need to decide whether your app, as a NINO, is actually contributing to the nostr ecosystem, or whether you're just using buzzwords to whitewash a legacy web software product.

If you're in the former camp, great! If you're in the latter, what are you waiting for? Only you can fix your NINO problem. And there are lots of ways to do this, depending on your own unique situation:

• Drop nostr support if it's not doing anyone any good. If you want to build a normal company and make some money, that's perfectly fine.
• Build out your nostr integration - start taking advantage of webs of trust, self-authenticating data, event handlers, etc.
• Work around the problem. Think you need a special relay feature for your app to work? Guess again. Consider encryption, AUTH, DVMs, or better data formats.
• Think your idea is a good one? Talk to other devs or open a PR to the nips repo. No one can adopt your NIP if they don't know about it.
• Keep going. It can sometimes be hard to distinguish a research project from a NINO. New ideas have to be built out before they can be fully appreciated.
• Listen to advice. Nostr developers are friendly and happy to help. If you're not sure why you're getting traction, ask!

I sincerely hope this article is useful for all of you out there in NINO land. Maybe this made you feel better about not passing the totally optional nostr app purity test. Or maybe it gave you some actionable next steps towards making a great NINON (Nostr In Not Only Name) app. In either case, GM and PV.

@ 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.

@ df57b498:d049124f

Chef's notes

This is cobbled together from trial and error and the web.

Serve hot pancakes with preferably butter and maple syrup. Add other toppings like bananas, nuts, or other fruits and toppings as have available and/or desired.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10 minutes
• 🍳 Cook time: 10 minutes

Ingredients

• 1 cup flour
• 2 tablespoons sugar
• 2 teaspoons baking powder
• 1 teaspoon salt
• 1 cup milk
• 2 tablespoons vegetable oil
• 1 egg, beaten

Directions

1. Combine the dry ingredients.
2. Add the wet ingredients and mix.
3. Pour or ladle the batter onto the oiled griddle or pan.
4. Cook until bubbles form, flip, and cook on the other side.

@ 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.

@ 8d34bd24:414be32b

So many of our problems are due to our point of view. The closer our point of view gets to God, the more peace and joy we will feel.

Too often we look at God as the big, bad killjoy. We resent when He tells us all the “fun” things we aren’t supposed to do and when He tells us to do difficult things like submit to God, submit to husbands, submit to authorities. Too many people focus on the “do nots,” and don’t like the idea of anyone telling them what to do. They then do their own thing, which they think will make them happy. Unfortunately, this leads to the opposite.

God is our Creator. He created us for a purpose within the rest of His creation.

For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. (Ephesians 2:10)

When we are doing His will we will find peace and joy. When we fight Him on what we should and should not be doing, we feel frustration, depression, and even despair. Our constant seeking of things to make us happy is actually our innate desire for God and to fulfill His will. Unfortunately, we frequently don’t see the truth and avoid the one thing that will give us peace because it is hard, inconvenient, and doesn’t lead to what we think we want right now.

God wants what is best for us. He also thinks eternally. He doesn’t think in the here and now, like we do. Just as a parent makes decisions for his/her child based on knowledge of what will be better for them in the long term (saving vs spending, healthy food vs junk food, etc.), God makes decisions for us based on what will best prepare us for eternity with Him. Frequently that looks much different than what we think we want. Frequently that even includes hardship and pain because we are much more likely to grow in faith, strength, and holiness during hardship than we do during comfort. We need to understand that God knows best and that He never makes a mistake.

Trust in the Lord with all your heart\ And do not lean on your own understanding.\ In all your ways acknowledge Him,\ And He will make your paths straight.\ Do not be wise in your own eyes;\ Fear the Lord and turn away from evil.\ It will be healing to your body\ And refreshment to your bones. (Proverbs 3:5-8)

Nothing happens on earth without God allowing it. Just as Satan had to ask permission to persecute Job, in the same way nobody can cause believers harm without God allowing it for His purpose, which is usually related to helping them to put their full trust in Him.

Remember the former things long past,\ For I am God, and there is no other;\ I am God, and there is no one like Me,\ Declaring the end from the beginning,\ And from ancient times things which have not been done,\ Saying, ‘My purpose will be established,\ And I will accomplish all My good pleasure’; (Isaiah 46:9-10)

So often I focus on how awesome, powerful, and holy our God is. He is also the most tender, loving, caring, personal father God. Read Psalm 139. The God of the Bible is not a distant clock maker who set the world in motion and let it go about without His care. He is personally involved in everything that happens and in the life of every person on earth, but especially in the life of those who trust in Him.

O Lord, You have searched me and known me.\ You know when I sit down and when I rise up;\ You understand my thought from afar.\ You scrutinize my path and my lying down,\ *And are intimately acquainted with all my ways.\ Even before there is a word on my tongue,\ Behold, O Lord, You know it all.*\ You have enclosed me behind and before,\ And laid Your hand upon me.\ Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;\ It is too high, I cannot attain to it.\ Where can I go from Your Spirit?\ Or where can I flee from Your presence?\ If I ascend to heaven, You are there;\ If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there.\ If I take the wings of the dawn,\ If I dwell in the remotest part of the sea,\ *Even there Your hand will lead me*,\ And Your right hand will lay hold of me.\ If I say, “Surely the darkness will overwhelm me,\ And the light around me will be night,”\ Even the darkness is not dark to You,\ And the night is as bright as the day.\ Darkness and light are alike to You.\ For You formed my inward parts;\ You wove me in my mother’s womb.\ I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;\ Wonderful are Your works,\ And my soul knows it very well.\ My frame was not hidden from You,\ When I was made in secret,\ And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth;\ Your eyes have seen my unformed substance;\ And in Your book were all written\ The days that were ordained for me,\ When as yet there was not one of them.\ How precious also are Your thoughts to me, O God!\ How vast is the sum of them!\ If I should count them, they would outnumber the sand.\ When I awake, I am still with You.\ O that You would slay the wicked, O God;\ Depart from me, therefore, men of bloodshed.\ For they speak against You wickedly,\ And Your enemies take Your name in vain.\ Do I not hate those who hate You, O Lord?\ And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?\ I hate them with the utmost hatred;|\ They have become my enemies.\ **Search me, O God, and know my heart;\ Try me and know my anxious thoughts;\ And see if there be any hurtful way in me,\ And lead me in the everlasting way. (Psalm 139) {emphasis mine}

What is one of the greatest desires of our hearts? Isn’t it to be truly known and loved for who we are?

O Lord, You have searched me and known me.\ You know when I sit down and when I rise up;\ You understand my thought from afar. (Psalm 139:1-2)

How amazing is it that the Creator of the universe knows you personally and cares for you among all of creation?

Even before there is a word on my tongue,\ Behold, O Lord, You know it all. (Psalm 139:4)

He knows our every action, our every thought, and our every feeling before we do.

Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;\ It is too high, I cannot attain to it. (Psalm 139:6)

We cannot fully understand how much our Creator cares for us and how carefully God guides us in our every path. We usually can’t see what is for our best. We usually can’t see what great work God is working in us. We usually can’t comprehend how great is His love, knowledge, and plan.

Even there Your hand will lead me,\ And Your right hand will lay hold of me. (Psalm 139:10)

It doesn’t matter how difficult a situation we have gotten into. It doesn’t matter how powerful our adversaries are. It doesn’t matter how weak we are. God is always there guiding us and protecting us. Just as God allowed Job to go through difficulty as part of God’s plan for Job and for us, He did not allow Job to be killed. He was guided through the worst of situations and led to ultimate blessing.

Your eyes have seen my unformed substance;\ And in Your book were all written\ The days that were ordained for me,\ When as yet there was not one of them. (Psalm 139:16)

God knew us and had a plan for us before He even created the universe. He knew every day we would live before we were conceived. We can’t surprise Him and He will be guiding us every day of our lives, especially those who have trusted Him as savior.

How precious also are Your thoughts to me, O God!\ How vast is the sum of them! (Psalm 139:17)

We are precious to God and He should be precious to us because of all He has done for us.

Search me, O God, and know my heart;\ Try me and know my anxious thoughts;\ And see if there be any hurtful way in me,\ And lead me in the everlasting way. (Psalm 139:23-24)

This should be our prayer. We should ask for Him to bring are faults to our minds so we can repent and we should ask for Him to lead us in His “everlasting way.” We should admit that our Father God knows best and submit to His will. Everything goes so much smoother when we aren’t fighting our God. Even when He leads us through hardship, being in His will makes all of the difference in the world.

I pray that you will put your trust in our loving Creator and that you will submit to His will. I pray that you will understand that His ways are better even when you don’t understand the why. I pray that you will humbly submit to His will and be used to further the Kingdom for His glory and your blessing.

Trust Jesus.

FYI, Psalm 139 is also one of the best passages on why all believers should oppose abortion. In God’s universe there are no accidents and there are no unwanted babies. Every person ever conceived had a purpose in God’s plan. Every person ever conceived is valuable and made in the image of God. God values all human life and so should we.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

Chef's notes

arbitray

• test
• of
• chefs notes

hedding 2

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20
• 🍳 Cook time: 1 hour
• 🍽️ Servings: 5

Ingredients

• Test ingredient
• 2nd test ingredient

Directions

1. Bake
2. Cool

@ 30b99916:3cc6e3fe

Details

• 🍳 Cook time: 10 to 8 minutes at 350
• 🍽️ Servings: About 4 dozen cookies

Ingredients

• 2 sticks of butter
• 2 eggs
• 1 cup granulated sugar
• 1 cup brown sugar
• 1 cup peanut butter
• 1 t vanilla
• 2 cups flour
• 1/2 t salt
• 1 t soda
• 6 oz Semi-Sweet Chocolate chips (optional)

Directions

1. Blend butter, eggs, vanilla and sugars together thoroughly
2. Next blend in peanut butter thoroughly
3. Next blend in flour, salt, and soda thoroughly
4. Optional blend in chocolate chips
5. Add about table spoon of cookie dough per cookie on a cookie sheet. With a fork based in sugar place a cross hatch pattern on each cookie. Bake cookies for 10 to 8 minutes and place onto cooler rack.

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Definição de ULID:

Timestamp 48 bits, Aleatoriedade 80 bits Sendo Timestamp 48 bits inteiro, tempo UNIX em milissegundos, Não ficará sem espaço até o ano 10889 d.C. e Aleatoriedade 80 bits, Fonte criptograficamente segura de aleatoriedade, se possível.

Gerar ULID

```sql

CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS pgcrypto;

CREATE FUNCTION generate_ulid() RETURNS TEXT AS $$ DECLARE -- Crockford's Base32 encoding BYTEA = '0123456789ABCDEFGHJKMNPQRSTVWXYZ'; timestamp BYTEA = E'\000\000\000\000\000\000'; output TEXT = '';

unix_time BIGINT; ulid BYTEA; BEGIN -- 6 timestamp bytes unix_time = (EXTRACT(EPOCH FROM CLOCK_TIMESTAMP()) * 1000)::BIGINT; timestamp = SET_BYTE(timestamp, 0, (unix_time >> 40)::BIT(8)::INTEGER); timestamp = SET_BYTE(timestamp, 1, (unix_time >> 32)::BIT(8)::INTEGER); timestamp = SET_BYTE(timestamp, 2, (unix_time >> 24)::BIT(8)::INTEGER); timestamp = SET_BYTE(timestamp, 3, (unix_time >> 16)::BIT(8)::INTEGER); timestamp = SET_BYTE(timestamp, 4, (unix_time >> 8)::BIT(8)::INTEGER); timestamp = SET_BYTE(timestamp, 5, unix_time::BIT(8)::INTEGER);

-- 10 entropy bytes ulid = timestamp || gen_random_bytes(10);

-- Encode the timestamp output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 0) & 224) >> 5)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 0) & 31))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 1) & 248) >> 3)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 1) & 7) << 2) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 2) & 192) >> 6))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 2) & 62) >> 1)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 2) & 1) << 4) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 3) & 240) >> 4))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 3) & 15) << 1) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 4) & 128) >> 7))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 4) & 124) >> 2)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 4) & 3) << 3) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 5) & 224) >> 5))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 5) & 31)));

-- Encode the entropy output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 6) & 248) >> 3)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 6) & 7) << 2) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 7) & 192) >> 6))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 7) & 62) >> 1)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 7) & 1) << 4) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 8) & 240) >> 4))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 8) & 15) << 1) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 9) & 128) >> 7))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 9) & 124) >> 2)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 9) & 3) << 3) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 10) & 224) >> 5))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 10) & 31))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 11) & 248) >> 3)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 11) & 7) << 2) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 12) & 192) >> 6))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 12) & 62) >> 1)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 12) & 1) << 4) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 13) & 240) >> 4))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 13) & 15) << 1) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 14) & 128) >> 7))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 14) & 124) >> 2)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 14) & 3) << 3) | ((GET_BYTE(ulid, 15) & 224) >> 5))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(ulid, 15) & 31)));

RETURN output; END $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql VOLATILE; ```

ULID TO UUID

```sql CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION parse_ulid(ulid text) RETURNS bytea AS $$ DECLARE -- 16byte bytes bytea = E'\x00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000'; v char[]; -- Allow for O(1) lookup of index values dec integer[] = ARRAY[ 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 1, 18, 19, 1, 20, 21, 0, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 255, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 255, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 1, 18, 19, 1, 20, 21, 0, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 255, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ]; BEGIN IF NOT ulid ~* '^[0-7][0-9ABCDEFGHJKMNPQRSTVWXYZ]{25}$' THEN RAISE EXCEPTION 'Invalid ULID: %', ulid; END IF;

v = regexp_split_to_array(ulid, '');

-- 6 bytes timestamp (48 bits) bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 0, (dec[ASCII(v[1])] << 5) | dec[ASCII(v[2])]); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 1, (dec[ASCII(v[3])] << 3) | (dec[ASCII(v[4])] >> 2)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 2, (dec[ASCII(v[4])] << 6) | (dec[ASCII(v[5])] << 1) | (dec[ASCII(v[6])] >> 4)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 3, (dec[ASCII(v[6])] << 4) | (dec[ASCII(v[7])] >> 1)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 4, (dec[ASCII(v[7])] << 7) | (dec[ASCII(v[8])] << 2) | (dec[ASCII(v[9])] >> 3)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 5, (dec[ASCII(v[9])] << 5) | dec[ASCII(v[10])]);

-- 10 bytes of entropy (80 bits); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 6, (dec[ASCII(v[11])] << 3) | (dec[ASCII(v[12])] >> 2)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 7, (dec[ASCII(v[12])] << 6) | (dec[ASCII(v[13])] << 1) | (dec[ASCII(v[14])] >> 4)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 8, (dec[ASCII(v[14])] << 4) | (dec[ASCII(v[15])] >> 1)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 9, (dec[ASCII(v[15])] << 7) | (dec[ASCII(v[16])] << 2) | (dec[ASCII(v[17])] >> 3)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 10, (dec[ASCII(v[17])] << 5) | dec[ASCII(v[18])]); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 11, (dec[ASCII(v[19])] << 3) | (dec[ASCII(v[20])] >> 2)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 12, (dec[ASCII(v[20])] << 6) | (dec[ASCII(v[21])] << 1) | (dec[ASCII(v[22])] >> 4)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 13, (dec[ASCII(v[22])] << 4) | (dec[ASCII(v[23])] >> 1)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 14, (dec[ASCII(v[23])] << 7) | (dec[ASCII(v[24])] << 2) | (dec[ASCII(v[25])] >> 3)); bytes = SET_BYTE(bytes, 15, (dec[ASCII(v[25])] << 5) | dec[ASCII(v[26])]);

RETURN bytes; END $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE;

CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION ulid_to_uuid(ulid text) RETURNS uuid AS $$ BEGIN RETURN encode(parse_ulid(ulid), 'hex')::uuid; END $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE; ```

UUID to ULID

```sql CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION uuid_to_ulid(id uuid) RETURNS text AS $$ DECLARE encoding bytea = '0123456789ABCDEFGHJKMNPQRSTVWXYZ'; output text = ''; uuid_bytes bytea = uuid_send(id); BEGIN

-- Encode the timestamp output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 0) & 224) >> 5)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 0) & 31))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 1) & 248) >> 3)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 1) & 7) << 2) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 2) & 192) >> 6))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 2) & 62) >> 1)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 2) & 1) << 4) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 3) & 240) >> 4))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 3) & 15) << 1) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 4) & 128) >> 7))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 4) & 124) >> 2)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 4) & 3) << 3) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 5) & 224) >> 5))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 5) & 31)));

-- Encode the entropy output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 6) & 248) >> 3)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 6) & 7) << 2) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 7) & 192) >> 6))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 7) & 62) >> 1)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 7) & 1) << 4) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 8) & 240) >> 4))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 8) & 15) << 1) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 9) & 128) >> 7))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 9) & 124) >> 2)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 9) & 3) << 3) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 10) & 224) >> 5))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 10) & 31))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 11) & 248) >> 3)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 11) & 7) << 2) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 12) & 192) >> 6))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 12) & 62) >> 1)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 12) & 1) << 4) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 13) & 240) >> 4))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 13) & 15) << 1) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 14) & 128) >> 7))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 14) & 124) >> 2)); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 14) & 3) << 3) | ((GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 15) & 224) >> 5))); output = output || CHR(GET_BYTE(encoding, (GET_BYTE(uuid_bytes, 15) & 31)));

RETURN output; END $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE; ```

Gera 11 Digitos aleatórios: YBKXG0CKTH4

```sql -- Cria a extensão pgcrypto para gerar uuid CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS pgcrypto;

-- Cria a função para gerar ULID CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION gen_lrandom() RETURNS TEXT AS $$ DECLARE ts_millis BIGINT; ts_chars TEXT; random_bytes BYTEA; random_chars TEXT; base32_chars TEXT := '0123456789ABCDEFGHJKMNPQRSTVWXYZ'; i INT; BEGIN -- Pega o timestamp em milissegundos ts_millis := FLOOR(EXTRACT(EPOCH FROM clock_timestamp()) * 1000)::BIGINT;

-- Converte o timestamp para base32
ts_chars := '';
FOR i IN REVERSE 0..11 LOOP
    ts_chars := ts_chars || substr(base32_chars, ((ts_millis >> (5 * i)) & 31) + 1, 1);
END LOOP;

-- Gera 10 bytes aleatórios e converte para base32
random_bytes := gen_random_bytes(10);
random_chars := '';
FOR i IN 0..9 LOOP
    random_chars := random_chars || substr(base32_chars, ((get_byte(random_bytes, i) >> 3) & 31) + 1, 1);
    IF i < 9 THEN
        random_chars := random_chars || substr(base32_chars, (((get_byte(random_bytes, i) & 7) << 2) | (get_byte(random_bytes, i + 1) >> 6)) & 31 + 1, 1);
    ELSE
        random_chars := random_chars || substr(base32_chars, ((get_byte(random_bytes, i) & 7) << 2) + 1, 1);
    END IF;
END LOOP;

-- Concatena o timestamp e os caracteres aleatórios
RETURN ts_chars || random_chars;

END; $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql; ```

Exemplo de USO

```sql -- Criação da extensão caso não exista CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS pgcrypto; -- Criação da tabela pessoas CREATE TABLE pessoas ( ID UUID DEFAULT gen_random_uuid ( ) PRIMARY KEY, nome TEXT NOT NULL );

-- Busca Pessoa na tabela SELECT * FROM "pessoas" WHERE uuid_to_ulid ( ID ) = '252FAC9F3V8EF80SSDK8PXW02F'; ```

Fontes

• https://github.com/scoville/pgsql-ulid
• https://github.com/geckoboard/pgulid

@ 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

@ e97aaffa:2ebd765d

Será que neste ciclo teremos turistas no #Bitcoin? Nos últimos meses tenho me debruçado muito sobre este assunto, mas não consigo chegar a uma conclusão.

Antes de mais, o que são turistas? Os turistas são aqueles que compram Bitcoin alimentados pelo FOMO, com a ganância de enriquecer rapidamente. Não tem o mínimo conhecimento do Bitcoin, nem tem interesse em conhecer, só estão pelo dinheiro.

Com a entrada dos turistas, o preço do Bitcoin começa a valorizar exponencialmente, é a segunda fase da bullrun, acontece sempre após o halving e após superar o anterior ATH. Com o novo ATH começa a surgir as notícias nas televisões e jornais, o mainstream acorda. Só que a quantidade de turistas é de tal maneira elevada, muito superior à dos holders. Este desequilíbrio entre forças de curto prazo(turistas) e do longo prazo(holders), gera forte volatilidade. Quanto maior o desequilíbrio, maior a volatilidade. A avalanche de turistas, faz o preço disparar e quanto mais sobe, mais turistas atrai.

Só que o movimento não dura para sempre, a esperança dos turistas de enriquecer rápido, desvanece e rapidamente se transforma numa desilusão, na sua grande maioria entra em pânico, assim que o preço começa a corrigir, vendendo em prejuízo. Sendo responsável pelas gigantes correções, superiores a 70%.

Este é o meu 4° ciclo, eu noto que este está a ser completamente diferente. Nos anteriores, os turistas entravam pelo Bitcoin, mas desta vez está a acontecer uma mudança. Devido ao elevado marketcap do Bitcoin, este já não permite valorização exponenciais num curto espaço de tempo, estes turistas que procuram multiplicar o seu dinheiro por 10x, 100x ou 1000x, estão a ir directamente para as shitcoins ou memecoins. Estas valorização pornograficas, só acontecerá em meia dúzia, mas o grande problema é que existem milhões de memecoins, é como encontrar uma agulha num palheiro. É o verdadeiro casino e os turistas procuram isto.

Só que neste ciclo, a maior parte dos novos inflows estão a ser através do institucional, sobretudo pelos ETFs. Só que tem um perfil não diferente dos turistas, têm conhecimento de mercados financeiros tradicionais, são muito mais racionais, têm um conhecimento mínimo do Bitcoin. Não têm as mãos de diamante como os holders, mas também não são mãos de alface como os turistas. É um perfil de investidor intermédio. Poderá vender uma pequena parte do Bitcoin, para retirar uma parte do seu investimento inicial, mas tem um pensamento mais de médio-longo prazo.

Com isto, existe um maior equilíbrio entre os que pensam a curto prazo e os que pensam a longo prazo. Até ao momento, eu tenho a sensação que os turistas já não procuram o Bitcoin, ou são muito poucos.

O afastamento dos turistas é bom ou mau? A meu ver é bom, é verdade que deixamos de ter aquelas enormes explosões no preço para cima, mas também acredito que as correções também serão muito menores. Em suma, uma redução na volatilidade do Bitcoin. Mas essa redução na volatilidade, vai trazer um novo público, aquele que não é especulador, que apenas quer preservar o seu património, o real valor do Bitcoin, que pensa a longo prazo.

Estes turistas que procuram o 100x, com uma pura ganância, vão passar muitas noites sem dormir e na sua maioria vão perder muito dinheiro, vão acabar por receber uma dura lição de vida. Alguns vão finalmente compreender que Bitcoin é diferente, e que os 2x é suficiente para a sua vida.

A redução de turistas não afeta só o Bitcoin, mas também afeta o mercado das altcoins e das memecoins. Nos ciclos anteriores, os turistas entravam pelo Bitcoin mas depois rodavam o capital para as altcoins, gerando a chamada altseason. Se neste ciclo, os turistas descartam o Bitcoin, consequentemente a rotação será muito menor, possivelmente não haverá altseason.

Mas isto é apenas a minha convicção, só o tempo dirá, se os turistas trocaram o Bitcoin, pelo casino das memecoins.

@ c69b71dc:426ba763

Chef's notes

This raw vegan curry ramen is a vibrant, nourishing dish packed with fresh vegetables and a rich, creamy coconut curry broth. It’s quick to prepare, full of flavour, and the perfect guilt-free comfort food! 🌱 Feel free to use your favourite veggies👩🏼‍🍳

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 20 min.
• 🍳 Cook time: 0
• 🍽️ Servings: 2

Ingredients

• 500g or 2 packs kelp noodles
• 1/2 Lemon juice ( 1/4 for soaking and 1/4 for the soup
• Salt
• Fresh vegetables of your choice, such as: 4 medium mushrooms, 4 leaves red cabbage, 2 carrots (julienned or peeled into strips), 1 Celery stick (diced)
• 2 cups coconut milk (or coconut cream diluted with water)
• 1/2 flesh of a Coconut (optional, if using fresh coconuts) otherwise more coconut cream
• 1 thumb of fresh ginger
• 1 thumb of fresh turmeric
• 2 tbsp light miso paste
• 2 pitted dates
• 2 tbsp cashews
• 1 clove garlic
• 1 tsp curry powder or pepper (optional)

Directions

1. Prepare the Noodles: Rinse the kelp noodles thoroughly. Then soak them in warm water with a squeeze of lemon juice and a pinch of salt for 10 minutes to soften.
2. Prep the Vegetables: Thinly slice or julienne carrots, dice celery, thinly cut mushrooms, cut the red cabbage into thin strips.
3. Make the Broth: In a blender, combine the following: 2 cups coconut milk (or coconut cream diluted with water if fresh coconuts are unavailable), ginger, turmeric, 1/4 juice of 1 lemon, light miso paste, pitted dates, cashews, garlic, salt, curry powder
4. Blend on high speed for about 3 to 4 minutes until the broth is smooth and slightly warm. Do not overheat!
5. Assemble the Ramen: Drain the kelp noodles and place them in serving bowls. Arrange the prepped vegetables on top of the noodles. Pour the warm curry broth over the noodles and vegetables.
6. Serve immediately and enjoy your raw vegan ramen with chopsticks for an authentic touch!

@ 2cde0e02:180a96b9

Moving to pencil. Portraits too difficult currently in ink immediately.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/876045

@ 6f3670d9:03f04036

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

---

A Different Pickaxe

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

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

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

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

Flashing From Web UI

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

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

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

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

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

Flashing Using the Serial Port

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

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

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

Wiring

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

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

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

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

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

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

Setting up the Arduino

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

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

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

Click the "Install" button.

Once the package is installed, click "Close".

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flashing Using the Serial Port, for Real

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

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

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

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

sudo apt-get install pipx

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

pipx install esptool

The output will be something like this:

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

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

pipx ensurepath

And we'll see something like this:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hope this helps!

Stay humble,
dumb-package

A Warning About Beta Versions of AxeOS

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

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

Bonus: File Hashes

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

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

@ d1b118c6:4985b38d

Chef's notes

Let me know how it goes for you https://maria.omg.lol

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 5-20 minutes
• 🍳 Cook time: 20-40 minutes
• 🍽️ Servings: As many as you want omg!!!!

Ingredients

• Spaghetti/whatever pasta you want
• Garlic/smashed or diced as much as you want
• Tomatoes/ diced or more liquid state whatever you want
• Scallops/ I use the frozen bagged mini kind and just do a couple handfuls as many as you want
• Butter and/or olive oil but the butter is v good imo but also I used both
• Bacon/ make it extra crispy and then crumble up as much as you want
• Whatever seasonings

Directions

1. Set oven to 400° or so
2. Put all your bacon 🥓 strips onto tin foil lined baking sheet/s and then put the trays in the oven for 15-20 min
3. Boil up your pasta in salty water
4. Pull the bacon out when done
5. In a pan cook up the scallops real quick like 5-10 min idk
6. Sauté the tomatoes and garlic and whatever use whatever seasons and lots of butter
7. Strain the pasta when it’s ready
8. Mix pasta and sautéed sauce
9. Add more crumbled bacon on top #garnish

@ 30b99916:3cc6e3fe

Chef's notes

Recipe modified from a recipe published from a school cookbook in 1963.

Details

• 🍳 Cook time: 8 to 10 Minutes at 400
• 🍽️ Servings: 3 dozen or so depending on cookie size

Ingredients

• 2 sticks of butter
• 1 1/2 Cup sugar
• 2 eggs
• 1 t. vanilla (optional but recommended)
• 2 3/4 cups flour
• 2 t. Cream of tartar
• 1 t. Soda
• 1/4 t. Salt

Directions

1. 1. Heat over to 400
2. 1. Mix butter, sugar, eggs, and vanilla thoroughly.
3. 1. Sift together flour, cream of tartar, soda, salt and blend into mixture.
4. 1. Form small dough balls and roll in sugar/cinnamon
5. 1. Place each cookie dough ball 2" apart on a cookie sheet

@ 6f3670d9:03f04036

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

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

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

Stay humble,
dumb-package

@ 554ab6fe:c6cbc27e

Modern life, despite all our technology, can still feel challenging. Many of us work very long hours to make ends meet, burdened by stress that can dramatically affect our health. The internet provides us with a wealth of helpful knowledge but also bombards us with headlines that can make us uneasy about the state of the world. In short, life can feel very stressful. Sometimes, leaving it all behind and becoming a monk may seem like a perfect way to escape it all. Though this may work for some, this is simply not a practical thing to do for many of us. Many of us are here to stay. However, even though the stressful nature of society will not change for a very long time, it is possible to reorient one's perspective so that it feels less stressful. In other words, rather than needing to go to a temple to become a monk, one can learn to bring the monk mind here.

It can be challenging to know where to begin to generate a positive outlook on life. So many people try to give advice, yet there never seems to be a "one size fits all" approach. We attempt to solve our outlooks by rationalizing the situation in a more positive way. Indeed, this can be useful for some, but not all. Furthermore, different people require different rationalizations. Regardless of advice, some are still stuck wondering how to have a better outlook on life. There is, of course, another method of perspective, and that is through non-judgment and simple acceptance.

Mindfulness meditation is a method of training the mind to become calmer and more at peace. In the scientific community, meditation is defined as a method of self-regulation of attention to the present moment, involving adopting a particular orientation toward one's experiences characterized by curiosity, openness, acceptance, and non-judgmental (Bishop et al., 2004). The benefits of meditation are many; however, much more research is required to understand its benefits and mechanisms better. The most well-documented benefit of mindfulness meditation is its ability to alleviate stress and anxiety (Greeson et al., 2018; Petterson & Olson, 2017; Querstret et al., 2020). The method by which this occurs is still reasonably unclear, yet many researchers have developed psychological and physiological theories. Furthermore, meditation reduces stress and anxiety while also creating resilience (Chin et al., 2019; Hwang et al., 2018). So, not only does it seem to be a curative treatment, but a preventative one as well. Understanding how meditation creates stress resilience is crucial to understand why meditation is so beneficial to health—the lessons provided in the research share profound philosophical lessons for us to bear in mind.

When studying meditation and its effects on the mind and body, it is essential to take a neuroscientific and psychological approach. The neuroscientific approach is valuable in both providing evidence that meditation impacts the body and sheds light on the mechanisms of action. A psychological perspective is also critical because it evaluates the mental schemas' effect on the body to better understand how the reader can practice this at home and in their daily lives. Both points of view will be discussed below.

Amygdala and ACC connectivity

The two brain areas that seem to be highly related to the process of resilience toward stress induced by mindfulness meditation are the amygdala and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC).

The amygdala is found medial to the brain's temporal lobe and plays a vital role in emotional regulation and attention (Desbordes et al., 2012). For this reason, numerous studies have shown to be heavily involved in the experience of stress (Britton, 2006; Hölzel et al., 2009; Rubinow et al., 2016). It also influences the body in response to stress. For example, the amygdala regulates blood pressure in response to stressful stimuli (Saha, 2005).

The role of the ACC is seemingly more complex than the amygdala. In general, it is involved in executing responses regarding incoming interoceptive signals (signals from within the body) (Craig, 2002). For this reason, it connects to the motor cortex of the brain (Craig, 2002). On this same note, the anterior portion of the amygdala, the more executive region, has been associated with regulating endocrine functions, conditioned learning responses, expressing internal states vocally, and maternal-infant interactions (Devinsky et al., 1995). The ACC is related mainly to the processing of internal stimuli, associating it with the practice of mindfulness meditation. Less clear is how it relates to the amygdala and resilience to stress.

The neuroscientific observations of stress resilience are found within the connectivity between the amygdala and the ACC. In a randomized control trial involving a 3-day intensive mindfulness meditation program, researchers found that reduced stress following the practice was marked by decreased communication between the amygdala and the ACC (Taren et al., 2014). The study also noted reduced communication between the amygdala and ACC lessened HPA-axis activation (Taren et al., 2014). The HPA-axis is responsible for releasing hormones such as cortisol, which is a common biomarker for the activation of stress. This study is not alone in observing signs that mindfulness meditation reduces cortisol (Hoge et al., 2018). This is strong evidence that meditation induces physical changes within the brain, promoting resilience to biological responses to stress. The question is, how does this occur mentally, and how can we put this into practice?

Important Techniques within Meditation

The discussion and research surrounding how meditation leads to physical changes in the brain and body are complex and poorly understood. The appreciation for science in the west is new, and there is much research to be done. The author's current opinion is that meditation involves both physical and mental mechanisms that lead to some of its practical health benefits. Regarding resilience, a randomized control trial also observed that the resilience created was both physical and mental (Hoge et al., 2018). Though the exact mechanism is not fully understood, there has been an effort to gain insight applicable to modern-day life.

The research involving the mechanism at which meditation generates resilience towards stress is often pursued from a psychological point of view. To pursue this question, experiments involve different groups of people who are asked to perform similar tasks but differ in mental schemas practiced. The observed differences in health results indicate specific meditation techniques that are so helpful in generating resilience. For example, a randomized control trial in 2018 involved sending a group of participants to a temple (Hwang et al., 2018). One group was asked to participate in meditation sessions, while another group was asked to simply relax during this time at a peaceful place. The purpose was to discern whether or not the relaxing aspect of meditation was sufficient to produce resilience to stress or if something else was causing the change. The results found that both groups showed short-term benefits, but only the meditators had prolonged resilience towards stress months after the experiment. The results indicate that there was a mental practice involved through meditation that promoted stress resilience. A randomized control trial in 2019 expanded on this investigation by having one group of meditators purely practice the focused attention on the present, while the other group focused on the present while also cultivating a perspective of acceptance to all incoming stimuli (Chin et al., 2019). This study found that those who practiced a non-judgmental awareness showed a more significant reduction of stress than the attention group and the non-meditators, suggesting that the non-judgmental awareness of the present moment and experience was an essential aspect of stress resilience. Others have produced a similar theory on why meditation seems to be a healthy therapeutic method for those suffering from PTSD (Thompson & Waltz, 2010). The significance of these findings is not only crucial for those who have a meditation practice but anyone in general.

Be Non-Judgmental

A key aspect of meditation practice is to be mindful and aware of the present experience and interpret all thoughts, experiences, and stimuli in an accepting and non-judgemental manner. Not only is this important within the philosophical teachings, but it is a core aspect of how meditation works from a scientific point of view. This has profound implications for the importance of how we generate personal narratives. In meditation, one learns to let go of every incoming experience, no matter how tempting it is to value that thought or feeling. This is perhaps why the amygdala and ACC are involved. The amygdala is involved in emotions and stress, and the ACC is involved in "doing something about it." In meditation, no matter the feeling, thought, or stressor, one must cultivate an attitude of acceptance. One must simply continue sitting and focusing on the present. There is no evaluation, no judgment, simply acceptance.

This article began with the idea that one can become resilient to stress and experience less of it by simply reorienting their perspective of modern stressors. It was also stated that there is seemingly no one answer for everyone. This may be because people often try to generate rational or schemas to help people think about events differently. This article argues a different approach: don't think, just accept, let go, and move on. This is easier said than done, of course, and by no means are the benefits of meditation best articulated through argument. It is best to be experienced first hand.

Nonetheless, we are heavily burdened by the values we give to thoughts related to the stressors of modern-day life. We cannot avoid the stressors, but we can change their power over us. Removing their meaning and value removes their power and influence.

References

Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., Segal, Z. v., Abbey, S., Speca, M., Velting, D., & Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A Proposed Operational Definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230–241. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bph077

Britton, W. B. (2006). Meditation and Depression.

Chin, B., Lindsay, E. K., Greco, C. M., Brown, K. W., Smyth, J. M., Wright, A. G. C., & Creswell, J. D. (2019). Psychological mechanisms driving stress resilience in mindfulness training: A randomized controlled trial. Health Psychology, 38(8), 759–768. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000763

Craig, A. D. (2002). How do you feel? Nature Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105308095062

Desbordes, G., Negi, L. T., Pace, T. W. W., Alan Wallace, B., Raison, C. L., & Schwartz, E. L. (2012). Effects of mindful-attention and compassion meditation training on amygdala response to emotional stimuli in an ordinary, Nonmeditative State. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6(OCTOBER 2012), 292. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00292

Devinsky, O., Morrell, M. J., & Vogt, B. A. (1995). Contributions of anterior cingulate cortex to behaviour. Brain, 118(1), 279–306. https://doi.org/10.1093/BRAIN/118.1.279

Greeson, J. M., Zarrin, H., Smoski, M. J., Brantley, J. G., Lynch, T. R., Webber, D. M., Hall, M. H., Suarez, E. C., & Wolever, R. Q. (2018). Mindfulness Meditation Targets Transdiagnostic Symptoms Implicated in Stress-Related Disorders: Understanding Relationships between Changes in Mindfulness, Sleep Quality, and Physical Symptoms. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4505191

Hoge, E. A., Bui, E., Palitz, S. A., Schwarz, N. R., Owens, M. E., Johnston, J. M., Pollack, M. H., & Simon, N. M. (2018). The effect of mindfulness meditation training on biological acute stress responses in generalized anxiety disorder. Psychiatry Research, 262(May 2016), 328–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.01.006

Hölzel, B. K., Carmody, J., Evans, K. C., Hoge, E. A., Dusek, J. A., Morgan, L., Pitman, R. K., & Lazar, S. W. (2009). Stress reduction correlates with structural changes in the amygdala. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 5(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsp034

Hwang, W. J., Lee, T. Y., Lim, K. O., Bae, D., Kwak, S., Park, H. Y., & Kwon, J. S. (2018). The effects of four days of intensive mindfulness meditation training (Templestay program) on resilience to stress: A randomized controlled trial. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 23(5), 497–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2017.1363400

Petterson, H., & Olson, B. L. (2017). Effects of mindfulness-based interventions in high school and college athletes for reducing stress and injury, and improving quality of life. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 26(6), 578–587. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.2016-0047

Querstret, D., Morison, L., Dickinson, S., Cropley, M., & John, M. (2020). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for psychological health and well-being in nonclinical samples: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Stress Management, 27(4), 394–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/str0000165

Rubinow, M. J., Mahajan, G., May, W., Overholser, J. C., Jurjus, G. J., Dieter, L., Herbst, N., Steffens, D. C., Miguel-Hidalgo, J. J., Rajkowska, G., & Stockmeier, C. A. (2016). Basolateral amygdala volume and cell numbers in major depressive disorder: a postmortem stereological study. Brain Structure and Function, 221(1), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-014-0900-z

Saha, S. (2005). ROLE OF THE CENTRAL NUCLEUS OF THE AMYGDALA IN THE CONTROL OF BLOOD PRESSURE: DESCENDING PATHWAYS TO MEDULLARY CARDIOVASCULAR NUCLEI. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology, 32(5–6), 450–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1681.2005.04210.x

Taren, A. A., Gianaros, P. J., Greco, C. M., Lindsay, E. K., Fairgrieve, A., Brown, K. W., Rosen, R. K., Ferris, J. L., Julson, E., Marsland, A. L., Bursley, J. K., Ramsburg, J., & Creswell, J. D. (2014). Mindfulness meditation training alters stress-related amygdala resting state functional connectivity: A randomized controlled trial. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10(12), 1758–1768. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsv066

Thompson, B. L., & Waltz, J. (2010). Mindfulness and experiential avoidance as predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder avoidance symptom severity. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 24(4), 409–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.02.005

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

I just read this, and found it enlightening.

Jung... notes that intelligence can be seen as problem solving at an everyday level..., whereas creativity may represent problem solving for less common issues

Other studies have used metaphor creation as a creativity measure instead of divergent thinking and a spectrum of CHC components instead of just g and have found much higher relationships between creativity and intelligence than past studies

https://www.mdpi.com/2079-3200/3/3/59

I'm unusually intelligent (Who isn't?), but I'm much more creative, than intelligent, and I think that confuses people. The ability to apply intelligence, to solve completely novel problems, on the fly, is something IQ tests don't even claim to measure. They just claim a correlation.

Creativity requires taking wild, mental leaps out into nothingness; simply trusting that your brain will land you safely. And this is why I've been at the forefront of massive innovation, over and over, but never got rich off of it.

I'm a starving autist.

Zaps are the first time I've ever made money directly, for solving novel problems. Companies don't do this because there is a span of time between providing a solution and the solution being implemented, and the person building the implementation (or their boss) receives all the credit for the existence of the solution. At best, you can hope to get pawned off with a small bonus.

Nobody can remember who came up with the solution, originally, and that person might not even be there, anymore, and probably never filed a patent, and may have no idea that their idea has even been built. They just run across it, later, in a tech magazine or museum, and say, "Well, will you look at that! Someone actually went and built it! Isn't that nice!"

Universities at least had the idea of cementing novel solutions in academic papers, but that: 1) only works if you're an academic, and at a university, 2) is an incredibly slow process, not appropriate for a truly innovative field, 3) leads to manifestations of perverse incentives and biased research frameworks, coming from 'publish or perish' policies.

But I think long-form notes and zaps solve for this problem. #Alexandria, especially, is being built to cater to this long-suffering class of chronic underachievers. It leaves a written, public, time-stamped record of Clever Ideas We Have Had.

Because they are clever, the ideas. And we have had them.

@ b035c1dc:7a27ddbd

Sockz

@ 0c503f08:4aed05c7

Sometimes I think I'm a bit nihilistic, it can make me sad at times, but at times it also gives me ultimate freedom. What gets you up in the morning?

We’re stardust that somehow became self-aware. The odds of existing are astronomically small—every ancestor in your lineage survived long enough to pass on life, through ice ages, disasters, and chaos. You’re the universe experiencing itself.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/875807

@ ccc8ee23:9f3d9783

Chef's notes

Indulge in tender, golden-fried chicken breast, crunchy with every bite. Nestled on a bed of steamed rice, this dish is elevated by a rich, velvety curry sauce, infused with the warmth of fragrant spices and the umami depth of soy.

Paired with vibrant vegetables for a harmonious balance of textures and flavors, this comforting classic promises to delight your soul.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 30 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 2

Ingredients

• Chicken Fillet 250 grams
• Potato 100 grams
• Egg 1 pc
• Curry block 2 pcs or 20 grams
• breadcrumbs 100 grams / 2 cups
• flour 20 grams
• Cooking oil (for frying)
• chicken or vegetable stock 500ml
• soy sauce 1 tbsp
• Seasoning
• onion 1 pc, finely chopped
• garlic cloves 2 pcs, minced
• carrot 1 pc, chopped

Directions

1. Chicken Katsu: Pound the chicken breasts until about 1/2 inch thick. Season with salt and pepper. Coat each piece in flour, then dip in beaten egg, and finally coat with breadcrumbs. Heat oil in a pan and fry the chicken for about 3-4 minutes on each side, until golden brown and fully cooked. Place on paper towels to drain.
2. Make Curry Sauce: In a pan, sauté the onion, garlic, add potato and carrot until soft. Gradually add curry block and the stock, stir well. Simmer for 5-10 minutes until thickened. Add seasoning and soy sauce to taste.
3. Plating: Slice the cooked chicken katsu and place it over a bed of steamed rice. Pour the curry sauce on the side or over the chicken. Garnish with chopped green chilies.

@ 0a9436f8:9935ad4f

Introduction

1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.

2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.

3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.

4. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can't predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society.

5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM

6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology. (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY

10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strict sense but a whole spectrum of related traits; low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have some such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights activists have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftish anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the world "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)

12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families.

13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)

14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative," "enterprise," "optimism," etc., play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's problems for them, satisfy everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.

18. Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e., failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.

19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. Hisfeelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.

20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.

21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.

22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.

23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.

OVERSOCIALIZATION

24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are oversocialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]

26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goofoff at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to conform to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.

27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals [3] constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment.

28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes [4] for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.

29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects most leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible," they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.

30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.

31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumbnail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.

32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.

THE POWER PROCESS

33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the "power process." This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44).

34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power.

35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.

36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.

37, Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.

SURROGATE ACTIVITIES

38. But not every leisured aristocrat becomes bored and demoralized. For example, the emperor Hirohito, instead of sinking into decadent hedonism, devoted himself to marine biology, a field in which he became distinguished. When people do not have to exert themselves to satisfy their physical needs they often set up artificial goals for themselves. In many cases they then pursue these goals with the same energy and emotional involvement that they otherwise would have put into the search for physical necessities. Thus the aristocrats of the Roman Empire had their literary pretensions; many European aristocrats a few centuries ago invested tremendous time and energy in hunting, though they certainly didn't need the meat; other aristocracies have competed for status through elaborate displays of wealth; and a few aristocrats, like Hirohito, have turned to science.

39. We use the term "surrogate activity" to designate an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that people set up for themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us say, merely for the sake of the "fulfillment" that they get from pursuing the goal. Here is a rule of thumb for the identification of surrogate activities. Given a person who devotes much time and energy to the pursuit of goal X, ask yourself this: If he had to devote most of his time and energy to satisfying his biological needs, and if that effort required him to use his physical and mental faculties in a varied and interesting way, would he feel seriously deprived because he did not attain goal X? If the answer is no, then the person's pursuit of goal X is a surrogate activity. Hirohito's studies in marine biology clearly constituted a surrogate activity, since it is pretty certain that if Hirohito had had to spend his time working at interesting non-scientific tasks in order to obtain the necessities of life, he would not have felt deprived because he didn't know all about the anatomy and life-cycles of marine animals. On the other hand the pursuit of sex and love (for example) is not a surrogate activity, because most people, even if their existence were otherwise satisfactory, would feel deprived if they passed their lives without ever having a relationship with a member of the opposite sex. (But pursuit of an excessive amount of sex, more than one really needs, can be a surrogate activity.)

40. In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one's physical needs. It is enough to go through a training program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on time and exert the very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence and, most of all, simple OBEDIENCE. If one has those, society takes care of one from cradle to grave. (Yes, there is an underclass that cannot take the physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues that are not important for the activist personally, as in the case of white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These are not always PURE surrogate activities, since for many people they may be motivated in part by needs other than the need to have some goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive for prestige, artistic creation by a need to express feelings, militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue them, these activities are in large part surrogate activities. For example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that the "fulfillment" they get from their work is more important than the money and prestige they earn.

41. For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satisfying than the pursuit of real goals (that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives himself to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue surrogate activities will say that they get far more fulfillment from these activities than they do from the "mundane" business of satisfying their biological needs, but that is because in our society the effort needed to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to triviality. More importantly, in our society people do not satisfy their biological needs AUTONOMOUSLY but by functioning as parts of an immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities.

AUTONOMY

42. Autonomy as a part of the power process may not be necessary for every individual. But most people need a greater or lesser degree of autonomy in working toward their goals. Their efforts must be undertaken on their own initiative and must be under their own direction and control. Yet most people do not have to exert this initiative, direction and control as single individuals. It is usually enough to act as a member of a SMALL group. Thus if half a dozen people discuss a goal among themselves and make a successful joint effort to attain that goal, their need for the power process will be served. But if they work under rigid orders handed down from above that leave them no room for autonomous decision and initiative, then their need for the power process will not be served. The same is true when decisions are made on a collective basis if the group making the collective decision is so large that the role of each individual is insignificant. [5]

43. It is true that some individuals seem to have little need for autonomy. Either their drive for power is weak or they satisfy it by identifying themselves with some powerful organization to which they belong. And then there are unthinking, animal types who seem to be satisfied with a purely physical sense of power (the good combat soldier, who gets his sense of power by developing fighting skills that he is quite content to use in blind obedience to his superiors).

44. But for most people it is through the power processshaving a goal, making an AUTONOMOUS effort and attaining the goalsthat self-esteem, self-confidence and a sense of power are acquired. When one does not have adequate opportunity to go through the power process the consequences are (depending on the individual and on the way the power process is disrupted) boredom, demoralization, low self-esteem, inferiority feelings, defeatism, depression, anxiety, guilt, frustration, hostility, spouse or child abuse, insatiable hedonism, abnormal sexual behavior, sleep disorders, eating disorders, etc. [6]

SOURCES OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS

45. Any of the foregoing symptoms can occur in any society, but in modern industrial society they are present on a massive scale. We aren't the first to mention that the world today seems to be going crazy. This sort of thing is not normal for human societies. There is good reason to believe that primitive man suffered from less stress and frustration and was better satisfied with his way of life than modern man is. It is true that not all was sweetness and light in primitive societies. Abuse of women was common among the Australian aborigines, transexuality was fairly common among some of the American Indian tribes. But it does appear that GENERALLY SPEAKING the kinds of problems that we have listed in the preceding paragraph were far less common among primitive peoples than they are in modern society.

46. We attribute the social and psychological problems of modern society to the fact that that society requires people to live under conditions radically different from those under which the evolved and to behave in ways that conflict with the patterns of behavior that the human race developed while living under the earlier conditions. It is clear from what we have already written that we consider lack of opportunity to properly experience the power process as the most important of the abnormal conditions to which modern society subjects people. But it is not the only one. Before dealing with disruption of the power process as a source of social problems we will discuss some of the other sources.

47. Among the abnormal conditions present in modern industrial society are excessive density of population, isolation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of social change and the breakdown of natural small-scale communities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe.

48. It is well known that crowding increases stress and aggression. The degree of crowding that exists today and the isolation of man from nature are consequences of technological progress. All pre-industrial societies were predominantly rural. The Industrial Revolution vastly increased the size of cities and the proportion of the population that lives in them, and modern agricultural technology has made it possible for the Earth to support a far denser population than it ever did before. (Also, technology exacerbates the effects of crowding because it puts increased disruptive powers in people's hands. For example, a variety of noise-making devices: power mowers, radios, motorcycles, etc. If the use of these devices is unrestricted, people who want peace and quiet are frustrated by the noise. If their use is restricted, people who use the devices are frustrated by the regulations. But if these machines had never been invented there would have been no conflict and no frustration generated by them.)

49. For primitive societies the natural world (which usually changes only slowly) provided a stable framework and therefore a sense of security. In the modern world it is human society that dominates nature rather than the other way around, and modern society changes very rapidly owing to technological change. Thus there is no stable framework.

50. The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can't make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society without causing rapid changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traditional values.

51. The breakdown of traditional values to some extent implies the breakdown of the bonds that hold together traditional small-scale social groups. The disintegration of small-scale social groups is also promoted by the fact that modern conditions often require or tempt individuals to move to new locations, separating themselves from their communities. Beyond that, a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system and only secondarily to a small-scale community, because if the internal loyalties of small-scale communities were stronger than loyalty to the system, such communities would pursue their own advantage at the expense of the system.

52. Suppose that a public official or a corporation executive appoints his cousin, his friend or his co-religionist to a position rather than appointing the person best qualified for the job. He has permitted personal loyalty to supersede his loyalty to the system, and that is "nepotism" or "discrimination," both of which are terrible sins in modern society. Would-be industrial societies that have done a poor job of subordinating personal or local loyalties to loyalty to the system are usually very inefficient. (Look at Latin America.) Thus an advanced industrial society can tolerate only those small-scale communities that are emasculated, tamed and made into tools of the system. [7]

53. Crowding, rapid change and the breakdown of communities have been widely recognized as sources of social problems. But we do not believe they are enough to account for the extent of the problems that are seen today.

54. A few pre-industrial cities were very large and crowded, yet their inhabitants do not seem to have suffered from psychological problems to the same extent as modern man. In America today there still are uncrowded rural areas, and we find there the same problems as in urban areas, though the problems tend to be less acute in the rural areas. Thus crowding does not seem to be the decisive factor.

55. On the growing edge of the American frontier during the 19th century, the mobility of the population probably broke down extended families and small-scale social groups to at least the same extent as these are broken down today. In fact, many nuclear families lived by choice in such isolation, having no neighbors within several miles, that they belonged to no community at all, yet they do not seem to have developed problems as a result.

56. Furthermore, change in American frontier society was very rapid and deep. A man might be born and raised in a log cabin, outside the reach of law and order and fed largely on wild meat; and by the time he arrived at old age he might be working at a regular job and living in an ordered community with effective law enforcement. This was a deeper change than that which typically occurs in the life of a modern individual, yet it does not seem to have led to psychological problems. In fact, 19th century American society had an optimistic and self-confident tone, quite unlike that of today's society. [8]

57. The difference, we argue, is that modern man has the sense (largely justified) that change is IMPOSED on him, whereas the 19th century frontiersman had the sense (also largely justified) that he created change himself, by his own choice. Thus a pioneer settled on a piece of land of his own choosing and made it into a farm through his own effort. In those days an entire county might have only a couple of hundred inhabitants and was a far more isolated and autonomous entity than a modern county is. Hence the pioneer farmer participated as a member of a relatively small group in the creation of a new, ordered community. One may well question whether the creation of this community was an improvement, but at any rate it satisfied the pioneer's need for the power process.

58. It would be possible to give other examples of societies in which there has been rapid change and/or lack of close community ties without the kind of massive behavioral aberration that is seen in today's industrial society. We contend that the most important cause of social and psychological problems in modern society is the fact that people have insufficient opportunity to go through the power process in a normal way. We don't mean to say that modern society is the only one in which the power process has been disrupted. Probably most if not all civilized societies have interfered with the power process to a greater or lesser extent. But in modern industrial society the problem has become particularly acute. Leftism, at least in its recent (mid- to late-20th century) form, is in part a symptom of deprivation with respect to the power process.

DISRUPTION OF THE POWER PROCESS IN MODERN SOCIETY

59. We divide human drives into three groups: (1) those drives that can be satisfied with minimal effort; (2) those that can be satisfied but only at the cost of serious effort; (3) those that cannot be adequately satisfied no matter how much effort one makes. The power process is the process of satisfying the drives of the second group. The more drives there are in the third group, the more there is frustration, anger, eventually defeatism, depression, etc.

60. In modern industrial society natural human drives tend to be pushed into the first and third groups, and the second group tends to consist increasingly of artificially created drives.

61. In primitive societies, physical necessities generally fall into group 2: They can be obtained, but only at the cost of serious effort. But modern society tends to guaranty the physical necessities to everyone [9] in exchange for only minimal effort, hence physical needs are pushed into group 1. (There may be disagreement about whether the effort needed to hold a job is "minimal"; but usually, in lower- to middle-level jobs, whatever effort is required is merely that of OBEDIENCE. You sit or stand where you are told to sit or stand and do what you are told to do in the way you are told to do it. Seldom do you have to exert yourself seriously, and in any case you have hardly any autonomy in work, so that the need for the power process is not well served.)

62. Social needs, such as sex, love and status, often remain in group 2 in modern society, depending on the situation of the individual. [10] But, except for people who have a particularly strong drive for status, the effort required to fulfill the social drives is insufficient to satisfy adequately the need for the power process.

63. So certain artificial needs have been created that fall into group 2, hence serve the need for the power process. Advertising and marketing techniques have been developed that make many people feel they need things that their grandparents never desired or even dreamed of. It requires serious effort to earn enough money to satisfy these artificial needs, hence they fall into group 2. (But see paragraphs 80-82.) Modern man must satisfy his need for the power process largely through pursuit of the artificial needs created by the advertising and marketing industry [11], and through surrogate activities.

64. It seems that for many people, maybe the majority, these artificial forms of the power process are insufficient. A theme that appears repeatedly in the writings of the social critics of the second half of the 20th century is the sense of purposelessness that afflicts many people in modern society. (This purposelessness is often called by other names such as "anomic" or "middle-class vacuity.") We suggest that the so-called "identity crisis" is actually a search for a sense of purpose, often for commitment to a suitable surrogate activity. It may be that existentialism is in large part a response to the purposelessness of modern life. [12] Very widespread in modern society is the search for "fulfillment." But we think that for the majority of people an activity whose main goal is fulfillment (that is, a surrogate activity) does not bring completely satisfactory fulfillment. In other words, it does not fully satisfy the need for the power process. (See paragraph 41.) That need can be fully satisfied only through activities that have some external goal, such as physical necessities, sex, love, status, revenge, etc.

65. Moreover, where goals are pursued through earning money, climbing the status ladder or functioning as part of the system in some other way, most people are not in a position to pursue their goals AUTONOMOUSLY. Most workers are someone else's employee and, as we pointed out in paragraph 61, must spend their days doing what they are told to do in the way they are told to do it. Even people who are in business for themselves have only limited autonomy. It is a chronic complaint of small-business persons and entrepreneurs that their hands are tied by excessive government regulation. Some of these regulations are doubtless unnecessary, but for the most part government regulations are essential and inevitable parts of our extremely complex society. A large portion of small business today operates on the franchise system. It was reported in the Wall Street Journal a few years ago that many of the franchise-granting companies require applicants for franchises to take a personality test that is designed to EXCLUDE those who have creativity and initiative, because such persons are not sufficiently docile to go along obediently with the franchise system. This excludes from small business many of the people who most need autonomy.

66. Today people live more by virtue of what the system does FOR them or TO them than by virtue of what they do for themselves. And what they do for themselves is done more and more along channels laid down by the system. Opportunities tend to be those that the system provides, the opportunities must be exploited in accord with rules and regulations [13], and techniques prescribed by experts must be followed if there is to be a chance of success.

67. Thus the power process is disrupted in our society through a deficiency of real goals and a deficiency of autonomy in the pursuit of goals. But it is also disrupted because of those human drives that fall into group 3: the drives that one cannot adequately satisfy no matter how much effort one makes. One of these drives is the need for security. Our lives depend on decisions made by other people; we have no control over these decisions and usually we do not even know the people who make them. ("We live in a world in which relatively few peoplesmaybe 500 or 1,000smake the important decisions"sPhilip B. Heymann of Harvard Law School, quoted by Anthony Lewis, New York Times, April 21, 1995.) Our lives depend on whether safety standards at a nuclear power plant are properly maintained; on how much pesticide is allowed to get into our food or how much pollution into our air; on how skillful (or incompetent) our doctor is; whether we lose or get a job may depend on decisions made by government economists or corporation executives; and so forth. Most individuals are not in a position to secure themselves against these threats to more [than] a very limited extent. The individual's search for security is therefore frustrated, which leads to a sense of powerlessness.

68. It may be objected that primitive man is physically less secure than modern man, as is shown by his shorter life expectancy; hence modern man suffers from less, not more than the amount of insecurity that is normal for human beings. But psychological security does not closely correspond with physical security. What makes us FEEL secure is not so much objective security as a sense of confidence in our ability to take care of ourselves. Primitive man, threatened by a fierce animal or by hunger, can fight in self-defense or travel in search of food. He has no certainty of success in these efforts, but he is by no means helpless against the things that threaten him. The modern individual on the other hand is threatened by many things against which he is helpless: nuclear accidents, carcinogens in food, environmental pollution, war, increasing taxes, invasion of his privacy by large organizations, nationwide social or economic phenomena that may disrupt his way of life.

69. It is true that primitive man is powerless against some of the things that threaten him; disease for example. But he can accept the risk of disease stoically. It is part of the nature of things, it is no one's fault, unless it is the fault of some imaginary, impersonal demon. But threats to the modern individual tend to be MAN-MADE. They are not the results of chance but are IMPOSED on him by other persons whose decisions he, as an individual, is unable to influence. Consequently he feels frustrated, humiliated and angry.

70. Thus primitive man for the most part has his security in his own hands (either as an individual or as a member of a SMALL group) whereas the security of modern man is in the hands of persons or organizations that are too remote or too large for him to be able personally to influence them. So modern man's drive for security tends to fall into groups 1 and 3; in some areas (food, shelter etc.) his security is assured at the cost of only trivial effort, whereas in other areas he CANNOT attain security. (The foregoing greatly simplifies the real situation, but it does indicate in a rough, general way how the condition of modern man differs from that of primitive man.)

71. People have many transitory drives or impulses that are necessarily frustrated in modern life, hence fall into group 3. One may become angry, but modern society cannot permit fighting. In many situations it does not even permit verbal aggression. When going somewhere one may be in a hurry, or one may be in a mood to travel slowly, but one generally has no choice but to move with the flow of traffic and obey the traffic signals. One may want to do one's work in a different way, but usually one can work only according to the rules laid down by one's employer. In many other ways as well, modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations (explicit or implicit) that frustrate many of his impulses and thus interfere with the power process. Most of these regulations cannot be dispensed with, because they are necessary for the functioning of industrial society.

72. Modern society is in certain respects extremely permissive. In matters that are irrelevant to the functioning of the system we can generally do what we please. We can believe in any religion we like (as long as it does not encourage behavior that is dangerous to the system). We can go to bed with anyone we like (as long as we practice "safe sex"). We can do anything we like as long as it is UNIMPORTANT. But in all IMPORTANT matters the system tends increasingly to regulate our behavior.

73. Behavior is regulated not only through explicit rules and not only by the government. Control is often exercised through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation, and by organizations other than the government, or by the system as a whole. Most large organizations use some form of propaganda [14] to manipulate public attitudes or behavior. Propaganda is not limited to "commercials" and advertisements, and sometimes it is not even consciously intended as propaganda by the people who make it. For instance, the content of entertainment programming is a powerful form of propaganda. An example of indirect coercion: There is no law that says we have to go to work every day and follow our employer's orders. Legally there is nothing to prevent us from going to live in the wild like primitive people or from going into business for ourselves. But in practice there is very little wild country left, and there is room in the economy for only a limited number of small business owners. Hence most of us can survive only as someone else's employee.

74. We suggest that modern man's obsession with longevity, and with maintaining physical vigor and sexual attractiveness to an advanced age, is a symptom of unfulfillment resulting from deprivation with respect to the power process. The "mid-life crisis" also is such a symptom. So is the lack of interest in having children that is fairly common in modern society but almost unheard-of in primitive societies.

75. In primitive societies life is a succession of stages. The needs and purposes of one stage having been fulfilled, there is no particular reluctance about passing on to the next stage. A young man goes through the power process by becoming a hunter, hunting not for sport or for fulfillment but to get meat that is necessary for food. (In young women the process is more complex, with greater emphasis on social power; we won't discuss that here.) This phase having been successfully passed through, the young man has no reluctance about settling down to the responsibilities of raising a family. (In contrast, some modern people indefinitely postpone having children because they are too busy seeking some kind of "fulfillment." We suggest that the fulfillment they need is adequate experience of the power processswith real goals instead of the artificial goals of surrogate activities.) Again, having successfully raised his children, going through the power process by providing them with the physical necessities, the primitive man feels that his work is done and he is prepared to accept old age (if he survives that long) and death. Many modern people, on the other hand, are disturbed by the prospect of physical deterioration and death, as is shown by the amount of effort they expend trying to maintain their physical condition, appearance and health. We argue that this is due to unfulfillment resulting from the fact that they have never put their physical powers to any practical use, have never gone through the power process using their bodies in a serious way. It is not the primitive man, who has used his body daily for practical purposes, who fears the deterioration of age, but the modern man, who has never had a practical use for his body beyond walking from his car to his house. It is the man whose need for the power process has been satisfied during his life who is best prepared to accept the end of that life.

76. In response to the arguments of this section someone will say, "Society must find a way to give people the opportunity to go through the power process." For such people the value of the opportunity is destroyed by the very fact that society gives it to them. What they need is to find or make their own opportunities. As long as the system GIVES them their opportunities it still has them on a leash. To attain autonomy they must get off that leash.

HOW SOME People adjust

77. Not everyone in industrial-technological society suffers from psychological problems. Some people even profess to be quite satisfied with society as it is. We now discuss some of the reasons why people differ so greatly in their response to modern society.

78. First, there doubtless are differences in the strength of the drive for power. Individuals with a weak drive for power may have relatively little need to go through the power process, or at least relatively little need for autonomy in the power process. These are docile types who would have been happy as plantation darkies in the Old South. (We don't mean to sneer at the "plantation darkies" of the Old South. To their credit, most of the slaves were NOT content with their servitude. We do sneer at people who ARE content with servitude.)

79. Some people may have some exceptional drive, in pursuing which they satisfy their need for the power process. For example, those who have an unusually strong drive for social status may spend their whole lives climbing the status ladder without ever getting bored with that game.

80. People vary in their susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques. Some are so susceptible that, even if they make a great deal of money, they cannot satisfy their constant craving for the the shiny new toys that the marketing industry dangles before their eyes. So they always feel hard-pressed financially even if their income is large, and their cravings are frustrated.

81. Some people have low susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques. These are the people who aren't interested in money. Material acquisition does not serve their need for the power process.

82. People who have medium susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques are able to earn enough money to satisfy their craving for goods and services, but only at the cost of serious effort (putting in overtime, taking a second job, earning promotions, etc.). Thus material acquisition serves their need for the power process. But it does not necessarily follow that their need is fully satisfied. They may have insufficient autonomy in the power process (their work may consist of following orders) and some of their drives may be frustrated (e.g., security, aggression). (We are guilty of oversimplification in paragraphs 80-82 because we have assumed that the desire for material acquisition is entirely a creation of the advertising and marketing industry. Of course it's not that simple. [11]

83. Some people partly satisfy their need for power by identifying themselves with a powerful organization or mass movement. An individual lacking goals or power joins a movement or an organization, adopts its goals as his own, then works toward those goals. When some of the goals are attained, the individual, even though his personal efforts have played only an insignificant part in the attainment of the goals, feels (through his identif ication with the movement or organization) as if he had gone through the power process. This phenomenon was exploited by the fascists, nazis and communists. Our society uses it too, though less crudely. Example: Manuel Noriega was an irritant to the U.S. (goal: punish Noriega). The U.S. invaded Panama (effort) and punished Noriega (attainment of goal). Thus the U.S. went through the power process and many Americans, because of their identification with the U.S., experienced the power process vicariously. Hence the widespread public approval of the Panama invasion; it gave people a sense of power. [15] We see the same phenomenon in armies, corporations, political parties, humanitarian organizations, religious or ideological movements. In particular, leftist movements tend to attract people who are seeking to satisfy their need for power. But for most people identification with a large organization or a mass movement does not fully satisfy the need for power.

84. Another way in which people satisfy their need for the power process is through surrogate activities. As we explained in paragraphs 38-40, a surrogate activity is an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that the individual pursues for the sake of the "fulfillment" that he gets from pursuing the goal, not because he needs to attain the goal itself. For instance, there is no practical motive for building enormous muscles, hitting a little ball into a hole or acquiring a complete series of postage stamps. Yet many people in our society devote themselves with passion to bodybuilding, golf or stamp-collecting. Some people are more "other-directed" than others, and therefore will more readily attach importance to a surrogate activity simply because the people around them treat it as important or because society tells them it is important. That is why some people get very serious about essentially trivial activities such as sports, or bridge, or chess, or arcane scholarly pursuits, whereas others who are more clear-sighted never see these things as anything but the surrogate activities that they are, and consequently never attach enough importance to them to satisfy their need for the power process in that way. It only remains to point out that in many cases a person's way of earning a living is also a surrogate activity. Not a PURE surrogate activity, since part of the motive for the activity is to gain the physical necessities and (for some people) social status and the luxuries that advertising makes them want. But many people put into their work far more effort than is necessary to earn whatever money and status they require, and this extra effort constitutes a surrogate activity. This extra effort, together with the emotional investment that accompanies it, is one of the most potent forces acting toward the continual development and perfecting of the system, with negative consequences for individual freedom (see paragraph 131). Especially, for the most creative scientists and engineers, work tends to be largely a surrogate activity. This point is so important that it deserves a separate discussion, which we shall give in a moment (paragraphs 87-92).

85. In this section we have explained how many people in modern society do satisfy their need for the power process to a greater or lesser extent. But we think that for the majority of people the need for the power process is not fully satisfied. In the first place, those who have an insatiable drive for status, or who get firmly "hooked" on a surrogate activity, or who identify strongly enough with a movement or organization to satisfy their need for power in that way, are exceptional personalities. Others are not fully satisfied with surrogate activities or by identification with an organization (see paragraphs 41, 64). In the second place, too much control is imposed by the system through explicit regulation or through socialization, which results in a deficiency of autonomy, and in frustration due to the impossibility of attaining certain goals and the necessity of restraining too many impulses.

86. But even if most people in industrial-technological society were well satisfied, we (FC) would still be opposed to that form of society, because (among other reasons) we consider it demeaning to fulfill one's need for the power process through surrogate activities or through identification with an organization, rather than through pursuit of real goals.

THE MOTIVES OF SCIENTISTS

87. Science and technology provide the most important examples of surrogate activities. Some scientists claim that they are motivated by "curiosity" or by a desire to "benefit humanity." But it is easy to see that neither of these can be the principal motive of most scientists. As for "curiosity," that notion is simply absurd. Most scientists work on highly specialized problems that are not the object of any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a mathematician or an entomologist curious about the properties of isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a chemist is curious about such a thing, and he is curious about it only because chemistry is his surrogate activity. Is the chemist curious about the appropriate classification of a new species of beetle? No. That question is of interest only to the entomologist, and he is interested in it only because entomology is his surrogate activity. If the chemist and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exercised their abilities in an interesting way but in some nonscientific pursuit, then they wouldn't give a damn about isopropyltrimethylmethane or the classification of beetles. Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate education had led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested in insurance matters but would have cared nothing about isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to put into the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of time and effort that scientists put into their work. The "curiosity" explanation for the scientists' motive just doesn't stand up.

88. The "benefit of humanity" explanation doesn't work any better. Some scientific work has no conceivable relation to the welfare of the human racesmost of archaeology or comparative linguistics for example. Some other areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities. Yet scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about their work as those who develop vaccines or study air pollution. Consider the case of Dr. Edward Teller, who had an obvious emotional involvement in promoting nuclear power plants. Did this involvement stem from a desire to benefit humanity? If so, then why didn't Dr. Teller get emotional about other "humanitarian" causes? If he was such a humanitarian then why did he help to develop the H-bomb? As with many other scientific achievements, it is very much open to question whether nuclear power plants actually do benefit humanity. Does the cheap electricity outweigh the accumulating waste and the risk of accidents? Dr. Teller saw only one side of the question. Clearly his emotional involvement with nuclear power arose not from a desire to "benefit humanity" but from a personal fulfillment he got from his work and from seeing it put to practical use.

89. The same is true of scientists generally. With possible rare exceptions, their motive is neither curiosity nor a desire to benefit humanity but the need to go through the power process: to have a goal (a scientific problem to solve), to make an effort (research) and to attain the goal (solution of the problem.) Science is a surrogate activity because scientists work mainly for the fulfillment they get out of the work itself.

90. Of course, it's not that simple. Other motives do play a role for many scientists. Money and status for example. Some scientists may be persons of the type who have an insatiable drive for status (see paragraph 79) and this may provide much of the motivation for their work. No doubt the majority of scientists, like the majority of the general population, are more or less susceptible to advertising and marketing techniques and need money to satisfy their craving for goods and services. Thus science is not a PURE surrogate activity. But it is in large part a surrogate activity.

91. Also, science and technology constitute a power mass movement, and many scientists gratify their need for power through identification with this mass movement (see paragraph 83).

92. Thus science marches on blindly, without regard to the real welfare of the human race or to any other standard, obedient only to the psychological needs of the scientists and of the government officials and corporation executives who provide the funds for research.

THE NATURE OF FREEDOM

93. We are going to argue that industrial-technological society cannot be reformed in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing the sphere of human freedom. But, because "freedom" is a word that can be interpreted in many ways, we must first make clear what kind of freedom we are concerned with.

94. By "freedom" we mean the opportunity to go through the power process, with real goals not the artificial goals of surrogate activities, and without interference, manipulation or supervision from anyone, especially from any large organization. Freedom means being in control (either as an individual or as a member of a SMALL group) of the life-and-death issues of one's existence; food, clothing, shelter and defense against whatever threats there may be in one's environment. Freedom means having power; not the power to control other people but the power to control the circumstances of one's own life. One does not have freedom if anyone else (especially a large organization) has power over one, no matter how benevolently, tolerantly and permissively that power may be exercised. It is important not to confuse freedom with mere permissiveness (see paragraph 72).

95. It is said that we live in a free society because we have a certain number of constitutionally guaranteed rights. But these are not as important as they seem. The degree of personal freedom that exists in a society is determined more by the economic and technological structure of the society than by its laws or its form of government. [16] Most of the Indian nations of New England were monarchies, and many of the cities of the Italian Renaissance were controlled by dictators. But in reading about these societies one gets the impression that they allowed far more personal freedom than our society does. In part this was because they lacked efficient mechanisms for enforcing the ruler's will: There were no modern, well-organized police forces, no rapid long-distance communications, no surveillance cameras, no dossiers of information about the lives of average citizens. Hence it was relatively easy to evade control.

96. As for our constitutional rights, consider for example that of freedom of the press. We certainly don't mean to knock that right; it is very important tool for limiting concentration of political power and for keeping those who do have political power in line by publicly exposing any misbehavior on their part. But freedom of the press is of very little use to the average citizen as an individual. The mass media are mostly under the control of large organizations that are integrated into the system. Anyone who has a little money can have something printed, or can distribute it on the Internet or in some such way, but what he has to say will be swamped by the vast volume of material put out by the media, hence it will have no practical effect. To make an impression on society with words is therefore almost impossible for most individuals and small groups. Take us (FC) for example. If we had never done anything violent and had submitted the present writings to a publisher, they probably would not have been accepted. If they had been been accepted and published, they probably would not have attracted many readers, because it's more fun to watch the entertainment put out by the media than to read a sober essay. Even if these writings had had many readers, most of these readers would soon have forgotten what they had read as their minds were flooded by the mass of material to which the media expose them. In order to get our message before the public with some chance of making a lasting impression, we've had to kill people.

97. Constitutional rights are useful up to a point, but they do not serve to guarantee much more than what might be called the bourgeois conception of freedom. According to the bourgeois conception, a "free" man is essentially an element of a social machine and has only a certain set of prescribed and delimited freedoms; freedoms that are designed to serve the needs of the social machine more than those of the individual. Thus the bourgeois's "free" man has economic freedom because that promotes growth and progress; he has freedom of the press because public criticism restrains misbehavior by political leaders; he has a right to a fair trial because imprisonment at the whim of the powerful would be bad for the system. This was clearly the attitude of Simon Bolivar. To him, people deserved liberty only if they used it to promote progress (progress as conceived by the bourgeois). Other bourgeois thinkers have taken a similar view of freedom as a mere means to collective ends. Chester C. Tan, "Chinese Political Thought in the Twentieth Century," page 202, explains the philosophy of the Kuomintang leader Hu Han-min: "An individual is granted rights because he is a member of society and his community life requires such rights. By community Hu meant the whole society of the nation." And on page 259 Tan states that according to Carsum Chang (Chang Chun-mai, head of the State Socialist Party in China) freedom had to be used in the interest of the state and of the people as a whole. But what kind of freedom does one have if one can use it only as someone else prescribes? FC's conception of freedom is not that of Bolivar, Hu, Chang or other bourgeois theorists. The trouble with such theorists is that they have made the development and application of social theories their surrogate activity. Consequently the theories are designed to serve the needs of the theorists more than the needs of any people who may be unlucky enough to live in a society on which the theories are imposed.

98. One more point to be made in this section: It should not be assumed that a person has enough freedom just because he SAYS he has enough. Freedom is restricted in part by psychological controls of which people are unconscious, and moreover many people's ideas of what constitutes freedom are governed more by social convention than by their real needs. For example, it's likely that many leftists of the oversocialized type would say that most people, including themselves, are socialized too little rather than too much, yet the oversocialized leftist pays a heavy psychological price for his high level of socialization.

SOME PRINCIPLES OF HISTORY

99. Think of history as being the sum of two components: an erratic component that consists of unpredictable events that follow no discernible pattern, and a regular component that consists of long-term historical trends. Here we are concerned with the long-term trends.

100. FIRST PRINCIPLE. If a SMALL change is made that affects a long-term historical trend, then the effect of that change will almost always be transitorysthe trend will soon revert to its original state. (Example: A reform movement designed to clean up political corruption in a society rarely has more than a short-term effect; sooner or later the reformers relax and corruption creeps back in. The level of political corruption in a given society tends to remain constant, or to change only slowly with the evolution of the society. Normally, a political cleanup will be permanent only if accompanied by widespread social changes; a SMALL change in the society won't be enough.) If a small change in a long-term historical trend appears to be permanent, it is only because the change acts in the direction in which the trend is already moving, so that the trend is not altered by only pushed a step ahead.

101. The first principle is almost a tautology. If a trend were not stable with respect to small changes, it would wander at random rather than following a definite direction; in other words it would not be a long-term trend at all.

102. SECOND PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is sufficiently large to alter permanently a long-term historical trend, then it will alter the society as a whole. In other words, a society is a system in which all parts are interrelated, and you can't permanently change any important part without changing all other parts as well.

103. THIRD PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is large enough to alter permanently a long-term trend, then the consequences for the society as a whole cannot be predicted in advance. (Unless various other societies have passed through the same change and have all experienced the same consequences, in which case one can predict on empirical grounds that another society that passes through the same change will be like to experience similar consequences.)

104. FOURTH PRINCIPLE. A new kind of society cannot be designed on paper. That is, you cannot plan out a new form of society in advance, then set it up and expect it to function as it was designed to do.

105. The third and fourth principles result from the complexity of human societies. A change in human behavior will affect the economy of a society and its physical environment; the economy will affect the environment and vice versa, and the changes in the economy and the environment will affect human behavior in complex, unpredictable ways; and so forth. The network of causes and effects is far too complex to be untangled and understood.

106. FIFTH PRINCIPLE. People do not consciously and rationally choose the form of their society. Societies develop through processes of social evolution that are not under rational human control.

107. The fifth principle is a consequence of the other four.

108. To illustrate: By the first principle, generally speaking an attempt at social reform either acts in the direction in which the society is developing anyway (so that it merely accelerates a change that would have occurred in any case) or else it has only a transitory effect, so that the society soon slips back into its old groove. To make a lasting change in the direction of development of any important aspect of a society, reform is insufficient and revolution is required. (A revolution does not necessarily involve an armed uprising or the overthrow of a government.) By the second principle, a revolution never changes only one aspect of a society, it changes the whole society; and by the third principle changes occur that were never expected or desired by the revolutionaries. By the fourth principle, when revolutionaries or utopians set up a new kind of society, it never works out as planned.

109. The American Revolution does not provide a counterexample. The American "Revolution" was not a revolution in our sense of the word, but a war of independence followed by a rather far-reaching political reform. The Founding Fathers did not change the direction of development of American society, nor did they aspire to do so. They only freed the development of American society from the retarding effect of British rule. Their political reform did not change any basic trend, but only pushed American political culture along its natural direction of development. British society, of which American society was an offshoot, had been moving for a long time in the direction of representative democracy. And prior to the War of Independence the Americans were already practicing a significant degree of representative democracy in the colonial assemblies. The political system established by the Constitution was modeled on the British system and on the colonial assemblies. With major alteration, to be suresthere is no doubt that the Founding Fathers took a very important step. But it was a step along the road that English-speaking world was already traveling. The proof is that Britain and all of its colonies that were populated predominantly by people of British descent ended up with systems of representative democracy essentially similar to that of the United States. If the Founding Fathers had lost their nerve and declined to sign the Declaration of Independence, our way of life today would not have been significantly different. Maybe we would have had somewhat closer ties to Britain, and would have had a Parliament and Prime Minister instead of a Congress and President. No big deal. Thus the American Revolution provides not a counterexample to our principles but a good illustration of them.

110. Still, one has to use common sense in applying the principles. They are expressed in imprecise language that allows latitude for interpretation, and exceptions to them can be found. So we present these principles not as inviolable laws but as rules of thumb, or guides to thinking, that may provide a partial antidote to naive ideas about the future of society. The principles should be borne constantly in mind, and whenever one reaches a conclusion that conflicts with them one should carefully reexamine one's thinking and retain the conclusion only if one has good, solid reasons for doing so.

INDUSTRIAL-TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY CANNOT BE REFORMED

111. The foregoing principles help to show how hopelessly difficult it would be to reform the industrial system in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing our sphere of freedom. There has been a consistent tendency, going back at least to the Industrial Revolution for technology to strengthen the system at a high cost in individual freedom and local autonomy. Hence any change designed to protect freedom from technology would be contrary to a fundamental trend in the development of our society. Consequently, such a change either would be a transitory onessoon swamped by the tide of historysor, if large enough to be permanent would alter the nature of our whole society. This by the first and second principles. Moreover, since society would be altered in a way that could not be predicted in advance (third principle) there would be great risk. Changes large enough to make a lasting difference in favor of freedom would not be initiated because it would be realized that they would gravely disrupt the system. So any attempts at reform would be too timid to be effective. Even if changes large enough to make a lasting difference were initiated, they would be retracted when their disruptive effects became apparent. Thus, permanent changes in favor of freedom could be brought about only by persons prepared to accept radical, dangerous and unpredictable alteration of the entire system. In other words by revolutionaries, not reformers.

112. People anxious to rescue freedom without sacrificing the supposed benefits of technology will suggest naive schemes for some new form of society that would reconcile freedom with technology. Apart from the fact that people who make such suggestions seldom propose any practical means by which the new form of society could be set up in the first place, it follows from the fourth principle that even if the new form of society could be once established, it either would collapse or would give results very different from those expected.

113. So even on very general grounds it seems highly improbable that any way of changing society could be found that would reconcile freedom with modern technology. In the next few sections we will give more specific reasons for concluding that freedom and technological progress are incompatible.

RESTRICTION OF FREEDOM IS UNAVOIDABLE IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY

114. As explained in paragraphs 65-67, 70-73, modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations, and his fate depends on the actions of persons remote from him whose decisions he cannot influence. This is not accidental or a result of the arbitrariness of arrogant bureaucrats. It is necessary and inevitable in any technologically advanced society. The system HAS TO regulate human behavior closely in order to function. At work people have to do what they are told to do, otherwise production would be thrown into chaos. Bureaucracies HAVE TO be run according to rigid rules. To allow any substantial personal discretion to lower-level bureaucrats would disrupt the system and lead to charges of unfairness due to differences in the way individual bureaucrats exercised their discretion. It is true that some restrictions on our freedom could be eliminated, but GENERALLY SPEAKING the regulation of our lives by large organizations is necessary for the functioning of industrial-technological society. The result is a sense of powerlessness on the part of the average person. It may be, however, that formal regulations will tend increasingly to be replaced by psychological tools that make us want to do what the system requires of us. (Propaganda [14], educational techniques, "mental health" programs, etc.)

115. The system HAS TO force people to behave in ways that are increasingly remote from the natural pattern of human behavior. For example, the system needs scientists, mathematicians and engineers. It can't function without them. So heavy pressure is put on children to excel in these fields. It isn't natural for an adolescent human being to spend the bulk of his time sitting at a desk absorbed in study. A normal adolescent wants to spend his time in active contact with the real world. Among primitive peoples the things that children are trained to do tend to be in reasonable harmony with natural human impulses. Among the American Indians, for example, boys were trained in active outdoor pursuits just the sort of thing that boys like. But in our society children are pushed into studying technical subjects, which most do grudgingly.

116. Because of the constant pressure that the system exerts to modify human behavior, there is a gradual increase in the number of people who cannot or will nottadjust to society's requirements: welfare leeches, youth-gang members, cultists, anti-government rebels, radical environmentalist saboteurs, dropouts and resisters of various kinds.

117. In any technologically advanced society the individual's fate MUST depend on decisions that he personally cannot influence to any great extent. A technological society cannot be broken down into small, autonomous communities, because production depends on the cooperation of very large numbers of people and machines. Such a society MUST be highly organized and decisions HAVE TO be made that affect very large numbers of people. When a decision affects, say, a million people, then each of the affected individuals has, on the average, only a one-millionth share in making the decision. What usually happens in practice is that decisions are made by public officials or corporation executives, or by technical specialists, but even when the public votes on a decision the number of voters ordinarily is too large for the vote of any one individual to be significant. [17] Thus most individuals are unable to influence measurably the major decisions that affect their lives. There is no conceivable way to remedy this in a technologically advanced society. The system tries to "solve" this problem by using propaganda to make people WANT the decisions that have been made for them, but even if this "solution" were completely successful in making people feel better, it would be demeaning.

118. Conservatives and some others advocate more "local autonomy." Local communities once did have autonomy, but such autonomy becomes less and less possible as local communities become more enmeshed with and dependent on large-scale systems like public utilities, computer networks, highway systems, the mass communications media, the modern health care system. Also operating against autonomy is the fact that technology applied in one location often affects people at other locations far way. Thus pesticide or chemical use near a creek may contaminate the water supply hundreds of miles downstream, and the greenhouse effect affects the whole world.

119. The system does not and cannot exist to satisfy human needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to be modified to fit the needs of the system. This has nothing to do with the political or social ideology that may pretend to guide the technological system. It is the fault of technology, because the system is guided not by ideology but by technical necessity. [18] Of course the system does satisfy many human needs, but generally speaking it does this only to the extend that it is to the advantage of the system to do it. It is the needs of the system that are paramount, not those of the human being. For example, the system provides people with food because the system couldn't function if everyone starved; it attends to people's psychological needs whenever it can CONVENIENTLY do so, because it couldn't function if too many people became depressed or rebellious. But the system, for good, solid, practical reasons, must exert constant pressure on people to mold their behavior to the needs of the system. To much waste accumulating? The government, the media, the educational system, environmentalists, everyone inundates us with a mass of propaganda about recycling. Need more technical personnel? A chorus of voices exhorts kids to study science. No one stops to ask whether it is inhumane to force adolescents to spend the bulk of their time studying subjects most of them hate. When skilled workers are put out of a job by technical advances and have to undergo "retraining," no one asks whether it is humiliating for them to be pushed around in this way. It is simply taken for granted that everyone must bow to technical necessity. and for good reason: If human needs were put before technical necessity there would be economic problems, unemployment, shortages or worse. The concept of "mental health" in our society is defined largely by the extent to which an individual behaves in accord with the needs of the system and does so without showing signs of stress.

120. Efforts to make room for a sense of purpose and for autonomy within the system are no better than a joke. For example, one company, instead of having each of its employees assemble only one section of a catalogue, had each assemble a whole catalogue, and this was supposed to give them a sense of purpose and achievement. Some companies have tried to give their employees more autonomy in their work, but for practical reasons this usually can be done only to a very limited extent, and in any case employees are never given autonomy as to ultimate goalsstheir "autonomous" efforts can never be directed toward goals that they select personally, but only toward their employer's goals, such as the survival and growth of the company. Any company would soon go out of business if it permitted its employees to act otherwise. Similarly, in any enterprise within a socialist system, workers must direct their efforts toward the goals of the enterprise, otherwise the enterprise will not serve its purpose as part of the system. Once again, for purely technical reasons it is not possible for most individuals or small groups to have much autonomy in industrial society. Even the small-business owner commonly has only limited autonomy. Apart from the necessity of government regulation, he is restricted by the fact that he must fit into the economic system and conform to its requirements. For instance, when someone develops a new technology, the small-business person often has to use that technology whether he wants to or not, in order to remain competitive.

THE 'BAD' PARTS OF TECHNOLOGY CANNOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE 'GOOD' PARTS

121. A further reason why industrial society cannot be reformed in favor of freedom is that modern technology is a unified system in which all parts are dependent on one another. You can't get rid of the "bad" parts of technology and retain only the "good" parts. Take modern medicine, for example. Progress in medical science depends on progress in chemistry, physics, biology, computer science and other fields. Advanced medical treatments require expensive, high-tech equipment that can be made available only by a technologically progressive, economically rich society. Clearly you can't have much progress in medicine without the whole technological system and everything that goes with it.

122. Even if medical progress could be maintained without the rest of the technological system, it would by itself bring certain evils. Suppose for example that a cure for diabetes is discovered. People with a genetic tendency to diabetes will then be able to survive and reproduce as well as anyone else. Natural selection against genes for diabetes will cease and such genes will spread throughout the population. (This may be occurring to some extent already, since diabetes, while not curable, can be controlled through use of insulin.) The same thing will happen with many other diseases susceptibility to which is affected by genetic degradation of the population. The only solution will be some sort of eugenics program or extensive genetic engineering of human beings, so that man in the future will no longer be a creation of nature, or of chance, or of God (depending on your religious or philosophical opinions), but a manufactured product.

123. If you think that big government interferes in your life too much NOW, just wait till the government starts regulating the genetic constitution of your children. Such regulation will inevitably follow the introduction of genetic engineering of human beings, because the consequences of unregulated genetic engineering would be disastrous. [19]

124. The usual response to such concerns is to talk about "medical ethics." But a code of ethics would not serve to protect freedom in the face of medical progress; it would only make matters worse. A code of ethics applicable to genetic engineering would be in effect a means of regulating the genetic constitution of human beings. Somebody (probably the upper-middle class, mostly) would decide that such and such applications of genetic engineering were "ethical" and others were not, so that in effect they would be imposing their own values on the genetic constitution of the population at large. Even if a code of ethics were chosen on a completely democratic basis, the majority would be imposing their own values on any minorities who might have a different idea of what constituted an "ethical" use of genetic engineering. The only code of ethics that would truly protect freedom would be one that prohibited ANY genetic engineering of human beings, and you can be sure that no such code will ever be applied in a technological society. No code that reduced genetic engineering to a minor role could stand up for long, because the temptation presented by the immense power of biotechnology would be irresistible, especially since to the majority of people many of its applications will seem obviously and unequivocally good (eliminating physical and mental diseases, giving people the abilities they need to get along in today's world). Inevitably, genetic engineering will be used extensively, but only in ways consistent with the needs of the industrial-technological system. [20]

TECHNOLOGY IS A MORE POWERFUL SOCIAL FORCE THAN THE ASPIRATION FOR FREEDOM

125. It is not possible to make a LASTING compromise between technology and freedom, because technology is by far the more powerful social force and continually encroaches on freedom through REPEATED compromises. Imagine the case of two neighbors, each of whom at the outset owns the same amount of land, but one of whom is more powerful than the other. The powerful one demands a piece of the other's land. The weak one refuses. The powerful one says, "OK, let's compromise. Give me half of what I asked." The weak one has little choice but to give in. Some time later the powerful neighbor demands another piece of land, again there is a compromise, and so forth. By forcing a long series of compromises on the weaker man, the powerful one eventually gets all of his land. So it goes in the conflict between technology and freedom.

126. Let us explain why technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration for freedom.

127. A technological advance that appears not to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without observing any traffic regulations, and was independent of technological support-systems. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man's freedom. They took no freedom away from the walking man, no one had to have an automobile if he didn't want one, and anyone who did choose to buy an automobile could travel much faster and farther than a walking man. But the introduction of motorized transport soon changed society in such a way as to restrict greatly man's freedom of locomotion. When automobiles became numerous, it became necessary to regulate their use extensively. In a car, especially in densely populated areas, one cannot just go where one likes at one's own pace one's movement is governed by the flow of traffic and by various traffic laws. One is tied down by various obligations: license requirements, driver test, renewing registration, insurance, maintenance required for safety, monthly payments on purchase price. Moreover, the use of motorized transport is no longer optional. Since the introduction of motorized transport the arrangement of our cities has changed in such a way that the majority of people no longer live within walking distance of their place of employment, shopping areas and recreational opportunities, so that they HAVE TO depend on the automobile for transportation. Or else they must use public transportation, in which case they have even less control over their own movement than when driving a car. Even the walker's freedom is now greatly restricted. In the city he continually has to stop to wait for traffic lights that are designed mainly to serve auto traffic. In the country, motor traffic makes it dangerous and unpleasant to walk along the highway. (Note this important point that we have just illustrated with the case of motorized transport: When a new item of technology is introduced as an option that an individual can accept or not as he chooses, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional. In many cases the new technology changes society in such a way that people eventually find themselves FORCED to use it.)

128. While technological progress AS A WHOLE continually narrows our sphere of freedom, each new technical advance CONSIDERED BY ITSELF appears to be desirable. Electricity, indoor plumbing, rapid long-distance communications ... how could one argue against any of these things, or against any other of the innumerable technical advances that have made modern society? It would have been absurd to resist the introduction of the telephone, for example. It offered many advantages and no disadvantages. Yet, as we explained in paragraphs 59-76, all these technical advances taken together have created a world in which the average man's fate is no longer in his own hands or in the hands of his neighbors and friends, but in those of politicians, corporation executives and remote, anonymous technicians and bureaucrats whom he as an individual has no power to influence. [21] The same process will continue in the future. Take genetic engineering, for example. Few people will resist the introduction of a genetic technique that eliminates a hereditary disease. It does no apparent harm and prevents much suffering. Yet a large number of genetic improvements taken together will make the human being into an engineered product rather than a free creation of chance (or of God, or whatever, depending on your religious beliefs).

129. Another reason why technology is such a powerful social force is that, within the context of a given society, technological progress marches in only one direction; it can never be reversed. Once a technical innovation has been introduced, people usually become dependent on it, so that they can never again do without it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it. (Imagine what would happen to the system today if computers, for example, were eliminated.) Thus the system can move in only one direction, toward greater technologization. Technology repeatedly forces freedom to take a step back, but technology can never take a step backsshort of the overthrow of the whole technological system.

130. Technology advances with great rapidity and threatens freedom at many different points at the same time (crowding, rules and regulations, increasing dependence of individuals on large organizations, propaganda and other psychological techniques, genetic engineering, invasion of privacy through surveillance devices and computers, etc.). To hold back any ONE of the threats to freedom would require a long and difficult social struggle. Those who want to protect freedom are overwhelmed by the sheer number of new attacks and the rapidity with which they develop, hence they become apathetic and no longer resist. To fight each of the threats separately would be futile. Success can be hoped for only by fighting the technological system as a whole; but that is revolution, not reform.

131. Technicians (we use this term in its broad sense to describe all those who perform a specialized task that requires training) tend to be so involved in their work (their surrogate activity) that when a conflict arises between their technical work and freedom, they almost always decide in favor of their technical work. This is obvious in the case of scientists, but it also appears elsewhere: Educators, humanitarian groups, conservation organizations do not hesitate to use propaganda or other psychological techniques to help them achieve their laudable ends. Corporations and government agencies, when they find it useful, do not hesitate to collect information about individuals without regard to their privacy. Law enforcement agencies are frequently inconvenienced by the constitutional rights of suspects and often of completely innocent persons, and they do whatever they can do legally (or sometimes illegally) to restrict or circumvent those rights. Most of these educators, government officials and law officers believe in freedom, privacy and constitutional rights, but when these conflict with their work, they usually feel that their work is more important.

132. It is well known that people generally work better and more persistently when striving for a reward than when attempting to avoid a punishment or negative outcome. Scientists and other technicians are motivated mainly by the rewards they get through their work. But those who oppose technological invasions of freedom are working to avoid a negative outcome, consequently there are few who work persistently and well at this discouraging task. If reformers ever achieved a signal victory that seemed to set up a solid barrier against further erosion of freedom through technical progress, most would tend to relax and turn their attention to more agreeable pursuits. But the scientists would remain busy in their laboratories, and technology as it progresses would find ways, in spite of any barriers, to exert more and more control over individuals and make them always more dependent on the system.

133. No social arrangements, whether laws, institutions, customs or ethical codes, can provide permanent protection against technology. History shows that all social arrangements are transitory; they all change or break down eventually. But technological advances are permanent within the context of a given civilization. Suppose for example that it were possible to arrive at some social arrangements that would prevent genetic engineering from being applied to human beings, or prevent it from being applied in such a way as to threaten freedom and dignity. Still, the technology would remain waiting. Sooner or later the social arrangement would break down. Probably sooner, given the pace of change in our society. Then genetic engineering would begin to invade our sphere of freedom, and this invasion would be irreversible (short of a breakdown of technological civilization itself). Any illusions about achieving anything permanent through social arrangements should be dispelled by what is currently happening with environmental legislation. A few years ago its seemed that there were secure legal barriers preventing at least SOME of the worst forms of environmental degradation. A change in the political wind, and those barriers begin to crumble.

134. For all of the foregoing reasons, technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration for freedom. But this statement requires an important qualification. It appears that during the next several decades the industrial-technological system will be undergoing severe stresses due to economic and environmental problems, and especially due to problems of human behavior (alienation, rebellion, hostility, a variety of social and psychological difficulties). We hope that the stresses through which the system is likely to pass will cause it to break down, or at least will weaken it sufficiently so that a revolution against it becomes possible. If such a revolution occurs and is successful, then at that particular moment the aspiration for freedom will have proved more powerful than technology.

135. In paragraph 125 we used an analogy of a weak neighbor who is left destitute by a strong neighbor who takes all his land by forcing on him a series of compromises. But suppose now that the strong neighbor gets sick, so that he is unable to defend himself. The weak neighbor can force the strong one to give him his land back, or he can kill him. If he lets the strong man survive and only forces him to give the land back, he is a fool, because when the strong man gets well he will again take all the land for himself. The only sensible alternative for the weaker man is to kill the strong one while he has the chance. In the same way, while the industrial system is sick we must destroy it. If we compromise with it and let it recover from its sickness, it will eventually wipe out all of our freedom.

SIMPLER SOCIAL PROBLEMS HAVE PROVED INTRACTABLE

136. If anyone still imagines that it would be possible to reform the system in such a way as to protect freedom from technology, let him consider how clumsily and for the most part unsuccessfully our society has dealt with other social problems that are far more simple and straightforward. Among other things, the system has failed to stop environmental degradation, political corruption, drug trafficking or domestic abuse.

137. Take our environmental problems, for example. Here the conflict of values is straightforward: economic expedience now versus saving some of our natural resources for our grandchildren. [22] But on this subject we get only a lot of blather and obfuscation from the people who have power, and nothing like a clear, consistent line of action, and we keep on piling up environmental problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. Attempts to resolve the environmental issue consist of struggles and compromises between different factions, some of which are ascendant at one moment, others at another moment. The line of struggle changes with the shifting currents of public opinion. This is not a rational process, nor is it one that is likely to lead to a timely and successful solution to the problem. Major social problems, if they get "solved" at all, are rarely or never solved through any rational, comprehensive plan. They just work themselves out through a process in which various competing groups pursuing their own (usually short-term) self-interest [23] arrive (mainly by luck) at some more or less stable modus vivendi. In fact, the principles we formulated in paragraphs 100-106 make it seem doubtful that rational, long-term social planning can EVER be successful.

138. Thus it is clear that the human race has at best a very limited capacity for solving even relatively straightforward social problems. How then is it going to solve the far more difficult and subtle problem of reconciling freedom with technology? Technology presents clear-cut material advantages, whereas freedom is an abstraction that means different things to different people, and its loss is easily obscured by propaganda and fancy talk.

139. And note this important difference: It is conceivable that our environmental problems (for example) may some day be settled through a rational, comprehensive plan, but if this happens it will be only because it is in the long-term interest of the system to solve these problems. But it is NOT in the interest of the system to preserve freedom or small-group autonomy. On the contrary, it is in the interest of the system to bring human behavior under control to the greatest possible extent. [24] Thus, while practical considerations may eventually force the system to take a rational, prudent approach to environmental problems, equally practical considerations will force the system to regulate human behavior ever more closely (preferably by indirect means that will disguise the encroachment on freedom). This isn't just our opinion. Eminent social scientists (e.g. James Q. Wilson) have stressed the importance of "socializing" people more effectively.

REVOLUTION IS EASIER THAN REFORM

140. We hope we have convinced the reader that the system cannot be reformed in such a way as to reconcile freedom with technology. The only way out is to dispense with the industrial-technological system altogether. This implies revolution, not necessarily an armed uprising, but certainly a radical and fundamental change in the nature of society.

141. People tend to assume that because a revolution involves a much greater change than reform does, it is more difficult to bring about than reform is. Actually, under certain circumstances revolution is much easier than reform. The reason is that a revolutionary movement can inspire an intensity of commitment that a reform movement cannot inspire. A reform movement merely offers to solve a particular social problem. A revolutionary movement offers to solve all problems at one stroke and create a whole new world; it provides the kind of ideal for which people will take great risks and make great sacrifices. For this reasons it would be much easier to overthrow the whole technological system than to put effective, permanent restraints on the development or application of any one segment of technology, such as genetic engineering, for example. Not many people will devote themselves with single-minded passion to imposing and maintaining restraints on genetic engineering, but under suitable conditions large numbers of people may devote themselves passionately to a revolution against the industrial-technological system. As we noted in paragraph 132, reformers seeking to limit certain aspects of technology would be working to avoid a negative outcome. But revolutionaries work to gain a powerful rewardsfulfillment of their revolutionary visionsand therefore work harder and more persistently than reformers do.

142. Reform is always restrained by the fear of painful consequences if changes go too far. But once a revolutionary fever has taken hold of a society, people are willing to undergo unlimited hardships for the sake of their revolution. This was clearly shown in the French and Russian Revolutions. It may be that in such cases only a minority of the population is really committed to the revolution, but this minority is sufficiently large and active so that it becomes the dominant force in society. We will have more to say about revolution in paragraphs 180-205.

CONTROL OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR

143. Since the beginning of civilization, organized societies have had to put pressures on human beings of the sake of the functioning of the social organism. The kinds of pressures vary greatly from one society to another. Some of the pressures are physical (poor diet, excessive labor, environmental pollution), some are psychological (noise, crowding, forcing human behavior into the mold that society requires). In the past, human nature has been approximately constant, or at any rate has varied only within cer tain bounds. Consequently, societies have been able to push people only up to certain limits. When the limit of human endurance has been passed, things start going wrong: rebellion, or crime, or corruption, or evasion of work, or depression and other mental problems, or an elevated death rate, or a declining birth rate or something else, so that either the society breaks down, or its functioning becomes too inefficient and it is (quickly or gradually, through conquest, attrition or evolution) replaced by some more efficient form of society. [25]

144. Thus human nature has in the past put certain limits on the development of societies. People could be pushed only so far and no farther. But today this may be changing, because modern technology is developing ways of modifying human beings.

145. Imagine a society that subjects people to conditions that make them terribly unhappy, then gives them drugs to take away their unhappiness. Science fiction? It is already happening to some extent in our own society. It is well known that the rate of clinical depression has been greatly increasing in recent decades. We believe that this is due to disruption of the power process, as explained in paragraphs 59-76. But even if we are wrong, the increasing rate of depression is certainly the result of SOME conditions that exist in today's society. Instead of removing the conditions that make people depressed, modern society gives them antidepressant drugs. In effect, antidepressants are a means of modifying an individual's internal state in such a way as to enable him to tolerate social conditions that he would otherwise find intolerable. (Yes, we know that depression is often of purely genetic origin. We are referring here to those cases in which environment plays the predominant role.)

146. Drugs that affect the mind are only one example of the new methods of controlling human behavior that modern society is developing. Let us look at some of the other methods.

147. To start with, there are the techniques of surveillance. Hidden video cameras are now used in most stores and in many other places, computers are used to collect and process vast amounts of information about individuals. Information so obtained greatly increases the effectiveness of physical coercion (i.e., law enforcement). [26] Then there are the methods of propaganda, for which the mass communication media provide effective vehicles. Efficient techniques have been developed for winning elections, selling products, influencing public opinion. The entertainment industry serves as an important psychological tool of the system, possibly even when it is dishing out large amounts of sex and violence. Entertainment provides modern man with an essential means of escape. While absorbed in television, videos, etc., he can forget stress, anxiety, frustration, dissatisfaction. Many primitive peoples, when they don't have work to do, are quite content to sit for hours at a time doing nothing at all, because they are at peace with themselves and their world. But most modern people must be constantly occupied or entertained, otherwise they get "bored," i.e., they get fidgety, uneasy, irritable.

148. Other techniques strike deeper than the foregoing. Education is no longer a simple affair of paddling a kid's behind when he doesn't know his lessons and patting him on the head when he does know them. It is becoming a scientific technique for controlling the child's development. Sylvan Learning Centers, for example, have had great success in motivating children to study, and psychological techniques are also used with more or less success in many conventional schools. "Parenting" techniques that are taught to parents are designed to make children accept fundamental values of the system and behave in ways that the system finds desirable. "Mental health" programs, "intervention" techniques, psychotherapy and so forth are ostensibly designed to benefit individuals, but in practice they usually serve as methodsfor inducing individuals to think and behave as the system requires. (There is no contradiction here; an individual whose attitudes or behavior bring him into conflict with the system is up against a force that is too powerful for him to conquer or escape from, hence he is likely to suffer from stress, frustration, defeat. His path will be much easier if he thinks and behaves as the system requires. In that sense the system is acting for the benefit of the individual when it brainwashes him into conformity.) Child abuse in its gross and obvious forms is disapproved in most if not all cultures. Tormenting a child for a trivial reason or no reason at all is something that appalls almost everyone. But many psychologists interpret the concept of abuse much more broadly. Is spanking, when used as part of a rational and consistent system of discipline, a form of abuse? The question will ultimately be decided by whether or not spanking tends to produce behavior that makes a person fit in well with the existing system of society. In practice, the word "abuse" tends to be interpreted to include any method of child-rearing that produces behavior inconvenient for the system. Thus, when they go beyond the prevention of obvious, senseless cruelty, programs for preventing "child abuse" are directed toward the control of human behavior on behalf of the system.

149. Presumably, research will continue to increase the effectiveness of psychological techniques for controlling human behavior. But we think it is unlikely that psychological techniques alone will be sufficient to adjust human beings to the kind of society that technology is creating. Biological methods probably will have to be used. We have already mentioned the use of drugs in this connection. Neurology may provide other avenues for modifying the human mind. Genetic engineering of human beings is already beginning to occur in the form of "gene therapy," and there is no reason to assume that such methods will not eventually be used to modify those aspects of the body that affect mental functioning.

150. As we mentioned in paragraph 134, industrial society seems likely to be entering a period of severe stress, due in part to problems of human behavior and in part to economic and environmental problems. And a considerable proportion of the system's economic and environmental problems result from the way human beings behave. Alienation, low self-esteem, depression, hostility, rebellion; children who won't study, youth gangs, illegal drug use, rape, child abuse, other crimes, unsafe sex, teen pregnancy, population growth, political corruption, race hatred, ethnic rivalry, bitter ideological conflict (e.g., pro-choice vs. pro-life), political extremism, terrorism, sabotage, anti-government groups, hate groups. All these threaten the very survival of the system. The system will therefore be FORCED to use every practical means of controlling human behavior.

151. The social disruption that we see today is certainly not the result of mere chance. It can only be a result of the conditions of life that the system imposes on people. (We have argued that the most important of these conditions is disruption of the power process.) If the systems succeeds in imposing sufficient control over human behavior to assure its own survival, a new watershed in human history will have been passed. Whereas formerly the limits of human endurance have imposed limits on the development of societies (as we explained in paragraphs 143, 144), industrial-technological society will be able to pass those limits by modifying human beings, whether by psychological methods or biological methods or both. In the future, social systems will not be adjusted to suit the needs of human beings. Instead, human being will be adjusted to suit the needs of the system. [27]

152. Generally speaking, technological control over human behavior will probably not be introduced with a totalitarian intention or even through a conscious desire to restrict human freedom. [28] Each new step in the assertion of control over the humanmind will be taken as a rational response to a problem that faces society, such as curing alcoholism, reducing the crime rate or inducing young people to study science and engineering. In many cases there will be a humanitarian justification. For example, when a psychiatrist prescribes an anti-depressant for a depressed patient, he is clearly doing that individual a favor. It would be inhumane to withhold the drug from someone who needs it. When parents send their children to Sylvan Learning Centers to have them manipulated into becoming enthusiastic about their studies, they do so from concern for their children's welfare. It may be that some of these parents wish that one didn't have to have specialized training to get a job and that their kid didn't have to be brainwashed into becoming a computer nerd. But what can they do? They can't change society, and their child may be unemployable if he doesn't have certain skills. So they send him to Sylvan.

153. Thus control over human behavior will be introduced not by a calculated decision of the authorities but through a process of social evolution (RAPID evolution, however). The process will be impossible to resist, because each advance, considered by itself, will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will seem to be less than that which would result from not making it (see paragraph 127). Propaganda for example is used for many good purposes, such as discouraging child abuse or race hatred. [14] Sex education is obviously useful, yet the effect of sex education (to the extent that it is successful) is to take the shaping of sexual attitudes away from the family and put it into the hands of the state as represented by the public school system.

154. Suppose a biological trait is discovered that increases the likelihood that a child will grow up to be a criminal, and suppose some sort of gene therapy can remove this trait. [29] Of course most parents whose children possess the trait will have them undergo the therapy. It would be inhumane to do otherwise, since the child would probably have a miserable life if he grew up to be a criminal. But many or most primitive societies have a low crime rate in comparison with that of our society, even though they have neither high-tech methods of child-rearing nor harsh systems of punishment. Since there is no reason to suppose that more modern men than primitive men have innate predatory tendencies, the high crime rate of our society must be due to the pressures that modern conditions put on people, to which many cannot or will not adjust. Thus a treatment designed to remove potential criminal tendencies is at least in part a way of re-engineering people so that they suit the requirements of the system.

155. Our society tends to regard as a "sickness" any mode of thought or behavior that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an individual doesn't fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to adjust him to the system is seen as a "cure" for a "sickness" and therefore as good.

156. In paragraph 127 we pointed out that if the use of a new item of technology is INITIALLY optional, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional, because the new technology tends to change society in such a way that it becomes difficult or impossible for an individual to function without using that technology. This applies also to the technology of human behavior. In a world in which most children are put through a program to make them enthusiastic about studying, a parent will almost be forced to put his kid through such a program, because if he does not, then the kid will grow up to be, comparatively speaking, an ignoramus and therefore unemployable. Or suppose a biological treatment is discovered that, without undesirable side-effects, will greatly reduce the psychological stress from which so many people suffer in our society.If large numbers of people choose to undergo the treatment, then the general level of stress in society will be reduced, so that it will be possible for the system to increase the stress-producing pressures. In fact, something like this seems to have happened already with one of our society's most important psychological tools for enabling people to reduce (or at least temporarily escape from) stress, namely, mass entertainment (see paragraph 147). Our use of mass entertainment is "optional": No law requires us to watch television, listen to the radio, read magazines. Yet mass entertainment is a means of escape and stress-reduction on which most of us have become dependent. Everyone complains about the trashiness of television, but almost everyone watches it. A few have kicked the TV habit, but it would be a rare person who could get along today without using ANY form of mass entertainment. (Yet until quite recently in human history most people got along very nicely with no other entertainment than that which each local community created for itself.) Without the entertainment industry the system probably would not have been able to get away with putting as much stress-producing pressure on us as it does.

157. Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful that the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents.

158. It presumably would be impractical for all people to have electrodes inserted in their heads so that they could be controlled by the authorities. But the fact that human thoughts and feelings are so open to biological intervention shows that the problem of controlling human behavior is mainly a technical problem; a problem of neurons, hormones and complex molecules; the kind of problem that is accessible to scientific attack. Given the outstanding record of our society in solving technical problems, it is overwhelmingly probable that great advances will be made in the control of human behavior.

159. Will public resistance prevent the introduction of technological control of human behavior? It certainly would if an attempt were made to introduce such control all at once. But since technological control will be introduced through a long sequence of small advances, there will be no rational and effective public resistance. (See paragraphs 127, 132, 153.)

160. To those who think that all this sounds like science fiction, we point out that yesterday's science fiction is today's fact. The Industrial Revolution has radically altered man's environment and way of life, and it is only to be expected that as technology is increasingly applied to the human body and mind, man himself will be altered as radically as his environment and way of life have been.

HUMAN RACE AT A CROSSROADS

161. But we have gotten ahead of our story. It is one thing to develop in the laboratory a series of psychological or biological techniques for manipulating human behavior and quite another to integrate these techniques into a functioning social system. The latter problem is the more difficult of the two. For example, while the techniques of educational psychology doubtless work quite well in the "lab schools" where they are developed, it is not necessarily easy to apply them effectively throughout our educational system. We all know what many of our schools are like. The teachers are too busy taking knives and guns away from the kids to subject them to the latest techniques for making them into computer nerds. Thus, in spite of all its technical advances relating to human behavior, the system to date has not been impressively successful in controlling human beings. The people whose behavior is fairly well under the control of the system are those of the type that might be called "bourgeois." But there are growing numbers of people who in one way or another are rebels against the system: welfare leaches, youth gangs, cultists, satanists, nazis, radical environmentalists, militiamen, etc.

162. The system is currently engaged in a desperate struggle to overcome certain problems that threaten its survival, among which the problems of human behavior are the most important. If the system succeeds in acquiring sufficient control over human behavior quickly enough, it will probably survive. Otherwise it will break down. We think the issue will most likely be resolved within the next several decades, say 40 to 100 years.

163. Suppose the system survives the crisis of the next several decades. By that time it will have to have solved, or at least brought under control, the principal problems that confront it, in particular that of "socializing" human beings; that is, making people sufficiently docile so that heir behavior no longer threatens the system. That being accomplished, it does not appear that there would be any further obstacle to the development of technology, and it would presumably advance toward its logical conclusion, which is complete control over everything on Earth, including human beings and all other important organisms. The system may become a unitary, monolithic organization, or it may be more or less fragmented and consist of a number of organizations coexisting in a relationship that includes elements of both cooperation and competition, just as today the government, the corporations and other large organizations both cooperate and compete with one another. Human freedom mostly will have vanished, because individuals and small groups will be impotent vis-a-vis large organizations armed with supertechnology and an arsenal of advanced psychological and biological tools for manipulating human beings, besides instruments of surveillance and physical coercion. Only a small number of people will have any real power, and even these probably will have only very limited freedom, because their behavior too will be regulated; just as today our politicians and corporation executives can retain their positions of power only as long as their behavior remains within certain fairly narrow limits.

164. Don't imagine that the systems will stop developing further techniques for controlling human beings and nature once the crisis of the next few decades is over and increasing control is no longer necessary for the system's survival. On the contrary, once the hard times are over the system will increase its control over people and nature more rapidly, because it will no longer be hampered by difficulties of the kind that it is currently experiencing. Survival is not the principal motive for extending control. As we explained in paragraphs 87-90, technicians and scientists carry on their work largely as a surrogate activity; that is, they satisfy their need for power by solving technical problems. They will continue to do this with unabated enthusiasm, and among the most interesting and challenging problems for them to solve will be those of understanding the human body and mind and intervening in their development. For the "good of humanity," of course.

165. But suppose on the other hand that the stresses of the coming decades prove to be too much for the system. If the system breaks down there may be a period of chaos, a "time of troubles" such as those that history has recorded at various epochs in the past. It is impossible to predict what would emerge from such a time of troubles, but at any rate the human race would be given a new chance. The greatest danger is that industrial society may begin to reconstitute itself within the first few years after the breakdown. Certainly there will be many people (power-hungry types especially) who will be anxious to get the factories running again.

166. Therefore two tasks confront those who hate the servitude to which the industrial system is reducing the human race. First, we must work to heighten the social stresses within the system so as to increase the likelihood that it will break down or be weakened sufficiently so that a revolution against it becomes possible. Second, it is necessary to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial society if and when the system becomes sufficiently weakened. And such an ideology will help to assure that, if and when industrial society breaks down, its remnants will be smashed beyond repair, so that the system cannot be reconstituted. The factories should be destroyed, technical books burned, etc.

HUMAN SUFFERING

167. The industrial system will not break down purely as a result of revolutionary action. It will not be vulnerable to revolutionary attack unless its own internal problems of development lead it into very serious difficulties. So if the system breaks down it will do so either spontaneously, or through a process that is in part spontaneous but helped along by revolutionaries. If the breakdown is sudden, many people will die, since the world's population has become so overblown that it cannot even feed itself any longer without advanced technology. Even if the breakdown is gradual enough so that reduction of the population can occur more through lowering of the birth rate than through elevation of the death rate, the process of de-industrialization probably will be very chaotic and involve much suffering. It is naive to think it likely that technology can be phased out in a smoothly managed, orderly way, especially since the technophiles will fight stubbornly at every step. Is it therefore cruel to work for the breakdown of the system? Maybe, but maybe not. In the first place, revolutionaries will not be able to break the system down unless it is already in enough trouble so that there would be a good chance of its eventually breaking down by itself anyway; and the bigger the system grows, the more disastrous the consequences of its breakdown will be; so it may be that revolutionaries, by hastening the onset of the breakdown, will be reducing the extent of the disaster.

168. In the second place, one has to balance struggle and death against the loss of freedom and dignity. To many of us, freedom and dignity are more important than a long life or avoidance of physical pain. Besides, we all have to die some time, and it may be better to die fighting for survival, or for a cause, than to live a long but empty and purposeless life.

169. In the third place, it is not at all certain that survival of the system will lead to less suffering than breakdown of the system would. The system has already caused, and is continuing to cause, immense suffering all over the world. Ancient cultures, that for hundreds of years gave people a satisfactory relationship with each other and with their environment, have been shattered by contact with industrial society, and the result has been a whole catalogue of economic, environmental, social and psychological problems. One of the effects of the intrusion of industrial society has been that over much of the world traditional controls on population have been thrown out of balance. Hence the population explosion, with all that that implies. Then there is the psychological suffering that is widespread throughout the supposedly fortunate countries of the West (see paragraphs 44, 45). No one knows what will happen as a result of ozone depletion, the greenhouse effect and other environmental problems that cannot yet be foreseen. And, as nuclear proliferation has shown, new technology cannot be kept out of the hands of dictators and irresponsible Third World nations. Would you like to speculate about what Iraq or North Korea will do with genetic engineering?

170. "Oh!" say the technophiles, "Science is going to fix all that! We will conquer famine, eliminate psychological suffering, make everybody healthy and happy!" Yeah, sure. That's what they said 200 years ago. The Industrial Revolution was supposed to eliminate poverty, make everybody happy, etc. The actual result has been quite different. The technophiles are hopelessly naive (or self-deceiving) in their understanding of social problems. They are unaware of (or choose to ignore) the fact that when large changes, even seemingly beneficial ones, are introduced into a society, they lead to a long sequence of other changes, most of which are impossible to predict (paragraph 103). The result is disruption of the society. So it is very probable that in their attempts to end poverty and disease, engineer docile, happy personalities and so forth, the technophiles will create social systems that are terribly troubled, even more so than the present once. For example, the scientists boast that they will end famine by creating new, genetically engineered food plants. But this will allow the human population to keep expanding indefinitely, and it is well known that crowding leads to increased stress and aggression. This is merely one example of the PREDICTABLE problems that will arise. We emphasize that, as past experience has shown, technical progress will lead to other new problems that CANNOT be predicted in advance (paragraph 103). In fact, ever since the Industrial Revolution, technology has been creating new problems for society far more rapidly than it has been solving old ones. Thus it will take a long and difficult period of trial and error for the technophiles to work the bugs out of their Brave New World (if they every do). In the meantime there will be great suffering. So it is not at all clear that the survival of industrial society would involve less suffering than the breakdown of that society would. Technology has gotten the human race into a fix from which there is not likely to be any easy escape.

THE FUTURE

171. But suppose now that industrial society does survive the next several decades and that the bugs do eventually get worked out of the system, so that it functions smoothly. What kind of system will it be? We will consider several possibilities.

172. First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing intelligent machines that can do all things better than human beings can do them. In that case presumably all work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary. Either of two cases might occur. The machines might be permitted to make all of their own decisions without human oversight, or else human control over the machines might be retained.

173. If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can't make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all power to the machines. But we are suggesting neither that the human race would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines' decisions. As society and the problems that face it become more and more complex and as machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more and more of their decisions for them, simply because machine-made decisions will bring better results than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won't be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide.

174. On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car or his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elitesjust as it is today, but with two differences. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consists of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone's physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes "treatment" to cure his "problem." Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or to make them "sublimate" their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they most certainly will not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals.

175. But suppose now that the computer scientists do not succeed in developing artificial intelligence, so that human work remains necessary. Even so, machines will take care of more and more of the simpler tasks so that there will be an increasing surplus of human workers at the lower levels of ability. (We see this happening already. There are many people who find it difficult or impossible to get work, because for intellectual or psychological reasons they cannot acquire the level of training necessary to make themselves useful in the present system.) On those who are employed, ever-increasing demands will be placed: They will need more and more training, more and more ability, and will have to be ever more reliable, conforming and docile, because they will be more and more like cells of a giant organism. Their tasks will be increasingly specialized, so that their work will be, in a sense, out of touch with the real world, being concentrated on one tiny slice of reality. The system will have to use any means that it can, whether psychological or biological, to engineer people to be docile, to have the abilities that the system requires and to "sublimate" their drive for power into some specialized task. But the statement that the people of such a society will have to be docile may require qualification. The society may find competitiveness useful, provided that ways are found of directing competitiveness into channels that serve the needs of the system. We can imagine a future society in which there is endless competition for positions of prestige and power. But no more than a very few people will ever reach the top, where the only real power is (see end of paragraph 163). Very repellent is a society in which a person can satisfy his need for power only by pushing large numbers of other people out of the way and depriving them of THEIR opportunity for power.

176. One can envision scenarios that incorporate aspects of more than one of the possibilities that we have just discussed. For instance, it may be that machines will take over most of the work that is of real, practical importance, but that human beings will be kept busy by being given relatively unimportant work. It has been suggested, for example, that a great development of the service industries might provide work for human beings. Thus people would spent their time shining each other's shoes, driving each other around in taxicabs, making handicrafts for one another, waiting on each other's tables, etc. This seems to us a thoroughly contemptible way for the human race to end up, and we doubt that many people would find fulfilling lives in such pointless busy-work. They would seek other, dangerous outlets (drugs, crime, "cults," hate groups) unless they were biologically or psychologically engineered to adapt them to such a way of life.

177. Needless to say, the scenarios outlined above do not exhaust all the possibilities. They only indicate the kinds of outcomes that seem to us most likely. But we can envision no plausible scenarios that are any more palatable than the ones we've just described. It is overwhelmingly probable that if the industrial-technological system survives the next 40 to 100 years, it will by that time have developed certain general characteristics: Individuals (at least those of the "bourgeois" type, who are integrated into the system and make it run, and who therefore have all the power) will be more dependent than ever on large organizations; they will be more "socialized" than ever and their physical and mental qualities to a significant extent (possibly to a very great extent) will be those that are engineered into them rather than being the results of chance (or of God's will, or whatever); and whatever may be left of wild nature will be reduced to remnants preserved for scientific study and kept under the supervision and management of scientists (hence it will no longer be truly wild). In the long run (say a few centuries from now) it is likely that neither the human race nor any other important organisms will exist as we know them today, because once you start modifying organisms through genetic engineering there is no reason to stop at any particular point, so that the modifications will probably continue until man and other organisms have been utterly transformed.

178. Whatever else may be the case, it is certain that technology is creating for human beings a new physical and social environment radically different from the spectrum of environments to which natural selection has adapted the human race physically and psychologically. If man is not adjusted to this new environment by being artificially re-engineered, then he will be adapted to it through a long and painful process of natural selection. The former is far more likely than the latter.

179. It would be better to dump the whole stinking system and take the consequences.

STRATEGY

180. The technophiles are taking us all on an utterly reckless ride into the unknown. Many people understand something of what technological progress is doing to us yet take a passive attitude toward it because they think it is inevitable. But we (FC) don't think it is inevitable. We think it can be stopped, and we will give here some indications of how to go about stopping it.

181. As we stated in paragraph 166, the two main tasks for the present are to promote social stress and instability in industrial society and to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial system. When the system becomes sufficiently stressed and unstable, a revolution against technology may be possible. The pattern would be similar to that of the French and Russian Revolutions. French society and Russian society, for several decades prior to their respective revolutions, showed increasing signs of stress and weakness. Meanwhile, ideologies were being developed that offered a new world view that was quite different from the old one. In the Russian case, revolutionaries were actively working to undermine the old order. Then, when the old system was put under sufficient additional stress (by financial crisis in France, by military defeat in Russia) it was swept away by revolution. What we propose is something along the same lines.

182. It will be objected that the French and Russian Revolutions were failures. But most revolutions have two goals. One is to destroy an old form of society and the other is to set up the new form of society envisioned by the revolutionaries. The French and Russian revolutionaries failed (fortunately!) to create the new kind of society of which they dreamed, but they were quite successful in destroying the old society. We have no illusions about the feasibility of creating a new, ideal form of society. Our goal is only to destroy the existing form of society.

183. But an ideology, in order to gain enthusiastic support, must have a positive ideal as well as a negative one; it must be FOR something as well as AGAINST something. The positive ideal that we propose is Nature. That is, WILD nature: those aspects of the functioning of the Earth and its living things that are independent of human management and free of human interference and control. And with wild nature we include human nature, by which we mean those aspects of the functioning of the human individual that are not subject to regulation by organized society but are products of chance, or free will, or God (depending on your religious or philosophical opinions).

184. Nature makes a perfect counter-ideal to technology for several reasons. Nature (that which is outside the power of the system) is the opposite of technology (which seeks to expand indefinitely the power of the system). Most people will agree that nature is beautiful; certainly it has tremendous popular appeal. The radical environmentalists ALREADY hold an ideology that exalts nature and opposes technology. [30] It is not necessary for the sake of nature to set up some chimerical utopia or any new kind of social order. Nature takes care of itself: It was a spontaneous creation that existed long before any human society, and for countless centuries many different kinds of human societies coexisted with nature without doing it an excessive amount of damage. Only with the Industrial Revolution did the effect of human society on nature become really devastating. To relieve the pressure on nature it is not necessary to create a special kind of social system, it is only necessary to get rid of industrial society. Granted, this will not solve all problems. Industrial society has already done tremendous damage to nature and it will take a very long time for the scars to heal. Besides, even pre-industrial societies can do significant damage to nature. Nevertheless, getting rid of industrial society will accomplish a great deal. It will relieve the worst of the pressure on nature so that the scars can begin to heal. It will remove the capacity of organized society to keep increasing its control over nature (including human nature). Whatever kind of society may exist after the demise of the industrial system, it is certain that most people will live close to nature, because in the absence of advanced technology there is no other way that people CAN live. To feed themselves they must be peasants or herdsmen or fishermen or hunters, etc. And, generally speaking, local autonomy should tend to increase, because lack of advanced technology and rapid communications will limit the capacity of governments or other large organizations to control local communities.

185. As for the negative consequences of eliminating industrial societyswell, you can't eat your cake and have it too. To gain one thing you have to sacrifice another.

186. Most people hate psychological conflict. For this reason they avoid doing any serious thinking about difficult social issues, and they like to have such issues presented to them in simple, black-and-white terms: THIS is all good and THAT is all bad. The revolutionary ideology should therefore be developed on two levels.

187. On the more sophisticated level the ideology should address itself to people who are intelligent, thoughtful and rational. The object should be to create a core of people who will be opposed to the industrial system on a rational, thought-out basis, with full appreciation of the problems and ambiguities involved, and of the price that has to be paid for getting rid of the system. It is particularly important to attract people of this type, as they are capable people and will be instrumental in influencing others. These people should be addressed on as rational a level as possible. Facts should never intentionally be distorted and intemperate language should be avoided. This does not mean that no appeal can be made to the emotions, but in making such appeal care should be taken to avoid misrepresenting the truth or doing anything else that would destroy the intellectual respectability of the ideology.

188. On a second level, the ideology should be propagated in a simplified form that will enable the unthinking majority to see the conflict of technology vs. nature in unambiguous terms. But even on this second level the ideology should not be expressed in language that is so cheap, intemperate or irrational that it alienates people of the thoughtful and rational type. Cheap, intemperate propaganda sometimes achieves impressive short-term gains, but it will be more advantageous in the long run to keep the loyalty of a small number of intelligently committed people than to arouse the passions of an unthinking, fickle mob who will change their attitude as soon as someone comes along with a better propaganda gimmick. However, propaganda of the rabble-rousing type may be necessary when the system is nearing the point of collapse and there is a final struggle between rival ideologies to determine which will become dominant when the old world-view goes under.

189. Prior to that final struggle, the revolutionaries should not expect to have a majority of people on their side. History is made by active, determined minorities, not by the majority, which seldom has a clear and consistent idea of what it really wants. Until the time comes for the final push toward revolution [31], the task of revolutionaries will be less to win the shallow support of the majority than to build a small core of deeply committed people. As for the majority, it will be enough to make them aware of the existence of the new ideology and remind them of it frequently; though of course it will be desirable to get majority support to the extent that this can be done without weakening the core of seriously committed people.

190. Any kind of social conflict helps to destabilize the system, but one should be careful about what kind of conflict one encourages. The line of conflict should be drawn between the mass of the people and the power-holding elite of industrial society (politicians, scientists, upper-level business executives, government officials, etc.). It should NOT be drawn between the revolutionaries and the mass of the people. For example, it would be bad strategy for the revolutionaries to condemn Americans for their habits of consumption. Instead, the average American should be portrayed as a victim of the advertising and marketing industry, which has suckered him into buying a lot of junk that he doesn't need and that is very poor compensation for his lost freedom. Either approach is consistent with the facts. It is merely a matter of attitude whether you blame the advertising industry for manipulating the public or blame the public for allowing itself to be manipulated. As a matter of strategy one should generally avoid blaming the public.

191. One should think twice before encouraging any other social conflict than that between the power-holding elite (which wields technology) and the general public (over which technology exerts its power). For one thing, other conflicts tend to distract attention from the important conflicts (between power-elite and ordinary people, between technology and nature); for another thing, other conflicts may actually tend to encourage technologization, because each side in such a conflict wants to use technological power to gain advantages over its adversary. This is clearly seen in rivalries between nations. It also appears in ethnic conflicts within nations. For example, in America many black leaders are anxious to gain power for African Americans by placing back individuals in the technological power-elite. They want there to be many black government officials, sc ientists, corporation executives and so forth. In this way they are helping to absorb the African American subculture into the technological system. Generally speaking, one should encourage only those social conflicts that can be fitted into the framework of the conflicts of power-elite vs. ordinary people, technology vs nature.

192. But the way to discourage ethnic conflict is NOT through militant advocacy of minority rights (see paragraphs 21, 29). Instead, the revolutionaries should emphasize that although minorities do suffer more or less disadvantage, this disadvantage is of peripheral significance. Our real enemy is the industrial-technological system, and in the struggle against the system, ethnic distinctions are of no importance.

193. The kind of revolution we have in mind will not necessarily involve an armed uprising against any government. It may or may not involve physical violence, but it will not be a POLITICAL revolution. Its focus will be on technology and economics, not politics. [32]

194. Probably the revolutionaries should even AVOID assuming political power, whether by legal or illegal means, until the industrial system is stressed to the danger point and has proved itself to be a failure in the eyes of most people. Suppose for example that some "green" party should win control of the United States Congress in an election. In order to avoid betraying or watering down their own ideology they would have to take vigorous measures to turn economic growth into economic shrinkage. To the average man the results would appear disastrous: There would be massive unemployment, shortages of commodities, etc. Even if the grosser ill effects could be avoided through superhumanly skillful management, still people would have to begin giving up the luxuries to which they have become addicted. Dissatisfaction would grow, the "green" party would be voted out of office and the revolutionaries would have suffered a severe setback. For this reason the revolutionaries should not try to acquire political power until the system has gotten itself into such a mess that any hardships will be seen as resulting from the failures of the industrial system itself and not from the policies of the revolutionaries. The revolution against technology will probably have to be a revolution by outsiders, a revolution from below and not from above.

195. The revolution must be international and worldwide. It cannot be carried out on a nation-by-nation basis. Whenever it is suggested that the United States, for example, should cut back on technological progress or economic growth, people get hysterical and start screaming that if we fall behind in technology the Japanese will get ahead of us. Holy robots! The world will fly off its orbit if the Japanese ever sell more cars than we do! (Nationalism is a great promoter of technology.) More reasonably, it is argued that if the relatively democratic nations of the world fall behind in technology while nasty, dictatorial nations like China, Vietnam and North Korea continue to progress, eventually the dictators may come to dominate the world. That is why the industrial system should be attacked in all nations simultaneously, to the extent that this may be possible. True, there is no assurance that the industrial system can be destroyed at approximately the same time all over the world, and it is even conceivable that the attempt to overthrow the system could lead instead to the domination of the system by dictators. That is a risk that has to be taken. And it is worth taking, since the difference between a "democratic" industrial system and one controlled by dictators is small compared with the difference between an industrial system and a non-industrial one. [33] It might even be argued that an industrial system controlled by dictators would be preferable, because dictator-controlled systems usually have proved inefficient, hence they are presumably more likely to break down. Look at Cuba.

196. Revolutionaries might consider favoring measures that tend to bind the world economy into a unified whole. Free trade agreements like NAFTA and GATT are probably harmful to the environment in the short run, but in the long run they may perhaps be advantageous because they foster economic interdependence between nations. It will be easier to destroy the industrial system on a worldwide basis if the world economy is so unified that its breakdown in any one major nation will lead to its breakdown in all industrialized nations.

197. Some people take the line that modern man has too much power, too much control over nature; they argue for a more passive attitude on the part of the human race. At best these people are expressing themselves unclearly, because they fail to distinguish between power for LARGE ORGANIZATIONS and power for INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS. It is a mistake to argue for powerlessness and passivity, because people NEED power. Modern man as a collective entitysthat is, the industrial systemshas immense power over nature, and we (FC) regard this as evil. But modern INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS have far less power than primitive man ever did. Generally speaking, the vast power of "modern man" over nature is exercised not by individuals or small groups but by large organizations. To the extent that the average modern INDIVIDUAL can wield the power of technology, he is permitted to do so only within narrow limits and only under the supervision and control of the system. (You need a license for everything and with the license come rules and regulations.) The individual has only those technological powers with which the system chooses to provide him. His PERSONAL power over nature is slight.

198. Primitive INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS actually had considerable power over nature; or maybe it would be better to say power WITHIN nature. When primitive man needed food he knew how to find and prepare edible roots, how to track game and take it with homemade weapons. He knew how to protect himself from heat, cold, rain, dangerous animals, etc. But primitive man did relatively little damage to nature because the COLLECTIVE power of primitive society was negligible compared to the COLLECTIVE power of industrial society.

199. Instead of arguing for powerlessness and passivity, one should argue that the power of the INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM should be broken, and that this will greatly INCREASE the power and freedom of INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS.

200. Until the industrial system has been thoroughly wrecked, the destruction of that system must be the revolutionaries' ONLY goal. Other goals would distract attention and energy from the main goal. More importantly, if the revolutionaries permit themselves to have any other goal than the destruction of technology, they will be tempted to use technology as a tool for reaching that other goal. If they give in to that temptation, they will fall right back into the technological trap, because modern technology is a unified, tightly organized system, so that, in order to retain SOME technology, one finds oneself obliged to retain MOST technology, hence one ends up sacrificing only token amounts of technology.

201. Suppose for example that the revolutionaries took "social justice" as a goal. Human nature being what it is, social justice would not come about spontaneously; it would have to be enforced. In order to enforce it the revolutionaries would have to retain central organization and control. For that they would need rapid long-distance transportation and communication, and therefore all the technology needed to support the transportation and communication systems. To feed and clothe poor people they would have to use agricultural and manufacturing technology. And so forth. So that the attempt to insure social justice would force them to retain most parts of the technological system. Not that we have anything against social justice, but it must not be allowed to interfere with the effort to get rid of the technological system.

202. It would be hopeless for revolutionaries to try to attack the system without using SOME modern technology. If nothing else they must use the communications media to spread their message. But they should use modern technology for only ONE purpose: to attack the technological system.

203. Imagine an alcoholic sitting with a barrel of wine in front of him. Suppose he starts saying to himself, "Wine isn't bad for you if used in moderation. Why, they say small amounts of wine are even good for you! It won't do me any harm if I take just one little drink.... " Well you know what is going to happen. Never forget that the human race with technology is just like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine.

204. Revolutionaries should have as many children as they can. There is strong scientific evidence that social attitudes are to a significant extent inherited. No one suggests that a social attitude is a direct outcome of a person's genetic constitution, but it appears that personality traits are partly inherited and that certain personality traits tend, within the context of our society, to make a person more likely to hold this or that social attitude. Objections to these findings have been raised, but the objections are feeble and seem to be ideologically motivated. In any event, no one denies that children tend on the average to hold social attitudes similar to those of their parents. From our point of view it doesn't matter all that much whether the attitudes are passed on genetically or through childhood training. In either case they ARE passed on.

205. The trouble is that many of the people who are inclined to rebel against the industrial system are also concerned about the population problems, hence they are apt to have few or no children. In this way they may be handing the world over to the sort of people who support or at least accept the industrial system. To insure the strength of the next generation of revolutionaries the present generation should reproduce itself abundantly. In doing so they will be worsening the population problem only slightly. And the important problem is to get rid of the industrial system, because once the industrial system is gone the world's population necessarily will decrease (see paragraph 167); whereas, if the industrial system survives, it will continue developing new techniques of food production that may enable the world's population to keep increasing almost indefinitely.

206. With regard to revolutionary strategy, the only points on which we absolutely insist are that the single overriding goal must be the elimination of modern technology, and that no other goal can be allowed to compete with this one. For the rest, revolutionaries should take an empirical approach. If experience indicates that some of the recommendations made in the foregoing paragraphs are not going to give good results, then those recommendations should be discarded.

TWO KINDS OF TECHNOLOGY

207. An argument likely to be raised against our proposed revolution is that it is bound to fail, because (it is claimed) throughout history technology has always progressed, never regressed, hence technological regression is impossible. But this claim is false.

208. We distinguish between two kinds of technology, which we will call small-scale technology and organization-dependent technology. Small-scale technology is technology that can be used by small-scale communities without outside assistance. Organization-dependent technology is technology that depends on large-scale social organization. We are aware of no significant cases of regression in small-scale technology. But organization-dependent technology DOES regress when the social organization on which it depends breaks down. Example: When the Roman Empire fell apart the Romans' small-scale technology survived because any clever village craftsman could build, for instance, a water wheel, any skilled smith could make steel by Roman methods, and so forth. But the Romans' organization-dependent technology DID regress. Their aqueducts fell into disrepair and were never rebuilt. Their techniques of road construction were lost. The Roman system of urban sanitation was forgotten, so that not until r ather recent times did the sanitation of European cities equal that of Ancient Rome.

209. The reason why technology has seemed always to progress is that, until perhaps a century or two before the Industrial Revolution, most technology was small-scale technology. But most of the technology developed since the Industrial Revolution is organization-dependent technology. Take the refrigerator for example. Without factory-made parts or the facilities of a post-industrial machine shop it would be virtually impossible for a handful of local craftsmen to build a refrigerator. If by some miracle they did succeed in building one it would be useless to them without a reliable source of electric power. So they would have to dam a stream and build a generator. Generators require large amounts of copper wire. Imagine trying to make that wire without modern machinery. And where would they get a gas suitable for refrigeration? It would be much easier to build an icehouse or preserve food by drying or picking, as was done before the invention of the refrigerator.

210. So it is clear that if the industrial system were once thoroughly broken down, refrigeration technology would quickly be lost. The same is true of other organization-dependent technology. And once this technology had been lost for a generation or so it would take centuries to rebuild it, just as it took centuries to build it the first time around. Surviving technical books would be few and scattered. An industrial society, if built from scratch without outside help, can only be built in a series of stages: You need tools to make tools to make tools to make tools ... . A long process of economic development and progress in social organization is required. And, even in the absence of an ideology opposed to technology, there is no reason to believe that anyone would be interested in rebuilding industrial society. The enthusiasm for "progress" is a phenomenon peculiar to the modern form of society, and it seems not to have existed prior to the 17th century or thereabouts.

211. In the late Middle Ages there were four main civilizations that were about equally "advanced": Europe, the Islamic world, India, and the Far East (China, Japan, Korea). Three of those civilizations remained more or less stable, and only Europe became dynamic. No one knows why Europe became dynamic at that time; historians have their theories but these are only speculation. At any rate, it is clear that rapid development toward a technological form of society occurs only under special conditions. So there is no reason to assume that a long-lasting technological regression cannot be brought about.

212. Would society EVENTUALLY develop again toward an industrial-technological form? Maybe, but there is no use in worrying about it, since we can't predict or control events 500 or 1,000 years in the future. Those problems must be dealt with by the people who will live at that time.

THE DANGER OF LEFTISM

213. Because of their need for rebellion and for membership in a movement, leftists or persons of similar psychological type often are unattracted to a rebellious or activist movement whose goals and membership are not initially leftist. The resulting influx of leftish types can easily turn a non-leftist movement into a leftist one, so that leftist goals replace or distort the original goals of the movement.

214. To avoid this, a movement that exalts nature and opposes technology must take a resolutely anti-leftist stance and must avoid all collaboration with leftists. Leftism is in the long run inconsistent with wild nature, with human freedom and with the elimination of modern technology. Leftism is collectivist; it seeks to bind together the entire world (both nature and the human race) into a unified whole. But this implies management of nature and of human life by organized society, and it requires advanced technology. You can't have a united world without rapid transportation and communication, you can't make all people love one another without sophisticated psychological techniques, you can't have a "planned society" without the necessary technological base. Above all, leftism is driven by the need for power, and the leftist seeks power on a collective basis, through identification with a mass movement or an organization. Leftism is unlikely ever to give up technology, because technology is too valuable a source of collective power.

215. The anarchist [34] too seeks power, but he seeks it on an individual or small-group basis; he wants individuals and small groups to be able to control the circumstances of their own lives. He opposes technology because it makes small groups dependent on large organizations.

216. Some leftists may seem to oppose technology, but they will oppose it only so long as they are outsiders and the technological system is controlled by non-leftists. If leftism ever becomes dominant in society, so that the technological system becomes a tool in the hands of leftists, they will enthusiastically use it and promote its growth. In doing this they will be repeating a pattern that leftism has shown again and again in the past. When the Bolsheviks in Russia were outsiders, they vigorously opposed censorship and the secret police, they advocated self-determination for ethnic minorities, and so forth; but as soon as they came into power themselves, they imposed a tighter censorship and created a more ruthless secret police than any that had existed under the tsars, and they oppressed ethnic minorities at least as much as the tsars had done. In the United States, a couple of decades ago when leftists were a minority in our universities, leftist professors were vigorous proponents of academic freedom, but today, in those of our universities where leftists have become dominant, they have shown themselves ready to take away from everyone else's academic freedom. (This is "political correctness.") The same will happen with leftists and technology: They will use it to oppress everyone else if they ever get it under their own control.

217. In earlier revolutions, leftists of the most power-hungry type, repeatedly, have first cooperated with non-leftist revolutionaries, as well as with leftists of a more libertarian inclination, and later have double-crossed them to seize power for themselves. Robespierre did this in the French Revolution, the Bolsheviks did it in the Russian Revolution, the communists did it in Spain in 1938 and Castro and his followers did it in Cuba. Given the past history of leftism, it would be utterly foolish for non-leftist revolutionaries today to collaborate with leftists.

218. Various thinkers have pointed out that leftism is a kind of religion. Leftism is not a religion in the strict sense because leftist doctrine does not postulate the existence of any supernatural being. But, for the leftist, leftism plays a psychological role much like that which religion plays for some people. The leftist NEEDS to believe in leftism; it plays a vital role in his psychological economy. His beliefs are not easily modified by logic or facts. He has a deep conviction that leftism is morally Right with a capital R, and that he has not only a right but a duty to impose leftist morality on everyone. (However, many of the people we are referring to as "leftists" do not think of themselves as leftists and would not describe their system of beliefs as leftism. We use the term "leftism" because we don't know of any better words to designate the spectrum of related creeds that includes the feminist, gay rights, political correctness, etc., movements, and because these movements have a strong affinity with the old left. See paragraphs 227-230.)

219. Leftism is a totalitarian force. Wherever leftism is in a position of power it tends to invade every private corner and force every thought into a leftist mold. In part this is because of the quasi-religious character of leftism; everything contrary to leftist beliefs represents Sin. More importantly, leftism is a totalitarian force because of the leftists' drive for power. The leftist seeks to satisfy his need for power through identification with a social movement and he tries to go through the power process by helping to pursue and attain the goals of the movement (see paragraph 83). But no matter how far the movement has gone in attaining its goals the leftist is never satisfied, because his activism is a surrogate activity (see paragraph 41). That is, the leftist's real motive is not to attain the ostensible goals of leftism; in reality he is motivated by the sense of power he gets from struggling for and then reaching a social goal. [35] Consequently the leftist is never satisfied with the goals he has already attained; his need for the power process leads him always to pursue some new goal. The leftist wants equal opportunities for minorities. When that is attained he insists on statistical equality of achievement by minorities. And as long as anyone harbors in some corner of his mind a negative attitude toward some minority, the leftist has to re-educated him. And ethnic minorities are not enough; no one can be allowed to have a negative attitude toward homosexuals, disabled people, fat people, old people, ugly people, and on and on and on. It's not enough that the public should be informed about the hazards of smoking; a warning has to be stamped on every package of cigarettes. Then cigarette advertising has to be restricted if not banned. The activists will never be satisfied until tobacco is outlawed, and after that it will be alcohol, then junk food, etc. Activists have fought gross child abuse, which is reasonable. But now they want to stop all spanking. When they have done that they will want to ban something else they consider unwholesome, then another thing and then another. They will never be satisfied until they have complete control over all child rearing practices. And then they will move on to another cause.

220. Suppose you asked leftists to make a list of ALL the things that were wrong with society, and then suppose you instituted EVERY social change that they demanded. It is safe to say that within a couple of years the majority of leftists would find something new to complain about, some new social "evil" to correct because, once again, the leftist is motivated less by distress at society's ills than by the need to satisfy his drive for power by imposing his solutions on society.

221. Because of the restrictions placed on their thoughts and behavior by their high level of socialization, many leftists of the over-socialized type cannot pursue power in the ways that other people do. For them the drive for power has only one morally acceptable outlet, and that is in the struggle to impose their morality on everyone.

222. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, are True Believers in the sense of Eric Hoffer's book, "The True Believer." But not all True Believers are of the same psychological type as leftists. Presumably a true-believing nazi, for instance, is very different psychologically from a true-believing leftist. Because of their capacity for single-minded devotion to a cause, True Believers are a useful, perhaps a necessary, ingredient of any revolutionary movement. This presents a problem with which we must admit we don't know how to deal. We aren't sure how to harness the energies of the True Believer to a revolution against technology. At present all we can say is that no True Believer will make a safe recruit to the revolution unless his commitment is exclusively to the destruction of technology. If he is committed also to another ideal, he may want to use technology as a tool for pursuing that other ideal (see paragraphs 220, 221).

223. Some readers may say, "This stuff about leftism is a lot of crap. I know John and Jane who are leftish types and they don't have all these totalitarian tendencies." It's quite true that many leftists, possibly even a numerical majority, are decent people who sincerely believe in tolerating others' values (up to a point) and wouldn't want to use high-handed methods to reach their social goals. Our remarks about leftism are not meant to apply to every individual leftist but to describe the general character of leftism as a movement. And the general character of a movement is not necessarily determined by the numerical proportions of the various kinds of people involved in the movement.

224. The people who rise to positions of power in leftist movements tend to be leftists of the most power-hungry type, because power-hungry people are those who strive hardest to get into positions of power. Once the power-hungry types have captured control of the movement, there are many leftists of a gentler breed who inwardly disapprove of many of the actions of the leaders, but cannot bring themselves to oppose them. They NEED their faith in the movement, and because they cannot give up this faith they go along with the leaders. True, SOME leftists do have the guts to oppose the totalitarian tendencies that emerge, but they generally lose, because the power-hungry types are better organized, are more ruthless and Machiavellian and have taken care to build themselves a strong power base.

225. These phenomena appeared clearly in Russia and other countries that were taken over by leftists. Similarly, before the breakdown of communism in the USSR, leftish types in the West would seldom criticize that country. If prodded they would admit that the USSR did many wrong things, but then they would try to find excuses for the communists and begin talking about the faults of the West. They always opposed Western military resistance to communist aggression. Leftish types all over the world vigorously protested the U.S. military action in Vietnam, but when the USSR invaded Afghanistan they did nothing. Not that they approved of the Soviet actions; but because of their leftist faith, they just couldn't bear to put themselves in opposition to communism. Today, in those of our universities where "political correctness" has become dominant, there are probably many leftish types who privately disapprove of the suppression of academic freedom, but they go along with it anyway.

226. Thus the fact that many individual leftists are personally mild and fairly tolerant people by no means prevents leftism as a whole form having a totalitarian tendency.

227. Our discussion of leftism has a serious weakness. It is still far from clear what we mean by the word "leftist." There doesn't seem to be much we can do about this. Today leftism is fragmented into a whole spectrum of activist movements. Yet not all activist movements are leftist, and some activist movements (e.g., radical environmentalism) seem to include both personalities of the leftist type and personalities of thoroughly un-leftist types who ought to know better than to collaborate with leftists. Varieties of leftists fade out gradually into varieties of non-leftists and we ourselves would often be hard-pressed to decide whether a given individual is or is not a leftist. To the extent that it is defined at all, our conception of leftism is defined by the discussion of it that we have given in this article, and we can only advise the reader to use his own judgment in deciding who is a leftist.

228. But it will be helpful to list some criteria for diagnosing leftism. These criteria cannot be applied in a cut and dried manner. Some individuals may meet some of the criteria without being leftists, some leftists may not meet any of the criteria. Again, you just have to use your judgment.

229. The leftist is oriented toward large-scale collectivism. He emphasizes the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. He has a negative attitude toward individualism. He often takes a moralistic tone. He tends to be for gun control, for sex education and other psychologically "enlightened" educational methods, for social planning, for affirmative action, for multiculturalism. He tends to identify with victims. He tends to be against competition and against violence, but he often finds excuses for those leftists who do commit violence. He is fond of using the common catch-phrases of the left, like "racism," "sexism," "homophobia," "capitalism," "imperialism," "neocolonialism," "genocide," "social change," "social justice," "social responsibility." Maybe the best diagnostic trait of the leftist is his tendency to sympathize with the following movements: feminism, gay rights, ethnic rights, disability rights, animal rights, political correctness. Anyone who strongly sympathizes with ALL of these movements is almost certainly a leftist. [36]

230. The more dangerous leftists, that is, those who are most power-hungry, are often characterized by arrogance or by a dogmatic approach to ideology. However, the most dangerous leftists of all may be certain oversocialized types who avoid irritating displays of aggressiveness and refrain from advertising their leftism, but work quietly and unobtrusively to promote collectivist values, "enlightened" psychological techniques for socializing children, dependence of the individual on the system, and so forth. These crypto-leftists (as we may call them) approximate certain bourgeois types as far as practical action is concerned, but differ from them in psychology, ideology and motivation. The ordinary bourgeois tries to bring people under control of the system in order to protect his way of life, or he does so simply because his attitudes are conventional. The crypto-leftist tries to bring people under control of the system because he is a True Believer in a collectivistic ideology. The crypto-leftist is differentiated from the average leftist of the oversocialized type by the fact that his rebellious impulse is weaker and he is more securely socialized. He is differentiated from the ordinary well-socialized bourgeois by the fact that there is some deep lack within him that makes it necessary for him to devote himself to a cause and immerse himself in a collectivity. And maybe his (well-sublimated) drive for power is stronger than that of the average bourgeois.

FINAL NOTE

231. Throughout this article we've made imprecise statements and statements that ought to have had all sorts of qualifications and reservations attached to them; and some of our statements may be flatly false. Lack of sufficient information and the need for brevity made it impossible for us to formulate our assertions more precisely or add all the necessary qualifications. And of course in a discussion of this kind one must rely heavily on intuitive judgment, and that can sometimes be wrong. So we don't claim that this article expresses more than a crude approximation to the truth.

232. All the same, we are reasonably confident that the general outlines of the picture we have painted here are roughly correct. Just one possible weak point needs to be mentioned. We have portrayed leftism in its modern form as a phenomenon peculiar to our time and as a symptom of the disruption of the power process. But we might possibly be wrong about this. Oversocialized types who try to satisfy their drive for power by imposing their morality on everyone have certainly been around for a long time. But we THINK that the decisive role played by feelings of inferiority, low self-esteem, powerlessness, identification with victims by people who are not themselves victims, is a peculiarity of modern leftism. Identification with victims by people not themselves victims can be seen to some extent in 19th century leftism and early Christianity but as far as we can make out, symptoms of low self-esteem, etc., were not nearly so evident in these movements, or in any other movements, as they are in modern leftism. But we are not in a position to assert confidently that no such movements have existed prior to modern leftism. This is a significant question to which historians ought to give their attention.

Notes

1. (Paragraph 19) We are asserting that ALL, or even most, bullies and ruthless competitors suffer from feelings of inferiority.

2. (Paragraph 25) During the Victorian period many oversocialized people suffered from serious psychological problems as a result of repressing or trying to repress their sexual feelings. Freud apparently based his theories on people of this type. Today the focus of socialization has shifted from sex to aggression.

3. (Paragraph 27) Not necessarily including specialists in engineering or the "hard" sciences.

4. (Paragraph 28) There are many individuals of the middle and upper classes who resist some of these values, but usually their resistance is more or less covert. Such resistance appears in the mass media only to a very limited extent. The main thrust of propaganda in our society is in favor of the stated values.

The main reason why these values have become, so to speak, the official values of our society is that they are useful to the industrial system. Violence is discouraged because it disrupts the functioning of the system. Racism is discouraged because ethnic conflicts also disrupt the system, and discrimination wastes the talents of minority-group members who could be useful to the system. Poverty must be "cured" because the underclass causes problems for the system and contact with the underclass lowers the morale of the other classes. Women are encouraged to have careers because their talents are useful to the system and, more importantly, because by having regular jobs women become better integrated into the system and tied directly to it rather than to their families. This helps to weaken family solidarity. (The leaders of the system say they want to strengthen the family, but they really mean is that they want the family to serve as an effective tool for socializing children in accord with the needs of the system. We argue in paragraphs 51, 52 that the system cannot afford to let the family or other small-scale social groups be strong or autonomous.)

5. (Paragraph 42) It may be argued that the majority of people don't want to make their own decisions but want leaders to do their thinking for them. There is an element of truth in this. People like to make their own decisions in small matters, but making decisions on difficult, fundamental questions requires facing up to psychological conflict, and most people hate psychological conflict. Hence they tend to lean on others in making difficult decisions. But it does not follow that they like to have decisions imposed upon them without having any opportunity to influence those decisions. The majority of people are natural followers, not leaders, but they like to have direct personal access to their leaders, they want to be able to influence the leaders and participate to some extent in making even the difficult decisions. At least to that degree they need autonomy.

6. (Paragraph 44) Some of the symptoms listed are similar to those shown by caged animals.

To explain how these symptoms arise from deprivation with respect to the power process:

Common-sense understanding of human nature tells one that lack of goals whose attainment requires effort leads to boredom and that boredom, long continued, often leads eventually to depression. Failure to attain goals leads to frustration and lowering of self-esteem. Frustration leads to anger, anger to aggression, often in the form of spouse or child abuse. It has been shown that long-continued frustration commonly leads to depression and that depression tends to cause guilt, sleep disorders, eating disorders and bad feelings about oneself. Those who are tending toward depression seek pleasure as an antidote; hence insatiable hedonism and excessive sex, with perversions as a means of getting new kicks. Boredom too tends to cause excessive pleasure-seeking since, lacking other goals, people often use pleasure as a goal. See accompanying diagram.

The foregoing is a simplification. Reality is more complex, and of course, deprivation with respect to the power process is not the ONLY cause of the symptoms described.

By the way, when we mention depression we do not necessarily mean depression that is severe enough to be treated by a psychiatrist. Often only mild forms of depression are involved. And when we speak of goals we do not necessarily mean long-term, thought-out goals. For many or most people through much of human history, the goals of a hand-to-mouth existence (merely providing oneself and one's family with food from day to day) have been quite sufficient.

7. (Paragraph 52) A partial exception may be made for a few passive, inward-looking groups, such as the Amish, which have little effect on the wider society. Apart from these, some genuine small-scale communities do exist in America today. For instance, youth gangs and "cults." Everyone regards them as dangerous, and so they are, because the members of these groups are loyal primarily to one another rather than to the system, hence the system cannot control them.

Or take the gypsies. The gypsies commonly get away with theft and fraud because their loyalties are such that they can always get other gypsies to give testimony that "proves" their innocence. Obviously the system would be in serious trouble if too many people belonged to such groups.

Some of the early-20th century Chinese thinkers who were concerned with modernizing China recognized the necessity breaking down small-scale social groups such as the family: "(According to Sun Yat-sen) the Chinese people needed a new surge of patriotism, which would lead to a transfer of loyalty from the family to the state.... (According to Li Huang) traditional attachments, particularly to the family had to be abandoned if nationalism were to develop in China." (Chester C. Tan, "Chinese Political Thought in the Twentieth Century," page 125, page 297.)

8. (Paragraph 56) Yes, we know that 19th century America had its problems, and serious ones, but for the sake of brevity we have to express ourselves in simplified terms.

9. (Paragraph 61) We leave aside the "underclass." We are speaking of the mainstream.

10. (Paragraph 62) Some social scientists, educators, "mental health" professionals and the like are doing their best to push the social drives into group 1 by trying to see to it that everyone has a satisfactory social life.

11. (Paragraphs 63, 82) Is the drive for endless material acquisition really an artificial creation of the advertising and marketing industry? Certainly there is no innate human drive for material acquisition. There have been many cultures in which people have desired little material wealth beyond what was necessary to satisfy their basic physical needs (Australian aborigines, traditional Mexican peasant culture, some African cultures). On the other hand there have also been many pre-industrial cultures in which material acquisition has played an important role. So we can't claim that today's acquisition-oriented culture is exclusively a creation of the advertising and marketing industry. But it is clear that the advertising and marketing industry has had an important part in creating that culture. The big corporations that spend millions on advertising wouldn't be spending that kind of money without solid proof that they were getting it back in increased sales. One member of FC met a sales manager a couple of years ago who was frank enough to tell him, "Our job is to make people buy things they don't want and don't need." He then described how an untrained novice could present people with the facts about a product, and make no sales at all, while a trained and experienced professional salesman would make lots of sales to the same people. This shows that people are manipulated into buying things they don't really want.

12. (Paragraph 64) The problem of purposelessness seems to have become less serious during the last 15 years or so, because people now feel less secure physically and economically than they did earlier, and the need for security provides them with a goal. But purposelessness has been replaced by frustration over the difficulty of attaining security. We emphasize the problem of purposelessness because the liberals and leftists would wish to solve our social problems by having society guarantee everyone's security; but if that could be done it would only bring back the problem of purposelessness. The real issue is not whether society provides well or poorly for people's security; the trouble is that people are dependent on the system for their security rather than having it in their own hands. This, by the way, is part of the reason why some people get worked up about the right to bear arms; possession of a gun puts that aspect of their security in their own hands.

13. (Paragraph 66) Conservatives' efforts to decrease the amount of government regulation are of little benefit to the average man. For one thing, only a fraction of the regulations can be eliminated because most regulations are necessary. For another thing, most of the deregulation affects business rather than the average individual, so that its main effect is to take power from the government and give it to private corporations. What this means for the average man is that government interference in his life is replaced by interference from big corporations, which may be permitted, for example, to dump more chemicals that get into his water supply and give him cancer. The conservatives are just taking the average man for a sucker, exploiting his resentment of Big Government to promote the power of Big Business.

14. (Paragraph 73) When someone approves of the purpose for which propaganda is being used in a given case, he generally calls it "education" or applies to it some similar euphemism. But propaganda is propaganda regardless of the purpose for which it is used.

15. (Paragraph 83) We are not expressing approval or disapproval of the Panama invasion. We only use it to illustrate a point.

16. (Paragraph 95) When the American colonies were under British rule there were fewer and less effective legal guarantees of freedom than there were after the American Constitution went into effect, yet there was more personal freedom in pre-industrial America, both before and after the War of Independence, than there was after the Industrial Revolution took hold in this country. We quote from "Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives," edited by Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Robert Gurr, Chapter 12 by Roger Lane, pages 476-478:

"The progressive heightening of standards of propriety, and with it the increasing reliance on official law enforcement (in 19th century America) ... were common to the whole society.... [T]he change in social behavior is so long term and so widespread as to suggest a connection with the most fundamental of contemporary social processes; that of industrial urbanization itself...."Massachusetts in 1835 had a population of some 660,940, 81 percent rural, overwhelmingly preindustrial and native born. It's citizens were used to considerable personal freedom. Whether teamsters, farmers or artisans, they were all accustomed to setting their own schedules, and the nature of their work made them physically independent of each other.... Individual problems, sins or even crimes, were not generally cause for wider social concern...."But the impact of the twin movements to the city and to the factory, both just gathering force in 1835, had a progressive effect on personal behavior throughout the 19th century and into the 20th. The factory demanded regularity of behavior, a life governed by obedience to the rhythms of clock and calendar, the demands of foreman and supervisor. In the city or town, the needs of living in closely packed neighborhoods inhibited many actions previously unobjectionable. Both blue- and white-collar employees in larger establishments were mutually dependent on their fellows; as one man's work fit into anther's, so one man's business was no longer his own.

"The results of the new organization of life and work were apparent by 1900, when some 76 percent of the 2,805,346 inhabitants of Massachusetts were classified as urbanites. Much violent or irregular behavior which had been tolerable in a casual, independent society was no longer acceptable in the more formalized, cooperative atmosphere of the later period.... The move to the cities had, in short, produced a more tractable, more socialized, more 'civilized' generation than its predecessors."

17. (Paragraph 117) Apologists for the system are fond of citing cases in which elections have been decided by one or two votes, but such cases are rare.

18. (Paragraph 119) "Today, in technologically advanced lands, men live very similar lives in spite of geographical, religious, and political differences. The daily lives of a Christian bank clerk in Chicago, a Buddhist bank clerk in Tokyo, and a Communist bank clerk in Moscow are far more alike than the life of any one of them is like that of any single man who lived a thousand years ago. These similarities are the result of a common technology...." L. Sprague de Camp, "The Ancient Engineers," Ballantine edition, page 17.

The lives of the three bank clerks are not IDENTICAL. Ideology does have SOME effect. But all technological societies, in order to survive, must evolve along APPROXIMATELY the same trajectory.

19. (Paragraph 123) Just think an irresponsible genetic engineer might create a lot of terrorists.

20. (Paragraph 124) For a further example of undesirable consequences of medical progress, suppose a reliable cure for cancer is discovered. Even if the treatment is too expensive to be available to any but the elite, it will greatly reduce their incentive to stop the escape of carcinogens into the environment.

21. (Paragraph 128) Since many people may find paradoxical the notion that a large number of good things can add up to a bad thing, we illustrate with an analogy. Suppose Mr. A is playing chess with Mr. B. Mr. C, a Grand Master, is looking over Mr. A's shoulder. Mr. A of course wants to win his game, so if Mr. C points out a good move for him to make, he is doing Mr. A a favor. But suppose now that Mr. C tells Mr. A how to make ALL of his moves. In each particular instance he does Mr. A a favor by showing him his best move, but by making ALL of his moves for him he spoils his game, since there is not point in Mr. A's playing the game at all if someone else makes all his moves.

The situation of modern man is analogous to that of Mr. A. The system makes an individual's life easier for him in innumerable ways, but in doing so it deprives him of control over his own fate.

22. (Paragraph 137) Here we are considering only the conflict of values within the mainstream. For the sake of simplicity we leave out of the picture "outsider" values like the idea that wild nature is more important than human economic welfare.

23. (Paragraph 137) Self-interest is not necessarily MATERIAL self-interest. It can consist in fulfillment of some psychological need, for example, by promoting one's own ideology or religion.

24. (Paragraph 139) A qualification: It is in the interest of the system to permit a certain prescribed degree of freedom in some areas. For example, economic freedom (with suitable limitations and restraints) has proved effective in promoting economic growth. But only planned, circumscribed, limited freedom is in the interest of the system. The individual must always be kept on a leash, even if the leash is sometimes long (see paragraphs 94, 97).

25. (Paragraph 143) We don't mean to suggest that the efficiency or the potential for survival of a society has always been inversely proportional to the amount of pressure or discomfort to which the society subjects people. That certainly is not the case. There is good reason to believe that many primitive societies subjected people to less pressure than European society did, but European society proved far more efficient than any primitive society and always won out in conflicts with such societies because of the advantages conferred by technology.

26. (Paragraph 147) If you think that more effective law enforcement is unequivocally good because it suppresses crime, then remember that crime as defined by the system is not necessarily what YOU would call crime. Today, smoking marijuana is a "crime," and, in some places in the U.S., so is possession of an unregistered handgun. Tomorrow, possession of ANY firearm, registered or not, may be made a crime, and the same thing may happen with disapproved methods of child-rearing, such as spanking. In some countries, expression of dissident political opinions is a crime, and there is no certainty that this will never happen in the U.S., since no constitution or political system lasts forever.

If a society needs a large, powerful law enforcement establishment, then there is something gravely wrong with that society; it must be subjecting people to severe pressures if so many refuse to follow the rules, or follow them only because forced. Many societies in the past have gotten by with little or no formal law-enforcement.

27. (Paragraph 151) To be sure, past societies have had means of influencing human behavior, but these have been primitive and of low effectiveness compared with the technological means that are now being developed.

28. (Paragraph 152) However, some psychologists have publicly expressed opinions indicating their contempt for human freedom. And the mathematician Claude Shannon was quoted in Omni (August 1987) as saying, "I visualize a time when we will be to robots what dogs are to humans, and I'm rooting for the machines."

29. (Paragraph 154) This is no science fiction! After writing paragraph 154 we came across an article in Scientific American according to which scientists are actively developing techniques for identifying possible future criminals and for treating them by a combination of biological and psychological means. Some scientists advocate compulsory application of the treatment, which may be available in the near future. (See "Seeking the Criminal Element," by W. Wayt Gibbs, Scientific American, March 1995.) Maybe you think this is OK because the treatment would be applied to those who might become violent criminals. But of course it won't stop there. Next, a treatment will be applied to those who might become drunk drivers (they endanger human life too), then perhaps to peel who spank their children, then to environmentalists who sabotage logging equipment, eventually to anyone whose behavior is inconvenient for the system.

30. (Paragraph 184) A further advantage of nature as a counter-ideal to technology is that, in many people, nature inspires the kind of reverence that is associated with religion, so that nature could perhaps be idealized on a religious basis. It is true that in many societies religion has served as a support and justification for the established order, but it is also true that religion has often provided a basis for rebellion. Thus it may be useful to introduce a religious element into the rebellion against technology, the more so because Western society today has no strong religious foundation. Religion, nowadays either is used as cheap and transparent support for narrow, short-sighted selfishness (some conservatives use it this way), or even is cynically exploited to make easy money (by many evangelists), or has degenerated into crude irrationalism (fundamentalist protestant sects, "cults"), or is simply stagnant (Catholicism, main-line Protestantism). The nearest thing to a strong, widespread, dynamic religion that the West has seen in recent times has been the quasi-religion of leftism, but leftism today is fragmented and has no clear, unified, inspiring goal.

Thus there is a religious vacuum in our society that could perhaps be filled by a religion focused on nature in opposition to technology. But it would be a mistake to try to concoct artificially a religion to fill this role. Such an invented religion would probably be a failure. Take the "Gaia" religion for example. Do its adherents REALLY believe in it or are they just play-acting? If they are just play-acting their religion will be a flop in the end.

It is probably best not to try to introduce religion into the conflict of nature vs. technology unless you REALLY believe in that religion yourself and find that it arouses a deep, strong, genuine response in many other people.

31. (Paragraph 189) Assuming that such a final push occurs. Conceivably the industrial system might be eliminated in a somewhat gradual or piecemeal fashion (see paragraphs 4, 167 and Note 4).

32. (Paragraph 193) It is even conceivable (remotely) that the revolution might consist only of a massive change of attitudes toward technology resulting in a relatively gradual and painless disintegration of the industrial system. But if this happens we'll be very lucky. It's far more probably that the transition to a nontechnological society will be very difficult and full of conflicts and disasters.

33. (Paragraph 195) The economic and technological structure of a society are far more important than its political structure in determining the way the average man lives (see paragraphs 95, 119 and Notes 16, 18).

34. (Paragraph 215) This statement refers to our particular brand of anarchism. A wide variety of social attitudes have been called "anarchist," and it may be that many who consider themselves anarchists would not accept our statement of paragraph 215. It should be noted, by the way, that there is a nonviolent anarchist movement whose members probably would not accept FC as anarchist and certainly would not approve of FC's violent methods.

35. (Paragraph 219) Many leftists are motivated also by hostility, but the hostility probably results in part from a frustrated need for power.

36. (Paragraph 229) It is important to understand that we mean someone who sympathizes with these MOVEMENTS as they exist today in our society. One who believes that women, homosexuals, etc., should have equal rights is not necessary a leftist. The feminist, gay rights, etc., movements that exist in our society have the particular ideological tone that characterizes leftism, and if one believes, for example, that women should have equal rights it does not necessarily follow that one must sympathize with the feminist movement as it exists today.

If copyright problems make it impossible for this long quotation to be printed, then please change Note 16 to read as follows:

16. (Paragraph 95) When the American colonies were under British rule there were fewer and less effective legal guarantees of freedom than there were after the American Constitution went into effect, yet there was more personal freedom in pre-industrial America, both before and after the War of Independence, than there was after the Industrial Revolution took hold in this country. In "Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives," edited by Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Robert Gurr, Chapter 12 by Roger Lane, it is explained how in pre-industrial America the average person had greater independence and autonomy than he does today, and how the process of industrialization necessarily led to the restriction of personal freedom.

@ a012dc82:6458a70d

Bitcoin halving is a cornerstone event in the cryptocurrency landscape, occurring approximately every four years, or after every 210,000 blocks are mined. This event is significant because it marks a reduction in the reward that miners receive for adding new blocks to the Bitcoin blockchain, effectively halving the rate at which new bitcoins are generated. The concept of halving is embedded in Bitcoin's protocol by Satoshi Nakamoto, its mysterious creator, as a measure to mimic the scarcity and deflationary characteristics of precious metals like gold. This mechanism is crucial in controlling the supply of Bitcoin, ensuring that it remains finite and valuable. As the next halving event draws near, it's not just miners who are impacted; the entire cryptocurrency market, including investors and enthusiasts, keenly anticipates the potential outcomes. Historically, halving events have been associated with increased market activity, price volatility, and heightened public interest in Bitcoin. The event is seen as a moment of transformation for Bitcoin, where the dynamics of supply and demand are altered, potentially leading to significant shifts in its market value.

Table Of Content

• Understanding the Hash Rate Surge

• Implications of the Rising Hash Rate

• The Halving Event: What to Expect

• Preparing for the Halving

• Conclusion

• FAQs

Understanding the Hash Rate Surge

What is Hash Rate?

The hash rate, in the context of Bitcoin, refers to the total computational power being used to mine and process transactions on the blockchain. It's a vital metric that reflects the health and security of the network. A higher hash rate means that more computational resources are being dedicated to maintaining the network, making it more robust against potential attacks. The hash rate is measured in hashes per second (H/s), and with advancements in mining technology, the network has seen this rate reach exahash levels (1 EH/s = 1 quintillion hashes per second). This metric is crucial for miners, as it affects their chances of solving the mathematical puzzles required to mine new blocks and earn rewards. It also indicates the level of competition among miners, as a higher hash rate suggests more participants or more powerful mining equipment in the network.

Record-Breaking Levels

The Bitcoin network's hash rate has recently hit an all-time high, reaching a staggering 491 exahashes per second (EH/s). This surge is indicative of the growing strength and security of the network. Such a high hash rate means that the network is more resilient than ever to potential attacks, such as the 51% attack, where a single entity could potentially gain control over the majority of the network's mining power. This level of security is crucial, especially as Bitcoin continues to gain mainstream acceptance and attract significant institutional investment. The record-breaking hash rate also reflects the increasing global interest in Bitcoin mining. It suggests that despite the high costs associated with mining - including specialized hardware and significant electricity consumption - miners are still heavily investing in this activity. This investment is not just in terms of money but also in research and development of more efficient mining technologies, which could further drive up the hash rate.

Implications of the Rising Hash Rate

Enhanced Network Security

The surge in Bitcoin's hash rate is a positive development for the network's security. A higher hash rate means that it becomes exponentially more difficult for a malicious actor to orchestrate an attack on the network. This security is paramount for a system that handles billions of dollars worth of transactions. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin relies heavily on the integrity of its blockchain, which is maintained by this collective computational effort. As the hash rate increases, the confidence in the network's security also grows, which is crucial for both individual users and institutional investors. This enhanced security is particularly important in the context of the upcoming halving event, as it ensures the stability and reliability of the network during a period of significant change.

Increased Mining Difficulty

With the rise in hash rate comes an increase in the difficulty of mining Bitcoin. The Bitcoin network is designed to adjust the difficulty of mining new blocks approximately every two weeks to ensure that the time between blocks remains around 10 minutes. As more computational power joins the network, the difficulty increases, making it harder for individual miners to solve the cryptographic puzzles required to mine new blocks. This increase in difficulty can have several implications for miners. Smaller miners or those with less efficient equipment may find it increasingly difficult to compete with larger mining operations that have access to more powerful and efficient technology. This could lead to a consolidation in the mining industry, where only the most efficient operations can survive. Additionally, as the difficulty increases, the profitability of mining can decrease, especially if the price of Bitcoin does not increase proportionally. Miners must constantly evaluate their operations' efficiency and electricity costs to ensure continued profitability.

Energy Consumption Concerns

The rising hash rate of the Bitcoin network has brought renewed attention to the issue of energy consumption in Bitcoin mining. The process of mining Bitcoin is energy-intensive, as it requires a significant amount of computational power. As the hash rate increases, so does the total energy consumption of the network. This has led to concerns about the environmental impact of Bitcoin mining, especially in regions where electricity is generated from fossil fuels. The debate around Bitcoin's energy consumption is complex. On one hand, proponents argue that much of the energy used for Bitcoin mining comes from renewable sources, and the industry drives innovation in energy efficiency. On the other hand, critics point out that the overall energy consumption is still substantial and could be directed towards other, more productive uses. This debate is likely to continue as the network grows and the hash rate increases, especially in the context of global concerns about climate change and sustainable energy practices.

The Halving Event: What to Expect

Reward Reduction

The upcoming Bitcoin halving event is a scheduled reduction in the rewards that miners receive for verifying and adding new transactions to the blockchain. This halving reduces the number of new bitcoins created and earned by miners with each new block from 6.25 bitcoins to 3.125 bitcoins. This event occurs every 210,000 blocks, or approximately every four years, and is a fundamental part of Bitcoin's economic model. The halving is designed to mimic the extraction of precious resources, becoming progressively harder and less rewarding over time. This mechanism ensures that the total supply of Bitcoin will never exceed 21 million coins, making Bitcoin a deflationary asset. The halving event is significant because it affects the economics of Bitcoin mining. With the reward halving, the revenue for miners is effectively cut in half overnight. This can lead to a shakeout in the mining industry, as less efficient miners may no longer be profitable and could be forced to shut down their operations.

Market Impact

Historically, Bitcoin halving events have been followed by significant price increases. This pattern has led to a common perception that halving events are bullish for Bitcoin's price. The rationale behind this is simple: as the rate of new supply of Bitcoin decreases, and if demand remains constant or increases, the price should theoretically go up. However, it's important to note that financial markets are influenced by a myriad of factors, and the impact of the halving may already be priced in by the time it occurs. Additionally, each halving event occurs in a different macroeconomic environment, and past performance is not indicative of future results. Investors and traders closely watch these events, as they can lead to increased volatility in the market. Some see the halving as an opportunity for long-term investment, while others may speculate on short-term price movements.

Preparing for the Halving

Miner Adaptations

In anticipation of the halving and its impact on profitability, miners are taking various steps to adapt. One key strategy is the investment in more efficient mining hardware. Newer models of mining rigs offer greater hash power with lower energy consumption, which can help maintain profitability even with reduced rewards. Miners are also exploring alternative sources of revenue, such as transaction fee income, which could become a more significant part of their earnings post-halving. Additionally, miners are looking at geographical relocation to regions with cheaper electricity and favorable regulatory environments to reduce operational costs. Another consideration for miners is the potential consolidation of mining operations. Larger mining pools might have a better chance of surviving the reduced rewards, leading to a more centralized mining landscape. This potential centralization raises concerns within the Bitcoin community, as it could impact the decentralized nature of the network.

Investor Strategies

Investors are also preparing for the halving event in various ways. Many are closely analyzing historical data to understand potential market movements, although it's widely acknowledged that past trends may not necessarily predict future outcomes. Some investors view the halving as a key event that could drive long-term value growth in Bitcoin and are adjusting their portfolios accordingly. Others are more cautious, considering the potential for increased volatility around the event. There is also a focus on diversification, with investors looking at other cryptocurrencies and blockchain projects that might benefit from increased interest in the crypto space around the halving. Additionally, institutional investors, who have increasingly entered the cryptocurrency market, are likely to play a significant role in how the market reacts to the halving. Their strategies, which may include hedging and derivative trading, could influence Bitcoin's price dynamics in ways that were not seen in previous halving events.

Conclusion The countdown to the Bitcoin halving is a period of significant anticipation and activity within the cryptocurrency community. The record-breaking hash rate ahead of the event is a testament to the network's strength and the commitment of its participants to maintain and secure the blockchain. As the halving approaches, the crypto world watches with keen interest, eager to see how this pivotal event will shape the future of Bitcoin. Whether it leads to a surge in price, increased adoption, or new challenges for miners, the halving is a reminder of the unique and dynamic nature of cryptocurrency and its underlying technology. As with any major event in the crypto space, the halving presents both opportunities and risks, and how it plays out could have lasting implications for the entire blockchain ecosystem.

FAQs

What is Bitcoin Halving? Bitcoin halving is an event that occurs approximately every four years, reducing the reward for mining new Bitcoin blocks by half. This mechanism controls the supply of new bitcoins and is a fundamental part of Bitcoin's economic model.

Why is the Bitcoin Hash Rate Important? The hash rate measures the total computational power used in mining and processing transactions on the Bitcoin network. A higher hash rate indicates a more secure and robust network, making it resistant to attacks.

What Happens to Bitcoin's Price After Halving? Historically, Bitcoin's price has increased following halving events, but this is not guaranteed. Market reactions can be unpredictable, and various factors influence Bitcoin's price.

How Does Halving Affect Bitcoin Miners? Halving reduces the reward miners receive for validating new blocks, impacting their profitability. Miners often need to upgrade to more efficient hardware or find cheaper energy sources to remain competitive.

Can Bitcoin Halving Lead to Increased Centralization in Mining? Potentially, yes. As mining becomes less profitable for smaller operations, there could be a consolidation towards larger mining pools, which might lead to a more centralized mining landscape.

Is the Increase in Bitcoin's Hash Rate Linked to the Upcoming Halving? Yes, the increase in hash rate is often linked to the upcoming halving as miners upgrade their equipment and increase their computational power in anticipation of the reduced mining rewards.

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.

@ ccc8ee23:9f3d9783

Chef's notes

Enjoy these Chocolate Sprinkle Cookies, a delightful combination of buttery richness, velvety chocolate, and a crunchy sprinkle finish

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 90 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 10

Ingredients

• Plain flour 250 grams
• Margarine 100 grams
• Butter 100 grams
• Vanilla essence 1 tsp
• Milk powder 1 tbsp
• Sugar 40 grams
• Chocolate bar - 80 grams, melted
• Chocolate sprinkles - for decoration

Directions

1. Make the Dough: Combine the plain flour, margarine, butter, milk powder, sugar, and vanilla essence in a mixing bowl. Knead the mixture by hand until smooth and well combined.
2. Shape and divide the dough into small balls, weighing approximately 8 grams each.
3. Preheat the oven to 175°C. Arrange the dough balls on a baking tray and bake for about 30 minutes, or until the cookies are dry and fully cooked.
4. Coat with Chocolate: Melt the chocolate bar using a double boiler or microwave. Once the cookies have cooled completely, dip each cookie into the melted chocolate, ensuring they are evenly coated.
5. Place the coated cookies onto paper cups.
6. While the chocolate coating is still wet, sprinkle chocolate sprinkles on top of each cookie.
7. Allow the chocolate to dry completely, then arrange the cookies in a decorative airtight container for storage.

@ 9f94e6cc:f3472946

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

Text: Aron Morhoff

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

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

Homo Digitalis Erectus

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

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

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

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

15 Sekunden Ruhm

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

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

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

@ ccc8ee23:9f3d9783

Chef's notes

Celebrating seasons🎉

Kastengel Chocolate-Dip, where the savoury richness of cheese meets the decadent sweetness of chocolate. A perfect flavours in every bite!

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 90 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 10

Ingredients

• Plain Flour 250 grams
• Margarine - 100 grams
• Butter 100 grams
• Egg yolk 1 pc
• Sugar 20 grams
• Grated cheese 100 grams (half for the dough, half for garnish, adjustable)
• Chocolate bar 80 grams, melted

Directions

1. Make the Dough: Combine the plain flour, margarine, butter, sugar, and half of the grated cheese in a bowl. Knead the mixture with your hands until smooth and well incorporated. Roll out the dough using a rolling pin and cut into desired shapes for cookies.
2. Beat the egg yolk. Brush the shaped cookies with the egg yolk mixture and sprinkle the remaining grated cheese on top.
3. Bake the cookies 175’C for about 30 minutes, or until they are dry and perfectly cooked.
4. Melt the chocolate bar in a double boiler or microwave until smooth.
5. Dip in Chocolate: Once the cookies have cooled completely, dip both the top and bottom ends of each cookie into the melted chocolate.
6. Place the dipped cookies on a wire rack or a cookie drying tray to allow the chocolate to harden and set.
7. Arrange the cookies neatly in an airtight container.

@ 1833ee04:7c4a8170

The international race for Bitcoin strategic reserves is just getting started.

If you’re stacking now, you’re still incredibly early.

At $100k per Bitcoin, it’s practically free for anyone who truly understands how massive this shift is.

Think back to when paper currency was introduced, people had to trade their gold for paper bills. Many laughed, saying, Who’s going to trust these worthless pieces of paper as money?

Yet today, you sell your time to earn these paper bills while your government can print an unlimited amount at will.

The world is returning to a gold standard. But this time, it’s Gold 2.0 which is Bitcoin.The international race for Bitcoin strategic reserves is just getting started.\ \ If you’re stacking now, you’re still incredibly early.\ \ At $100k per Bitcoin, it’s practically free for anyone who truly understands how massive this shift is.\ \ Think back to when paper currency was introduced, people had to trade their gold for paper bills. Many laughed, saying, Who’s going to trust these worthless pieces of paper as money?\ \ Yet today, you sell your time to earn these paper bills while your government can print an unlimited amount at will.\ \ The world is returning to a gold standard. But this time, it’s Gold 2.0 which is Bitcoin.

@ ac8bb9b0:70278acc

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 5
• 🍳 Cook time: 10
• 🍽️ Servings: 4

Ingredients

• 1 lb large shrimp, peeled and deveined
• 1 tablespoon extra virgin olive oil
• 3 cloves garlic, chopped
• 1/4 cup white wine, dry
• 14 oz can petite diced tomatoes, drained
• 1/2 cup half and half
• 1/2 teaspoon dried oregano
• kosher salt and fresh black pepper, to taste
• 1 teaspoon lemon juice
• 1/4 cup fresh parsley, chopped
• 8 ounces angel hair pasta, whole wheat, gluten-free or high fiber

Directions

1. Boil water with salt in a large pot for the pasta. Cook pasta al dente according to package directions.
2. Meanwhile, season shrimp with 1/4 teaspoon salt, black pepper and oregano.
3. Heat a large skillet over medium heat. Add the oil, when warm add the shrimp and garlic and cook about 2 minutes on each side.
4. Add tomatoes, wine, salt and pepper and cook an additional minute.
5. Remove from heat and stir in half and half. Add lemon juice and parsley and serve over pasta.
6. Divide equally in 4 plates or shallow bowls.

@ 5af07946:98fca8c4

Syādvāda, also known as the theory of conditional predication, is a fundamental concept in Jain philosophy that bears some intriguing similarities to modern concepts of probability.

Conditional Prediction system

Syādvāda is a theory of epistemological relativism that forms the basis of Jain logic. The term "syād" in Sanskrit means "may be" or "perhaps," and in the context of syādvāda, it translates to "in some ways" or "from a perspective". This theory asserts that reality is complex and multifaceted, and no single proposition can fully express its nature.

Saptabhangi: The Seven-fold Predication

The core of syādvāda is manifested in the process of Saptabhangi, or seven-fold prediction. This approach examines reality from seven different conditional and relative viewpoints:

• Syādasti (maybe, it is)
• Syānnāsti (maybe, it is not)
• Syādasti nāsti (maybe, it is, and it is not)
• Syādavaktavya (maybe, it is indeterminate)
• Syādasti avaktavya (maybe, it is and is indeterminate)
• Syānnāsti avaktavya (maybe, it is not and is indeterminate)
• Syādasti nāsti avaktavya (maybe, it is, is not, and is indeterminate)

Connections to Probability

Syādvāda shares conceptual similarities with Probability theory:

• Non-absolutism: Like probability theory, syādvāda acknowledges uncertainty and rejects absolute statements. However, it asserts that there are only seven categories necessary and also sufficient to exhaust all possibilities of knowledge!
• Conditional nature: Both syādvāda and probability deal with conditional statements and chances
• Multiple outcomes: Syādvāda's seven-fold prediction can be seen as analogous to considering multiple possible outcomes in probability.
• Indeterminacy: The fourth category of syādvāda, "avaktavya" (indeterminate), has been interpreted by some scholars as having relevance to the concept of probability.

An Illustrative Example

Consider the tossing of a coin:

• "It is head" (now) - Syādasti
• "It is not-head" (on another occasion) - Syānnāsti
• "It is, and it is not" - Syādasti nāsti
• "It is indeterminate" (before the toss) - Syādavaktavya

This example demonstrates how syādvāda's categories can be applied to a situation involving uncertainty, similar to how we might approach it using probability theory.

Historical Significance and Modern Relevance

Syādvāda was well-developed by the 6th century AD and received significant attention in medieval Indian logic. It is believed that it was based on astrological principles of Maharishi Parashara - the father of ancient astrology.

@ 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

@ ccc8ee23:9f3d9783

Chef's notes

Salmon Mentai Rice. Create your own layers of fluffy, seasoned rice are topped with tender, pan-seared chicken or salmon and a creamy, spicy mentai sauce made with spicy Japanese mayo .

Torched to golden perfection, it’s finished with nori and tobiko for a burst of texture and flavor. A simple tasty Japanese fusion delight that’s perfect🤩

Subtitude of Tobiko, white sesame seeds as economical option will add a nutty flavor and subtle crunch to the dish for texture and visual appeal.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 30 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 2

Ingredients

• Steamed Rice 400 grams
• Rice vinegar 1 tbsp
• Sugar 1 tsp
• chicken breast / thighs 250 grams
• soy sauce 1 tbsp
• oyster sauce 1 tbsp
• sesame oil 1 tsp
• garlic powder 1 tsp
• cooking oil 1 tbsp
• mayonnaise (e.g., Kewpie) 4 tbsp
• sriracha or any chili sauce 1 tbsp
• tobiko if any or white sesame as optional, for texture, 2 tsp only

Directions

1. Prepared the Rice: mixed in bowl 2 cups steam rice, 1 tbsp rice vinegar, 1 tsp sugar and 1/2 tsp salt. Set a side.
2. Cook the Chicken: 1. Marinate the chicken pieces with 1 tsp soy sauce, 1 tsp oyster sauce, 1 tsp sesame oil, 1 tsp garlic powder for 15–20 minutes. 2. Heat cooking oil in a pan over medium heat and stir-fry the chicken until fully cooked and slightly caramelized. Remove from heat.
3. Make the Mentai Sauce 1. In a small bowl, combine 4 tbsp mayonnaise, 1 tbsp chili sauce, and 1 tsp sesame oil. Add tobiko if desired for texture. Mix well.
4. Assemble the Mentai Rice 1. In a heatproof bowl or tray, layer the seasoned rice as the base. 2. Add a layer of cooked chicken on top of the rice. 3. Spread the mentai sauce evenly over the chicken layer.
5. Grill or Broil: Use a kitchen torch or place the dish under a broiler for 2–3 minutes until the sauce is slightly charred and bubbly.
6. Garnish with white sesame or nori strips, or extra tobiko.

@ 916a7ab7:146bb83e

It was not ago that my life was simpler than it is today.

I remember being a simple clone, droning on through a structured life as I'd been trained to do since birth.

Like most people I knew, I was raised in a world where you were mentally prepared for a conceptually simple life: 1. Finish high school, if possible. 2. Go to college, if possible. 3. Find a job. 4. Earn money. 5. Pay bills. 6. Get married. 7. Start a family. 8. Pay more bills. 9. Raise family and (hopefully) launch the kids. 10. Plan to retire, but expect to work into your 70s.

It was a programmed formula for life. A generational blueprint, if you will. Sure, there would be unpredictable details, but I expected my life to follow this path.

As I plodded along through my fairly boring life, I checked most of those things off the list. High school was easy, but getting off the farm was not. Enlisting in the military solved that problem, and the pay in the mid-1990s wasn't bad for a 17 year old kid with no bills. I got paid every two weeks, lived in the barracks, and spent most of my money on booze. Life was good, and I had no other purpose than to do my job and keep earning money.

Before I knew it, though, everything changed. I got married, had some kids and accumulated a mountain of debt. Like my parents before me, I was stuck in a never ending cycle of working my ass off, paying bills, buying food, and trying to save what little money was left over for a future that was unpredictable at best. Financial struggles stressed our marriage, the kids continued eating more and more food, and then 2008 tanked the value of our home. That was the first nudge that stirred my oblivious slumber.

And there was more to come. Rising taxes, inflation, the clown show at the federal reserve, the wars funded by central banks, an astronomical national debt, and the burdens of our mistakes weighing down the futures of our children. Not to mention a federal government that actively seeks to censor, suppress, and financially imprison its own people. The times exuded chaos.

Then a few months ago, I woke up...

It happened during an episode of The Tuttle Twins, a cartoon show from Angel Studios. I homeschool my three youngest kids, and I'd let them watch TV during lunch so I could grade some papers. This cartoon was new to me, but the kids liked the music and the crazy raccoon. As fate would have it, they ended up watching an episode about Bitcoin. This, of course, led to a long series of questions:

"Dad, what's Bitcoin?"

"Is Bitcoin real?"

"Do you have Bitcoin?"

"Can I get Bitcoin for allowance instead of dollars?"

I had no answers for these questions, so we started doing some research together. We turned on our Chromebooks and launched a barrage of web searches. After reading a bunch of articles I came away with the idea that Bitcoin might be a real thing. Later that evening, and after the kids were in bed, I couldn't stop thinking about Bitcoin. I honestly didn't understand half of what I read in those articles, which bothered me. I'm not a super smart guy, but I catch on to things pretty quickly, and I wanted to better understand what I'd read. I expanded my search to podcasts and YouTube videos.

I ended up listening to a couple episodes from a Bitcoin Veterans podcast. As a veteran myself, I figured that this group of Bitcoin-savvy veterans would be able to help me figure out all this madness. I was right. I quickly learned that the word "Bitcoin" was just the tip of the iceberg, and I quickly found myself falling through an endless rabbit hole. They pointed me in a lot of different directions, but they were all helpful. (If you're a US military veteran and want to connect with this group, find them at [bitcoinveterans.org].)

A couple months ago, I couldn't tell you the difference between a Bitcoin and a meme coin. I'd come across the phrase Bitcoin mining, and I just thought there was a special group of people who mined a special metal to create coins with a big "B" on them. Why couldn't they just use the metal we already mined? Sheesh! I thought nostr was a virus, and a Kraken was still a giant squid.

As of today, I'm happy to say that I've made a little bit of progress. Those things above no longer confuse me, and I actually have a little bit of Bitcoin now. Sure, I'm still trying to wrap my head around NFTs and figure out who the Pepe frog man is, but I'm no longer completely lost. Not to mention, I just spent most of the last 24 hours figuring this whole nostr thing out, which excites me. I kind of missed the boat on the big name social media platforms, so I'm looking forward to this new decentralized approach to things.

For now, I'm just happy to be awake. Finally. I see the need for decentralization and the necessity of moving away from fiat monies. I don't have much to offer except my intellect and my love of writing, but I'm here to serve in any way that I can.

@ 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.

@ ccc8ee23:9f3d9783

Chef's notes

Dare to taste the bold? One bite of Jengkol Balado and you’ll be hooked

Spicy Jengkol Balado - Betawi Style A traditional dish from Betawi (Jakarta), Jengkol Balado is nutty bold and aromatic delicacy made with jengkol beans. This version uses thinly sliced jengkol for a delightful texture.

Serve it with a plate of steamed fragrant white rice and a side of crunchy cucumber for a complete meal that satisfies on every level.

Details

• 🍳 Cook time: 40 min
• 🍽️ Servings: 2

Ingredients

• Jengkol 250 grams
• Chilli 100 grams
• Shallot 5 cloves
• Garlic 2 cloves
• Tomato 1 clove (small)
• Bay leaves 2
• Galangal 2cm. Bruished
• Veggie oil 20ml or 4 tsp
• Seasoning

Directions

1. Prepare the Jengkol Wash the jengkol thoroughly and slice it thinly. Boil the slices in water with the bay leaves for 10–15 minutes to soften and reduce their strong odour. Drain and set aside.
2. Make the Balado Paste. Blend chillies, shallots, garlic, candlenut and tomatoes into a slightly coarse paste using a blender
3. Heat oil in a pan and sauté the balado paste until fragrant and the oil starts to separate. Add the galangal, bay leaves, salt, sugar, and seasoning. Stir well
4. Add jengkol to the pan. Mix until jengkol are fully coated in the balado paste.
5. If the mixture seems too dry, add a splash of water and let it simmer on low heat to allow the flavours to infuse.
6. Taste the dish and adjust the seasoning with more salt or sugar if needed.
7. Remove from heat and serve hot with steamed rice.

@ b7274d28:c99628cb

For anyone interested in the list of essential essays from nostr:npub14hn6p34vegy4ckeklz8jq93mendym9asw8z2ej87x2wuwf8werasc6a32x (@anilsaidso) on Twitter that nostr:npub1h8nk2346qezka5cpm8jjh3yl5j88pf4ly2ptu7s6uu55wcfqy0wq36rpev mentioned on Read 856, here it is. I have compiled it with as many of the essays as I could find, along with the audio versions, when available. Additionally, if the author is on #Nostr, I have tagged their npub so you can thank them by zapping them some sats.

All credit for this list and the graphics accompanying each entry goes to nostr:npub14hn6p34vegy4ckeklz8jq93mendym9asw8z2ej87x2wuwf8werasc6a32x, whose original thread can be found here: Anil's Essential Essays Thread

1.

History shows us that the corruption of monetary systems leads to moral decay, social collapse, and slavery.

Essay: https://breedlove22.medium.com/masters-and-slaves-of-money-255ecc93404f

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/RI0iCGRCCYdhnMXIN3L6

2.

The 21st century emergence of Bitcoin, encryption, the internet, and millennials are more than just trends; they herald a wave of change that exhibits similar dynamics as the 16-17th century revolution that took place in Europe.

Author: nostr:npub13l3lyslfzyscrqg8saw4r09y70702s6r025hz52sajqrvdvf88zskh8xc2

Essay: https://casebitcoin.com/docs/TheBitcoinReformation_TuurDemeester.pdf

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/uLgBG2tyCLMlOp3g50EL

3.

There are many men out there who will parrot the "debt is money WE owe OURSELVES" without acknowledging that "WE" isn't a static entity, but a collection of individuals at different points in their lives.

Author: nostr:npub1guh5grefa7vkay4ps6udxg8lrqxg2kgr3qh9n4gduxut64nfxq0q9y6hjy

Essay: https://www.tftc.io/issue-754-ludwig-von-mises-human-action/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/UXacM2rkdcyjG9xp9O2l

4.

If Bitcoin exists for 20 years, there will be near-universal confidence that it will be available forever, much as people believe the Internet is a permanent feature of the modern world.

Essay: https://vijayboyapati.medium.com/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoin-6ecc8bdecc1

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/jC3KbxTkXVzXO4vR7X3W

As you are surely aware, Vijay has expanded this into a book available here: The Bullish Case for Bitcoin Book

There is also an audio book version available here: The Bullish Case for Bitcoin Audio Book

5.

This realignment would not be traditional right vs left, but rather land vs cloud, state vs network, centralized vs decentralized, new money vs old, internationalist/capitalist vs nationalist/socialist, MMT vs BTC,...Hamilton vs Satoshi.

Essay: https://nakamoto.com/bitcoin-becomes-the-flag-of-technology/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/tFJKjYLKhiFY8voDssZc

6.

Gradually, Then Suddenly

I became convinced that, whether bitcoin survives or not, the existing financial system is working on borrowed time.

Essay: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/gradually-then-suddenly/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/Mf6hgTFUNESqvdxEIOGZ

Parker Lewis went on to release several more articles in the Gradually, Then Suddenly series. They can be found here: Gradually, Then Suddenly Series

nostr:npub1h8nk2346qezka5cpm8jjh3yl5j88pf4ly2ptu7s6uu55wcfqy0wq36rpev has, of course, read all of them for us. Listing them all here is beyond the scope of this article, but you can find them by searching the podcast feed here: Bitcoin Audible Feed

Finally, Parker Lewis has refined these articles and released them as a book, which is available here: Gradually, Then Suddenly Book

7.

Bitcoin is a beautifully-constructed protocol. Genius is apparent in its design to most people who study it in depth, in terms of the way it blends math, computer science, cyber security, monetary economics, and game theory.

Author: nostr:npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a

Essay: https://www.lynalden.com/invest-in-bitcoin/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/axeqKBvYCSP1s9aJIGSe

8.

Bitcoin offers a sweeping vista of opportunity to re-imagine how the financial system can and should work in the Internet era..

Essay: https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

9.

Using Bitcoin for consumer purchases is akin to driving a Concorde jet down the street to pick up groceries: a ridiculously expensive waste of an astonishing tool.

Author: nostr:npub1gdu7w6l6w65qhrdeaf6eyywepwe7v7ezqtugsrxy7hl7ypjsvxksd76nak

Essay: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/economics-of-bitcoin-as-a-settlement-network/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/JoSpRFWJtoogn3lvTYlz

10.

The Internet is a dumb network, which is its defining and most valuable feature. The Internet’s protocol (..) doesn’t offer “services.” It doesn’t make decisions about content. It doesn’t distinguish between photos, text, video and audio.

Essay: https://fee.org/articles/decentralization-why-dumb-networks-are-better/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/b7gOEqmWxn8RiDziffXf

11.

Most people are only familiar with (b)itcoin the electronic currency, but more important is (B)itcoin, with a capital B, the underlying protocol, which encapsulates and distributes the functions of contract law.

I was unable to find this essay or any audio version. Clicking on Anil's original link took me to Naval's blog, but that particular entry seems to have been removed.

12.

Bitcoin can approximate unofficial exchange rates which, in turn, can be used to detect both the existence and the magnitude of the distortion caused by capital controls & exchange rate manipulations.

Essay: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=2714921

13.

You can create something which looks cosmetically similar to Bitcoin, but you cannot replicate the settlement assurances which derive from the costliness of the ledger.

Essay: https://medium.com/@nic__carter/its-the-settlement-assurances-stupid-5dcd1c3f4e41

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/5NoPoiRU4NtF2YQN5QI1

14.

When we can secure the most important functionality of a financial network by computer science... we go from a system that is manual, local, and of inconsistent security to one that is automated, global, and much more secure.

Essay: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/library/money-blockchains-and-social-scalability/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/VMH9YmGVCF8c3I5zYkrc

15.

The BCB enforces the strictest deposit regulations in the world by requiring full reserves for all accounts. ..money is not destroyed when bank debts are repaid, so increased money hoarding does not cause liquidity traps..

Author: nostr:npub1hxwmegqcfgevu4vsfjex0v3wgdyz8jtlgx8ndkh46t0lphtmtsnsuf40pf

Essay: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/the-bitcoin-central-banks-perfect-monetary-policy/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/ralOokFfhFfeZpYnGAsD

16.

When Satoshi announced Bitcoin on the cryptography mailing list, he got a skeptical reception at best. Cryptographers have seen too many grand schemes by clueless noobs. They tend to have a knee jerk reaction.

Essay: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/library/bitcoin-and-me/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/Vx8hKhLZkkI4cq97qS4Z

17.

No matter who you are, or how big your company is, 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙣𝙨𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙬𝙤𝙣’𝙩 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙥𝙖𝙜𝙖𝙩𝙚 𝙞𝙛 𝙞𝙩’𝙨 𝙞𝙣𝙫𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙙.

Essay: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/bitcoin-miners-beware-invalid-blocks-need-not-apply/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/bcSuBGmOGY2TecSov4rC

18.

Just like a company trying to protect itself from being destroyed by a new competitor, the actions and reactions of central banks and policy makers to protect the system that they know, are quite predictable.

Author: nostr:npub1s05p3ha7en49dv8429tkk07nnfa9pcwczkf5x5qrdraqshxdje9sq6eyhe

Essay: https://medium.com/the-bitcoin-times/the-greatest-game-b787ac3242b2

Audio Part 1: https://fountain.fm/episode/5bYyGRmNATKaxminlvco

Audio Part 2: https://fountain.fm/episode/92eU3h6gqbzng84zqQPZ

19.

Technology, industry, and society have advanced immeasurably since, and yet we still live by Venetian financial customs and have no idea why. Modern banking is the legacy of a problem that technology has since solved.

Author: nostr:npub1sfhflz2msx45rfzjyf5tyj0x35pv4qtq3hh4v2jf8nhrtl79cavsl2ymqt

Essay: https://allenfarrington.medium.com/bitcoin-is-venice-8414dda42070

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/s6Fu2VowAddRACCCIxQh

Allen Farrington and Sacha Meyers have gone on to expand this into a book, as well. You can get the book here: Bitcoin is Venice Book

And wouldn't you know it, Guy Swann has narrated the audio book available here: Bitcoin is Venice Audio Book

20.

The rich and powerful will always design systems that benefit them before everyone else. The genius of Bitcoin is to take advantage of that very base reality and force them to get involved and help run the system, instead of attacking it.

Author: nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu

Essay: https://quillette.com/2021/02/21/can-governments-stop-bitcoin/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/jeZ21IWIlbuC1OGnssy8

21.

In the realm of infor­ma­tion, there is no coin-stamping without time-stamping. The relent­less beating of this clock is what gives rise to all the magical proper­ties of Bitcoin.

Author: nostr:npub1dergggklka99wwrs92yz8wdjs952h2ux2ha2ed598ngwu9w7a6fsh9xzpc

Essay: https://dergigi.com/2021/01/14/bitcoin-is-time/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/pTevCY2vwanNsIso6F6X

22.

You can stay on the Fiat Standard, in which some people get to produce unlimited new units of money for free, just not you. Or opt in to the Bitcoin Standard, in which no one gets to do that, including you.

Essay: https://casebitcoin.com/docs/StoneRidge_2020_Shareholder_Letter.pdf

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/PhBTa39qwbkwAtRnO38W

23.

Long term investors should use Bitcoin as their unit of account and every single investment should be compared to the expected returns of Bitcoin.

Essay: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/everyones-a-scammer/

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/vyR2GUNfXtKRK8qwznki

24.

When you’re in the ivory tower, you think the term “ivory tower” is a silly misrepresentation of your very normal life; when you’re no longer in the ivory tower, you realize how willfully out of touch you were with the world.

Essay: https://www.citadel21.com/why-the-yuppie-elite-dismiss-bitcoin

Audio: https://fountain.fm/episode/7do5K4pPNljOf2W3rR2V

You might notice that many of the above essays are available from the Satoshi Nakamoto Institute. It is a veritable treasure trove of excellent writing on subjects surrounding #Bitcoin and #AustrianEconomics. If you find value in them keeping these written works online for the next wave of new Bitcoiners to have an excellent source of education, please consider donating to the cause.

@ ac8bb9b0:70278acc

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10
• 🍳 Cook time: 20
• 🍽️ Servings: 5

Ingredients

• 8 ounces uncooked linguine
• 1 pound chicken breast, cut into strips
• 1-2 tsp Cajun seasoning, or more to taste
• 1 tsp garlic powder
• 1 tbsp extra virgin olive oil
• 1 medium red bell pepper, thinly sliced
• 1 medium yellow bell pepper, thinly sliced
• 8 oz fresh mushrooms, sliced
• 1/2 red onion, sliced
• 3 cloves garlic, minced
• 2 tomatoes, diced
• 1 cup low sodium chicken broth
• 1/3 cup skim milk
• 1 tbsp flour
• 3 tbsp light cream cheese
• fresh cracked pepper
• 2 scallions, chopped
• kosher salt to taste
• avocado oil spray

Directions

1. Prep all your vegetables.
2. In a small blender make a slurry by combining milk, flour and cream cheese. Set aside.
3. Season chicken generously with Cajun seasoning, garlic powder and salt.
4. Prepare pasta in salted water according to package directions.
5. Heat a large heavy nonstick skillet over medium-high heat; spray with oil and add half of the chicken.
6. Sauté 5 to 6 minutes or until done, set aside on a plate and repeat with the remaining chicken. Set aside.
7. Add olive oil to the skillet and reduce to medium; add bell peppers, onions, and garlic to skillet, sauté 3-4 minutes.
8. Add mushrooms and tomatoes and sauté 3-4 more minutes or until vegetables are tender.
9. Season with 1/4 tsp salt, garlic powder and fresh cracked pepper to taste.
10. Reduce heat to medium-low; add chicken broth and pour in slurry stirring about 2 minutes.
11. Return chicken to skillet; adjust salt and Cajun seasoning to taste, cook another minute or two until hot, then add linguine; toss well to coat.
12. Top with chopped scallions and enjoy!

@ ef1e59bf:b686587d

Key Insights Explained

While both systems provide innovative soilless growing solutions, the unique difference lies in their approach—hydroponics relies on a nutrient-rich water solution, whereas aquaponics integrates fish into the ecosystem to naturally supply nutrients. This not only impacts their cultivation techniques but also illustrates varying levels of sustainability and resource use.

In exploring these systems, one cannot help but consider the broader implications for urban agriculture. For those looking to adopt such systems, understanding key differences can significantly impact decisions on efficiency, cost, and ecological footprint.

What Is Hydroponics?

In hydroponics, we grow plants in water enriched with nutrients rather than soil. This method provides a controlled environment where the roots receive all necessary elements directly from the nutrient solution. It's fascinating how plants can thrive without ever touching the soil.

The benefits of hydroponics are impressive. We can achieve faster growth rates due to optimal nutrient delivery, and the space-saving designs, such as vertical farms, maximise small areas. Moreover, nutrient levels can be controlled precisely, ensuring plants receive exactly what they need.

What Is Aquaponics?

Aquaponics is an innovative system that blends aquaculture, which is the practice of raising fish, with hydroponics, the soilless cultivation of plants. In this symbiotic setup, fish waste serves as a natural fertiliser, supplying essential nutrients to the plants. In return, the plants help purify the water, creating a healthy environment for the fish.

This system is unique because it mimics natural ecosystems, enhancing sustainability. The dual benefits of growing plants and fish simultaneously make aquaponics an attractive option for those of us interested in sustainable agriculture and promoting organic cultivation practices.

Key Differences

Hydroponics and aquaponics each offer unique benefits and challenges. Understanding these systems requires examining their differences in nutrient sources, water usage, plant growth density, time to harvest, setup intricacies, and the types of produce they best support.

Nutrient Source

In hydroponics, plants receive nutrients through specially prepared solutions, often purchased from commercial suppliers. This method allows us to maintain a high level of control over nutrient balance, making precise adjustments as needed.

Aquaponics, by contrast, relies on fish waste to supply nutrients. This forms a more natural ecosystem, requiring biological processes like nitrification to convert waste into nutrients usable by plants. While this approach involves fewer chemical inputs and is more sustainable, it offers less control over nutrient levels.

Water Usage

Hydroponic systems excel in water efficiency by recirculating water, though they necessitate regular changes to keep nutrient solutions balanced. Despite their efficiency, water loss can occur through evaporation or leaks, which requires monitoring.

Aquaponics operates as a closed-loop system where water is continually recycled between the fish tank and plant beds, minimising waste. This setup further reduces water use due to natural filtration by plants, making it an incredibly water-efficient choice.

Grow Density

Hydroponics typically supports higher density plant growth, especially in vertical setups. This is ideal for cultivating leafy greens, herbs, and other fast-growing plants in compact spaces.

Aquaponics requires space for both fish and plants, which limits plant density. Although some plants may grow slower due to varying nutrient availability, this method offers the benefit of integrating fish care into the system.

Grow Time

In hydroponics, plants enjoy faster growth rates thanks to controlled nutrient and environmental conditions. These systems often facilitate shorter growing cycles compared to traditional farming, enhancing efficiency.

Aquaponics, while efficient, may experience slightly slower growth rates due to the time taken for natural nutrient conversion. Balancing fish growth with plant cycles adds an extra layer of complexity but is a rewarding experience for those willing to engage deeply with the system.

Set Up and Maintenance

Starting a hydroponic system is relatively straightforward, with pumps, nutrient tanks, and light management being primary needs. Regular checks of pH, nutrient levels, and water are essential yet generally simple.

Aquaponics demands more initial infrastructure and expertise due to the need for integrated fish tanks and plant systems. Balancing fish health and water quality with plant needs adds complexity, but long-term sustainability benefits are significant. Setting up these systems can seem daunting but offer reduced external nutrient input over time.

Produce Types

Hydroponics shines when growing leafy greens and herbs, achieving high success rates with crops like lettuce, basil, and spinach. These systems, however, have limitations when it comes to larger or more nutrient-demanding produce.

Aquaponics expands possibilities by supporting a broader range of plants, including fruiting ones such as tomatoes, alongside fish like tilapia or trout. This dual-production feature offers diverse yields, though the choice of fish can influence plant variety.

Which Is More Sustainable?

When we consider the sustainability of hydroponics, several factors come to mind. First, high water efficiency and space-saving designs make it attractive for eco-conscious growers. Yet, the reliance on artificial nutrients and the higher energy usage, particularly for lighting and pumps, may impact its overall eco-friendliness. These elements can sometimes offset the system’s environmental benefits.

In contrast, aquaponics offers a unique closed-loop system that naturally recycles waste. This can significantly reduce the need for external inputs, aligning well with principles of organic farming. While this method requires more space and careful maintenance for both fish and plants, it typically involves less chemical intervention, appealing to those seeking a more natural approach.

Let's compare the environmental impact of these methods:

• Aquaponics might have a lower environmental footprint due to its natural nutrient cycle, reducing waste and chemical use.

• On the other hand, hydroponics can be well-suited for urban environments or locations with limited resources, thanks to its efficient use of water and space.

Ultimately, deciding which system is more sustainable depends on specific circumstances and priorities. If natural nutrient cycles and less chemical intervention are valued, aquaponics might be favoured. Nevertheless, if water and space efficiency are paramount, especially in urban settings, hydroponics might be more suitable.

Hydroponics is a game-changer for sustainable farming, offering efficient water use, reduced land impact, and year-round crop production. Whether you're a beginner or an experienced grower, having the right tools and knowledge is key to success. Visit Hyjo for high-quality hydroponic systems, nutrients, and expert advice. Start growing smarter and greener with Hyjo today!

@ a10260a2:caa23e3e

A zero-dependency, zero-framework QR code web component for Bitcoin on-chain, Lightning, and unified BIP-21 payments.

Just discovered this tool by nostr:npub18agram6s6kulwwhc638d8q8y5vysutrrvvdll2wdjxd75wp4dfjqshytrf and found it to be very useful. Also, did I mention easy-to-use?

You can find the GitHub here and a demo I made (complete with a function to check for payment) on the Bullish Prototype. 👨‍💻

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/737255

@ ac8bb9b0:70278acc

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 10
• 🍳 Cook time: 20
• 🍽️ Servings: 6

Ingredients

• 2 tablespoons extra virgin olive oil
• 1 1/2 pounds ground chicken
• 1 yellow onion, chopped
• 2 tablespoons taco seasoning
• salt and black pepper
• 2 1/2 cups salsa or enchilada sauce
• 1 chipotle chili in adobo, chopped
• 2 cups fresh corn
• 4 ounces cream cheese, at room temperature
• 1/4 cup plain greek yogurt
• 1 teaspoon chili powder
• 1 1/2 cups shredded Mexican cheese blend
• 2 cups tortilla chips
• avocado, cilantro, and green onions, for serving

Directions

1. Preheat the oven to 400° F.
2. In a large oven-safe skillet, combine the olive oil, chicken, onion, salt, and pepper. Set the skillet over high heat. Cook, breaking up the meat as it cooks, until browned all over, 5 minutes. Add the taco seasoning, cook another 2 minutes. Then add 1/2 cup water. Stir in the salsa/enchilada sauce and chipotle. Simmer 5 minutes. Remove from the heat and add in the cilantro.
3. In a bowl, combine the corn, cream cheese, yogurt, chili powder, and salt. Stir in 1/2 cup cheese.
4. Dollop 1/3 of the corn mix over the skillet. Add the tortilla chips on top, pressing them gently into the skillet. Add the remaining corn mix by spoonfuls on top of the chips (like nachos). Top with the remaining cheese. Bake for 15 minutes, until the cheese is melted.
5. Serve topped as desired with avocado, cilantro, green onion, and cotija/feta cheese.

@ fa0165a0:03397073

Chef's notes

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

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

When done: Enjoy during Fika!

PS;

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

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

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

Ingredients

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

Directions

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

@ 07804b78:c375c543

Japanese follows. 日本語はあとで。

This article is for the 14th day of Nostr Advent Calendar 2024 (relay blogging). The article for the 13th day was "Open Sats 申請編" (Applying for Open Sats) by mono-san. The article for the 14th day will be "Nostrはじめました。" (I started Nostr) by bro-san.

Thinking of Thingstr

I've come up with an idea for Other Staff that I think is interesting (at least, for me), so I'm going to write about it. I actually wanted to show you the implementation and brag about it, but it's not solid enough to be implemented yet.

The key idea is just “add a reaction to the WikiData ID”.

WikiData

There is a service called WikiData. It is a knowledge base that provides structured data. You may be wondering what it is, but the important thing to understand here is that WikiData assigns identifiers to a fairly wide range of “objects” and “things”.

So, if you can react to this, you can think of various applications just by thinking of it for a moment, right?

For example, the anime series “There are too many losing heroines!” is assigned the ID Q123819103. The corresponding page is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123819103 .

(NOTE: The canonical URI for entities on Wikidata is http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1142841. This is in accordance with Semantic Web conventions, and is not https, but http. Also, this URI does not necessarily match the actual address of the correspnding web page. Just an identifier. In most cases, it will redirect).

What can wd do?

For example, what about a website that records your anime viewing history? You can record what you want to watch with 👀, what you've already watched with ✅, and your favorites with ☆. You can also express your “likes” for production companies, staff, voice actors, etc. In this way, you can see what a particular user likes.

This could be a movie, a book, a comic, an author, music, an idol group, a place, or food (Someone likes pork cutlet Q1142841). The fact that you can record everything in the same framework is what makes it interesting.

What form of event should it be recorded as?

There is probably room for discussion about how to record this information in a concrete way. The simplest way would be to use NIP-25's "Reactions to a website" kind:17 (a.k.a. Makibishi). How about something like this?

json [ ["i", "wd:Q123819103", "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q123819103"], ]

Since NIP-73 has External Content IDs, it would be good if we could include WikiData here so that we could write wd:Q123819103. Actually, isbn: and other identifiers have already been defined, so it is possible to use the current NIP range to describe books (however, the authors do not have IDs. If we use WikiData as an ID, we can also describe reactions related to the author). Of course, it is not a matter of choosing one or the other, and it is also fine to add the ISBN tag at the same time as the WikiData tag for books.

Search for recorded reactions

So far, this is all very simple, but it would be inconvenient if we didn't include tags to mark subsets of reactions (for example, only those related to anime) so that we can query them together. When we try to create a site that is specialized for a certain purpose, we need to be able to extract the reactions that are necessary.

On Wikidata, the predicate wdt:P31 (instance of) is used to group together concepts that represent the same thing. For example, how about including this in the l tag? "There are too many losing heroines!" is a "Japanese television anime series (Q63952888)", so:

json [ ["i", "wd:Q1142841", "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1142841"], ["l", "wdt:P31 wd:Q63952888"] ]

UPDATE(2024-12-15): rnurachue-san suggested that #l or #L might be better for labeling (the first version used #a). I think that's a good idea, so I've updated the article. nostr:nevent1qgswamu0rsela0kwhj87p24ueapxdp04vzz7ar0pp6lfyq923t3l02cqyr9786635s60ra0f973nwv2sln2l74lqx4twdlgxfz2jgevpvsgtc9zwn6d

However, when you think about creating an anime website, you may want to query both TV anime and anime films. This makes things more complicated. "Japanese TV anime series (Q63952888)" is a subclass (subclass of; wdt:P279) of "Anime series (Q117467261)", which is in turn a subclass of "Anime (Q1107)". However, if you were to embed this hierarchy in each reaction, it would waste a lot of space. The following query will get all the superclasses of "Japanese TV anime series (Q63952888)", but there are 54 of them.

https://query.wikidata.org/#%23%20Subclass%20hierarchy%20traversal%20for%20Q63952888%0ASELECT%20%3Fitem%20%3FitemLabel%20%3Fsuperclass%20%3FsuperclassLabel%0AWHERE%20%7B%0A%20%20%23%20Starting%20class%0A%20%20wd%3AQ63952888%20wdt%3AP279%2a%20%3Fsuperclass%20.%0A%20%20BIND%28wd%3AQ63952888%20AS%20%3Fitem%29%0A%20%20SERVICE%20wikibase%3Alabel%20%7B%20bd%3AserviceParam%20wikibase%3Alanguage%20%22%5BAUTO_LANGUAGE%5D%2Cen%22.%20%7D%0A%7D%0AORDER%20BY%20%3Fsuperclass%0A

So, I think it should be okay for practical purposes to embed P31s of the reaction target. In other words, if you search for "anime series Q63952888" and "anime movie Q20650540", that should be enough. Fortunately, the conditions for single-character tags work with OR, so you can query multiple tags at once. we'll have to try it to see how well it works in practice, though.

Discussion: Which kind should I use?

So far we have considered using kind:17, but we have not yet decided whether it is a good idea to mix Thingstr events with reactions to web pages.

Also, there may be a debate over whether to record regular events or addressable events, depending on the purpose of use. For example, if you want to record the transition of viewing results and impressions on an anime viewing site, you should use regular events, and if you want to maintain the viewing status, you should use addressable events.

What do you think?

Other ideas

If we can react to Nodes on OpenStreetMap using the same framework, we might be able to create something like Swarm. Since the views you want to see will differ depending on the purpose, it would be good to create various sites while having a consistent way of recording. Wouldn't that be the most Nostr-like thing?

Summary

I discussed how to use WikiData and OpenStreetMap as an ID infrastructure and realize various check-in and review services with a unified data model by using them on Nostr. Please let us know if you have any feedback. Or why not try implementing it?

---

この記事は Nostr Advent Calendar 2024 の14日目の記事です。13日目の記事はmonoさんによる「Open Sats 申請編」でした。15日目の記事はbroさんによる「Nostrはじめました。」です。

Thingstrについて考えた

面白そうな（と勝手に思ってる） Other Staff のアイディアを思いついたので、書いてみます。 本当は実装を持ってきて自慢したかったのですが、まだふわっとしていて実装に落ちていません。

コアになるアイディアは「WikiData の ID に対して、Reactionをつける」これだけです。

WikiData

WikiData というサービスがあります。構造化データを提供する知識ベースです。 なにそれ？という感じですが、ここで大事なのはWikiDataはかなり広範な「もの」「こと」に識別子(Identifier)を付与している、ということです。

だから、これにリアクションできれば、ぱっと思いつくだけでもいろいろな応用ができそうじゃないですか。

例えば、アニメシリーズ「負けヒロインが多すぎる！」には Q123819103 というIDが振られています。これに対応するページとして https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123819103 があります。

（ただし、WikiData のエンティティに対する canonical な URI は http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1142841 であることには注意が必要です。セマンティックウェブの作法で https ではなく http になっています。そして、このURIは必ずしもWebページのアドレス一致しません。大抵の場合はリダイレクトされます）。

なにができるの

たとえば、アニメの視聴記録サイトはどうでしょう。👀は見たい作品、✅は視聴済み、☆はお気に入り、みたいに記録していく。制作会社、スタッフ、声優、...に対してLikeを表明したりできそうです。そうすると、あるユーザが何にLikeしているかわかります。

これが映画でもいいし、書籍、漫画、作家でもいいし、音楽でもいいし、アイドルグループでもいいし、場所でもいいし、食べ物でもいい（とんかつ Q1142841 が好き、とか）。全部同じ枠組みで記録できるのが面白そうなところです。

どういうNostrイベントで記録する？

具体的な記録の仕方には議論の余地があるでしょう。一番単純なのは、NIP-25の "Reactions to a website" kind:17 (Makibishi) を使う方法でしょうか。こんなのはどうでしょう。

json [ ["i", "wd:Q123819103", "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q123819103"], ]

NIP-73にExternal Content IDsがあるので、ここにWikiDataを入れられるようにして wd:Q123819103 と書けるとよさそうです。実は isbn: などはすでに定義されているので、書籍に関しては現行のNIPの範囲でもうまいことできます（ただ、著者にはIDが振られていません。WikiDataをIDに使うと著者に関するリアクションも記述できます）。もちろん、どちらか一方を選ぶというものでもなくて、書籍にはWikiDataのタグと当時にISBNのタグを付与しておいてもいいと思います。

記録されたリアクションを検索する

ここまではシンプルでよいのですが、リアクションの部分集合（たとえばアニメに関連するものだけ、とか）をまとめてクエリできるように、目印となるタグを入れておかないと不便です。ある目的に特化したサイトを作ろうとしたとき、必要になるリアクションが抽出できるようにしておかないといけません。

WikiData では wdt:P31 (instance of) という述語で、ある概念が何を表しているかをグルーピングしてくれています。例えばこれをlタグとかに含めておくのはどうでしょうか。

負けヒロインが多すぎる！は「日本のテレビアニメシリーズ(Q63952888)」なので、

json [ ["i", "wd:Q1142841", "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1142841"], ["l", "wdt:P31 wd:Q63952888"] ]

みたいな感じで付与します。

UPDATE(2024-12-15): rnurachueさんからラベル付けには #l または #L のほうがよいかもという提案をいただきました。最初のバージョンでは #a を使用していました。そのとおりだと思ったので更新しました。 nostr:nevent1qgswamu0rsela0kwhj87p24ueapxdp04vzz7ar0pp6lfyq923t3l02cqyr9786635s60ra0f973nwv2sln2l74lqx4twdlgxfz2jgevpvsgtc9zwn6d

ただ、アニメサイトを作ることを考えると、テレビアニメも劇場版アニメも両方クエリしたいこともありそうですよね。そうなると話が複雑になってきます。

「日本のテレビアニメシリーズ(Q63952888)」は「アニメシリーズ(Q117467261)」のサブクラス(subclass of; wdt:P279)で、それがさらに「アニメ(Q1107)」 のサブクラスになっています。ただ、この階層をいちいちリアクションに埋め込むのと大変なことになります。以下のようなクエリで「日本のテレビアニメシリーズ(Q63952888)」のすべての上位クラスが取れるのですが、54件もあります。

https://query.wikidata.org/#%23%20Subclass%20hierarchy%20traversal%20for%20Q63952888%0ASELECT%20%3Fitem%20%3FitemLabel%20%3Fsuperclass%20%3FsuperclassLabel%0AWHERE%20%7B%0A%20%20%23%20Starting%20class%0A%20%20wd%3AQ63952888%20wdt%3AP279%2a%20%3Fsuperclass%20.%0A%20%20BIND%28wd%3AQ63952888%20AS%20%3Fitem%29%0A%20%20SERVICE%20wikibase%3Alabel%20%7B%20bd%3AserviceParam%20wikibase%3Alanguage%20%22%5BAUTO_LANGUAGE%5D%2Cen%22.%20%7D%0A%7D%0AORDER%20BY%20%3Fsuperclass%0A

なので、リアクション対象のP31を埋め込む、くらいで実用上は問題ないような気がします。つまり、検索するときに 「アニメシリーズ Q63952888」と「アニメ映画 Q20650540」を対象にすれば、十分では、ということです。幸い、一文字タグの条件はORで効くので、複数を並べて一度にクエリできます。実際にどのくらいうまく行くかはやってみないとわからないですが。

議論: どの kind を使うべきか？

一旦 kind 17 を使うことを考えてきましたが、Thingstr のイベントが Web ページに対するリアクションと混ざるのが良いことなのか、いまいち判断がついていません。

また、用途によって regular event で記録するべきか、それとも addressable event で記録すべきか、という議論もありそうです。 アニメ視聴サイトを例にあげるなら、視聴実績とか感想の変遷を記録したいならば regular event でしょうし、視聴の状態を保持したいならば addressable とするのがよさそうです。

どう思いますか？

他のアイディア

これと同じ枠組みで OpenStreetMap の Node に対してリアクションできるようにすれば Swarm のようなものも実現できるかもしれません。

用途ごとに見たいビューは違うだろうから、一貫した記録の仕方を持ちつつ、色々なサイトを作ったらいいんじゃないでしょうか。それって最高にNostrっぽくないですか？

まとめ

WikiDataやOpenStreetMapをID基盤として活用し、Nostr上でreactすることで、様々なチェックインサービス、レビューサービスを統一的なデータモデルで実現する方法について議論しました。フィードバックがあったら教えてください。むしろ実装してみてください。

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

President Trump has started rolling out his tariffs, something I blogged about in November. People are talking about these tariffs a lot right now, with many people (correctly) commenting on how consumers will end up with higher prices as a result of these tariffs. While that part is true, I’ve seen a lot of people taking it to the next, incorrect step: that consumers will pay the entirety of the tax. I put up a poll on X to see what people thought, and while the right answer got a lot of votes, it wasn't the winner.

For purposes of this blog post, our ultimate question will be the following:

• Suppose apples currently sell for $1 each in the entire United States.
• There are domestic sellers and foreign sellers of apples, all receiving the same price.
• There are no taxes or tariffs on the purchase of apples.
• The question is: if the US federal government puts a $0.50 import tariff per apple, what will be the change in the following:
• Number of apples bought in the US
• Price paid by buyers for apples in the US
• Post-tax price received by domestic apple producers
• Post-tax price received by foreign apple producers

Before we can answer that question, we need to ask an easier, first question: before instituting the tariff, why do apples cost $1?

And finally, before we dive into the details, let me provide you with the answers to the ultimate question. I recommend you try to guess these answers before reading this, and if you get it wrong, try to understand why:

1. The number of apples bought will go down
2. The buyers will pay more for each apple they buy, but not the full amount of the tariff
3. Domestic apple sellers will receive a higher price per apple
4. Foreign apple sellers will receive a lower price per apple, but not lowered by the full amount of the tariff

In other words, regardless of who sends the payment to the government, both taxed parties (domestic buyers and foreign sellers) will absorb some of the costs of the tariff, while domestic sellers will benefit from the protectionism provided by tariffs and be able to sell at a higher price per unit.

Marginal benefit

All of the numbers discussed below are part of a helper Google Sheet I put together for this analysis. Also, apologies about the jagged lines in the charts below, I hadn’t realized before starting on this that there are some difficulties with creating supply and demand charts in Google Sheets.

Let’s say I absolutely love apples, they’re my favorite food. How much would I be willing to pay for a single apple? You might say “$1, that’s the price in the supermarket,” and in many ways you’d be right. If I walk into supermarket A, see apples on sale for $50, and know that I can buy them at supermarket B for $1, I’ll almost certainly leave A and go buy at B.

But that’s not what I mean. What I mean is: how high would the price of apples have to go everywhere so that I’d no longer be willing to buy a single apple? This is a purely personal, subjective opinion. It’s impacted by how much money I have available, other expenses I need to cover, and how much I like apples. But let’s say the number is $5.

How much would I be willing to pay for another apple? Maybe another $5. But how much am I willing to pay for the 1,000th apple? 10,000th? At some point, I’ll get sick of apples, or run out of space to keep the apples, or not be able to eat, cook, and otherwise preserve all those apples before they rot.

The point being: I’ll be progressively willing to spend less and less money for each apple. This form of analysis is called marginal benefit: how much benefit (expressed as dollars I’m willing to spend) will I receive from each apple? This is a downward sloping function: for each additional apple I buy (quantity demanded), the price I’m willing to pay goes down. This is what gives my personal demand curve. And if we aggregate demand curves across all market participants (meaning: everyone interested in buying apples), we end up with something like this:

Assuming no changes in people’s behavior and other conditions in the market, this chart tells us how many apples will be purchased by our buyers at each price point between $0.50 and $5. And ceteris paribus (all else being equal), this will continue to be the demand curve for apples.

Marginal cost

Demand is half the story of economics. The other half is supply, or: how many apples will I sell at each price point? Supply curves are upward sloping: the higher the price, the more a person or company is willing and able to sell a product.

Let’s understand why. Suppose I have an apple orchard. It’s a large property right next to my house. With about 2 minutes of effort, I can walk out of my house, find the nearest tree, pick 5 apples off the tree, and call it a day. 5 apples for 2 minutes of effort is pretty good, right?

Yes, there was all the effort necessary to buy the land, and plant the trees, and water them… and a bunch more than I likely can’t even guess at. We’re going to ignore all of that for our analysis, because for short-term supply-and-demand movement, we can ignore these kinds of sunk costs. One other simplification: in reality, supply curves often start descending before ascending. This accounts for achieving efficiencies of scale after the first number of units purchased. But since both these topics are unneeded for understanding taxes, I won’t go any further.

Anyway, back to my apple orchard. If someone offers me $0.50 per apple, I can do 2 minutes of effort and get $2.50 in revenue, which equates to a $75/hour wage for me. I’m more than happy to pick apples at that price!

However, let’s say someone comes to buy 10,000 apples from me instead. I no longer just walk out to my nearest tree. I’m going to need to get in my truck, drive around, spend the day in the sun, pay for gas, take a day off of my day job (let’s say it pays me $70/hour). The costs go up significantly. Let’s say it takes 5 days to harvest all those apples myself, it costs me $100 in fuel and other expenses, and I lose out on my $70/hour job for 5 days. We end up with:

• Total expenditure: $100 + $70 * 8 hours a day * 5 days \== $2900
• Total revenue: $5000 (10,000 apples at $0.50 each)
• Total profit: $2100

So I’m still willing to sell the apples at this price, but it’s not as attractive as before. And as the number of apples purchased goes up, my costs keep increasing. I’ll need to spend more money on fuel to travel more of my property. At some point I won’t be able to do the work myself anymore, so I’ll need to pay others to work on the farm, and they’ll be slower at picking apples than me (less familiar with the property, less direct motivation, etc.). The point being: at some point, the number of apples can go high enough that the $0.50 price point no longer makes me any money.

This kind of analysis is called marginal cost. It refers to the additional amount of expenditure a seller has to spend in order to produce each additional unit of the good. Marginal costs go up as quantity sold goes up. And like demand curves, if you aggregate this data across all sellers, you get a supply curve like this:

Equilibrium price

We now know, for every price point, how many apples buyers will purchase, and how many apples sellers will sell. Now we find the equilibrium: where the supply and demand curves meet. This point represents where the marginal benefit a buyer would receive from the next buyer would be less than the cost it would take the next seller to make it. Let’s see it in a chart:

You’ll notice that these two graphs cross at the $1 price point, where 63 apples are both demanded (bought by consumers) and supplied (sold by producers). This is our equilibrium price. We also have a visualization of the surplus created by these trades. Everything to the left of the equilibrium point and between the supply and demand curves represents surplus: an area where someone is receiving something of more value than they give. For example:

• When I bought my first apple for $1, but I was willing to spend $5, I made $4 of consumer surplus. The consumer portion of the surplus is everything to the left of the equilibrium point, between the supply and demand curves, and above the equilibrium price point.
• When a seller sells his first apple for $1, but it only cost $0.50 to produce it, the seller made $0.50 of producer surplus. The producer portion of the surplus is everything to the left of the equilibrium point, between the supply and demand curves, and below the equilibrium price point.

Another way of thinking of surplus is “every time someone got a better price than they would have been willing to take.”

OK, with this in place, we now have enough information to figure out how to price in the tariff, which we’ll treat as a negative externality.

Modeling taxes

Alright, the government has now instituted a $0.50 tariff on every apple sold within the US by a foreign producer. We can generally model taxes by either increasing the marginal cost of each unit sold (shifting the supply curve up), or by decreasing the marginal benefit of each unit bought (shifting the demand curve down). In this case, since only some of the producers will pay the tax, it makes more sense to modify the supply curve.

First, let’s see what happens to the foreign seller-only supply curve when you add in the tariff:

With the tariff in place, for each quantity level, the price at which the seller will sell is $0.50 higher than before the tariff. That makes sense: if I was previously willing to sell my 82nd apple for $3, I would now need to charge $3.50 for that apple to cover the cost of the tariff. We see this as the tariff “pushing up” or “pushing left” the original supply curve.

We can add this new supply curve to our existing (unchanged) supply curve for domestic-only sellers, and we end up with a result like this:

The total supply curve adds up the individual foreign and domestic supply curves. At each price point, we add up the total quantity each group would be willing to sell to determine the total quantity supplied for each price point. Once we have that cumulative supply curve defined, we can produce an updated supply-and-demand chart including the tariff:

As we can see, the equilibrium has shifted:

• The equilibrium price paid by consumers has risen from $1 to $1.20.
• The total number of apples purchased has dropped from 63 apples to 60 apples.
• Consumers therefore received 3 less apples. They spent $72 for these 60 apples, whereas previously they spent $63 for 3 more apples, a definite decrease in consumer surplus.
• Foreign producers sold 36 of those apples (see the raw data in the linked Google Sheet), for a gross revenue of $43.20. However, they also need to pay the tariff to the US government, which accounts for $18, meaning they only receive $25.20 post-tariff. Previously, they sold 42 apples at $1 each with no tariff to be paid, meaning they took home $42.
• Domestic producers sold the remaining 24 apples at $1.20, giving them a revenue of $28.80. Since they don’t pay the tariff, they take home all of that money. By contrast, previously, they sold 21 apples at $1, for a take-home of $21.
• The government receives $0.50 for each of the 60 apples sold, or in other words receives $30 in revenue it wouldn’t have received otherwise.

We could be more specific about the surpluses, and calculate the actual areas for consumer surplus, producer surplus, inefficiency from the tariff, and government revenue from the tariff. But I won’t bother, as those calculations get slightly more involved. Instead, let’s just look at the aggregate outcomes:

• Consumers were unquestionably hurt. Their price paid went up by $0.20 per apple, and received less apples.
• Foreign producers were also hurt. Their price received went down from the original $1 to the new post-tariff price of $1.20, minus the $0.50 tariff. In other words: foreign producers only receive $0.70 per apple now. This hurt can be mitigated by shifting sales to other countries without a tariff, but the pain will exist regardless.
• Domestic producers scored. They can sell less apples and make more revenue doing it.
• And the government walked away with an extra $30.

Hopefully you now see the answer to the original questions. Importantly, while the government imposed a $0.50 tariff, neither side fully absorbed that cost. Consumers paid a bit more, foreign producers received a bit less. The exact details of how that tariff was split across the groups is mediated by the relevant supply and demand curves of each group. If you want to learn more about this, the relevant search term is “price elasticity,” or how much a group’s quantity supplied or demanded will change based on changes in the price.

Other taxes

Most taxes are some kind of a tax on trade. Tariffs on apples is an obvious one. But the same applies to income tax (taxing the worker for the trade of labor for money) or payroll tax (same thing, just taxing the employer instead). Interestingly, you can use the same model for analyzing things like tax incentives. For example, if the government decided to subsidize domestic apple production by giving the domestic producers a $0.50 bonus for each apple they sell, we would end up with a similar kind of analysis, except instead of the foreign supply curve shifting up, we’d see the domestic supply curve shifting down.

And generally speaking, this is what you’ll always see with government involvement in the economy. It will result in disrupting an existing equilibrium, letting the market readjust to a new equilibrium, and incentivization of some behavior, causing some people to benefit and others to lose out. We saw with the apple tariff, domestic producers and the government benefited while others lost.

You can see the reverse though with tax incentives. If I give a tax incentive of providing a deduction (not paying income tax) for preschool, we would end up with:

• Government needs to make up the difference in tax revenue, either by raising taxes on others or printing more money (leading to inflation). Either way, those paying the tax or those holding government debased currency will pay a price.
• Those people who don’t use the preschool deduction will receive no benefit, so they simply pay a cost.
• Those who do use the preschool deduction will end up paying less on tax+preschool than they would have otherwise.

This analysis is fully amoral. It’s not saying whether providing subsidized preschool is a good thing or not, it simply tells you where the costs will be felt, and points out that such government interference in free economic choice does result in inefficiencies in the system. Once you have that knowledge, you’re more well educated on making a decision about whether the costs of government intervention are worth the benefits.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

GitCitadel Development Operations

We, at GitCitadel, have been updating, moving, and rearranging our servers, for quite some time. As a rather large, complex, sprawling project, we have the infrastructure setup to match, so we've decided to give you all a quick run-down of what we are doing behind-the-scenes.

Supplier Coordination

Our first task, this week, was figuring out who would host what where. We have four different locations, where our infra is stored and managed, including two locations from our suppliers. We got that straightened out, quickly, and it's all slowly coming together and being connected and networked. Exciting to watch our DevOps landscape evolve and all of the knowledge-transfer that the interactions provide.

OneDev Implementation

Our biggest internal infra project this week was the migration of all of our issues from Jira, build scripts from Jenkins, and repos from GitHub to a self-hosted OneDev instance. In the future, all of our internal build, test, issue, patch/PR, etc. effort will take place there. We also have a separate repo there for communicating with external developers and suppliers.

Our team's GitHub projects will be demoted to mirrors and a place for external devs to PR to. Public issues and patches will continue to be managed over our self-hosted GitWorkshop instance.

We're especially glad to finally escape the GitHub Gulag, and avoid being bled dry by Jira fees, without having to give up the important features that we've come to know and love. So, yay!

Next Infrasteps

Automated Testing

Now, that we have everything tied up in one, neat, backed-up package, we can finally move on to the nitty-gritty and the dirty work. So, we're rolling up our sleeves and writing the Selenium smoke test for our Alexandria client. We'll be running that in Docker containers containing different "typical Nostr" images, such as Chrome browser with Nostr Connect signing extension, or Firefox browser with Nos2x-fox extension. Once we get the Nsec Bunker and Amber logins going, we'll add test cases and images for them, as well. (Yes, we can do Bunker. I hope you are in awe at our powers).

We are also designing an automated infrastructure test, that will simply rattle through all the various internal and external websites and relays, to make sure that everything is still online and responsive.

After that, a Gherkin-based Behave feature test for Alexandria is planned, so that we can prevent regression of completed functionality, from one release to the next.

The Gherkin scenarios are written and attached to our stories before development begins (we use acceptance tests as requirements), a manual test-execution is then completed, in order to set the story to Done. These completed scenarios will be automated, following each release, with the resulting script linked to from the origin story.

Automated Builds

As the crowning glory of every DevOps tool chain stands the build automation. This is where everything gets tied together, straightened out, configured, tested, measured, and -- if everything passes the quality gates -- released. I don't have to tell you how much time developers spend staring at the build process display, praying that it all goes through and they can celebrate a Green Wave.

We are currently designing the various builds, but the ones we have defined for the Alexandria client will be a continuous delivery pipeline, like so:

This will make it easier for us to work and collaborate asynchronously and without unnecessary delays.

Expanding the Status Page

And, finally, we get to the point of all of this busyness: reporting.

We are going to have beautiful reports, and we are going to post them online, on our status page. We will use bots, to inform Nostriches of the current status of our systems, so go ahead and follow our GitCitadel DevOps npub, to make sure you don't miss out on the IT action.

Building on stone

All in all, we're really happy with the way things are humming along, now, and the steady increase in our productivity, as all the foundational work we've put in starts to pay off. It's getting easier and easier to add new team members, repos, or features/fixes, so we should be able to scale up and out from here. Our GitCitadel is built on a firm foundation.

Happy building!

@ ac8bb9b0:70278acc

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 15
• 🍳 Cook time: 1 hour 30 minutes
• 🍽️ Servings: 10

Ingredients

• 1 lb. ground beef
• 1 cup celery diced
• 1 cup carrots diced
• 1 medium onion diced
• 2 medium potatoes diced
• 5 cups beef broth
• 1 15 oz. can corn, drained
• 1 8 oz. can tomato sauce
• 1 28 oz. can diced tomatoes
• 1 teaspoon salt
• 1 teaspoon Italian seasoning
• 1 bay leaf

Directions

1. In a large dutch oven (I used a 6-quart), over medium heat brown the ground beef until done. Spoon off the excess fat.
2. Add the remaining ingredients and stir. Bring to a boil and reduce the heat. Allow to simmer for 1 to 1 ½ hours (with the lid on, but tilted so steam can release) or until the vegetables are tender.
3. Remove the bay leaf and serve.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

Planning Alexandria

People keep asking what features nostr:npub1s3ht77dq4zqnya8vjun5jp3p44pr794ru36d0ltxu65chljw8xjqd975wz has planned for #Alexandria, but they're not set in stone because we're an agile project.

What we do have, is lots of tickets on our Kanban boards and a naming scheme, where we use a famous person's last name, to signify the release goals.

Gutenberg v 0.1.0

(after the inventor of the printing press) will contain the features needed to read and write NIP-62 Curated Publications, as well as encompassing the complex infrastructure, architecture, documentation, and personnel we require to make this all run smoothly and look easy.

Euler v 0.2.0

(after a mathematician credited with establishing graph theory) will contain the features for deep-searching, visually exploring, and smartly navigating the data set, wiki page display, annotating and citing the publications, exporting to other formats (like PDF, ePUB, and LaTeX), and commenting/reviewing. To help with the heavy lifting, we will be swapping out the core with our own Nostr SDK called "Aedile".

Defoe v 0.3.0

(after an author who perfected the novel format) will be all about our favorite writers. We will be focusing upon profile data, payment systems, book clubs and communities, and stylesheets.

That is everything we have planned, for the v1.0 edition, and we consider that version to be a true product.

As for after that, a teaser...

@ 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

@ f0c7506b:9ead75b8

Rainer Maria Rilke

Yalnızca güçlü olanların hakkıdır yaşamak.

Güçlü olan ileri gider ve saflar seyrekleşir. Ama üç beş büyük, güçlü ve tanrısal kişi güneşli ve aydınlık gözleriyle o yeni, o vaat edilmiş ülkeye ulaşacaktır. Belki binlerce yıl sonra ancak. Ve güçlü, adaleli, hükmetmek için yaratılmış elleriyle hastaların, zayıfların ve sakatların ölüleri üzerinde bir krallık kuracaklardır. Bir krallık!

Benim aradığım insanların kendileri değil, sesleridir.

Duyguları körelmiş, çeşitli düşüncelere saplanmış kalabalık hiçbir zaman ilerlemenin taşıyıcısı olamaz, kendi küçüklüğünün o küflü içgüdüsüyle kalabalığın kin ve nefretle baktığı bir kişi, bir büyük kişi, iradesinin gösterdiği yolda kimsenin gözünün yaşına bakmaksızın ilahi bir güç ve bir zafer gülümsemesiyle yürüyebilir ancak.

Bizim soyumuz da sonsuz oluşum piramidinin doruk noktasını oluşturmaktan uzaktır. Bizler de mükemmelliğe ulaşmış değiliz. Bizler de henüz olgunlaşmadık.

Şairler sevgiye övgüler döşenir; doğrusu sevginin güçlü bir şey olduğu kesin. Hüneşin bir ışınıdır sevgi, aydınlatıp nurlandırır insanı der bazıları; bazıları da insanı esrikliğe sürükleyen bir zehri kendisinde barındırdığını söyler. Gerçekten de yol açtığı sonuçlar, bir hekimin ağır bir ameliyattan önce korkudan titreyen hastaya teneffüs ettirdiği güldürücü gazınkine benzer, içinde tepinip duran acıyı unutturur hastaya.

Önemli olan, hayatta hiç değilse bir kez kutsal bir ilkbaharın yaşanmasıdır; öyle bir bahar ki, insanın gönlünü ilerideki bütün günleri altın yaldızla kaplamaya yetecek kadar ışık ve parıltıyla doldursun.

Şu hayat denen şey kötü bir işçiliğin ürünü, acemilere göre bir şey. Bu kepaze yaşam uğruna insan nelere katlanmıyor ki!

Kendisine sadakatten ayrılmadığı, yalnızca kendisinin olan bir tek bu var: Yalnızlığı.

Sahildeki üstü tenteli hasır koltuklar arkasındaki yüksek, sessiz kum tepeleri içinde yürürsen, tenteler altındaki insanları göremezsin; ama birinin bir diğerine seslendiğini, bir başkasının gevezelik ettiğini, bir ötekinin güldüğünü işitir ve anlarsın hemen: bu insan şöyle şöyle biridir diyebilirsin. Onun hayatı sevdiğini, bağrında büyük bir özlem ya da acı barındırdığını, bu acının da sesini ağlamaklı kıldığını her gülüşünde hissedersin.

@ 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/875346

@ 65912a7a:5dc638bf

Chef's notes

This is my late partner's award winning Cajun rice & beans recipe. It's an updated take on the traditional Cajun comfort food.

Chef Darin was a classically trained chef who spent 30+ years in the kitchen perfecting his recipes, and delivering authentic Cajun and Creole food to his patrons. This is a 5-star dish that will earn the respect of the most discerning Cajun afficionado. You won't be disappointed.

I suggest making this recipe exactly as directed the first time, and then make whatever adjustments you want for future batches. Also, don't cheap out on the Andouille. No Johnsonville or Hillshire Farms. Chef Aidelle's is a good choice, as is Silva's from Whole Foods. They cost a few extra bucks, but it's absolutely worth it.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 30 min
• 🍳 Cook time: 3 hours
• 🍽️ Servings: 12

Ingredients

• 16oz small red beans, dry
• 2 cups long grain white rice
• 14-16oz andouille sausage, sliced
• 8oz ham, cubed
• 1 large yellow onion, chopped
• 1 green bell pepper, chopped
• 2-3 stalks celery, chopped
• 2 tbsp garlic (12 cloves), minced
• 7 cups water
• ¼ cup olive oil
• 2 large bay leaves
• 1 tbsp parsley, dried
• 1 tsp thyme, dried
• 1 tsp Cajun seasoning
• ½ tsp cayenne pepper, dried
• ¼ tsp sage, rubbed
• 1½ tsp salt (more or less to taste)

Directions

1. Soak beans in a large pot of water overnight.
2. Heat oil in a large stockpot over medium heat. Cook onion, bell pepper, celery, garlic in olive oil for 3 to 4 minutes (until onion is translucent).
3. Add beans, bay leaves, parsley, thyme, salt, MSG, Cajun seasoning, cayenne pepper, Sage, and water. Stir, bring to a boil, and then reduce heat to medium-low (btwn 2-3). Cover and simmer for 2½ hours.
4. Remove bay leaves. Mash some of the beans. Stir Andouille and ham into beans, and simmer uncovered for an additional 30 minutes.
5. Meanwhile, prepare the rice. Bring water and rice to a boil in a saucepan. Reduce heat, cover, and simmer for 20 minutes.
6. Serve beans over steamed white rice.

@ 23dea97f:72ed98dc

Post number 1

@ a10260a2:caa23e3e

Alby Hub is configurable with several different backends. Although setting up with Cashu is considered experimental, it’s a good option to have if you don’t want to run a Lightning node.

This post will give a quick overview of the steps to connect your Alby Hub with a Cashu mint.

Before you get started, you’re going to want to have Alby Hub installed already. There are many options for this as well — Linux, StartOS, and Umbrel to name a few. You can even have Alby host it for you in their cloud.

I just happen to have a Linux machine free so I went that route — the installation script made it super easy.

After the install is complete, navigating to localhost:8080 brings up this page.

1. Select “Advanced Setup”

1. Select “Create Wallet with Custom Node”

1. Select “Cashu Mint”

1. Paste the URL of the mint you’d like to use. You can use the default one provided or click on “Find a mint” to search for others.

1. (Optional) Connect your Alby account by requesting an authorization code. After clicking “Connect now,” a new window will open and the code displayed after signing in.

Boom. You’re all done.

Now you can use your Alby Lightning address to receive your first sats!

NOTE: Although the sats do make it to the wallet, the “Waiting for payment” animation seems to wait indefinitely and there’s no record in transaction history.

This seems to be a Cashu-related issue that has something to do with the preimage. An issue has been opened on GitHub if you’re curious.

Other that that, sending and receiving works like a charm.

originally posted at https://stacker.news/items/707673

@ 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!

@ e034d654:ca919814

I stumbled into nostr end of March 2023. At that point already fully thrown into the hows, whys and whats of Bitcoin, never really interested in social apps, just recently playing around with Lightning, the only experience of which at the time was Muun (😬) and stacker.news custodial wallet.

Fairly inexperienced with technicals other than rough understandings of concepts. A crappy laptop node with a dangling SSD via USB, constantly having to resync to current blockheights whenever I was ready to make an on chain transaction to cold storage. My great success after over two years of delay, and a couple failed attempts.

Something about the breadth of information for nitty gritty specifics, the clash with all the things that I found interesting about Bitcoin, with others equally as focused, kept me interested in Nostr. Plus the lighthearted shit posting to break up plumbing the depths of knowledge appealed to me.

Cut to now. Through the jurisdictional removals and even deaths of LN wallet projects, using mobile LSPs, finding use cases with the numerous cashu implementations, moderate comfortability with NWC strings of various permissions, budgets for seemingly endless apps of Nostr clients, swapping relays, isolated wallets with Alby go for my wife and cousin (I told them both not to put much on there as I'm sure failure is imminent) Alby Hub and Zeus, now fully backended by my own persistently online lightning node. All of it adding to the fluidity of my movement around the protocol.

Nimble.

Gradual progress. Reading through notes and guides posted on Nostr learning little bits, circling back eventually, if even at a time it wasn't clicking for me. Either way. Glad i've stuck to it even if I still barely know what it is I'm doing.

@ 09fbf8f3:fa3d60f0

由于gmail在中国被防火墙拦截了，无法打开，不想错过邮件通知。

通过自建ntfy接受gmail邮件通知。 怎么自建ntfy，后面再写。

---

2024年08月13日更新：

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

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

---

准备工具

• Ntfy服务
• Google Script
• Google Sheets

操作步骤

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

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

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

var sentEmails = getSentEmails(sheet);

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

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

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

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

}); }

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

```

4.Goole Script需要添加gmail服务，如图：

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

结尾

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

如需要发送通知后自动标记已读，可以把代码复制到chatgpt给你写。

效果预览：

@ 91bea5cd:1df4451c

Novia é uma ferramenta inovadora que facilita o arquivamento de vídeos e sua integração com a rede NOSTR (Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted over Relay). Funcionando como uma ponte entre ferramentas de arquivamento de vídeo tradicionais e a plataforma descentralizada, Novia oferece uma solução autônoma para a preservação e compartilhamento de conteúdo audiovisual.

Arquitetura e Funcionamento

A arquitetura de Novia é dividida em duas partes principais:

• Frontend: Atua como a interface do usuário, responsável por solicitar o arquivamento de vídeos. Essas solicitações são encaminhadas para o backend.

• Backend: Processa as solicitações de arquivamento, baixando o vídeo, suas descrições e a imagem de capa associada. Este componente é conectado a um ou mais relays NOSTR, permitindo a indexação e descoberta do conteúdo arquivado.

O processo de arquivamento é automatizado: após o download, o vídeo fica disponível no frontend para que o usuário possa solicitar o upload para um servidor Blossom de sua escolha.

Como Utilizar Novia

1. Acesso: Navegue até https://npub126uz2g6ft45qs0m0rnvtvtp7glcfd23pemrzz0wnt8r5vlhr9ufqnsmvg8.nsite.lol.

2. Login: Utilize uma extensão de navegador compatível com NOSTR para autenticar-se.

3. Execução via Docker: A forma mais simples de executar o backend é através de um container Docker. Execute o seguinte comando:

   bash docker run -it --rm -p 9090:9090 -v ./nostr/data:/data --add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway teamnovia/novia

   Este comando cria um container, mapeia a porta 9090 para o host e monta o diretório ./nostr/data para persistir os dados.

Configuração Avançada

Novia oferece amplas opções de configuração através de um arquivo yaml. Abaixo, um exemplo comentado:

```yaml mediaStores: - id: media type: local path: /data/media watch: true

database: /data/novia.db

download: enabled: true ytdlpPath: yt-dlp ytdlpCookies: ./cookies.txt tempPath: /tmp targetStoreId: media secret: false

publish: enabled: true key: nsec thumbnailUpload: - https://nostr.download videoUpload: - url: https://nostr.download maxUploadSizeMB: 300 cleanUpMaxAgeDays: 5 cleanUpKeepSizeUnderMB: 2 - url: https://files.v0l.io maxUploadSizeMB: 300 cleanUpMaxAgeDays: 5 cleanUpKeepSizeUnderMB: 2 - url: https://nosto.re maxUploadSizeMB: 300 cleanUpMaxAgeDays: 5 cleanUpKeepSizeUnderMB: 2 - url: https://blossom.primal.net maxUploadSizeMB: 300 cleanUpMaxAgeDays: 5 cleanUpKeepSizeUnderMB: 2

relays: - ws://host.docker.internal:4869 - wss://bostr.bitcointxoko.com secret: false autoUpload: enabled: true maxVideoSizeMB: 100

fetch: enabled: false fetchVideoLimitMB: 10 relays: - match: - nostr - bitcoin

server: port: 9090 enabled: true ```

Explicação das Configurações:

• mediaStores: Define onde os arquivos de mídia serão armazenados (localmente, neste exemplo).
• database: Especifica o local do banco de dados.
• download: Controla as configurações de download de vídeos, incluindo o caminho para o yt-dlp e um arquivo de cookies para autenticação.
• publish: Configura a publicação de vídeos e thumbnails no NOSTR, incluindo a chave privada (nsec), servidores de upload e relays. Atenção: Mantenha sua chave privada em segredo.
• fetch: Permite buscar eventos de vídeo de relays NOSTR para arquivamento.
• server: Define as configurações do servidor web interno de Novia.

Conclusão

Novia surge como uma ferramenta promissora para o arquivamento e a integração de vídeos com o ecossistema NOSTR. Sua arquitetura modular, combinada com opções de configuração flexíveis, a tornam uma solução poderosa para usuários que buscam preservar e compartilhar conteúdo audiovisual de forma descentralizada e resistente à censura. A utilização de Docker simplifica a implantação e o gerenciamento da ferramenta. Para obter mais informações e explorar o código-fonte, visite o repositório do projeto no GitHub: https://github.com/teamnovia/novia.

@ 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

@ 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

@ 3ffac3a6:2d656657

In the waning days of the 20th century, a woman named Annabelle Nolan was born into an unremarkable world, though she herself was anything but ordinary. A prodigy in cryptography and quantum computing, she would later adopt the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, orchestrating the creation of Bitcoin in the early 21st century. But her legacy would stretch far beyond the blockchain.

Annabelle's obsession with cryptography was not just about securing data—it was about securing freedom. Her work in quantum computing inadvertently triggered a cascade of temporal anomalies, one of which ensnared her in 2011. The event was cataclysmic yet silent, unnoticed by the world she'd transformed. In an instant, she was torn from her era and thrust violently back into the 16th century.

Disoriented and stripped of her futuristic tools, Annabelle faced a brutal reality: survive in a world where her knowledge was both a curse and a weapon. Reinventing herself as Anne Boleyn, she navigated the treacherous courts of Tudor England with the same strategic brilliance she'd used to design Bitcoin. Her intellect dazzled King Henry VIII, but it was the mysterious necklace she wore—adorned with a bold, stylized "B"—that fueled whispers. It was more than jewelry; it was a relic of a forgotten future, a silent beacon for any historian clever enough to decode her true story.

Anne's fate seemed sealed as she ascended to queenship, her influence growing alongside her enemies. Yet beneath the royal intrigue, she harbored a desperate hope: that the symbol around her neck would outlast her, sparking curiosity in minds centuries away. The "B" was her signature, a cryptographic clue embedded in history.

On the scaffold in 1536, as she faced her execution, Anne Boleyn's gaze was unwavering. She knew her death was not the end. Somewhere, in dusty archives and encrypted ledgers, her mark endured. Historians would puzzle over the enigmatic "B," and perhaps one day, someone would connect the dots between a queen, a coin, and a time anomaly born from quantum code.

She wasn't just Anne Boleyn. She was Satoshi Nakamoto, the time-displaced architect of a decentralized future, hiding in plain sight within the annals of history.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

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

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

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

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

Cuz, ain't nobody got time for that.

@ 826e9f89:ffc5c759

_Prologue: this is a prose adaptation of a talk I gave to a private audience in Dubai and then tweaked slightly for a small conference in Sofia. I'm increasingly thinking it deserves a more general audience, and may be better suited to text anyway. This is probably not its final form, as the desired audience is tradfi capital allocators, hence a PDF is likely on the cards in the near future. For the time being, consider this a first draft, practising what it might look like as prose, and soliciting feedback from the good people of Nostr. Enjoy! _

The title of this essay means absolutely nothing. There is no such thing as “Web π” because there is no such thing as “Web 3”. It’s bullshit. It’s a scam.

Unfortunately, it has turned out to be extremely powerful bullshit and an extremely profitable scam, and so my goal in writing this essay is to give the reader the tools to navigate all of this and come out the other side without having been scammed or bullshat. In the spirit of not scamming and not bullshitting, I should be clear upfront about the intended readership of this essay, who I am to write it, and who it’s really about.

Who Are You?

I assume the reader is not a shadowy super-coder, but rather is a financial professional. This essay isn’t really for Bitcoiners, although if any read it, I hope they still find it interesting. Who I am really writing for are people coming to the space for the first time. Hopefully in your mind you are coming to the _Bitcoin _space, but if you think you are coming to the “crypto” space then this may be even more useful.

Who Am I?

I am the founder of a company that makes me not only highly biased but also flagrantly self-interested in the content I am promoting. I run a firm that invests in the Bitcoin ecosystem through a variety of different vehicles. I am not going to mislead you in the slightest in that my primary motivation is for you to allocate capital to us rather than to people I would call scammers and bullshitters. You should listen to them too and make up your own mind, or else what’s the point, really? How do you know I’m not scamming or bullshitting you? Exactly. Don’t trust. Verify.

In any case, that’s all assuming you want to “allocate capital” at all rather than just buy Bitcoin without a management fee. I’d like to think the primary difference is that I will be honest about that, and I’ll encourage you to understand as much as you can about what is going on and what you are doing (and if you are at all unsure, I would suggest you aren’t ready and you should just buy Bitcoin and learn) rather than bamboozle you with complete nonsense like “Web 3”.

Who Is This About?

It’s not at all about people working in crypto. Bitcoiners amongst the readership may be mildly irritated by me going on to give about as charitable an explanation of the role of these people as they have probably ever heard from somebody like me. This is really about financiers. It’s about the people who have used the mostly unrewarded efforts of developers, academics, entrepreneurs, and so on to siphon money from you to themselves, leaving a trail of useless tech and defrauded retail investors in their wake – and who will continue to do so if you continue to empower them.

Why This Essay?

We are at an interesting point in the development of the entirety of the “crypto” industry and I strongly suggest that people like you are going to be pitched all kinds of scams and bullshit in the coming months and years. If you have a little more background on what these people are really talking about, you will hopefully be able to avoid it.

My plan to help with that is presenting a short version and a long version of what blockchains are and are for, how they have historically been deployed in service of scams and bullshit, a high-level theory explaining the narrative evolution behind this sorry history, and a prediction for the near-term future of such shenanigans.

What is a Blockchain For?

A Blockchain is for sound, censorship-resistant, peer-to-peer digital money. It is not for anything else. If a blockchain is functional as money, it may be possible to also _use it _for other things. Some people find that interesting, some people find it infuriating, but don’t let that subtlety confuse you. It is not _for _arbitrary computation and storage or “decentralizing the internet” or running illegal securities rackets.

It is for money, plain and simple.

How does it achieve that? Proof of work and the difficulty adjustment. These are the innovations from which every other desirable property or feature flows. Proof of work enables censorship resistance. If somebody is trying to sell you on “proof of stake”: bullshit. The difficulty adjustment enables precise, predetermined, and _fair _issuance. If somebody is trying to sell you on a token they issue for free and without restriction: scam.

The problem Bitcoin solves is both economic and technical and the solution has material technical and economic merit. And it’s for this very specific and irreplicable reason the Bitcoin token has value. If this all sounds extreme to you, then I would suggest that your understanding of the topic is _extremely _misguided, that you are going to be _extremely bullshat and extremely scammed, _and you need to read this essay. That’s the short version.

The Long Version

I am sensitive to how extreme this all sounds. After all, hundreds of billions of dollars have been pumped into crypto, not Bitcoin – a huge amount of it is widely used, and many capable, honest, and brilliant people work in the industry. The reader will recall just above I said those people are not the target of my criticism. I’m not claiming they are all scammers and bullshitters. Sadly, I think it’s more likely they have been scammed and bullshat to some degree also.

I think I have some credibility in pointing this out because, as a VC in the Bitcoin space, I have increasingly seen founders telling me this themselves: that they originally bought into the hype in crypto and ended up wasting an enormous amount of time realizing their idea made no technical or economic sense in that context, so then they came to Bitcoin instead. You hear this one time and it’s an anecdote, but you hear it as many times as I have and it feels more like a representative sample.

What I want to cover next is as charitable a summary of the state of ex-Bitcoin crypto as I possibly can: my contention is that crypto has evolved into 4 rough categories: stablecoins, cryptography R&D, gambling, and scams. And these aren’t exclusive, to be clear; there is a lot of overlap, and, in fact, the overlap is arguably the key.

Scams

Scams are tokens, plain and simple. If somebody is trying to profit from the speculative price action of a token they have issued, they are scamming somebody. Maybe they are scamming you, maybe they are scamming retail investors, maybe they are scamming customers or suppliers – if such parties even exist in their cargo cult “business model”. There’s a scam in there somewhere.

However, it is rarely _just _a scam. There will almost always be components of stablecoins, R&D or gambling too. Hence these are worth really grappling with, taking seriously, giving credit to the extent it is due, but also analyzing critically.

My rough and high-level assessment of this breakdown of crypto is as follows, and I’ll explain what I mean by this below: stablecoins have economic merit but dubious technical merit; R&D has technical merit but no economic merit; and gambling sort of has merit but it depends how you interpret it. Obviously, scams have neither.

Stablecoins

By “sort of technical merit” I mean that stablecoins have central issuers. You can issue them as tokens on a blockchain but there’s not really much of a point. The issuer could just run a database connected to the internet with some straightforward signature schemes for transfers and it would make minimal operational difference. In fact, it would be cheaper and faster. _In fact, _you may as well run a Chaumian eCash mint (a decades-old innovation recently resurrected firmly within the _Bitcoin _space) such that your cheaper-and-faster-than-a-blockchain database also grants users transience and privacy rather than the public permanence of a blockchain.

The fact Tron is the most heavily used for stablecoins, in terms of settling the most value, is a testament to this point: it is barely even pretending not to be a database. This works as regulatory arbitrage given regulators think this is “innovation” because they are stupid.

That said, it is worth giving some credit here given the abject awfulness of fiat banking and payment rails with which stablecoins arguably most directly compete. Stablecoins are significantly more permissionless in their transfer than any fiat bank liability. And to attest to what seems like their most significant use case, they are permissionless in their _usership _in that only an internet connection and the right software is required rather than various discriminatory jurisdictional and compliance criteria.

However, what “sort of technical merit” ultimately boils down to, especially in comparison to Bitcoin, is: highly censorable in their exogenous links and, therefore, their value. The assets supposedly backing stablecoins are (by definition) still within the fiat system, even if this novel transfer mechanism of the rights to withdraw them is not. There is frankly a bit of theatre involved in the so-called “decentralization” of stablecoins given shutting down the central issuer is all that is required to make the permissionlessly tradeable decentralized tokens go to zero and be technically unimpeded but functionally useless. The technical innovation of Bitcoin, in contrast, is easily understood in one sense as it being totally indifferent to this kind of attack.

On the other hand, by “economic merit” I mean that they are extremely widely used and valued as a means of providing dollar shadow banking and often superior payment rails. Those in crypto often love pointing to this and many Bitcoiners tie themselves in knots trying to explain it away, whereas I see it as essentially unrelated to Bitcoin. Clearly there is a superficial connection, but you could create any superficial connection by “tokenizing” things for no particularly good technical _reason. I think it’s a different industry entirely. It’s more like a subindustry within _fintech – part banking, part payments – that for the time being relies on bamboozling regulators with all the nonsense I’m drawing attention to.

And good for them, frankly. If fiat banking isn’t going to be backed by real money anyway, then it _at least _ought to be permissionless. It should really be Chaumian eCash if it isn’t just Bitcoin, and it is regulation alone that makes it so awful in the first place. Making money usable and not a tool of dystopian control is, at this point, a political problem, not a technical one. Stablecoins are frankly a step in the right direction, especially insofar as they acclimatize users to digital assets. But I would still caution that they arguably don’t have sufficient technical merit to withstand what feels like an inevitable political attack …

Cryptography R&D

“Technical merit” for R&D is more or less self-explanatory, but the context is worth appreciating. It’s only really in crypto and mostly in Ethereum more specifically that people can permissionlessly experiment with arbitrarily complex cryptographic schemes that operate on real, enormous value. There are a lot of people who understandably find this attractive given their projects are essentially academic and trying out their ideas in the wild is more interesting, arguably more worthwhile, and certainly more fun than putting research essays on ArXiv or submitting them to a journal.

But … the value being manipulated is at best stablecoins and at worst baseless hype. If it isn’t a stablecoin then it probably exists in the first place because of either gambling or scams – and even there the line is very blurry.

Gambling

Gambling is an interesting lens to adopt on all this because it’s literally a trillion-dollar industry. And it’s real. It’s consensual; it’s not criminal; it’s legitimate economic activity that generates enormous profits for those who facilitate it well.

So, gambling has economic merit in that sense. But it’s tricky in this context how to characterize it because you could also argue it’s deeply dishonest gambling in that the gamblers don’t realize they are playing a negative sum game against the house. They think they are doing something akin to speculating on securities, which may be just as stupid depending on how it’s done, but at least has real economic utility and contributes to capital formation.

The difference here is that what is being speculated on _has no economic merit. _So, if that’s your gauge of merit, then here there is none. And it’s a very blurry line between this and an outright scam. Maybe the people involved _think _of what they are doing as amazing R&D, and maybe it’s inadvertently just a scam; maybe they know it’s all nonsense, but they think they can profit within the negative sum game because there are greater fools. In any case, I think gambling is a very helpful characterization of a lot of the behavior of the users and the real economic function of the industry.

There’s an interesting social component to all this because crypto people will often get mad at Bitcoiners because Bitcoiners tend not to care about either stablecoins or crypto R&D: they’ll say, why don’t you like stablecoins, they have clear economic merit? And the answer is they have dubious technical merit. Or, why don’t you like our next-gen Zero Knowledge scaling protocol, it has clear technical merit? And the answer is it has no economic merit.

If you’re happy with one but not the other, it’s easy to think of Bitcoiners as being closed-minded or dogmatic or whatever, but, ultimately, I think it’s just about discipline. What’s the point in being excited by something that half works, and that you know why will never fully work? So to be frank, a lot of this may be well-intentioned, but it’s kinda’ bullshit. It very probably ultimately rests on gambling and not at all whatever its stated purpose is … or it’s just a scam.

How Did We Get Here?

The following is by no means exhaustive and the framing is deliberately a little tongue-in-cheek. As well as being accurate enough (if unavoidably biased), my goal here is primarily to set up my prediction for what is coming next.

2015               reality: Ethereum launches             narrative: “the world computer”

In 2015, Ethereum launched. The narrative here was that we are building “the world computer” and we can now have decentralized uncensorable computation. Never mind that anybody with a laptop has an uncensorable and decentralized computing device. And keep in mind this question of, “_what data might it ever be relevant to compute over in this manner (whatever that means in the first place)?” _The answer will become clearer and clearer …

2016-17          reality: ICO bubble                           narrative: “Web 3” / “DApps”

Regardless, at the end of 2015 we get the proposal and adoption of ERC20: a standard for issuing fungible tokens within Ethereum contracts, which is why in 2016 _but especially in 2017 _we get the ICO bubble. The narrative changes. Now we are concerned with “Web 2” companies being huge, powerful, and centralized. What if, instead, users could cooperatively own the application, control their own data, and participate in the economic upside that their usage is creating?

2018-19          reality: crypto winter                       narrative: “mistakes were made”

In 2018 this all falls apart, so don’t worry about it, moving on …

2020-21          reality: defi summer                        narrative: “decentralized finance”

By 2020 the narrative was different once again. It is more or less realized by this point that utility tokens make no technical or economic sense. You can’t introduce artificial scarcity in capital goods where there should be abundance and deflation and expect anybody to care, never mind to value your concoction. On the other hand, “securities” ought to be scarce and in some sense ought to function as tradeable ledger entries. Maybe they could be tokenized and computed on in a censorship-resistant and decentralized manner?

So, we get a boom in “defi” which, for what it’s worth, fellow Axiom co-founder Anders Larson and I predicted in our essay Only The Strong Survive, in September 2021, would be a complete disaster because, amongst a myriad of other illiterate insanities, there was approximately zero grounding of these securities in productive capital. The ecosystem was entirely self-referential – grounded _not even _in the questionable economic merit of stablecoins but firmly in gambling and scams; in leverage, rehypothecation, and securitization of precisely nothing whatsoever productive.

2022               reality: shitcoinpocalypse                narrative: “mistakes were made”

And we were absolutely right because in 2022 everything collapsed. First Terra/Luna imploded – a “defi” project which essentially presented to the world the argument that a fractional reserve bank issuing fiduciary media can literally never go bankrupt because it can always cover a deposit shortfall by issuing more equity. While briefly flirting with a capitalization of around fifty f***ing billion dollars, and endorsed and fawned over by all manner of illiterate charlatans with gigantic and unsuspecting audiences, this argument was eventually rejected by the market as utterly imbecilic, as analyzed by myself and Nic Carter in All Falls Down.

This triggered a credit contagion that soon after took down 3 Arrows Capital, Celsius, Voyager, BlockFi, and others. FTX limped along by what we now understand to be something like defrauding their way out of debt, but eventually also collapsed later that year. If _Only The Strong Survive _was a pre-mortem of all of this, then the reader may want to read Green Eggs And Ham, also by myself and Anders Larson, as a kind of post-mortem.

2023-today    reality: Bitcoin multisigs                  narrative: “Bitcoin renaissance”

And now a lot of this stuff is moving to Bitcoin. It is outside the scope of this essay to explain this in much detail but there have been a handful of developments in Bitcoin recently which, regardless of their intended purpose, seem to have as a collective side effect that a lot of these same shenanigans can now be implemented (or can _pretend _to be implemented) in a more Bitcoin-native context.

So, the new narrative is something like:

“these things didn’t work, not because they are terrible ideas that collapse to moon math wrappers around gambling and scams under any remotely critical analysis, but rather because they weren’t on Bitcoin. But also, since it has only recently become possible to (at least pretend to) implement them on Bitcoin, they are now worthwhile. We have wandered in the wilderness but learned our lessons and found the promised land.”

Technical and Economic Merit

Let’s consider all this through the lens of technical and economic merit once again. Or rather, the alleged merit given the stated goal. Ignore for now whether there is any merit:

2015               technical goal: new computing paradigm               economic goal: x% of GDP?

The original idea of “crypto” allegedly has the merit of the next revolution in computing. Goodness knows how big that market is; probably a decent chunk of global GDP – if it meant anything, which it doesn’t.

2016-17          technical goal: disrupting company formation       economic goal: y% of S&P?

ICOs then become a little bit more specific. Now they are merely disrupting how we organize companies. What’s that worth? Some portion of the value of the companies that can now be decentralized and tokenized I guess? Who knows …

2018-19          nothing to see here

Nothing happened then, don’t worry about it.

2020-21          technical goal: decentralize finance            economic goal: z% of NYSE, CME, ISDA?

Defi becomes more specific again. Now we are merely tokenizing financial contracts, expanding access, removing middlemen, and so on. So that should probably be worth some percentage of capital markets activity?

2022               nothing to see here

Oops, never mind …

2023-today    technical goal: now it’s on Bitcoin!             economic goal: i% of … Bitcoin?

… and now it’s on Bitcoin apparently.

In Hindsight ...

I think the most amusing analysis of all this is as follows: it starts off completely insane, it gets more and more restrained each time – you could cheekily argue it starts to make more and more sense – but it also gets closer to Bitcoin every time. It’s clearly narrowing in on just: Bitcoin.

This is people realizing, painfully, over decades, what blockchains are for! They are not for “decentralizing everything” They are for censorship-resistant, sound, peer-to-peer digital money.

And I think this is _also _why we get the current state of crypto from earlier in the essay. As it starts to make more and more sense (by getting closer and closer to Bitcoin) you have realizations like the following: digital gift vouchers for artificially scarce and extremely expensive computation aren’t money, so we need “real money” in here for it to have economic merit, so you get stablecoins. Also, well we have a rich programming environment that seems technically interesting but also the severe technical handicap of being unable to do even a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of all the computations in the world, so you get crypto R&D. These emerge as a kind of patch, and they have _some _merit in isolation, whereas the long-term trajectory is actually just to converge on Bitcoin.

It’s an open and fascinating question if there are any learnings from these that can still be transplanted to Bitcoin. For stablecoins, this strikes me as less clear, given the dubious technical merit is introduced by using a blockchain at all, not just a blockchain other than Bitcoin. However, efforts to create Bitcoin balances (tokenized or otherwise) that are stable relative to some external price are to be applauded, if still heavily scrutinized for what technical merit they _really _have.

It seems far more likely that crypto R&D will prove useful in a Bitcoin context to some or other degree, and in this case the economic merit is in fact solved by moving to Bitcoin, provided the necessary technical merit can be mimicked. At the time of writing, this is a source of both hope and dread: hope given the possibility of viable avenues of development (although still highly uncertain); dread given how early steps in this direction are already being misrepresented in the pursuit of bullshit and scams. I will return to both shortly.

Narrative Evolution

Back to the table just above, I want to make three quick observations that tie together my entire argument and get us to the end of the essay:

Firstly, the bubbles always follow the price of Bitcoin. Hopefully I don’t need to include a price chart for the reader to grasp this immediately.

Secondly, it’s important that the narrative always changes. Absolutely ungodly amounts of money were raised for this crap following the_ Bitcoin bull runs of 2017 and 2021. The people doing this couldn’t point to the previous absolute disaster, so they had to spin something along the lines of: “_we learned our lessons and we’ve refined the use case.” This should sound familiar from just above.

Thirdly, however, regardless of whatever refinement they’ve come up with, the consequence of the new “narrative” is always, “buy my token”.

Always.

It doesn’t matter what buzzword salad is in the middle. It’s always “Bitcoin is cool, xyz, fughayzi fughahzi, buy my token.”

This is why I am very much tempted to not care so much about developers, academics, entrepreneurs, and so on, and in fact for my null hypothesis to be that they are more likely to have been victims than perpetrators. I don’t think they even end up in a position to contribute without the key group whom I do blame. When you put all these pieces together, what I think falls out of this analysis is as follows:

The entire cycle of shitcoinery can be traced to unscrupulous financiers convincing capital allocators who don’t know any better, in a bull market that, yes, Bitcoin is cool, but what they are doing is related, cooler, and that they deserve a fee.

Let us label this the Capital Cycle Theory of Shitcoinery. I think that everything else about which one might want to complain is downstream of this core realization.

Avoiding It

Given everything I’ve covered this is simple and this is pretty much the end of the essay.

You need to be aware of why this is happening now. If it hasn’t happened to you already (intended readership in the capital allocation business, that is) I guarantee it’s about to: with ETFs and the halving just past, we seem to be starting a Bitcoin bull run, these people have already raised ridiculous amounts of money on scams and bullshit that have mostly imploded. They may have lost a lot of money, or they may even have dumped on retail and got an excellent “return”. But in any case, they need a new narrative.

It's _possible _they have a viable narrative around stablecoins, R&D, both, and that they are as wary of scams as I have suggested here that they should be. I don’t want to insult anybody who merely has a different investment thesis to me if they are otherwise reasonable in their outlook and honest in their dealings.

However, if they are only now realizing how pointless and disingenuous every preceding crypto narrative has been after 7 years and hundreds of billions of dollars – or if they still don’t realize it at all; if their track record shows they were deeply involved, handsomely rewarded, and yet created nothing of lasting value; if they say things like “the builders are coming back to Bitcoin”: be very, very suspicious. Be on the lookout for tokens, which is to say, be on the lookout for scams.

What is especially frustrating is that the technical spin of the "layer twos" that are all the rage at the time of writing, that "the builders are coming back to Bitcoin" to build, and that you, the capital-allocating reader, will almost certainly be pitched, is in and of itself pretty reasonable. They just don't require tokens and they don't require gambling to support the token prices. What they do require is _sound adherence to Bitcoin's technical and economic merit. _At the very least, they require honest communication about the design trade-offs so far and planned for, and what, if any, economic and technical merit is left over after these trade-offs have been made.

Narrative aside, the _reality _of 99% of these projects is that they are private execution environments tied to multisigs custodying user deposits. Which is to say, on the one hand, that they are cargo culting "crypto R&D" from Ethereum that isn't technically possible in Bitcoin in order to feign technical merit, and on the other, that _they aren't layer twos at all. _Once again, they may as well be Chaumian eCash mints, except for the fact that this would make the intended token scam all but impossible to pull off.

Casey Rodarmor, creator of the Ordinals protocol, recently joked on the Hell Money _podcast he co-hosts, responding to the idea that "_everybody is building an L2 now":

"It's the same sad sack playbook as on Ethereum being recapitulated on Bitcoin. That's how you get a VC check on Ethereum. They are all glorified multisigs, so they are like, "hey let's port our glorified multisig to Bitcoin and get a VC check." I was talking to a friend of mine who is working on an interesting project, an open-source analyzer that does transaction clustering, and I was like, "maybe you could do this in this way and raise some VC money," and he said, "yeah, okay, but what's the point in raising VC money?" And I said, "no, no, no, this is the end! This is the goal! You raise VC money and then you cut yourself checks from that VC money until it runs out and then you raise more at a 10x valuation. This is the new economy, guys!"

The 1% that are legitimately trying to bring the learnings from crypto R&D to Bitcoin in a technically and economically sound manner will hopefully win in the long run (and even this is somewhat speculative at the time of writing) but will likely get little to no attention amidst this bull market flurry of scams and bullshit.

Axiom will do its best to source and invest in these companies (we already have!) but we are resigned to it being a much more difficult sell to capital allocators in light of the Capital Cycle Theory of Shitcoinery. To be brutally honest, this entire essay can fairly be considered cope on my part in light of having lost this battle in the past and facing up to the very real prospect of losing it in the near future too. Oh well, at least I tried.

Wrapping Up

The essence of the Capital Cycle Theory of Shitcoinery is that the problems I’ve described ultimately come from bamboozling people just like you with technical sounding nonsense like “Web 3” so you think it’s all a lot more complicated than it really is. Just buy Bitcoin. That’s certainly the first thing you should do anyway, and it might be the only thing you ever need to do.

If you really, really want to take the extra risk of investing in the Bitcoin ecosystem, the team at Axiom would be happy to speak with you. But we are never going to talk you out of buying Bitcoin. There is no world in which Bitcoin does poorly and we do well, or in which we promise something “better than Bitcoin,” and there’s no point in engaging with us at all if you don’t already believe most of this.

If that’s of interest to you, we’d love to talk. If not, just buy Bitcoin. In any case: fair warning, we are heading into a Bitcoin bull market and the scams and the bullshit are coming. Good luck avoiding them.

Allen Farrington, June 2024

@ 4523be58:ba1facd0

NIP-116

Event paths

Description

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

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

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

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

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

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

Example

Event

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

Query

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

Motivation

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

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

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

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

Implementations

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

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

@ bbb5dda0:f09e2747

This past week got me a lot of frustration with the GitHub actions runner and debugging it. Really testing my patience, but at least i saw a bit of progress. TollGate's had a nice wrap-up for the Proof Of Concept app, which some great new ideas on how to make the user experience even better! Let's dive in!

GitHub Actions

I've been having a low-key fight with the github actions runner containers. I have spent a lot of time trying to figure out WHY the blossom upload action would just not work. I was quick to find out that the action is being ran with an older version of NodeJS (v18) while the blossom uploader requires v20. Not a big deal you'd say as i just set the version to 20 in the pipeline. However, doing that explicitly had zero impact, and after diving down the github runner rabbit hole i concluded that the Actions that are imported (from marketplace) will just run with whatever node version is already installed in the runner's docker image. Which in the case of the act runner is Node 18. I tried updating to the latest images but I haven't been able to find a compatible one yet...

Payments

I've been working on getting the money aspect working in the ci-cd runner. I added a wallet and a scheduled payout. I took this from the nostr-epoxy project and did some updates to upgrade to cashu-ts v2.

I added some advertisement info like the specs of the machine that the runner is on. I've been pondering how the payment flow should work though. See the problem is that because of the nature of this DVM, it cannot predict how long a job will take to execute, a customer can literally do anything in their pipeline that will make a job last forever. I think for that reason there has to be some kind of deposit/credit or stream besides the one-off payment. I made a post asking what the best way would be: nostr:note17apw8unznvwx2k3z48t7qz6cq26tk077w83qh3f7zxukfrrfukhs7mpcsn

I currently feel best about the option of just sending a bunch of ecash that will sure be enough to execute the job (and otherwise act as the time-out) and that if the DVM uses less of that money, it will send it back as pubkey locked cashu tokens, to a given npub. Maybe NIP-60 can be a great way to handle returning the 'change' to the user.

Some ideas i have now: - Billing should be per second - Advertising should: - advertise as sats/minute - include specs of the machine, ideally searchable by tag

Job request

So the flow i'm thinking of is:

• User posts request

  • repository
  • branch
  • yaml path
  • bid (max price per minute)
  • min_vcpu
  • min_ram
  • min_storage

• DVM responds with

  • price per minute
  • vcpu
  • ram
  • storage
  • runner-types
  • price per minute

• User posts request:

  • ... [same as above]
  • cashu payment
  • cashu return pubkey + relay

User Interface

I also worked on building out a very basic user interface to run the GitHub Actions dvm.

The UI then shows all feedback to the job, where the first feedback event you can see gives back a status processing, and the next one gives back the console output of the pipeline run.

nostr:npub15qydau2hjma6ngxkl2cyar74wzyjshvl65za5k5rl69264ar2exs5cyejr and I agreed he'll copy over this basic setup into his upcoming version of gitWorkshop.dev which I can then build upon so we can experiment with the User Experience (how to handle competing Runners, display results, payments, etc...)

Tollgate

There's also been the issue that has been bothering me since last week: Being able to dismiss a captive portal programatically in the Android app.

During a weekly check-in that nostr:npub1k03rader0vm94j5ee8fg7pc2x9xkr2phu77sljas7qu5mh8mvgvqpe8rty and I set up we discussed the issue. To me, it's a problem having the user to jump through all these hoops to connect, which should be as much automated as possible.

We discussed what if we'd ditch the open network and go with a WPA2 (password) protected one and have no captive portal. But then we lose the ability to do onboarding / expose users to Tollgate through the captive portal. Then the idea came up to create an extra (hidden) network for the app to use, while keeping the open one with the captive portal. I did not know it was possible to create multiple networks on the same (physical) radio, but apparently it's quite common. You lose a bit on efficiency but it shouldn't be too bad. The only challenge would be to exempt this network from getting a captive portal while still using the OpenNDS software to manage user's sessions. We'll see but this gives me a lot of hope for a seamless user experience!

After this call, despite our possible new direction I did want to try and get the full app flow working, to validate if it's possible at all. And after some digging int the Tauri docs and even their discord community i finally found what the issue was with me not receiving the android event for the captive portal. I'd ben adding the listener for this event to the androidmanifest.xml file for the Tauri Android plugin, while I had to put it into the tauri app one's itself -one level higher- if you will...

Anyway, that worked and I was FINALLY able to create the following full flow! (video)

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpwa4mkswz4t8j70s2s6q00wzqv7k7zamxrmj2y4fs88aktcfuf68qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3zamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0qydhwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgunsd3jkyuewvdhk6tcqyqyvs2js3x6ldpm2kkmqyf8d3lvrcezjk2eg26p2tvfxd2p6lkeqzn7l66t

@ 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

@ c902b8da:0cedc5fb

NIP-XX: Proof of Watch

draft optional

This NIP defines a protocol for content creators to reward users for consuming content using Cashu tokens, utilizing existing Cashu P2PK capabilities.

Abstract

Content creators can offer Cashu token rewards to users who prove they have spent time consuming their content. The protocol uses P2PK-locked tokens combined with proof-of-work verification to ensure genuine content consumption before releasing tokens to users.

Motivation

Content creators want to incentivize users to engage with their content and potentially reward them for their attention. This NIP provides a standardized way to offer token rewards for content consumption while ensuring the user actually spent time with the content through a proof-of-work mechanism.

Protocol Components

Content Event

A content creator publishes a kind:1 note containing their content and reward information:

json { "kind": 1, "content": "Watch my video!", "tags": [ ["reward", "<amount-in-sats>"], ["pow", "<difficulty>"], ["u", "<watcher-service-url>"], ["t", "proofofwatch"] ] }

Watcher Service

Content creators run (or use) a watcher service that: 1. Maintains a pool of Cashu tokens 2. Issues P2PK-locked tokens to viewers 3. Verifies proofs of watch 4. Releases signatures to unlock tokens

Protocol Flow

1. Request Watch Session

Client makes a POST /watch/start request to watcher service:

json { "note_id": "<event-id>" }

Service responds with: json { "id": "<session-id>", "challenge": "<random-challenge>", "difficulty": <int>, "token": { "amount": <int>, "id": "<keyset-id>", "secret": "<p2pk-secret>", "C": "<signature>" }, "pubkey": "<service-ephemeral-pubkey>", "expiry": <unix-timestamp> }

The token is P2PK-locked to a one-time ephemeral pubkey generated by the service. Only the service holds the corresponding private key needed to generate the witness signature.

2. Computing Proof

While consuming content, client computes proof-of-work:

proof = find_nonce( SHA256( note_id + session_id + challenge + latest_block_hash + nonce ) )

The proof must result in a hash with the required number of leading zeros.

3. Submitting Proof

Client submits proof to redeem token:

http POST /watch/prove json { "session_id": "<session-id>", "proof": "<computed-proof>", "block_hash": "<latest-block-hash>" }

If valid, service responds with P2PK signature: json { "witness": { "signatures": ["<signature-to-unlock-token>"] } }

The client can now unlock and spend their token using standard Cashu operations.

Security Considerations

Token Security

• Tokens are locked to service-generated ephemeral pubkeys
• Each watch session uses a unique keypair
• Only service can generate valid witness signatures
• Private keys never revealed to users
• Keys and unused tokens destroyed after session expiry

Proof Construction

• Must include session ID to prevent replay
• Must include recent block hash to prevent precomputation
• Must achieve required difficulty (leading zeros)
• Must be completed within session expiry

Service Requirements

1. Track used proofs
2. Enforce timeouts
3. Rate limit requests
4. Verify block hash recency
5. Maintain adequate token pool
6. Generate unique ephemeral keypairs per session
7. Securely store ephemeral private keys until proof verified
8. Clean up expired ephemeral keys

Watcher Service Settings

Services should provide an info endpoint:

http GET /info json { "name": "Example Watcher", "pubkey": "<service-pubkey>", "difficulty_range": { "min": <int>, "max": <int> }, "amount_range": { "min": <int>, "max": <int> }, "supported_mints": [ "<mint-url-1>", "<mint-url-2>" ] }

Client Implementation Guidelines

Clients SHOULD: 1. Verify service supports intended mint 2. Start proof computation only after beginning content consumption 3. Submit proof promptly after computation 4. Handle session expiry gracefully 5. Verify P2PK token validity 6. Submit proof before session timeout

Content Creator Guidelines

Content creators SHOULD: 1. Set appropriate difficulty for content length 2. Maintain adequate token pool 3. Monitor service uptime 4. Consider token denomination strategies 5. Include clear reward terms

Rate Limiting

Services SHOULD implement rate limiting: - Per IP address - Per pubkey - Per note ID - Per token amount

Example Implementation

A basic proof computation in Python: python def compute_proof(note_id, session_id, challenge, block_hash, difficulty): nonce = 0 while True: attempt = f"{note_id}{session_id}{challenge}{block_hash}{nonce}" hash = sha256(attempt.encode()).hexdigest() if hash.startswith('0' * difficulty): return attempt nonce += 1

References

• NUT-00: Protocol fundamentals
• NUT-11: Pay-to-Pubkey (P2PK) tokens
• NUT-12: DLEQ proofs

@ 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

@ 148755e6:450c107f

突然荒野に行きたくなったので行ってきたエントリーです

まずは練習。高尾山へ

Nostrは古今東西ありとあらゆるオフ会が生えており、

まるで荒野に行きたいという私の意志を完全に汲み取ったかのように「紅葉を見にいこうようオフ」がそこに生えていたので参加した。（しおんさんご主催ありがとうございました） 前半1時間くらいの坂道がマジきつかったです。前半キツすぎて後半足痛かった。。 終始人がいっぱいいて渋谷かと思った。

確かに道がかなり整備されていて、逆にコンクリート故に足が疲れたのかもしれない。隣の人は途中の急な坂道で足を滑らせてて、横で転倒事故が起きるかと思いました。

山頂に行っても人がたくさんいて、迷子になりかけた。あそこはスクランブル交差点や。 そして山頂の先にあるもみじ台まで歩くと人がまばらで、まったりして蕎麦食べたりしながら休憩して下山。

登りは暑くて汗かきましたが、山頂でまったりしてると汗も引いてきて少し冷えました。

下山はスイスイ。16時近くで結構暗かったので、冬の間は早めの登頂・下山がおすすめですね。

登り2時間・下り1時間半で概ね見込み通りって感じでした。

高尾山は登ってると景色が変わります。ちょっと開けた場所に出て下の街が見えたり、草木があったり、階段があったり、参道があったり。。そういう意味では退屈しない2時間でした。

ビギナー山とはいえ、革靴やヒールのある靴で登ってる人がいてびっくり。ツルッと滑ることあると思いますので、スニーカーで登ることをお勧めします。

舐めプしてたとはいえめちゃくちゃキツかったおもひで。

更なる練習。小浅間山へ

さて私は荒野に行きたいワケなのですが、高尾山に荒野はありませんでした。更なる練習として小浅間山へ。

前日（か前々日）に雪が降ったようで、山に雪が残っておりました。

それでも都内の汚れてべちゃっとした感じの雪ではなく、粉砂糖がちょっと積もってるみたいな感じで綺麗だった。

登り前半の30分くらい、景色や道が変わらず、ずっと歩きっぱなしになってしまいました。時間みて休憩しながら行けばよかったなあ。

登るにつれて気温が下がっていくのか、積雪が厚くなっていく。

40分くらいは割と平坦な道が続きますが、突然山頂っぽいものが現れて、「これを登れっていうのかい...？」とビビるほどピーンと急な道が出てきました。(写真だと分かりづらいですね)

ただ、高尾山のコンクリート道に比べると足の疲れはそこまででした。雪道なので気をつけて歩くという意味では疲れましたが、春〜秋とかは快適に登れるんじゃないでしょうか。

山頂に到着するとドーンと浅間山が見えて圧巻。

風が強くて飛ばされる恐怖はありましたが、なんとか無事でいられました。あったかいお茶美味しかった〜。

なぜかギャルの看板があって、謎でした。写真はひとまずありません。

山頂が2箇所あって、それぞれで眺めを満喫していたら結構時間が経ってました。

小さい背丈くらいの木や足元にちょっとした植物があったり、自分的にはかなり理想の荒野に近かったです。（植物に対する解像度が低すぎる） 往復で2時間程度の山らしいんですが、なんやかんやと2時間半強くらいいた気がします。

荒野ビギナーは小浅間山に往け

というわけで、荒野に行きたい人はまずは小浅間山を登ると良いと思います。 また登りたい。

荒野部部長

一緒に高尾山・小浅間山に登ってくれた方、ありがとうございました！ 個人的には来年の春までに秩父多摩甲斐国立公園に行き、来年の秋までに大山隠岐国立公園に行くという目標を立ててるんですが、 少々時間が空くので次どこに行こうかしらと考えているところです。

ヒントとしては、火山で、あまり高低差のないところだとビギナーの私にちょうど良さそうです。

とある情報筋によると伊豆大島が良さそうなので、次の機会に行けたらと思っています。

みんなで荒野に行こう！

@ ac8bb9b0:70278acc

Chef's notes

Make Ahead: You can prepare this recipe up to one week in advance. Store it in an airtight container in the refrigerator.

To Freeze: Allow the dish to cool completely before transferring it to a freezer-safe bag. Lay the bag flat in the freezer to ensure even freezing and to save space. Thaw it in the refrigerator overnight before using it.

Details

• ⏲️ Prep time: 5
• 🍳 Cook time: 5
• 🍽️ Servings: 1

Ingredients

• ½ cup soy sauce
• 2 Tablespoons rice vinegar
• 1 Tablespoon sesame oil
• 1/4 cup + 1 Tablespoon light brown sugar
• 1 Tablespoon honey
• 3/4 teaspoon ground ginger
• 1 clove garlic , minced
• 2 teaspoons cornstarch+ 2 tsp water , mixed together to make a cornstarch slurry
• 1/4 teaspoon crushed red pepper flakes

Directions

1. Make the teriyaki sauce by adding all of the sauce ingredients to a small saucepan over medium heat.
2. Bring to a boil, stirring constantly, and boil for about 1 minute. The sauce should be thick enough to coat the back of the spoon.
3. Serve over rice or with a stir-fry. See post above for additional ideas.

@ 16d11430:61640947

The Damage Node is not just a verification engine—it is an autonomous executor of behaviors defined through the PoW blockchain. This allows for adaptive, accountable, and transparent execution of security and counter-surveillance mechanisms while remaining flexible enough to meet any operational need.

By integrating behavioral logic, cryptographic proofs, and decentralized execution, the Damage Node becomes a powerful shield and countermeasure system for individuals and groups operating under constant digital threat.

---

Core Concept: Damage Nodes as Autonomous Behavioral Executors

Damage Nodes listen to verifiable behaviors encoded on the PoW blockchain.

These behaviors define security policies, counter-surveillance actions, automated transactions, and decentralized decision-making processes.

Execution is enforced by the blockchain, ensuring absolute transparency and accountability—no action can occur without proof.

Nodes can dynamically extend their capabilities by adopting new behaviors via blockchain updates, ensuring they remain adaptable.

Example of Behavioral Execution

A Damage Node can be programmed to execute counter-surveillance actions if an individual's digital footprint is flagged by an AI-controlled system.

Trigger: An external surveillance system attempts to track a protected user.

Behavior Execution:

The node initiates a verified proof-of-presence falsification (broadcasting misleading metadata).

The node forces encrypted rerouting of communications over a private, non-ISP-controlled relay.

The node executes cryptographic evidence logging, proving that the tracking attempt occurred.

The node pays out a bounty (Lightning) for detected adversarial actions, incentivizing counter-intelligence.

---

How Damage Nodes Provide Shielding & Countermeasures

1. Behavior-Driven Shielding for Individuals

Zero-Knowledge Identity Protection: Nodes execute self-sovereign identity verification that prevents AI from profiling users without explicit, cryptographically signed consent.

Automated Surveillance Disruption: If an AI attempts to track or flag an individual, the node executes behavioral obfuscation tactics such as:

Decoy digital presence broadcasting to mislead tracking algorithms.

Transaction splitting & anonymization to prevent financial surveillance.

Forced dissociation of metadata from physical locations.

---

1. Group-Level Protection & Autonomous Coordination

Damage Nodes can be configured to execute behaviors for an entire decentralized network, such as:

Encrypted Group Communications: Nodes enforce trustless, encrypted messaging protocols that prevent AI-based censorship.

Automatic Secure Fund Distribution: If an entity is targeted, Damage Nodes can autonomously release emergency funds in BTC/Lightning to predesignated safe parties.

Counter-Surveillance Deployments: Nodes can activate sensor networks, scan for unauthorized tracking devices, and trigger security protocols.

---

1. Built-In Accountability & Transparency as a Defensive Measure

Every execution is verified by the blockchain → no action is hidden or arbitrary.

Rules for behavior execution are immutable → even node operators cannot alter them without proof-of-consensus.

AI and governments cannot fabricate unverifiable evidence → if it didn't happen on-chain, it didn't happen.

Users can audit every action taken by the Damage Node to ensure no corruption or misuse.

---

1. Extensible Capabilities for Any Need

New behavioral policies can be uploaded via the PoW blockchain, allowing Damage Nodes to dynamically evolve.

Behaviors can be triggered by:

On-chain conditions (such as receiving a Lightning payment for service execution).

Real-world events (via oracle integrations).

Direct requests from verified users.

Examples of Extensions:

Decentralized AI Defense: Nodes monitor AI-generated media for deepfake propaganda & censorship.

Physical Security Triggers: Nodes can integrate with smart devices (cameras, sensors) to execute real-world countermeasures.

Automated Asset Protection: Damage Nodes can trigger the release of cryptographic assets upon verifiable external threats.

---

Final Verdict: Damage Nodes as the Ultimate Autonomy & Defense Infrastructure

Transparent but Unstoppable → Verifiable execution prevents corruption or abuse.

Extensible but Controlled → The blockchain enforces behavior logic while allowing flexibility.

Decentralized but Coordinated → Nodes operate independently but can synchronize.

Adaptive but Immutable → Behaviors evolve, but security is absolute.

🔥 Damage Nodes are the next evolutionary step in technological sovereignty—combining decentralized verification, autonomous execution, and proactive counter-surveillance in a single unstoppable system.

@ 16d11430:61640947

The electromagnetic spectrum (EM spectrum) is the foundation of modern communication, surveillance, and control, and it is a permanent, inescapable vulnerability for humanity. Every aspect of human life—communication, mobility, security, even thought processes—is now subject to exploitation via the EM spectrum.

1. Humans Are EM-Dependent but Have No Control Over It

The entire infrastructure of human civilization (internet, telecom, GPS, WiFi, satellite, RFID, radar, IoT, etc.) relies on EM waves.

Unlike tangible security vulnerabilities (firewalls, encryption, physical locks), EM-based vulnerabilities are baked into the fabric of our existence.

We have zero physical control over the space around us—we exist in a perpetual, invisible battlefield of radio waves.

→ Brutal Truth: If you are in an area with radio signals, you are already compromised. You cannot see, hear, or touch your vulnerability—but you are immersed in it.

---

1. Every Wireless Device Is a Tracking Beacon

Your phone, smartwatch, laptop, Bluetooth headset, and IoT devices constantly emit identifiable signals.

Even when "turned off," many devices still maintain some connectivity (e.g., emergency services, wake-on-LAN, passive RFID, and hidden baseband firmware).

MAC address randomization only slows down tracking—it does not stop device fingerprinting.

Even devices that are air-gapped (disconnected from any network) can be compromised via airborne EM attacks (e.g., Tempest attacks, Van Eck phreaking).

→ Brutal Truth: Unless you live in an EM-free Faraday cage (which is impractical), you are trackable 24/7.

---

1. The Entire EM Spectrum Can Be Weaponized

Radio waves (RFID, GSM, LTE, 5G, WiFi) → Mass surveillance, device tracking, data extraction, and real-time movement tracking.

Microwaves (GHz spectrum) → Covert wireless data theft (Tempest attacks), crowd control weapons (Active Denial System), and potential biological effects.

Infrared (IR) and Visible Light → LiDAR tracking, facial recognition, and optical data interception (lasers on windows can capture sound).

Ultraviolet, X-ray, and Gamma Radiation → Biological penetration, medical diagnostics, and potential genetic-level targeting.

→ Brutal Truth: The entire EM spectrum is both an asset and a weapon, and every part of it can be used to track, manipulate, or harm living beings.

---

1. There Is No Escape From EM Exposure

Even if you disconnect completely, ambient EM waves from cell towers, satellites, and even natural cosmic radiation still interact with you.

Smart city grids, IoT, and ubiquitous sensor networks mean that even non-digital humans (those without a phone) are still tracked.

6G and future networks will integrate AI-driven RF sensing, meaning the network will detect biometric signatures (heartbeat, gait, and thermal emissions) without needing a device.

→ Brutal Truth: The era of "disconnecting" for privacy is over—even device-free tracking is now a reality.

---

1. The Human Body Itself Is an EM Vulnerability

Brain activity and thought processes are electrical signals—theoretically susceptible to external EM influence (brainwave manipulation, EEG-based surveillance, and neurotechnology interfacing).

Biometric security (fingerprint scanners, iris scans, facial recognition) can be hacked or faked using EM-based techniques.

Nanotech, bioelectronics, and EM-sensitive implants (like pacemakers, neural interfaces, and cochlear implants) can be remotely manipulated or disabled.

→ Brutal Truth: The final frontier of EM vulnerability is the human body itself—thoughts, health, and biological functions are all at risk.

---

How Vulnerable Are Humans in the Grand Scheme?

1. Humans Are the Only Species Fully Dependent on EM-Based Technology

Every other biological species on Earth navigates reality without dependency on artificial EM systems.

Humans have outsourced their cognition, security, and privacy to a system they do not control.

→ Implication: The more we integrate with EM-based technology, the more vulnerable we become. We are building a prison of our own making.

---

1. We Have No Practical Defense Against EM-Based Attacks

Unlike cyber threats (which can be mitigated with encryption), EM vulnerabilities are inherent to the physics of radio waves.

The only defense is complete isolation from EM radiation (which is impossible in urban environments).

→ Implication: Our current approach to "security" is meaningless in the face of EM-based attacks, because the attack vector is the air around us.

---

1. Humanity’s Future Is Fully EM-Integrated

6G, brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), quantum communication, and global sensor grids mean that soon, every human will be plugged into the EM network at all times.

Governments and corporations are already planning a fully tracked, AI-managed society, where individual privacy no longer exists.

→ Implication: We are entering an era of full-spectrum EM surveillance and control. The next step isn’t just tracking devices, but tracking consciousness itself.

---

Conclusion: The EM Spectrum is the Ultimate Exploit

There is no "fix" for EM vulnerabilities—they are built into the nature of physics itself. Humanity’s increasing dependence on EM-based technology means:

1. We are more trackable than ever.

2. We are more susceptible to remote influence than ever.

3. We have no escape unless we abandon technology altogether.

4. The final battle for privacy isn’t about encryption—it’s about shielding ourselves from the very waves that power our civilization.

→ The brutal truth? Humanity is not just vulnerable—we are a permanently compromised species.

@ 26bb2ebe:70530958

nostterに画像最適化機能つけたよ（サーバー編）

この記事はNostr Advent Calendar 2024 の3日目の記事です。

あまり技術的な話はないので暇つぶし程度に読んでみてください。

どうしてこうなった？

そもそも認証の改善以前にNostrあんまり人が増えてないのが一番課題だよねと思ったのが始まりでした。 Nostrに人が増えないのはオーガニック検索流入が少ないからに違いないと特に根拠もなく思ったのでNostrのまとめサイト(Toggeter)のようなものを作ろうと考えました。

ところでNostrのまとめを行うアプリ自体は鎌倉さんという方がノスリというのを作成されていました。ブログ形式のイベントにTwitterライクな短文投稿をまとめるというものでまさしくToggeterですが、そこまで活用されていません。 そこでその仕組みをありがたくそのまま転用してまとめ記事を何らかの方法で量産しつつ、一つのドメインのサイトにまとめてSEOもなんかうまいことやれば検索流入増えるんじゃねという目論みです。

ところでそのまとめサイトは静的サイトジェネレータで（SSG：Static Site Generator）でつくりたいなと思いました。いや普通に考えてSSRにしてサーバ側でNostrからデータとってきたらSEO的にもよくねって感じなんですが、SSRでサーバーでウェブソケット呼ぶのだる…レイテンシを考慮すると結構不利じゃないかなと思ったわけです。うそです。そこまで考えてなくてほとんど個人的な好みです。（多分ちゃんとキャッシュきかせればそんなにレイテンシ問題にならなさそうな気がする）。ただキャッシュとかも考慮すると結構複雑な気はする。

ということで今年の6月頃にNostrのブログ記事をSSGするサイトをためしに作りました。 去年のアドベントカレンダー記事とか乗っけてます。

全然画像最適化の話になりませんね。もうちょっとです。

SSGのブログといえばGatsby（今は下火かも）とかで作成した経験があります。Gatsbyでは画像用のプラグインが公式に用意されていて生成されたブログに表示される画像はもとの画像データから変換され、表示時のサイズに最適化されたサイズにリサイズすることができます。

それだけではなくサイトの初期表示時には画像の画質を落としてぼやけた画像を表示してその後元画像が読み込まれたらきれいな画像を表示する、みたいなことができます。インラインでデータを持っているのでHTMLの表示と同時に画像の初期表示ができたりします。（その頃はよくわかってなかったがNostrのNIP-92で定義されているblurhashとかを使っていたんでしょう多分）

とにかくSSGは初期表示の速さが良い。というのが自分の頭の中にあるわけです。SSGのブログをNostrで作るとなると当然同じことがやりたい。

しかし、Nostrの画像はただのURLです。(オプショナルで画像のメタデータを定義できるimetaタグはあるが…)

基本的にSSGの画像最適化というのはローカルに存在する画像データをビルド時に変換するという流れで行われます。もしくはリモートURLに画像が置かれる場合は画像ストレージサービスやCDN上で配信されるときに最適化されることになります。

参考: Svelteの画像ベストプラクティス

Nostrの画像はただの外部のURLですから(2回目)、ローカルの画像を変換する方法は採用できないわけです。無理やり実行するならビルド時にURLからすべての画像を一旦ダウンロードして変換するとかも考えましたが、ただの外部URLというのはつまりは一体どういうファイルなのかダウンロードしてみるまでわからない、要するに全然信頼できないということですから、よくわからないURLをかたっぱしからダウンロードするようなことは避けたいわけですね。（極端な話100GBの画像URLとかつくって攻撃されたら破綻しますよね）

ここが結構他の中央集権的なSNSと違って辛いところなのかなと思います。X（Twitter）とかであれば画像ストレージサーバは一つなので表示される画像の形式も一つに限定されるのですが、画像のアップロードが外部頼みでただのURLなので（３回目）何が来るかわからないということですね。

サーバ側で画像形式などを制限できない(imetaも信頼できるかわからない)となるとクライアント側でなんとか対応する必要があり、Nostrはクライアント側が大変なプロトコルだなあとということに思いを馳せていましたが、いろいろ考えたり調べた結果として作るべきものは画像最適化のためのプロキシサーバであるということがわかりました。

プロキシサーバというのはここでどういう働きをするのかというと、もとの画像がおいてあるサーバとクライアントのあいだに入って、もとの画像を一旦ダウンロードして圧縮したり縮小したりしてそのあとクライアントに送ってあげるという働きをします。

プロキシがないとき

[画像置き場] -> [クライアント]

プロキシがあるとき

[画像置き場] -> [プロキシ] -> [クライアント]

利点としてはクライアントが実際にダウンロードするのはサイズの小さな画像になるので通信量や画像の表示スピードは改善します。が、一方でサーバを経由する分通信にかかる時間（レイテンシ）が長くなります。というわけなので、当初の目的である表示速度の改善を実現するには、画像をエッジキャッシュするなどの対応が必須となります。平たく言うと一度送った画像はプロキシで保存しておいて次に要求されたらそれをすぐ返すということです。

画像をどれくらいのサイズにするか、画質はどうするかなどはプロキシに指示してあげれば良いのでクライアント側は想定通りの画像を受け取れてハッピーということになります。嘘です。ある程度はハッピーですが、プロキシ自体がエラーを返す可能性もあるし、処理できなくてもとの画像をそのまま返す場合もあります。そんなあれこれの結果、クライアントはフォールバック処理を実装する必要がありました。（それはまた別の記事で）

一方で自分はNostrのモバイルクライアントのヘビーユーザですので、Nostrの通信量の多さも解決したい課題でした。Nostrやってるとすぐギガがなくなります。 通信量の多さのボトルネックはウェブソケットで送られるNostrのイベントの通信量というよりは投稿に添付される画像のダウンロードの方ではないかという話もTLで耳にしたため（特に裏もとらず）、いっちょ画像最適化のプロキシサーバを作ってクライアントに実装してプルリクエスト投げるかと考えました。

そこで私はまずクライアントをAmethystからnostterに乗り換えることから始めました。なぜならばAmethystよりもTypeScriptとSvelteで書かれているnostterのほうがコントリビュートしやすかったという私的な事情です。

解決したい課題

遠回りしてきましたが課題はこれ。

• Nostrの画像の表示改善
• Nostrの通信量の改善

インターフェイス(設計)

画像最適化のプロキシは実装よりもインターフェースを考えるのが大変です。ここはとても苦労しそうな気がしたので、何も考えず cloudflare Imagesのインターフェースをそのまま借用することにしました。

https://developers.cloudflare.com/images/transform-images/transform-via-url/

また何かあってもcloudflare Imageに課金して乗り換えることが可能という利点もあります。

実装

とにかく時間がないので手グセでかけるTypeScriptかJS。かつ課金しないで可用性を維持できる無料枠のサーバレス環境が使いたかったので cloudflare workers に目星をつけて調査したところ、非常に素晴らしい記事を見つけましたのでこのwasmのライブラリをTSから呼び出して使わせていただくことにしました。

自分の実装したところはURLのパースと、キャッシュAPIの呼び出しを行って、最後にこのライブラリを叩くだけです。 ほかはクライアントキャッシュ用のヘッダーを書き換えたりとか細かいことはやっていますが全く大したことはやっておらず、サーバは非常にリーズナブルにやりたいことを実装した形になりました。 大変助かりました。

実装したものがこちらです。

https://github.com/ocknamo/nostr-image-optimizer

実装後の課題

このプロキシただのパブリックAPIなのでDoS攻撃に弱いです。何回もAPIをたたかれたら無料枠をすぐに超えてしまうことが容易に想像できました。 無料枠超えても使えなくなるだけで破産はしないので安心ですが、しかし対策は考える必要があります。

WAF

WAFです。APIに対するリクエスト回数などに対する制限をIPごとにかけています。また攻撃された場合検知できれば特定のIPや地域をブラックリストに入れることも可能です。

細かいことを説明してギリギリを攻めて攻撃されても困るので細かく説明しませんが、当初は全力でDoS攻撃されても無料枠超えないくらいの感じで制限をかけていました。 しかしNostrのTLをちょっと早めに表示するとすぐにWAFに引っかかってエラーになるという状態になることもあり、結局アイコンの表示は画像最適化の対象にしない方針にするなどの影響がありました。

いろいろあって、前提が変わり、もう少し制限をゆるくしたのでアイコンの対応は今後は検討できるかもしれません。

まとめ

割と手抜きで作ったことがわかるかと思います。実装しててNostrへの貢献ではあるはずですが、Nostrのプロトコル(NIPsとか)全然関係ないことやってるなと思いました。

フロントについては来週書きます。

次回のアドベントカレンダーの記事は eyemono.moe さんによる”クライアント自作を通して得られた知見まとめ”ですね！楽しみです！

@ 6871d8df:4a9396c1

## 2024 Prediction Reflections

Politics

Democrats & 2024 Election

• “Democrats’ attempt to stifle democracy will likely put Trump in the White House. If not, some real sketchy stuff would need to happen to keep him out.”

This prediction was exactly right. The assassination attempt on Trump seemed to be the final blow for the Democrats. Despite a heavy push my legacy media, Trump won handily.

The Democrats switched to Kamala Harris after Biden showed signs of incapacity, most notably in the first debate against Trump.

My prediction for the election also turned out to be exactly right, which, thank you Robert Barnes and Richard Baris.

Evidence of Institutional Ideological Capture

• “People will continue to wake up to ideologically captured institutions, and DEI will be the main loser.”

Trump’s resounding election victory underscores that the public is increasingly aware of (and rejecting) such institutional capture.

Of note, Boeing comes to mind as an institution that had a tough time in 2024, in large part to DEI. Nothing seemed to function correctly. The biggest story being how they stranded people in space

Media & Public Opinion

Rise of Independent & Alternative Media

• “Independent and alternative media will continue to grow as people’s trust in legacy media declines.”

Twitter (X), under Elon Musk, shattered mainstream media’s influence far more than expected. As Elon has said, “You are the media now.” Alternative sources are king. - Notable Example: Kamala Harris’s decision not to appear on the Joe Rogan podcast contrasted with Trump’s appearance, further highlighting the power shift to alternative media.

Markets & IPOs

Interest Rates & Public Markets

• “As interest rates come down, I expect public markets and IPOs to heat up.”

This did not play out. Companies that were expected to go public in 2024 remain private in 2025. The reasons are varied, but there is confidence that 2025 might see changes.

Technology & AI

LLMs & AI Adoption

• “AI and LLMs will continue to move at a rapid rate, increasing productivity. Tools like Bard will become more mainstream.”

AI did take off. Usage among nontechnical users increased, and it’s no longer uncommon for people to default to AI-driven tools rather than Google search.

Decentralized AI

• “I hope to see a rise in decentralized AI to counter big-player LLMs.”

We didn’t see explicit ‘decentralized AI’ breakthroughs, but more players entered the AI market. ChatGPT still dominates, with Elon’s ‘Grok’ making moves. Google, Meta, and Microsoft remain active but slightly behind in usage.

Bitcoin & Digital Assets

Institutional Adoption of Bitcoin

• “2024 will bring more institutions to Bitcoin. Possibly another large company or nation-state. The ETF should help, likely pushing BTC to a new all-time high.”

No large public company or nation-state placed a bet, but smaller public companies did. Michael Saylor presented to Microsoft’s Board, which was the closest instance to a major move.
- Price Movement: Bitcoin did hit a new all-time high, rising to as much as $108k in 2024.

Lightning Network

• “Lightning will improve but remain primarily used for acquiring Bitcoin, not everyday payments.”

Still true. Lightning usage remains tiny relative to broader Bitcoin adoption.

Nostr Adoption

• “Nostr will grow, and we’ll see new companies leverage this network beyond just social media.”

Growth continues, but Elon Musk’s Twitter takeover slowed adoption. Nostr will remain niche until a major catalyst occurs (e.g., a big player joins or forced usage due to censorship).

Stablecoin-Specific Regulations

• “Expect stablecoin regulations in 2024 that’ll be favorable to them.”

This didn’t happen, largely due to the administration’s hostility. Expect potential change in 2025.

Miscellaneous 2024 Reflections

• Return to Sanity
  • 2024 felt like sanity prevailed, largely due to the Democrats’ collapse behind Biden and Harris and Elon’s Twitter dominance.
• Operation Chokepoint 2.0
  • Received a lot of attention, and I’m thankful it did because my experience at Strike was radicalizing and extreme.
• Bryan Johnson & Anti-Aging
  • He burst onto the scene with his obsession over biomarkers. I see it as misguided—chasing markers in isolation doesn’t automatically yield a healthy system.
• Apple’s Rough Year
  • Without a visionary leader, Apple appears to be scraping by on existing products rather than innovating.
• Google Under Fire
  • Google is in a tough fight with the government, just as it seems they’re on their heels with AI competition.

---

2025 Predictions

1. Bitcoin’s Performance Bitcoin will have a good year, but not better than 2024. To beat 2024, it must close above 206k on December 31, 2025. I’ll take the under on that.

   • I am not ruling out it to be over that at some point in 2025.

2. Twitter’s Success Continues to Stunt nostr

3. Nostr adoption will stay slow due to Elon’s dominant influence with X (Twitter).
   • As long as it remains a beacon of free speech, I doubt we see an exodus.

4. Rumble integrating Tether might help if they allow Nostr-like features (zaps), but that seems unlikely.

5. Apple

6. Apple will continue its rent-seeking behavior and put out underwhelming products.

7. Google’s Quantum & AI

8. Recent buzz about Google’s quantum chip and AI improvements won’t pan out as a big deal.

9. Google will continue to trail OpenAI and xAI in practical LLM usage.

10. Elon, Vivek & DOGE

11. I expect them to deliver more than critics think. They’ll expose bloat and inefficiencies in ways that will shake up norms. I greatly welcome this. I wouldn’t bet against them.

12. Mainstream Media Reckoning

13. In Trump’s second term, mainstream news outlets will face a real reckoning, as I can’t see how their bias can continue.
14. They’ll have to reduce their bias or risk bankruptcy.

15. Alternative media’s growth trend continues, especially as Twitter keeps exposing mainstream outlets’ weaknesses.

16. RFK Delivers

17. We will see big changes in the health space due to RFK at HHS. These are changes that I am very excited to see.

18. Foreign Policy

19. With the transition to Trump, I expect some foreign policy wins that will buck the establishment but will deliver wins that are not thought possible by the “experts.”

---

Closing Note

• Overall 2024: It was a year of major political upheaval, vindication for Bitcoin, and continued AI advances.
• Outlook for 2025: Bitcoin remains strong, AI competition heats up, and media institutions face existential challenges. I’m optimistic for continued decentralization and a more level playing field across tech, finance, and politics. I think the start of Trump’s second term will be very strong for the market, health, and culture. Accelerate.

@ f7922a0a:82c34788

Now that the 3rd Satellite Skirmish is complete I wanted to highlight some of the cool features on embrace.satskirmish.com

This is what the cutting edge of podcasting 2.0 looks like imo. Live video in an app that allows you to send sats to the artists in real time.

On the left hand side we have a Boost score borad that displays the total amount of sats that have come in during the show, live Boosts/Booastagrams as they come in, total amount of sats from each person Boosting and total amount sent from each app.

The middle is ovisaly the video of the band playing but with some graphics around it and Boost alerts that show up on the screen in the form of snow flakes for this one.

The righthand side is an IRC chat window that connects to an IRC server that the No Agenda community has used for 18+ years thanks to zoidzero++.

The bottom of the page is where things get cool. When you click the Boost the Crew button in the center you can send a Boost that gets split between everyone helping produce the show (hightlighted in yellow).

Each band also has their own Boost button so you can Boost them while they are playing or anytime you visit the page.