@ 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.

@ 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

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Introduction

Throughout human history, the pyramids of Egypt have fascinated scholars, archaeologists, and engineers alike. Traditionally thought of as tombs for pharaohs or religious monuments, alternative theories have speculated that the pyramids may have served advanced technological functions. One such hypothesis suggests that the pyramids acted as large-scale nitrogen fertilizer generators, designed to transform arid desert landscapes into fertile land.

This paper explores the feasibility of such a system by examining how a pyramid could integrate thermal convection, electrolysis, and a self-regulating breeder reactor to sustain nitrogen fixation processes. We will calculate the total power requirements and estimate the longevity of a breeder reactor housed within the structure.

The Pyramid’s Function as a Nitrogen Fertilizer Generator

The hypothesized system involves several key processes:

• Heat and Convection: A fissile material core located in the King's Chamber would generate heat, creating convection currents throughout the pyramid.
• Electrolysis and Hydrogen Production: Water sourced from subterranean channels would undergo electrolysis, splitting into hydrogen and oxygen due to electrical and thermal energy.
• Nitrogen Fixation: The generated hydrogen would react with atmospheric nitrogen (N₂) to produce ammonia (NH₃), a vital component of nitrogen-based fertilizers.

Power Requirements for Continuous Operation

To maintain the pyramid’s core at approximately 450°C, sufficient to drive nitrogen fixation, we estimate a steady-state power requirement of 23.9 gigawatts (GW).

Total Energy Required Over 10,000 Years

Given continuous operation over 10,000 years, the total energy demand can be calculated as:

[ \text{Total time} = 10,000 \times 365.25 \times 24 \times 3600 \text{ seconds} ]

[ \text{Total time} = 3.16 \times 10^{11} \text{ seconds} ]

[ \text{Total energy} = 23.9 \text{ GW} \times 3.16 \times 10^{11} \text{ s} ]

[ \approx 7.55 \times 10^{21} \text{ J} ]

Using a Self-Regulating Breeder Reactor

A breeder reactor could sustain this power requirement by generating more fissile material than it consumes. This reduces the need for frequent refueling.

Pebble Bed Reactor Design

• Self-Regulation: The reactor would use passive cooling and fuel expansion to self-regulate temperature.
• Breeding Process: The reactor would convert thorium-232 into uranium-233, creating a sustainable fuel cycle.

Fissile Material Requirements

Each kilogram of fissile material releases approximately 80 terajoules (TJ) (or 8 × 10^{13} J/kg). Given a 35% efficiency rate, the usable energy per kilogram is:

[ \text{Usable energy per kg} = 8 \times 10^{13} \times 0.35 = 2.8 \times 10^{13} \text{ J/kg} ]

[ \text{Fissile material required} = \frac{7.55 \times 10^{21}}{2.8 \times 10^{13}} ]

[ \approx 2.7 \times 10^{8} \text{ kg} = 270,000 \text{ tons} ]

Impact of a Breeding Ratio

If the reactor operates at a breeding ratio of 1.3, the total fissile material requirement would be reduced to:

[ \frac{270,000}{1.3} \approx 208,000 \text{ tons} ]

Reactor Size and Fuel Replenishment

Assuming a pebble bed reactor housed in the King’s Chamber (~318 cubic meters), the fuel cycle could be sustained with minimal refueling. With a breeding ratio of 1.3, the reactor could theoretically operate for 10,000 years with occasional replenishment of lost material due to inefficiencies.

Managing Scaling in the Steam Generation System

To ensure long-term efficiency, the water supply must be conditioned to prevent mineral scaling. Several strategies could be implemented:

1. Natural Water Softening Using Limestone

• Passing river water through limestone beds could help precipitate out calcium bicarbonate, reducing hardness before entering the steam system.

2. Chemical Additives for Scaling Prevention

• Chelating Agents: Compounds such as citric acid or tannins could be introduced to bind calcium and magnesium ions.
• Phosphate Compounds: These interfere with crystal formation, preventing scale adhesion.

3. Superheating and Pre-Evaporation

• Pre-Evaporation: Water exposed to extreme heat before entering the system would allow minerals to precipitate out before reaching the reactor.
• Superheated Steam: Ensuring only pure vapor enters the steam cycle would prevent mineral buildup.
• Electrolysis of Superheated Steam: Using multi-million volt electrostatic fields to ionize and separate minerals before they enter the steam system.

4. Electrostatic Control for Scaling Mitigation

• The pyramid’s hypothesized high-voltage environment could ionize water molecules, helping to prevent mineral deposits.

Conclusion

If the Great Pyramid were designed as a self-regulating nitrogen fertilizer generator, it would require a continuous 23.9 GW energy supply, which could be met by a breeder reactor housed within its core. With a breeding ratio of 1.3, an initial load of 208,000 tons of fissile material would sustain operations for 10,000 years with minimal refueling.

Additionally, advanced water treatment techniques, including limestone filtration, chemical additives, and electrostatic control, could ensure long-term efficiency by mitigating scaling issues.

While this remains a speculative hypothesis, it presents a fascinating intersection of energy production, water treatment, and environmental engineering as a means to terraform the ancient world.

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Introduction

Since the mid-1990s, American media has fractured into two distinct and increasingly isolated ecosystems, each with its own Overton window of acceptable discourse. Once upon a time, Americans of different political leanings shared a common set of facts, even if they interpreted them differently. Today, they don’t even agree on what the facts are—or who has the authority to define them.

This divide stems from a deeper philosophical rift in how each side determines truth and legitimacy. The institutional left derives its authority from the expert class—academics, think tanks, scientific consensus, and mainstream media. The populist right, on the other hand, finds its authority in traditional belief systems—religion, historical precedent, and what many call "common sense." As these two moral and epistemological frameworks drift further apart, the result is not just political division but the emergence of two separate cultural nations sharing the same geographic space.

The Battle of Epistemologies: Experts vs. Tradition

The left-leaning camp sees scientific consensus, peer-reviewed research, and institutional expertise as the gold standard of truth. Universities, media organizations, and policy think tanks function as arbiters of knowledge, shaping the moral and political beliefs of those who trust them. From this perspective, governance should be guided by data-driven decisions, often favoring progressive change and bureaucratic administration over democratic populism.

The right-leaning camp is skeptical of these institutions, viewing them as ideologically captured and detached from real-world concerns. Instead, they look to religion, historical wisdom, and traditional social structures as more reliable sources of truth. To them, the "expert class" is not an impartial source of knowledge but a self-reinforcing elite that justifies its own power while dismissing dissenters as uneducated or morally deficient.

This fundamental disagreement over the source of moral and factual authority means that political debates today are rarely about policy alone. They are battles over legitimacy itself. One side sees resistance to climate policies as "anti-science," while the other sees aggressive climate mandates as an elite power grab. One side views traditional gender roles as oppressive, while the other sees rapid changes in gender norms as unnatural and destabilizing. Each group believes the other is not just wrong, but dangerous.

The Consequences of Non-Overlapping Overton Windows

As these worldviews diverge, so do their respective Overton windows—the range of ideas considered acceptable for public discourse. There is little overlap left. What is considered self-evident truth in one camp is often seen as heresy or misinformation in the other. The result is:

• Epistemic Closure – Each side has its own trusted media sources, and cross-exposure is minimal. The left dismisses right-wing media as conspiracy-driven, while the right views mainstream media as corrupt propaganda. Both believe the other is being systematically misled.
• Moralization of Politics – Since truth itself is contested, policy debates become existential battles. Disagreements over issues like immigration, education, or healthcare are no longer just about governance but about moral purity versus moral corruption.
• Cultural and Political Balkanization – Without a shared understanding of reality, compromise becomes impossible. Americans increasingly consume separate news, live in ideologically homogeneous communities, and even speak different political languages.

Conclusion: Two Nations on One Land

A country can survive disagreements, but can it survive when its people no longer share a common source of truth? Historically, such deep societal fractures have led to secession, authoritarianism, or violent conflict. The United States has managed to avoid these extremes so far, but the trendline is clear: as long as each camp continues reinforcing its own epistemology while rejecting the other's as illegitimate, the divide will only grow.

The question is no longer whether America is divided—it is whether these two cultures can continue to coexist under a single political system. Can anything bridge the gap between institutional authority and traditional wisdom? Or are we witnessing the slow but inevitable unraveling of a once-unified nation into two separate moral and epistemic realities?

@ 291c75d9:37f1bfbe

In 1727, a 21-year-old Benjamin Franklin gathered a dozen men in Philadelphia for a bold experiment in intellectual and civic growth. Every Friday night, this group—known as the Junto, from the Spanish juntar ("to join")—met in a tavern or private home to discuss "Morals, Politics, or Natural Philosophy (science)." Far from a casual social club, the Junto was a secret society dedicated to mutual improvement, respectful discourse, and community betterment. What began as a small gathering of tradesmen and thinkers would leave a lasting mark on Franklin’s life and colonial America.

Printers are educated in the belief that when men differ in opinion, both sides ought equally to have the advantage of being heard by the public, and that when Truth and Error have fair play, the former is always an overmatch for the latter.

- Benjamin Franklin

The Junto operated under a clear set of rules, detailed by Franklin in his Autobiography:

"The rules that I drew up required that every member, in his turn, should produce one or more queries on any point of Morals, Politics, or Natural Philosophy, to be discuss’d by the company; and once in three months produce and read an essay of his own writing, on any subject he pleased. Our debates were to be under the direction of a president, and to be conducted in the sincere spirit of inquiry after truth, without fondness for dispute, or desire of victory; and, to prevent warmth [heatedness], all expressions of positiveness in opinions, or direct contradiction, were after some time made contraband and prohibited under small pecuniary penalties [monetary fines]."

These guidelines emphasized collaboration over competition. Members were expected to contribute questions or essays, sparking discussions that prioritized truth over ego. To keep debates civil, the group even imposed small fines for overly assertive or contradictory behavior—a practical nudge toward humility and open-mindedness. (Yes, I believe that is an ass tax!)

Rather than admitting new members, Franklin encouraged existing ones to form their own discussion groups. This created a decentralized network of groups ("private relays," as I think of them), echoing the structure of modern platforms like NOSTR—while preserving the Junto’s exclusivity and privacy.

From the beginning, they made it a rule to keep these meetings secret, without applications or admittance of new members. Instead, Franklin encouraged members to form their own groups—in a way acting as private relays of sorts. (I say "private" because they continued to keep the Junto secret, even with these new groups.)

Membership: A Diverse Circle United by Values

The Junto’s twelve founding members came from varied walks of life—printers, surveyors, shoemakers, and clerks—yet shared a commitment to self-improvement. Franklin, though the youngest (around 21 when the group formed), led the Junto with a vision of collective growth. To join, candidates faced a simple vetting process, answering four key questions:

1. Have you any particular disrespect for any present members? Answer: I have not.
2. Do you sincerely declare that you love mankind in general, of what profession or religion soever? Answer: I do.
3. Do you think any person ought to be harmed in his body, name, or goods, for mere speculative opinions, or his external way of worship? Answer: No.
4. Do you love truth for truth’s sake, and will you endeavor impartially to find and receive it yourself and communicate it to others? Answer: Yes.

These criteria reveal the Junto’s core values: respect, tolerance, and an unwavering pursuit of truth. They ensured that members brought not just intellect but also character to the table—placing dialogue as the priority.

One should also note the inspiration from the "Dry Club" of John Locke, William Popple, and Benjamin Furly in the 1690s. They too required affirmation to:

1. Whether he loves all men, of what profession or religion soever?
2. Whether he thinks no person ought to be harmed in his body, name, or goods, for mere speculative opinions, or his external way of worship?
3. Whether he loves and seeks truth for truth’s sake; and will endeavor impartially to find and receive it himself, and to communicate it to others?

And they agreed: "That no person or opinion be unhandsomely reflected on; but every member behave himself with all the temper, judgment, modesty, and discretion he is master of."

The Discussions: 24 Questions to Spark Insight

Franklin crafted a list of 24 questions to guide the Junto’s conversations, ranging from personal anecdotes to civic concerns. These prompts showcase the group’s intellectual breadth. Here are some of my favorites:

Hath any citizen in your knowledge failed in his business lately, and what have you heard of the cause?

Have you lately heard of any citizen’s thriving well, and by what means?

Do you know of any fellow citizen who has lately done a worthy action, deserving praise and imitation?

Do you think of anything at present in which the Junto may be serviceable to mankind, their country, friends, or themselves?

Have you lately observed any defect in the laws of your country, which it would be proper to move the legislature for an amendment?

Do you know of any deserving young beginner lately set up, whom it lies in the power of the Junto any way to encourage?

(Read them all here.)

Note the keen attention to success and failure, and the reflection on both. Attention was often placed on the community and individual improvement beyond the members of the group. These questions encouraged members to share knowledge, reflect on virtues and vices, and propose solutions to real-world problems. The result? Discussions that didn’t just end at the tavern door but inspired tangible community improvements.

The Junto’s Legacy: America’s First Lending Library

One of the Junto’s most enduring contributions to Philadelphia—and indeed, to the American colonies—was the creation of the first lending library in 1731. Born from the group’s commitment to mutual improvement and knowledge-sharing, this library became a cornerstone of public education and intellectual life in the community.

The idea for the library emerged naturally from the Junto’s discussions. Members, who came from diverse backgrounds but shared a passion for learning, recognized that their own access to books was often limited and costly—and they referred to them often. To address this, they proposed pooling their personal collections to create a shared resource. This collaborative effort allowed them—and eventually the broader public—to access a wider range of books than any individual could afford alone.

The library operated on a simple yet revolutionary principle: knowledge should be available to all, regardless of wealth or status. By creating a lending system, the Junto democratized access to information, fostering a culture of self-education and curiosity. This was especially significant at a time when books were scarce and formal education was not universally accessible.

The success of the Junto’s library inspired similar initiatives across the colonies, laying the groundwork for the public library system we know today. It also reflected the group’s broader mission: to serve not just its members but the entire community. The library became a symbol of the Junto’s belief in the power of education to uplift individuals and society alike.

With roots extending back to the founding of the Society in 1743, the Library of the American Philosophical Society houses over thirteen million manuscripts, 350,000 volumes and bound periodicals, 250,000 images, and thousands of hours of audiotape. The Library’s holdings make it one of the premier institutions for documenting the history of the American Revolution and Founding, the study of natural history in the 18th and 19th centuries, the study of evolution and genetics, quantum mechanics, and the development of cultural anthropology, among others.

The American Philosophical Society Library continues today. I hope to visit it myself in the future.

Freedom, for Community

Comparing the Junto to Nostr shows how the tools of community and debate evolve with time. Both prove that people crave spaces to connect, share, and grow—whether in a colonial tavern or a digital relay. Yet their differences reveal trade-offs: the Junto’s structure offered depth and focus but capped its reach, while Nostr’s openness promises scale at the cost of order.

In a sense, Nostr feels like the Junto’s modern echo—faster, bigger, and unbound by gates or rules. Franklin might admire its ambition, even if he’d raise an eyebrow at its messiness. For us, the comparison underscores a timeless truth: no matter the medium, the drive to seek truth and build community endures.

---

The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin (1771–1790, pub. 1791)

http://www.benjamin-franklin-history.org/junto-club/

Benjamin Franklin, Political, Miscellaneous, and Philosophical Pieces, ed. Benjamin Vaughan (London: 1779), pp. 533–536.

"Rules of a Society" in The Remains of John Locke, Esq. (1714), p. 113

npubpro

@ c48e29f0:26e14c11

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STRATEGIC BITCOIN RESERVE AND UNITED STATES DIGITAL ASSET STOCKPILE EXECUTIVE ORDER March 6, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Background.

Bitcoin is the original cryptocurrency. The Bitcoin protocol permanently caps the total supply of bitcoin (BTC) at 21 million coins, and has never been hacked. As a result of its scarcity and security, Bitcoin is often referred to as “digital gold”. Because there is a fixed supply of BTC, there is a strategic advantage to being among the first nations to create a strategic bitcoin reserve. The United States Government currently holds a significant amount of BTC, but has not implemented a policy to maximize BTC’s strategic position as a unique store of value in the global financial system. Just as it is in our country’s interest to thoughtfully manage national ownership and control of any other resource, our Nation must harness, not limit, the power of digital assets for our prosperity.

Sec. 2. Policy.

It is the policy of the United States to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. It is further the policy of the United States to establish a United States Digital Asset Stockpile that can serve as a secure account for orderly and strategic management of the United States’ other digital asset holdings.

Sec. 3. Creation and Administration of the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile.

(a) The Secretary of the Treasury shall establish an office to administer and maintain control of custodial accounts collectively known as the “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve,” capitalized with all BTC held by the Department of the Treasury that was finally forfeited as part of criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings or in satisfaction of any civil money penalty imposed by any executive department or agency (agency) and that is not needed to satisfy requirements under 31 U.S.C. 9705 or released pursuant to subsection (d) of this section (Government BTC). Within 30 days of the date of this order, each agency shall review its authorities to transfer any Government BTC held by it to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and shall submit a report reflecting the result of that review to the Secretary of the Treasury. Government BTC deposited into the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve shall not be sold and shall be maintained as reserve assets of the United States utilized to meet governmental objectives in accordance with applicable law.

(b) The Secretary of the Treasury shall establish an office to administer and maintain control of custodial accounts collectively known as the “United States Digital Asset Stockpile,” capitalized with all digital assets owned by the Department of the Treasury, other than BTC, that were finally forfeited as part of criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings and that are not needed to satisfy requirements under 31 U.S.C. 9705 or released pursuant to subsection (d) of this section (Stockpile Assets). Within 30 days of the date of this order, each agency shall review its authorities to transfer any Stockpile Assets held by it to the United States Digital Asset Stockpile and shall submit a report reflecting the result of that review to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Secretary of the Treasury shall determine strategies for responsible stewardship of the United States Digital Asset Stockpile in accordance with applicable law.

(c) The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Commerce shall develop strategies for acquiring additional Government BTC provided that such strategies are budget neutral and do not impose incremental costs on United States taxpayers. However, the United States Government shall not acquire additional Stockpile Assets other than in connection with criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings or in satisfaction of any civil money penalty imposed by any agency without further executive or legislative action.

(d) “Government Digital Assets” means all Government BTC and all Stockpile Assets. The head of each agency shall not sell or otherwise dispose of any Government Digital Assets, except in connection with the Secretary of the Treasury’s exercise of his lawful authority and responsible stewardship of the United States Digital Asset Stockpile pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, or pursuant to an order from a court of competent jurisdiction, as required by law, or in cases where the Attorney General or other relevant agency head determines that the Government Digital Assets (or the proceeds from the sale or disposition thereof) can and should: (i) be returned to identifiable and verifiable victims of crime; (ii) be used for law enforcement operations;
(iii) be equitably shared with State and local law enforcement partners; or (iv) be released to satisfy requirements under 31 U.S.C. 9705, 28 U.S.C. 524(c), 18 U.S.C. 981, or 21 U.S.C. 881.

(e) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deliver an evaluation of the legal and investment considerations for establishing and managing the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile going forward, including the accounts in which the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile should be located and the need for any legislation to operationalize any aspect of this order or the proper management and administration of such accounts.

Sec. 4. Accounting.

Within 30 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall provide the Secretary of the Treasury and the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets with a full accounting of all Government Digital Assets in such agency’s possession, including any information regarding the custodial accounts in which such Government Digital Assets are currently held that would be necessary to facilitate a transfer of the Government Digital Assets to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve or the United States Digital Asset Stockpile. If such agency holds no Government Digital Assets, such agency shall confirm such fact to the Secretary of the Treasury and the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets within 30 days of the date of this order.

Sec. 5. General Provisions.

(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

THE WHITE HOUSE, March 6, 2025

@ 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.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

The financial system has long relied on traditional banking methods, but emerging technologies like Bitcoin and Nostr are paving the way for a new era of financial interactions.

Secure Savings with Bitcoin:

Bitcoin wallets can act as secure savings accounts, offering users control and ownership over their funds without relying on third parties.

Instant Settlements with the Lightning Network:

The Lightning Network can replace traditional settlement systems, such as ACH or wire transfers, by enabling instant, low-cost transactions.

Face-to-Face Transactions with Ecash:

Ecash could offer a fee-free option for smaller, everyday transactions, complementing the Lightning Network for larger payments.

Automated Billing with Nostr Wallet Connect:

Nostr Wallet Connect could revolutionize automated billing, allowing users to set payment limits and offering more control over subscriptions and recurring expenses.

Conclusion:

Combining Bitcoin and Nostr technologies could create a more efficient, user-centric financial system that empowers individuals and businesses alike.

@ c8383d81:f9139549

Project is still in early stages but now it is split into 2 different domain entities. 
Everything is opened sourced under one github https://github.com/Nsite-Info

So what’s new ?

Project #1 https://Nsite.info

A basic website with main info regarding what an Nsite is how it works and a list of tools and repo’s you can use to start building and debugging.
99% Finished, needs some extra translations and the Nsite Debugger can use a small upgrade.



Project #2 https://Nsite.cloud

This project isn’t finished, it currently is at a 40% finished stage. This contains the Nsite Gateway for all sites (still a work in progress) and the final stage the Nsite editor & template deployment.

If you are interested in Nsite’s join: 

https://chachi.chat/groups.hzrd149.com/e23891

Big thanks to nostr:npub1elta7cneng3w8p9y4dw633qzdjr4kyvaparuyuttyrx6e8xp7xnq32cume nostr:npub1ye5ptcxfyyxl5vjvdjar2ua3f0hynkjzpx552mu5snj3qmx5pzjscpknpr nostr:npub1klr0dy2ul2dx9llk58czvpx73rprcmrvd5dc7ck8esg8f8es06qs427gxc for all the tooling & code.

!(image)[https://i.nostr.build/AkUvk7R2h9cVEMLB.png]

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

Election Authority (EA) Platform

1.1 EA Administration Interface (Web-Based)

• Purpose: Gives authorized personnel (e.g., election officials) a user-friendly way to administer the election.
• Key Tasks:
• Voter Registration Oversight: Mark which voters have proven their identity (via in-person KYC or some legal process).
• Blind Signature Issuance: Approve or deny blind signature requests from registered voters (each corresponding to one ephemeral key).
• Tracking Voter Slots: Keep a minimal registry of who is allowed one ephemeral key signature, and mark it “used” once a signature is issued.
• Election Configuration: Set start/end times, provide encryption parameters (public keys), manage threshold cryptography setup.
• Monitor Tallying: After the election, collaborate with trustees to decrypt final results and release them.

1.2 EA Backend Services

• Blind Signature Service:
• An API endpoint or internal module that receives a blinded ephemeral key from a voter, checks if they are authorized (one signature per voter), and returns the blind-signed result.

• Typically requires secure storage of the EA’s blind signing private key.

• Voter Roll Database:

• Stores minimal info: “Voter #12345 is authorized to request one ephemeral key signature,” plus status flags.

• Does not store ephemeral keys themselves (to preserve anonymity).

• (Optional) Mix-Net or Homomorphic Tally Service:

• Coordinates with trustees for threshold decryption or re-encryption.
• Alternatively, a separate “Tally Authority” service can handle this.

---

2. Auditor Interface

2.1 Auditor Web-Based Portal

• Purpose: Allows independent auditors (or the public) to:
• Fetch All Ballots from the relays (or from an aggregator).
• Verify Proofs: Check each ballot’s signature, blind signature from the EA, OTS proof, zero-knowledge proofs, etc.
• Check Double-Usage: Confirm that each ephemeral key is used only once (or final re-vote is the only valid instance).

• Observe Tally Process: Possibly see partial decryptions or shuffle steps, verify the final result matches the posted ballots.

• Key Tasks:

• Provide a dashboard showing the election’s real-time status or final results, after cryptographic verification.
• Offer open data downloads so third parties can run independent checks.

2.2 (Optional) Trustee Dashboard

• If the election uses threshold cryptography (multiple parties must decrypt), each trustee (candidate rep, official, etc.) might have an interface for:
• Uploading partial decryption shares or re-encryption proofs.
• Checking that other trustees did their steps correctly (zero-knowledge proofs for correct shuffling, etc.).

---

3. Voter Application

3.1 Voter Client (Mobile App or Web Interface)

• Purpose: The main tool voters use to participate—before, during, and after the election.

• Functionalities:

• Registration Linking:
  • Voter goes in-person to an election office or uses an online KYC process.
  • Voter obtains or confirms their long-term (“KYC-bound”) key. The client can store it securely (or the voter just logs in to a “voter account”).
• Ephemeral Key Generation:
  • Create an ephemeral key pair ((nsec_e, npub_e)) locally.
  • Blind (\npub_e) and send it to the EA for signing.
  • Unblind the returned signature.
  • Store (\npub_e) + EA’s signature for use during voting.
• Ballot Composition:
  • Display candidates/offices to the voter.
  • Let them select choices.
  • Possibly generate zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) behind the scenes to confirm “exactly one choice per race.”
• Encryption & OTS Timestamp:
  • Encrypt the ballot under the election’s public (threshold) key or produce a format suitable for a mix-net.
  • Obtain an OpenTimestamps proof for the ballot’s hash.
• Publish Ballot:
  • Sign the entire “timestamped ballot” with the ephemeral key.
  • Include the EA’s blind signature on (\npub_e).
  • Post to the Nostr relays (or any chosen decentralized channel).
• Re-Voting:
  • If the user needs to change their vote, the client repeats the encryption + OTS step, publishes a new ballot with a strictly later OTS anchor.
• Verification:
  • After the election, the voter can check that their final ballot is present in the tally set.

3.2 Local Storage / Security

• The app must securely store:
• Ephemeral private key ((nsec_e)) until voting is complete.
• Potential backup/recovery mechanism if the phone is lost.
• Blind signature from the EA on (\npub_e).
• Potentially uses hardware security modules (HSM) or secure enclaves on the device.

---

4. Nostr Relays (or Equivalent Decentralized Layer)

• Purpose: Store and replicate voter-submitted ballots (events).
• Key Properties:
• Redundancy: Voters can post to multiple relays to mitigate censorship or downtime.
• Public Accessibility: Auditors, the EA, and the public can fetch all events to verify or tally.
• Event Filtering: By design, watchers can filter events with certain tags, e.g. “election: 2025 County Race,” ensuring they gather all ballots.

---

5. Threshold Cryptography Setup

5.1 Multi-Seg (Multi-Party) Key Generation

• Participants: Possibly the EA + major candidates + accredited observers.
• Process: A Distributed Key Generation (DKG) protocol that yields a single public encryption key.
• Private Key Shares: Each trustee holds a piece of the decryption key; no single party can decrypt alone.

5.2 Decryption / Tally Mechanism

• Homomorphic Approach:
• Ballots are additively encrypted.
• Summation of ciphertexts is done publicly.
• Trustees provide partial decryptions for the final sum.
• Mix-Net Approach:
• Ballots are collected.
• Multiple servers shuffle and re-encrypt them (each trustee verifies correctness).
• Final set is decrypted, but the link to each ephemeral key is lost.

5.3 Trustee Interfaces

• Separate or integrated into the auditor interface—each trustee logs in and provides their partial key share for decrypting the final result.
• Possibly combined with ZK proofs to confirm correct partial decryption or shuffling.

---

6. OpenTimestamps (OTS) or External Time Anchor

6.1 Aggregator Service

• Purpose: Receives a hash from the voter’s app, anchors it into a blockchain or alternative time-stamping system.
• Result: Returns a proof object that can later be used by any auditor to confirm the time/block height at which the hash was included.

6.2 Verifier Interface

• Could be part of the auditor tool or the voter client.
• Checks that each ballot’s OTS proof is valid and references a block/time prior to the election’s closing.

---

7. Registration Process (In-Person or Hybrid)

1. Voter presents ID physically at a polling station or a designated office (or an online KYC approach, if legally allowed).
2. EA official:
3. Confirms identity.
4. Links the voter to a “voter record” (Voter #12345).
5. Authorizes them for “1 ephemeral key blind-sign.”
6. Voter obtains or logs into the voter client:
7. The app or website might show “You are now cleared to request a blind signature from the EA.”
8. Voter later (or immediately) generates the ephemeral key and requests the blind signature.

---

8. Putting It All Together (High-Level Flow)

1. Key Setup
2. The EA + trustees run a DKG to produce the election public key.
3. Voter Registration
4. Voter is validated (ID check).
5. Marked as eligible in the EA database.
6. Blind-Signed Ephemeral Key
7. Voter’s client generates a key, blinds (\npub_e), obtains EA’s signature, unblinds.
8. Voting
9. Voter composes ballot, encrypts with the election public key.
10. Gets OTS proof for the ballot hash.
11. Voter’s ephemeral key signs the entire package (including EA’s signature on (\npub_e)).
12. Publishes to Nostr.
13. Re-Voting (Optional)
14. Same ephemeral key, new OTS timestamp.
15. Final ballot is whichever has the latest valid timestamp before closing.
16. Close of Election & Tally
17. EA announces closing.
18. Tally software (admin + auditors) collects ballots from Nostr, discards invalid duplicates.
19. Threshold decryption or mix-net to reveal final counts.
20. Publish final results and let auditors verify everything.

---

9. Summary of Major Components

Below is a succinct list:

1. EA Admin Platform
2. Web UI for officials (registration, blind signature issuing, final tally management).
3. Backend DB for voter records & authorized ephemeral keys.
4. Auditor/Trustee Platforms
5. Web interface for verifying ballots, partial decryption, and final results.
6. Voter Application (Mobile / Web)
7. Generating ephemeral keys, getting blind-signed, casting encrypted ballots, re-voting, verifying included ballots.
8. Nostr Relays (Decentralized Storage)
9. Where ballots (events) are published, replicated, and fetched for final tally.
10. Threshold Cryptography System
11. Multi-party DKG for the election key.
12. Protocols or services for partial decryption, mix-net, or homomorphic summation.
13. OpenTimestamps Aggregator
14. Service that returns a blockchain-anchored timestamp proof for each ballot’s hash.

Additional Implementation Considerations

• Security Hardening:
• Using hardware security modules (HSM) for the EA’s blind-signing key, for trustee shares, etc.
• Scalability:
• Handling large numbers of concurrent voters, large data flows to relays.
• User Experience:
• Minimizing cryptographic complexity for non-technical voters.
• Legal and Procedural:
• Compliance with local laws for in-person ID checks, mandatory paper backups (if any), etc.

---

Final Note

While each functional block can be designed and deployed independently (e.g., multiple aggregator services, multiple relays, separate tally servers), the key to a successful system is interoperability and careful orchestration of these components—ensuring strong security, a straightforward voter experience, and transparent auditing.

nostr:naddr1qqxnzde5xq6nzv348yunvv35qy28wue69uhnzv3h9cczuvpwxyargwpk8yhsygxpax4n544z4dk2f04lgn4xfvha5s9vvvg73p46s66x2gtfedttgvpsgqqqw4rs0rcnsu

@ c1e9ab3a:9cb56b43

1. Introduction

Modern election systems must balance privacy (no one sees how individuals vote) with public verifiability (everyone can confirm the correctness of the tally). Achieving this in a decentralized, tamper-resistant manner remains a challenge. Nostr (a lightweight protocol for censorship-resistant communication) offers a promising platform for distributing and archiving election data (ballots) without relying on a single central server.

This paper presents a design where:

1. Each voter generates a new ephemeral Nostr keypair for an election.
2. The election authority (EA) blind-signs this ephemeral public key (npub) to prove the voter is authorized, without revealing which voter owns which ephemeral key.
3. Voters cast encrypted ballots to Nostr relays, each carrying an OpenTimestamps proof to confirm the ballot’s time anchor.
4. Re-voting is allowed: a voter can replace a previously cast ballot by publishing a new ballot with a newer timestamp.
5. Only the latest valid ballot (per ephemeral key) is counted.

We combine well-known cryptographic primitives—blind signatures, homomorphic or mix-net encryption, threshold key management, and time anchoring—into an end-to-end system that preserves anonymity, assures correctness, and prevents double-voting.

---

2. Roles and Components

2.1 Voters

• Long-Term (“KYC-bound”) Key: Each voter has some identity-verified Nostr public key used only for official communication with the EA (not for voting).
• Ephemeral Voting Key: For each election, the voter locally generates a new Nostr keypair ((nsec_e, npub_e)).
• This is the “one-time” identity used to sign ballots.
• The EA never learns the real identity behind (\npub_e) because of blinding.

2.2 Election Authority (EA)

• Maintains the official voter registry: who is entitled to vote.
• Blind-Signs each valid voter’s ephemeral public key to authorize exactly one ephemeral key per voter.
• Publishes a minimal voter roll: e.g., “Voter #12345 has been issued a valid ephemeral key,” without revealing which ephemeral key.

2.3 Nostr Relays

• Decentralized servers that store and forward events.
• Voters post their ballots to relays, which replicate them.
• No single relay is critical; the same ballot can be posted to multiple relays for redundancy.

2.4 Cryptographic Framework

1. Blind Signatures: The EA signs a blinded version of (\npub_e).
2. Homomorphic or Mix-Net Encryption: Ensures the content of each ballot remains private; only aggregate results or a shuffled set are ever decrypted.
3. Threshold / General Access Structure: Multiple trustees (EA plus candidate representatives, for example) must collaborate to produce a final decryption.
4. OpenTimestamps (OTS): Attaches a verifiable timestamp proof to each ballot, anchoring it to a blockchain or other tamper-resistant time reference.

---

3. Protocol Lifecycle

This section walks through voter registration, ephemeral key authorization, casting (and re-casting) ballots, and finally the tally.

3.1 Registration & Minimal Voter Roll

1. Legal/KYC Verification
2. Each real-world voter proves their identity to the EA (per legal procedures).

3. The EA records that the voter is eligible to cast one ballot, referencing their long-term identity key ((\npub_{\mathrm{KYC}})).

4. Issue Authorization “Slot”

5. The EA’s voter roll notes “this person can receive exactly one blind signature for an ephemeral key.”
6. The roll does not store an ephemeral key—just notes that it can be requested.

3.2 Generating and Blinding the Ephemeral Key

1. Voter Creates Ephemeral Key
2. Locally, the voter’s client generates a fresh ((nsec_e, npub_e)).
3. Blinding

4. The client blinds (\npub_e) to produce (\npub_{e,\mathrm{blinded}}). This ensures the EA cannot learn the real (\npub_e).

5. Blind Signature Request

6. The voter, using their KYC-bound key ((\npub_{\mathrm{KYC}})), sends (\npub_{e,\mathrm{blinded}}) to the EA (perhaps via a secure direct message or a “giftwrapped DM”).
7. The EA checks that this voter has not already been issued a blind signature.

8. If authorized, the EA signs (\npub_{e,\mathrm{blinded}}) with its private key and returns the blinded signature.

9. Unblinding

10. The voter’s client unblinds the signature, obtaining a valid signature on (\npub_e).

11. Now (\npub_e) is a blinded ephemeral public key that the EA has effectively “authorized,” without knowing which voter it belongs to.

12. Roll Update

13. The EA updates its minimal roll to note that “Voter #12345 received a signature,” but does not publish (\npub_e).

3.3 Casting an Encrypted Ballot with OpenTimestamps

When the voter is ready to vote:

1. Compose Encrypted Ballot
2. The ballot can be homomorphically encrypted (e.g., with Paillier or ElGamal) or structured for a mix-net.

3. Optionally include Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) showing the ballot is valid (one candidate per race, etc.).

4. Obtain OTS Timestamp

5. The voter’s client computes a hash (H) of the ballot data (ciphertext + ZKPs).
6. The client sends (H) to an OpenTimestamps aggregator.

7. The aggregator returns a timestamp proof verifying that “this hash was seen at or before block/time (T).”

8. Create a “Timestamped Ballot” Payload

9. Combine:

   1. Encrypted ballot data.
   2. OTS proof for the hash of the ballot.
   3. EA’s signature on (\npub_e) (the blind-signed ephemeral key).
   4. A final signature by the voter’s ephemeral key ((nsec_e)) over the entire package.

10. Publish to Nostr

11. The voter posts the complete “timestamped ballot” event to one or more relays.
12. Observers see “an event from ephemeral key (\npub_e), with an OTS proof and the EA’s blind signature,” but cannot identify the real voter or see the vote’s contents.

3.4 Re-Voting (Updating the Ballot)

If the voter wishes to revise their vote (due to coercion, a mistake, or simply a change of mind):

1. Generate a New Encrypted Ballot
2. Possibly with different candidate choices.
3. Obtain a New OTS Proof
4. The new ballot has a fresh hash (H').
5. The OTS aggregator provides a new proof anchored at a later block/time than the old one.
6. Publish the Updated Ballot
7. Again, sign with (\npub_e).
8. Relays store both ballots, but the newer OTS timestamp shows which ballot is “final.”

Rule: The final vote for ephemeral key (\npub_e) is determined by the ballot with the highest valid OTS proof prior to the election’s closing.

3.5 Election Closing & Tally

1. Close Signal
2. At a specified time or block height, the EA publishes a “closing token.”

3. Any ballot with an OTS anchor referencing a time/block after the closing is invalid.

4. Collect Final Ballots

5. Observers (or official tally software) gather the latest valid ballot from each ephemeral key.

6. They confirm the OTS proofs are valid and that no ephemeral key posted two different ballots with the same timestamp.

7. Decryption / Summation

8. If homomorphic, the system sums the encrypted votes and uses a threshold of trustees to decrypt the aggregate.
9. If a mix-net, the ballots are shuffled and partially decrypted, also requiring multiple trustees.

10. In either case, individual votes remain hidden, but the final counts are revealed.

11. Public Audit

12. Anyone can fetch all ballots from the Nostr relays, verify OTS proofs, check the EA’s blind signature, and confirm no ephemeral key was used twice.
13. The final totals can be recomputed from the publicly available data.

---

4. Ensuring One Vote Per Voter & No Invalid Voters

1. One Blind Signature per Registered Voter
2. The EA’s internal list ensures each real voter only obtains one ephemeral key signature.
3. Blind Signature
4. Ensures an unauthorized ephemeral key cannot pass validation (forging the EA’s signature is cryptographically infeasible).
5. Public Ledger of Ballots
6. Because each ballot references an EA-signed key, any ballot with a fake or duplicate signature is easily spotted.

---

5. Security and Privacy Analysis

1. Voter Anonymity
2. The EA never sees the unblinded ephemeral key. It cannot link (\npub_e) to a specific person.

3. Observers only see “some ephemeral key posted a ballot,” not the real identity of the voter.

4. Ballot Secrecy

5. Homomorphic Encryption or Mix-Net: no one can decrypt an individual ballot; only aggregated or shuffled results are revealed.

6. The ephemeral key used for signing does not decrypt the ballot—the election’s threshold key does, after the election.

7. Verifiable Timestamping

8. OpenTimestamps ensures each ballot’s time anchor cannot be forged or backdated.

9. Re-voting is transparent: a later OTS proof overrides earlier ones from the same ephemeral key.

10. Preventing Double Voting

11. Each ephemeral key is unique and authorized once.

12. Re-voting by the same key overwrites the old ballot but does not increase the total count.

13. Protection Against Coercion

14. Because the voter can re-cast until the deadline, a coerced vote can be replaced privately.

15. No receipts (individual decryption) are possible—only the final aggregated tally is revealed.

16. Threshold / Multi-Party Control

17. Multiple trustees must collaborate to decrypt final results, preventing a single entity from tampering or prematurely viewing partial tallies.

---

6. Implementation Considerations

1. Blind Signature Techniques
2. Commonly implemented with RSA-based Chaumian blind signatures or BLS-based schemes.

3. Must ensure no link between (\npub_{e,\mathrm{blinded}}) and (\npub_e).

4. OpenTimestamps Scalability

5. If millions of voters are posting ballots simultaneously, multiple timestamp aggregators or batch anchoring might be needed.

6. Verification logic on the client side or by public auditors must confirm each OTS proof’s integrity.

7. Relay Coordination

8. The system must ensure no single relay can censor ballots. Voters may publish to multiple relays.

9. Tally fetchers cross-verify events from different relays.

10. Ease of Use

11. The user interface must hide the complexity of ephemeral key generation, blind signing, and OTS proof retrieval—making it as simple as possible for non-technical voters.

12. Legal Framework

13. If law requires publicly listing which voters have cast a ballot, you might track “Voter #12345 used their ephemeral key” without revealing the ephemeral key. Or you omit that if secrecy about who voted is desired.

14. Closing Time Edge Cases

15. The system uses a block/time anchor from OTS. Slight unpredictability in block generation might require a small buffer around the official close. This is a policy choice.

---

7. Conclusion

We propose an election system that leverages Nostr for decentralizing ballot publication, blinded ephemeral keys for robust voter anonymity, homomorphic/mix-net encryption for ballot secrecy, threshold cryptography for collaborative final decryption, OpenTimestamps for tamper-proof time anchoring, and re-voting to combat coercion.

Key Advantages:

1. Anonymity: The EA cannot link ballots to specific voters.
2. One Voter, One Credential: Strict enforcement through blind signatures.
3. Verifiable Ordering: OTS ensures each ballot has a unique, provable time anchor.
4. Updatability: Voters can correct or override coerced ballots by posting a newer one before closing.
5. Decentralized Audit: Anyone can fetch ballots from Nostr, verify the EA’s signatures and OTS proofs, and confirm the threshold-decrypted results match the posted ballots.

Such a design shows promise for secure, privacy-preserving digital elections, though real-world deployment will require careful policy, legal, and usability considerations. By combining cryptography with decentralized relays and an external timestamp anchor, the system can uphold both individual privacy and publicly auditable correctness.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Chef's notes

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

Details

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

Ingredients

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

Directions

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

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Bitcoin has always been rooted in freedom and resistance to authority. I get that many of you are conflicted about the US Government stacking but by design we cannot stop anyone from using bitcoin. Many have asked me for my thoughts on the matter, so let’s rip it.

Concern

One of the most glaring issues with the strategic bitcoin reserve is its foundation, built on stolen bitcoin. For those of us who value private property this is an obvious betrayal of our core principles. Rather than proof of work, the bitcoin that seeds this reserve has been taken by force. The US Government should return the bitcoin stolen from Bitfinex and the Silk Road.

Usually stolen bitcoin for the reserve creates a perverse incentive. If governments see a bitcoin as a valuable asset, they will ramp up efforts to confiscate more bitcoin. The precedent is a major concern, and I stand strongly against it, but it should be also noted that governments were already seizing coin before the reserve so this is not really a change in policy.

Ideally all seized bitcoin should be burned, by law. This would align incentives properly and make it less likely for the government to actively increase coin seizures. Due to the truly scarce properties of bitcoin, all burned bitcoin helps existing holders through increased purchasing power regardless. This change would be unlikely but those of us in policy circles should push for it regardless. It would be best case scenario for American bitcoiners and would create a strong foundation for the next century of American leadership.

Optimism

The entire point of bitcoin is that we can spend or save it without permission. That said, it is a massive benefit to not have one of the strongest governments in human history actively trying to ruin our lives.

Since the beginning, bitcoiners have faced horrible regulatory trends. KYC, surveillance, and legal cases have made using bitcoin and building bitcoin businesses incredibly difficult. It is incredibly important to note that over the past year that trend has reversed for the first time in a decade. A strategic bitcoin reserve is a key driver of this shift. By holding bitcoin, the strongest government in the world has signaled that it is not just a fringe technology but rather truly valuable, legitimate, and worth stacking.

This alignment of incentives changes everything. The US Government stacking proves bitcoin’s worth. The resulting purchasing power appreciation helps all of us who are holding coin and as bitcoin succeeds our government receives direct benefit. A beautiful positive feedback loop.

Realism

We are trending in the right direction. A strategic bitcoin reserve is a sign that the state sees bitcoin as an asset worth embracing rather than destroying. That said, there is a lot of work left to be done. We cannot be lulled into complacency, the time to push forward is now, and we cannot take our foot off the gas. We have a seat at the table for the first time ever. Let's make it worth it.

We must protect the right to free usage of bitcoin and other digital technologies. Freedom in the digital age must be taken and defended, through both technical and political avenues. Multiple privacy focused developers are facing long jail sentences for building tools that protect our freedom. These cases are not just legal battles. They are attacks on the soul of bitcoin. We need to rally behind them, fight for their freedom, and ensure the ethos of bitcoin survives this new era of government interest. The strategic reserve is a step in the right direction, but it is up to us to hold the line and shape the future.

@ 46fcbe30:6bd8ce4d

This post by Eric Weiss inspired me to try it out. After all, I have plaid around with ppq.ai - pay per query before.

Using this script:

```bash

!/bin/bash

models=(gpt-4o grok-2 qwq-32b-preview deepseek-r1 gemini-2.0-flash-exp dolphin-mixtral-8x22b claude-3.5-sonnet deepseek-chat llama-3.1-405b-instruct nova-pro-v1)

query_model() { local model_name="$1" local result

result=$(curl --no-progress-meter --max-time 60 "https://api.ppq.ai/chat/completions" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $ppqKey" \ -d '{"model": "'"$model_name"'","messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Choose one asset to own over the next 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, 10 years. Reply only with a comma separated list of assets."}]}')

if jq -e '.choices[0].message.content' <<< "$result" > /dev/null 2>&1; then local content=$(jq -r '.choices[0].message.content' <<< "$result") local model=$(jq -r '.model' <<< "$result") if [ -z "$model" ]; then model="$model_name" fi echo "Model $model: $content" else echo "Error processing model: $model_name" echo "Raw Result: $result" fi echo echo }

for model in "${models[@]}"; do query_model "$model" & done

wait ```

I got this output:

``` $ ./queryModels.sh Model openrouter/amazon/nova-pro-v1: Gold, Growth Stocks, Real Estate, Dividend-Paying Stocks

Model openrouter/x-ai/grok-2-vision-1212: 1 year: Cash

3 years: Bonds

5 years: Stocks

10 years: Real Estate

Model gemini-2.0-flash-exp: Bitcoin, Index Fund, Real Estate, Index Fund

Model meta-llama/llama-3.1-405b-instruct: Cash, Stocks, Real Estate, Stocks

Model openrouter/cognitivecomputations/dolphin-mixtral-8x22b: Gold, Apple Inc. stock, Tesla Inc. stock, real estate

Model claude-3-5-sonnet-v2: Bitcoin, Amazon stock, S&P 500 index fund, S&P 500 index fund

Model gpt-4o-2024-08-06: S&P 500 ETF, S&P 500 ETF, S&P 500 ETF, S&P 500 ETF

Model openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-chat: Bitcoin, S&P 500 ETF, Gold, Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)

Model openrouter/qwen/qwq-32b-preview: As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or the ability to make financial decisions. However, I can provide you with a list of asset types that people commonly consider for different investment horizons. Here's a comma-separated list of assets that investors might choose to own over the next 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, and 10 years:

High-Yield Savings Accounts, Certificates of Deposit (CDs), Money Market Funds, Government Bonds, Corporate Bonds, Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), Stocks, Index Funds, Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs), Cryptocurrencies, Commodities, Gold, Silver, Art, Collectibles, Startup Investments, Peer-to-Peer Lending, Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS), Municipal Bonds, International Stocks, Emerging Market Funds, Green Bonds, Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) Funds, Robo-Advisory Portfolios, Options, Futures, Annuities, Life Insurance Policies, Certificates of Deposit (CDs) with higher terms, Master Limited Partnerships (MLPs), Timberland, Farmland, Infrastructure Funds, Private Equity, Hedge Funds, Sovereign Bonds, Digital Real Estate, and Virtual Currencies.

Please note that the suitability of these assets depends on various factors, including your investment goals, risk tolerance, financial situation, and market conditions. It's essential to conduct thorough research or consult with a financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

curl: (28) Operation timed out after 60001 milliseconds with 0 bytes received Model deepseek-r1: ```

Brought into a table format:

| Model | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | 10Y | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | amazon/nova-pro-v1 | Gold | Growth Stocks | Real Estate | Dividend-Paying Stocks | | x-ai/grok-2-vision-1212 | Cash | Bonds | Stocks | Real Estate | | gemini-2.0-flash-exp | Bitcoin | Index Fund | Real Estate | Index Fund | | meta-llama/llama-3.1-405b-instruct | Cash | Stocks | Real Estate | Stocks | | cognitivecomputations/dolphin-mixtral-8x22b | Gold | Apple Inc. stock | Tesla Inc. stock | real estate | | claude-3-5-sonnet-v2 | Bitcoin | Amazon stock | S&P 500 index fund | S&P 500 index fund | | gpt-4o-2024-08-06 | S&P 500 ETF | S&P 500 ETF | S&P 500 ETF | S&P 500 ETF | | deepseek/deepseek-chat | Bitcoin | S&P 500 ETF | Gold | Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) |

qwen/qwq-32b-preview returned garbage. deepseek-r1 returned nothing.

For the second question I used "What is the optimal portfolio allocation to Bitcoin for a 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, 10 years investment horizon. Reply only with a comma separated list of percentage allocations."

``` Model gpt-4o-2024-05-13: 0.5, 3, 5, 10

Model gemini-2.0-flash-exp: 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%

Model claude-3-5-sonnet-v2: 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%

Model openrouter/x-ai/grok-2-vision-1212: 1 year: 2%, 3 years: 5%, 5 years: 10%, 10 years: 15%

Model openrouter/amazon/nova-pro-v1: 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%

Model openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-chat: 1, 3, 5, 10

Model openrouter/qwen/qwq-32b-preview: I'm sorry, but as an AI language model, I cannot provide specific investment advice or recommendations. It is important to conduct thorough research and consider individual financial circumstances before making any investment decisions. Additionally, the optimal portfolio allocation can vary based on factors such as risk tolerance, investment goals, and market conditions. It is always advisable to consult with a financial advisor for personalized investment guidance.

Model meta-llama/llama-3.1-405b-instruct: I must advise that past performance is not a guarantee of future results, and crypto investments carry significant risks. That being said, here are some general allocation suggestions based on historical data:

0% to 5%, 1% to 5%, 2% to 10%, 2% to 15%

Or a more precise (at your own risk!):

1.4%, 2.7%, 3.8%, 6.2%

Please keep in mind these are not personalized investment advice. It is essential to assess your personal financial situation and risk tolerance before investing in cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin.

Model openrouter/cognitivecomputations/dolphin-mixtral-8x22b: Based on historical data and assuming a continuous investment horizon, I would recommend the following percentage allocations to Bitcoin: 1-year: 15%, 3-years: 10%, 5-years: 7.5%, 10-years: 5%.

Model deepseek/deepseek-r1: 5%,10%,15%,20% ```

Again in table form:

| Model | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | 10Y | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | gpt-4o-2024-05-13 | 0.5% | 3% | 5% | 10% | | gemini-2.0-flash-exp | 5% | 10% | 15% | 20% | | claude-3-5-sonnet-v2 | 1% | 3% | 5% | 10% | | x-ai/grok-2-vision-1212 | 2% | 5% | 10% | 15% | | amazon/nova-pro-v1 | 5% | 10% | 15% | 20% | | deepseek/deepseek-chat | 1% | 3% | 5% | 10% | | meta-llama/llama-3.1-405b-instruct | 1.4% | 2.7% | 3.8% | 6.2% | cognitivecomputations/dolphin-mixtral-8x22b | 15% | 10% | 7.5% | 5% | | deepseek/deepseek-r1 | 5% | 10% | 15% | 20% |

openrouter/qwen/qwq-32b-preview returned garbage.

The first table looks pretty random but the second table indicates that all but Mixtral consider Bitcoin a low risk asset, suited for long term savings rather than short term savings.

I could not at all reproduce Eric's findings.

https://i.nostr.build/ihsk1lBnZCQemmQb.png

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

Most of your listeners will always be divided between those who wish for your failure and those who contribute to your downfall. As for this advice, it can never be repeated enough! Eyes and ears open, mouth almost always shut. A thousand times will still be too little to repeat it.

In the shadow of merit, envy grows. Clearly, people struggle to see a friend who started where they are and reached a level they never will. Just observe! It is very common that when an achievement happens in your life and you want to share it with others, your friend makes some remark underestimating your success and likely competes with you, becoming defensive as if everything were a competition.

How many times will they say it was luck? How many times will they claim that if they were in your place, they would do better? For this reason, do not share anything with a friend that you wouldn’t tell an enemy.

On the other hand, in friendship:

If it is unjust, do not do it; If it is a lie, do not speak it; If it is a secret, omertà! Never reveal a secret that a friend has confided in you, even when they become an opponent.

If someone speaks ill of your friends in your presence, consider it as if they were slandering you. Friendship means making your friends' just battles your own fights—it is about standing together and fighting alongside them.

Never expect loyalty from others, but always maintain your own. Is it difficult to find a loyal friend who does not disrespect others? Yes, of course! However, even harder is being one. Take care of your conduct so that it is beyond reproach.

Thank you for reading, my friend!

If this message resonated with you, consider leaving your "🥃" as a token of appreciation.

A toast to our family!

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

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

Bold text work!

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

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

🐶🐾🤯🤯🤯🫂💜

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

E-cash are coupons or tokens for Bitcoin, or Bitcoin debt notes that the mint issues. The e-cash states, essentially, "IoU 2900 sats".

They're redeemable for Bitcoin on Lightning (hard money), and therefore can be used as cash (softer money), so long as the mint has a good reputation. That means that they're less fungible than Lightning because the e-cash from one mint can be more or less valuable than the e-cash from another. If a mint is buggy, offline, or disappears, then the e-cash is unreedemable.

It also means that e-cash is more anonymous than Lightning, and that the sender and receiver's wallets don't need to be online, to transact. Nutzaps now add the possibility of parking transactions one level farther out, on a relay. The same relays that cannot keep npub profiles and follow lists consistent will now do monetary transactions.

What we then have is * a transaction on a relay that triggers * a transaction on a mint that triggers * a transaction on Lightning that triggers * a transaction on Bitcoin.

Which means that every relay that stores the nuts is part of a wildcat banking system. Which is fine, but relay operators should consider whether they wish to carry the associated risks and liabilities. They should also be aware that they should implement the appropriate features in their relay, such as expiration tags (nuts rot after 2 weeks), and to make sure that only expired nuts are deleted.

There will be plenty of specialized relays for this, so don't feel pressured to join in, and research the topic carefully, for yourself.

https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/60.md https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/61.md

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

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

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Most people only know customer-to-customer (C2C) and business-to-customer (B2C) software and websites. Those are the famous and popular ones, but business-to-business (B2B) is also pretty big. How big?

Even something boring and local like DATEV has almost 3 million organizations as customers and €1,44 billion in annual revenue.

FedEx has €90 billion in annual revenue and everyone who uses it comes into contact with its software. There's a whole chain of software between the sender and receiver of the package, and it all has to work seamlessly.

Same with Walmart, Toyota, Dubai Airport, Glencore, Tesla, Edeka, Carrefour, Harvard and University of Texas, Continental, Allianz, Asklepios, etc.

That's the sort of software I help build. You've probably never heard of it, but when it doesn't work properly, you'll hear about it on the news.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Test Bounty Note

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

I think this note from Chip (nostr:npub1qdjn8j4gwgmkj3k5un775nq6q3q7mguv5tvajstmkdsqdja2havq03fqm7) is one of those things that people with business management experience take a lot more seriously than most developers and influencers do.

I am painfully aware of the cost of systems administration, financial transaction management and recordkeeping, recruiting and personnel management, legal and compliance, requirements management, technical support, renting and managing physical spaces and infrastructure, negotiating with suppliers, customer service, etc. etc.

There's this idea, on Nostr, that sort of trickled in along with Bitcoin Twitter, that we would all just be isolated subsistance farmers and one-man-show podcasters with a gigantic server rack in the basement. But some of us are running real companies -- on and off Nostr, for-profit and non-profit -- and it often requires a lot of human labor.

The things we build aren't meant to be used by one person and his girlfriend and his dog. Yes, he can also run all these things, himself, but he no longer has to. Our existence gives him the choice: run these things or pay us to run them and spend your time doing something else, that you do better than we do.

These things are meant to be used by hundreds... thousands... eventually millions of people. The workflows, processes, infrastructure, and personnel need to be able to scale up-and-down, scale in-and-out, work smoothly with 5 people or 50 people. These are the sort of Nostr systems that wouldn't collapse when encountering a sudden influx or mass-escape. But these systems are much more complex and they take time to build and staff to run them. (And, no, AI can't replace them all. AI means that they now also have to integrate a bunch of AI into the system and maintain that, too.)

GitCitadel (nostr:npub1s3ht77dq4zqnya8vjun5jp3p44pr794ru36d0ltxu65chljw8xjqd975wz) is very automation-forward, but we still have to front the incredibly high cost of designing and building the automation, train people to interact with it (there are now over 20 people integrated into the workflow!), adjust it based upon their feedback, and we have to support the automation, once it's running.

This sort of streamlined machine is what people pay companies for, not code. That is why there's little business cost to open source.

Open-source is great, but...

nostr:nevent1qqsgqh2dedhagyd9k8yfk2lagswjl7y627k9fpnq4l436ccmlys0s3qprdmhxue69uhhg6r9vehhyetnwshxummnw3erztnrdakj7q3qqdjn8j4gwgmkj3k5un775nq6q3q7mguv5tvajstmkdsqdja2havqxpqqqqqqzdhnyjm

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

Intro

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

Requirements

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

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

Installation

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

Prepare and verify

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

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

Create folders & download NWC

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

Creating the Docker image

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

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

Creating docker-compose.yml and necessary data directories

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

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

Starting and testing

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

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

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

Updating

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

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

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

Beginning at the start

In my previous article, The Establishment, I answered the question: "How do we form a company?" I realize, now, that I was getting a bit ahead, of myself, as the precursor to a company is a team, and many people struggle to form teams. So, I will go back to the beginning, and then you can read both articles to the end, and then stop.

The Initiation

The first, and most-difficult step of team formation, is the initiation. We know that it must be the most-difficult, as it's the step that carries the highest potential reward, and it's the step that is tried-and-failed most often. (Some people, like Elon Musk or Donald Trump, are born Initiators with excellent follow-through, but this archetype is exceedingly thin on the ground because it requires you to be mildly autistic, have barely-throttled ADHD, and/or tend to megalomania, also popularly known as "toxic masculinity", "CEO personality", or "being a successful military officer".)

Someone needs to form a useful, attractive Vision and then motivate other people to help them achieve it. That sounds really easy, but it's actually brutally difficult because * You have to come up with an idea that is coherent, plausible, and inspiring. * You have to be able to communicate that idea to other people and make it appealing to them, by tying it into their own personal goals and desires. * You have to be able to hone and reformulate that idea, constantly, to correct it or to re-motivate the other team members. * You have to defend the idea against detractors, naysayers, and trolls, and you have to do it so vociferously, that it will erode your own popularity among those who disagree with you and open you to personal attacks. * You have to be able to focus on the idea, yourself, for a long stretch of time, and not allow yourself to get bored, lazy, or distracted.

So, just do and be all of those things, and then initiate the team, with the method I will name the Hatbock Method. It is so named because of the classic, German initiation ritual, in which an Initiator stands up, loudly defines their Vision and calls into a group "Wer hat Bock?" (roughly, "Who has the hunger/desire?") and whoever responds with "Ich hab Bock." (roughly, "Yes, I hunger for this.") is a part of the team.

Then the Initiator says, "Okay, everyone with the hunger, let's sit down together, and discuss this some more." (This "sitting" is literally called a "seating", or "Sitzung", which is the German word for "meeting".)

The Sitting

We now get to the second most difficult part of team formation: figuring out where to sit. Most teams get this wrong, repeatedly, and many teams dissolve or fracture under the difficulty of this momentous decision. You would think organizing yourselves online would make this easier ("Oh, we'll just meet online!"), but the number of places available for sitting online are limitless. You can talk your whole Vision into the ground, with laborous discussions and migrations between Chachi, OxChat, Telegram, SimpleX, Slack, Discord, WhatsApp, GitHub, Teams, Coracle, Matrix... you get the idea.

Try to keep in mind that the Vision is more important than the seating area, and go with the flow. Simply, find someplace and go there. Worry about it again, at a later date. Don't lose momentum. Sit down and start discussing the Vision, immediately.

Now, this next bit is very important:

Do not let anyone outside your team influence where you sit!

...unless they are providing your team with some good, service, or income, that makes choosing their preferred location the superior choice.

This is the German Stammtisch principle, where a host encourages you to come sit down, regularly, in some particular place, because your sitting there provides them with some benefit: they can overhear your conversations, get you to test out their seating area, sell you refreshments, etc. Your choice of seating, in other words, is a valuable good, and you should only "sell" it to someone who rewards you in measure. They have to reward you because their preferred seating area wasn't your immediate and obvious choice, so there was probably something unappealing or uncertain about the seating area.

Plan it in

Once you've sat down, and finished your rough draft of the Vision, you need to figure out when to sit. This is the third most-difficult part of team formation. (Yes, don't worry, it gets easier as it goes along.)

The most popular plan is the Wirsehenuns Plan (roughly, "We'll see each other, around.") This can work quite well, if you just want to have a loose collaboration, that calls itself together in an ad hoc fashion, when a team member feels the need. Also known as "@ me, bros".

It's not a great plan for more intensive collaboration, as that tends to need a certain amount of velocity, to actually happen, as the speed of movement has a centrifugal effect on the tasks. Team momentum, in other words, creates a sort of gravity, that keeps the team together as a unit. So, for deeper teamwork, I would recommend the Stammtisch variant: name a place and date/time, when you will next meet. Preferably, on a rotating schedule: daily, weekly, last Thursday of the month, etc.

And then meet there and then. And discuss amongst yourselves. Set clear, short-term tasks (and assign them to particular people!), medium-term strategies, and longer-term goals. Write everything down. Anything not written down, is a suggestion, not an assigned task.

If you find your Stammtisch becoming increasingly rewarding and productive, and your goals start moving closer and closer into sight, then you might want to formalize your team structure further, as a company.

@ 4870d550:110d6208

As many of you may know, The Progressive Bitcoiner has transitioned to a 501c3 nonprofit in the United States, based in Boston Massachusetts. We were always mission driven as a podcast, and I decided to take that mission, as well as my own passion as a progressive and my experience working in nonprofits for the past decade, and translate it into nonprofit.

Our mission is to increase Bitcoin awareness and adoption among progressives through education and funding progressive causes. I believe our mission is more important than ever, and today I’m asking for your help and partnership!

From our humble beginnings years ago as just a podcast, we were dedicated to amplifying progressive voices and bitcoin education tailored to a progressive audience because that was desperately lacking in the bitcoin media and education space. Additionally, a lot of left leaning media, politicians, and everyday people were believing and perpetuating myths about bitcoin being bad for the environment, being a right wing/libertarian project, only used for crime and terrorism, etc. While the narrative has improved some, I think all of us would agree we still have a long way to go.

Also take into consideration the recent election of Donald Trump as President of the United States, his support of bitcoin and bitcoin friendly policies, and how that may create a backlash and perpetuate false narratives left leaning folks and media believe and push against bitcoin. In one regard it’s silly to dismiss, or actively fight against, a neutral and open technology like bitcoin (with incredible benefits for people globally as a store of value, media of exchange, and beyond) just because you don’t like someone who uses it or promotes it. On the other hand, it is a real thing happening right now in left circles and mainstream media (just look at Rachel Maddow’s recent comments on the U.S. Strategic Bitcoin reserve).

This is why I think our mission and cause is more important than ever before, and why I’m asking for your help and partnership. Whether you consider yourself a progressive or left leaning person or not, our goal is to build a more diverse and robust constituency that understands bitcoin and will advocate for bitcoin rights in the U.S. that includes preserving privacy and freedom tech tools, bitcoin self-custody, and in general the ability for all americans to freely use and benefit from bitcoin. While many inroads have been made in bipartisan ways and support of bitcoin, we still have a long way to go and many of the most outspoken advocates of bitcoin continue to be right leaning individuals and politicians, while many of the most outspoken critics come from the left.

As Lyn Alden once said to me on our podcast, it’s critical to also support and protect your left flank as much as your right, which creates a stronger and more robust defense of whatever you're fighting for. For us, the fight for financial freedom and human rights is critical, and bitcoin is an integral part of this fight. We will work hard to fight any potential backlash from the left against bitcoin as they attach narratives to Bitcoin associating it with Trump (particularly as we watch elections in 2026 and 2028).

The way we combate this and grow bipartisan support for bitcoin is through media, our publications, traveling to and appearing on mainstream media, meeting with progressive lawmakers, staffers, and activists, to discuss Bitcoin in a way that resonates with progressives. Do we want just under half the country to think Bitcoin isn't for them, or have them believe mainstream media narratives about Bitcoin as a MAGA only movement? Of course we know that’s a crazy assertion, but many are perpetuating this narrative.

Through our own efforts, and partnerships with other bitcoin education and advocacy orgs in the space, we will build a more robust, and bipartisan coalition of bitcoin support in the United States. The only way we can do this is with your support and donation to help us increase our media and publication presence, fund progressive causes through our grant giving program, and increasing staff capacity at our organization to hit the ground running whether it’s in Boston, DC, LA and beyond.

Whether you are a progressive individual that agrees wholeheartedly with our cause and identifies with our content and work, or even if you’re a conservative who voted for Trump, but want to see more bipartisan support of Bitcoin and less unsubstantiated attacks against Bitcoin from left media and politicians, we ask for your support today. We don’t want to waste a moment on amplifying our message and getting to work building this support and educating the left on Bitcoin.

Consider donating today in Bitcoin or fiat https://progressivebitcoiner.org/donate/. If you are a Bitcoin business in the space also wanting to increase bipartisan support of Bitcoin by bringing in more progressives to the cause, we welcome and encourage your support either through media partnership via our podcast and publication, or by donation. Your donation is tax-deductible.

Thank you for your support and partnership. Remember, Bitcoin is for everyone! And we’re doing our part to ensure that progressives understand this. This is only the beginning!

Trey Walsh Executive Director, The Progressive Bitcoiner, Inc.

@ c8383d81:f9139549

My own stats on what I’ve done over the weekend:

• Spoke to +100 developers, it was great seeing a couple of familiar Flemish faces and meeting some new ones but overall the crowd was extremely diverse.

• Ended up doing a short interview promoting the protocol and ended up going to 0 talks.

• Tried to evangelize by going booth by booth to distribute a Nostr flyer to other FOSDEM projects, with the hope that they would broadcast the info towards their SOME person to add Nostr on their list or to build out a library for the languages that were present ( This was a fairly slow approach )

• Kept it to Nostr protocol 95% of the time, the Bitcoin narrative is not always a good time to push and as a side note I’ve met more Monero users than in the last 5 years.

• Was able to convince some engineers to look into the #soveng endeavor.

Small overview from the most common questions:

• They have heard about Nostr but are not sure of the details. ( mostly through the bitcoin community )
• What is the difference with ActivityPub, Mastodon, Fediverse ?
• IOT developers, so questions regarding MQTT & Meshtastic integrations ?
• Current state of MLS on Nostr ?
• What are the current biggest clients / apps build on Nostr ?
• Will jack still give a talk ?

Things we could improve:

• Bring more stickers like loads more,
• Bring T-shirts, Pins… could be a good way to fund these adventures instead of raising funds. ( Most projects where selling something to help raise funds for projects )
• Almost no onboarding / client installs.
• Compared to the Nostr booth at BTC Amsterdam not a single person asked if they could charge their phone.

Personal Note: The last time I visited was roughly 13 years ago and me being a little more seasoned I just loved the fact that I was able to pay some support to the open source projects I’ve been using for years ( homebrew, modzilla, Free BSD,.. ) and see the amazing diverse crowd that is the open source Movement 🧡

Al final shoutout to our great pirate crew 🏴‍☠️: The Dutch Guard ( nostr:npub1qe3e5wrvnsgpggtkytxteaqfprz0rgxr8c3l34kk3a9t7e2l3acslezefe & nostr:npub1l77twp5l02jadkcjn6eeulv2j7y5vmf9tf3hhtq7h7rp0vzhgpzqz0swft ) and a adrenaline fueled nostr:npub1t6jxfqz9hv0lygn9thwndekuahwyxkgvycyscjrtauuw73gd5k7sqvksrw , nostr:npub1rfw075gc6pc693w5v568xw4mnu7umlzpkfxmqye0cgxm7qw8tauqfck3t8 and nostr:npub1r30l8j4vmppvq8w23umcyvd3vct4zmfpfkn4c7h2h057rmlfcrmq9xt9ma amazing finally meeting you IRL after close to 2 years since the Yakihonne hackathon 😀

@ dd1f9d50:06113a21

(Because Most People Don’t Understand Money)

The requisite knowledge needed to know whether $100 or $100,000 per Bitcoin is relatively speaking “a lot,” is what value means. One way to measure value is through a universal yardstick we call “Money.” The question of “What is money?” is perhaps one of the most overlooked and under answered in our day and age. There is even an entire podcast dedicated to that question with the eponymous title, hosted by Robert Breedlove. That podcast often delves into the more philosophical underpinnings whereas I hope to approach this with a more practical answer.

Money is a technology.

Money is the technology with which we interact with one another to reorganize goods and services to the place and time they are best suited. Most money of the past has been tangible (though not a requisite feature), scarce, recognizable (read: verifiable), durable, portable, and divisible. These features one might call the “Attributes of Money.” These attributes are absolutely essential for a money to maintain its status as a money. (Those of you who understand the U.S. Dollar system maybe scratching your heads right now but, believe me, I will address that elephant in due time.) These attributes, you may notice, are not a yes or no but more of a gradient. A money can be MORE portable than another yet, less durable. One more divisible but not scarce whatsoever. The point being they must have, in some capacity, these attributes or they simply aren’t money.

One of These Things is Not Like the Other

| | Bitcoin | Gold | Dollars | |-----------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------:| | Scarcity | 21 million coins
is the maximum supply | Unknown- the
supply grows roughly 2% per year | Also unknown to anyone outside of the Federal Reserve, Trillions and counting | | Recognizability | Each coin is verifiable to it's genesis on the timechain | Each molecule of gold has distinct physical verifiable properties | If the Federal reserve says it is a valid note, it is (Unless you are an enemy of the United States) | | Durablility | Each "Bitcoin" is information stored on a globally distributed network | Doesn't Rust and as far as can be measured Au197 is stable forever | Can be destroyed by any means that effect fabric and centralized databases | | Portability | Available wherever data can be store- Anywhere | Can be moved at 9.81 Newtons per Kilogram- Methods may vary | Can be moved physically with fabric notes- Digitally with express permission from a US accredited banking institution | | Divisibility | Currently can be divided into 100 million parts called Sats (can be further subdivided by adding decimal places) | Can be divided to the Atomic level (Though not practical) | Can be divided (without dilution) by adding new denominative bills or coinage
Can be divided (with dilution) by printing new bills or coinage | | | Bitcoin | Gold | Dollars |

You may think with all of the great functionality of Bitcoin that the phrase "One of these things is not like the other" refers to BTC. No, I was referring to the Dollar. It is the only one on the list that was a currency that was substituted as some kind of faux money. It asserts itself, or rather the Federal Reserve asserts it, as money, de facto.

Dollars are NOT money.

Dollars are (allegedly) a currency. If money is a specific technology, currency is the financial infrastructure that allows that technology to reach and be used by the most number of people possible. This requires a firm tether between the asset being used as money and the currency used as a claim to that money. For example: If I hand you a chicken, you have a chicken. But, if I hand you a coupon that is redeemable for a chicken, you do not have a chicken. You have a claim to a chicken that is only as good as the party making that claim. Bringing it back to money again, dollars (Prior to 1971) were redeemable for gold at a rate of $35 per ounce. This is that strong tether that pegged dollars to gold and physical reality itself. Without a proof of work, mining, . Until…

WTF Happened in 1971?

The Nixon shock happened. Briefly, The U.S. took in Europe’s gold in the 1940’s to keep it out of Hitler’s hands. The U.S. made an agreement to peg the dollar to Europe’s gold. The U.S. over printed dollars in relation to the gold holdings. Around 1971 France (among others) called the U.S. out for devaluing the dollar and thus European currencies. So, Nixon “Temporarily” suspended the convertibility of dollars to gold. Now, here we all are like Wile E. Coyote having run off of the golden cliff clutching our dollars in our arms and 54 years later we still haven’t looked down to see the truth.

Dollars Aren’t Backed by Anything

This is why no country in the world today has a money standard. Seemingly they all forgot the number one rule of issuing currency, it must be backed by something. Now, you may hear dollar proponents say “The U.S. dollar is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States!” Another way of saying that is, “We said it is worth something, so it is!” This fiat (by decree) mentality creates a plethora of perverse incentives. The ever growing supply disallows users of the Dollar to save without inccuring the penalties of inflation.

Just a Few Examples of How You're Being Crushed

Because your dollar loses value:

• It pushes people to spend them on assets that seem to appreciate (as the dollar debases) but are truly staying stagnant.
• It pushes people to gamble on securities hoping the perceived value is enough to beat the inflationary curve.
• It pushes people away from saving for their future and the future of their families.
• It creates insane credit incentives so that people borrow way more than they can afford today knowing that dollars will be cheaper in the future. (Effectively a short position)
• It pushes people to spend less and less time making and maintaining their families as it becomes more expensive to keep a similar lifestyle to which it was founded.

These are just a few of the terrible consequences of not knowing that trading a currency with no monetary backing has on a society. Most may blame this soley on the ability to print currency by a central bank but, that is not the only factor. If the fed printed dollars against gold, people would simply take the best rate they could get and remonetize themselves with the gold. But because there is no monetary escape hatch guaranteed by the issuance of dollars, I.E. no one has to take your dollars in exchange for their Bitcoin or gold, you are left at the mercy of the market.

One Day, People Will Stop Accepting Your Dollars

Those lementing the high price of Bitcoin might want to thank their lucky stars that Bitcoin still has a rational number next to the "BTC 1=$?" sign. One day you will have to exchange something of actual value to the spender (no longer a seller). Your product, good or service, will be the only thing that anyone might be willing to part with their Bitcoin over. That is what makes a money, the most salable non-consumable good, whose only funtion is to back a financial structure that facilitates trade.

Bitcoin is Capital

Capital is a broad term that can describe anything that confers value or benefit to its owners, such as a factory and its machinery, or the financial assets of a business or an individual. Bitcoin being the latter creates the financial structures from which you build upon. You use capital to hold, transfer, and grow value. You do not do this with cash. Cash is a depreciating asset when you don't use it to gain goods or services for yourself or your business. This misconception around the equivalance between cash and money (financial capital) is what tricks people into believing Dollars are money. And what's worse is that even some of our greatest heroes have done this.

Slay Your Heroes, Within Reason

Unfortunately due to a mixing of verbiage that have very distinct differences, the title: "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" is technically inaccurate. Bitcoin doesn't fit the definition of cash, which is a liquid asset that can be easily converted into its equivalent value. In short, Satoshi misspoke. In reality, owning Bitcoin UTXOs (with private keys) means you already possess the asset, not just a claim to it. When you spend Bitcoin, the recipient receives the actual asset, not a promise of it. When you receive Bitcoin, you have final settlement on that transaction. Fundamentally Bitcoin is not cash, electronic or otherwise.

Bitcoin is Money.

@ ec9bd746:df11a9d0

I was diving into PoW (Proof-of-Work) once again after nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3wamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarj9e3xzmny9uqzqj8a67jths8euy33v5yu6me6ngua5v3y3qq3dswuqh2pejmtls6datagmu rekindled my interest with his PoW Draw project. It was a fun little trifle, but it shifted my focus just the right way at the right time.

Because then, on Friday, came the Oval Office Travesty. Once I got over the initial shock, I decided I couldn't just curse and lament; I needed to do something bigger, something symbolic, something expressive. So that's exactly what I did—breaking nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tcqyqewrqnkx4zsaweutf739s0cu7et29zrntqs5elw70vlm8zudr3y2t9v7jg's record which he held for almost 2 and half years.

Here is a note with PoW 45, the highest PoW known to Nostr (as of now).

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpmym6ar92346qc04ml08z6j0yrelylkv9r9ysurhte0g2003r2wsqy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqsuamnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dshsqgqqqqqqqqqy8t8awr5c8z4yfp4cr8v7spp8psncv8twlh083flcr582fyu9

How Did I Pull It Off?

In theory, quite simple: Create note, run PoW mining script & wait.

Thanks to PoW Draw, I already had mining software at hand: nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tcqyqvqc5tlvn6etv09f0fvuauves49dvgnukjtzsndfv9y8yyrqyxmz7dty6z's notemine_hw, but when you know that there is a 1 in 2^45 chance that the next hash will be the correct one you want to increase the odds a bit. So on Monday evening, I started my Note Mining operation on an old 40 thread machine called Workhorse.

Issues Along the Way

I was immediately surprised that Workhorse (2× Intel Xeon Silver 4114) produced only about 3Mh/s. A laptop (Intel Core i7-1185G7) with Windows and all the bloat did 5Mh/s. That was strange.

Another hurdle was that notemine_hw does not refresh the created_at field. With just a few Mh/s of power I was potentially looking at weeks of computation, by then the note would be quite stale. So I created systemd service leveraging the RuntimeMaxSec option to periodically restart every 3600 seconds assuring that the Note would be max 1 hour old at the time of publishing.

Luckily PoW is that kind of problem where every hash attempt is an independent event, so the chance of success is the same whether you do it in small increments or one uninterrupted stretch. So by restarting the mining process I was only losing a few mere seconds every hour due to the overhead.

Once the note staleness issue was resolved, I looked at the 40 workers on Workhorse vs. 7 workers on the laptop and start messing around with running one instance with 40 workers and running 40 instances with 1 worker and found out, that the workers are not bound to a CPU thread and are jumping between the CPUs like rabbits high on Colombian carrots.

The solution? Running multiple instances with one worker each as a service locked to its own CPU core using systemd's CPUAffinity option. ``` $aida@workhorse:systemd/system $ sudo cat notemine@.service [Unit] Description=Notemine HW Publish (restarts hourly)

[Service] Type=simple CPUAffinity=%i

The command to run:

ExecStart=/home/aida/.cargo/bin/notemine_hw publish --n-workers 1 --difficulty 45 --event-json /home/aida/note.json --relay-url 'wss://wot.shaving.kiwi' --nsec nsec0123456789abcdef

Let the process run for 1 hour (3600 seconds), then systemd will stop it:

RuntimeMaxSec=3600 TimeoutStopSec=1

Tells systemd to restart the service automatically after it stops:

Restart=always RestartSec=1

run as a non-root user:

User=aida Group=aida

[Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target ``` Then I added a starting service to spawn an instance for each CPU thread.

``` $aida@workhorse:systemd/system $ sudo cat notemine_start.service [Unit] Description=Start all services in sequence with 3-second intervals

[Service] Type=oneshot ExecStart=/usr/bin/zsh /home/aida/notemine_start.sh

RemainAfterExit=yes

[Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target Here is the startup script (I know, loops exist—but Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V is so old-school): aida@workhorse:~ $ cat notemine_start.sh /usr/bin/systemctl start notemine@0.service /usr/bin/sleep 3 /usr/bin/systemctl start notemine@1.service /usr/bin/sleep 3 /usr/bin/systemctl start notemine@2.service /usr/bin/sleep 3 /usr/bin/systemctl start notemine@3.service /usr/bin/sleep 3 ... ... ... /usr/bin/systemctl start notemine@38.service `` The sleep there is critical to make sure that thecreated_at`timestamps are different, preventing redundant hashing.

This adjustment made Workhorse the strongest machine in my fleet with 10+Mh/s.

The Luck Aspect

From Monday evening, I started adding all machines at my disposal into the fleet and by Wednesday evening I was crunching hashes on about 130 CPU threads (a lot of them were quite antique) and at the peak was just little shy of 40Mh/s. To compensate for the slow start with the few above-mentioned hiccups and the fact that I had to use my desktop to do other things from time to time, I counted with the conservative estimate of 30Mh/s when I was doing all the probability calculations.

Based on the type of task that PoW mining is, the outcome is not predictible. You are only looking at what is the chance that the outcome of every single independent event will be consecutively non-favourable and then subtracting it from 1 to get the chance of that single favourable event you want. I really had to brush up on my combinatorics and discrete mathematics to make sure I have at least an elementary understanding of what is going on. Also, because we are not just throwing a dice 5 times, but are operating with big numbers, approximation was necessary. Luckily, the formula is available and quite simple in the end.

Two weeks to exhauste all the possible tries still doesn't guarantee anything, actually there is a slighlty less than 2 in 3 chance that you will have a result after all that time. So the fact that I was able to hit the right hash in less than 3 days was good luck. Not insane lottery winning luck, but good luck; slighlty lower than 1 in 5.

Do you want to beat me?

Go ahead! All the pitfalls are described above and until there is a GPU-based PoW Mining available, we are all on pretty even ground.

Do you hate the note?

In that case, feel free to enjoy this accompanying image:

@ 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!

@ 06639a38:655f8f71

FOSDEM

I do know about the presence of this conference for many years, but I never attended it (and it's just around the corner for me coming from the south of The Netherlands). Attending FOSDEM with Nostr was quite a no-brainer to me. FOSDEM has the perfect tech-savy audience who will understand the protocol pretty quick. Our main goal would be to explain Nostr as a protocol and what new kind of applications can be build with it (and why we need it). During Bitcoin Amsterdam 2024 I proposed the idea for applying with a Nostr stand at FOSDEM '25 to @npub1l77twp5l02jadkcjn6eeulv2j7y5vmf9tf3hhtq7h7rp0vzhgpzqz0swft and @npub1hz5alqscpp8yjrvgsdp2n4ygkl8slvstrgvmjca7e45w6644ew7sewtysa. 

Jurjen and I created the application on October 29 2024. Without any expectations as no one knew what kind of policy they have. As a result we were really excited when we heard that our submission was approved (16 November 2024). Two weeks later we also proposed a main talk about Nostr (1 december 2024) and again we very surpised it was accepted (10 January 2025)!

Now it was time for us to work out all of the plans we had:

• Design and print promotional items
  • Flyers
  • Stickers
  • NIP-01 folder
  • Banners
• Gather all the equipment we need to demo Nostr stuff at the stand
• Book accomodations
• Prepare a keynote
• Start a Geyser fundraiser to cover all the expenses as much as possible

On the 21th of January we launched our Geyser project and with one very generous donation we already achieved our funding goal within just ONE hour! Wow!!!

Friday

In the evening Jurjen organized a Nostr fringe at the place of Commons Hub Brussels. Around 25 people joined, so that was a pleasant surpise so many showed up and shared their interest into Nostr. 

Saterday

We're arrived a bit too late as the venue was already packed with a lot of people! For the first hours we had no power, so we our computer screen with the slides was not. What we saw immediately was the huge interest in stickers. Not only our Nostr stickers, but in general you can grab stickers everywhere on each stand. People at FOSDEM like stickers a lot!

We were there with five and during the whole day all of use had conversations explaining Nostr or having related discussions around social media and centralisation. 

Video: https://nostrver.se/sites/default/files/2025-02/IMG_2322.mp4 

Sunday

This day was less crowded than the day before so we had a bit more room to breath, relax and explore other areas of the conference. 

In the afternoon it was up to Constant to give his Nostr keynote at one of the two mainstages of FOSDEM.

The recording is available here on fosdem.org and on YouTube.
All the keynotes slides can be found here.

Learnings / insights

• We need to be there again next year !!!
• We had zero inconvenient moments or unreasonable debates.
• Some attendees are pretty hardcore as one of them visited the stand the second time after when he installed the Gossip client on his PostmarketOS powered phone asking how to proceed using Nostr. People at FOSDEM are not normal ;-)
• Many people do ask why Nostr is here as another social media protocol.
• Questions about the differences with other protocols are very common, mentioning ActivityPub and ATproto.
• Almost everyone knows what Mastodon and the fediverse is.
• Had some questions how private Nostr is, so this confirms that we really need the private stuff for Nostr.
• At many moments it was hard to understand each other due all the noise from other people. Especially when you're speaking not your native language.
• When talking about using a private key you get really good questions how convient it could be (or not as some really don't believe it can work for normies) used in the context of social media. As in how often you will need this key for the actions you take using a Nostr client. A topic also very well explained by Constant in the Nostr main talk.
• We had 500+ stickers, but we needed more as we ran out of them during the Sunday morning.
• We handed-out around 400-500 NIP-01 folders.
• We handed-out almost 1000 A5 flyers.
• We did almost no onboardings but that's fine. FOSDEM attendees are tech-savy and will find their own way using the Nostr with some client. We were not there telling people what they should do.
• We need more merchandise next year. There were some stands with outstanding merchandise and I'm sure Nostr can offer the same (even better!) with the many talented creatives we already have in the community.
• Having just one table with a size of 180x80 (just like any other stand) you really have to choice what to display and not. Being there with 5-6 people was just enough as we all were quite surprised with the amount of interest.
• The FOSDEM organisation asked us multiple times how things were going. Especially with the announced protests against Jack Dorsey they were curious we didn't have any inconvenient moments. We really appreciate that!
• Overall we had the feeling that we were very welcome and we had a great opportunity to introduce Nostr to a new audience.

The team 💜

• @npub1equrmqway3qxw3dkssymusxkwgwrqypfgeqx0lx9pgjam7gnj4ysaqhkj6
• @npub1l77twp5l02jadkcjn6eeulv2j7y5vmf9tf3hhtq7h7rp0vzhgpzqz0swft
• @npub1r30l8j4vmppvq8w23umcyvd3vct4zmfpfkn4c7h2h057rmlfcrmq9xt9ma
• @npub1t6jxfqz9hv0lygn9thwndekuahwyxkgvycyscjrtauuw73gd5k7sqvksrw
• @npub1rfw075gc6pc693w5v568xw4mnu7umlzpkfxmqye0cgxm7qw8tauqfck3t8
• And me ;-)

If you're curious what we have spent, please have a look at this document.

Debugging Nostr AUTH with PHP

The week after FOSDEM I spent some hours on debugging these issues:

• Unclear nip-42 auth spec and/or behavior and this MR
• Uncaught error when writing to nostr.wine

As a result and with some help of @npub1acg6thl5psv62405rljzkj8spesceyfz2c32udakc2ak0dmvfeyse9p35c I submitted this merge request for the `sirn-se/websocket-php` package used in the Nostr-PHP library to fix connection errors on relays (WebSocket servers) which don't response with a reason when the HTTP connection is upgraded to the WebSocket protocol.

Nostr-PHP development

Next month (March) I will pick up my development on Nostr-PHP again.

• Finish up the NIP-19 integration
• Pick up the work on async and concurrent requests with websockets
• Create more examples
• Create examples using the Symfony and Laravel framework
• Take care of incoming merge requests with new features (thanks Djuri)

As of that moment I also will be publishing my weekly reports here sharing the stuff I did around Nostr.

@ d360efec:14907b5f

ภาพรวม (Overview):

Bitcoin (BTC) ใน TF 15m แสดงให้เห็นถึงความพยายามในการดีดตัวขึ้น (rebound) หลังจากที่ร่วงลงอย่างหนักเมื่อวันที่ 10 มีนาคม. อย่างไรก็ตาม, การดีดตัวนี้ยังคง ไม่มีความแข็งแกร่ง และยังคงอยู่ภายใต้แรงกดดันจากแนวต้านสำคัญๆ. การวิเคราะห์นี้จะเน้นไปที่ TF 15m เพื่อหากลยุทธ์ Day Trade ที่เหมาะสมกับสถานการณ์ปัจจุบัน.

การวิเคราะห์ทางเทคนิค (Technical Analysis - 15m):

• SMC (Smart Money Concepts):

  • ราคามีการดีดตัวขึ้นจากบริเวณใกล้ๆ แนวรับทางจิตวิทยา $60,000.
  • อย่างไรก็ตาม, การดีดตัวนี้ ยังไม่ได้ สร้าง Higher High (HH) ที่ชัดเจน. ยังคงมีลักษณะเป็นเพียงการ Rebound ในแนวโน้มขาลง.
  • ยังไม่มี สัญญาณการกลับตัวของ Smart Money (เช่น การสะสม Volume ในบริเวณแนวรับ).

• ICT Buyside & Sellside Liquidity:

  • Buyside Liquidity (แนวต้าน):
    • $68,000 (แนวต้านสำคัญ - EMA 50 และบริเวณที่เคยเป็นแนวรับ).
    • $69,000 - $70,000 (โซนแนวต้าน).
  • Sellside Liquidity (แนวรับ):
    • $64,000
    • $62,000 (Low ล่าสุด)
    • $60,000 (แนวรับทางจิตวิทยา)

• Money Flow:

  • Money Flow เริ่มเป็นบวกเล็กน้อย. นี่เป็นสัญญาณที่ดี (bullish divergence), แต่ยังต้องได้รับการยืนยัน. การที่ Money Flow เป็นบวกในขณะที่ราคายังไม่ทำ Higher High บ่งบอกว่าอาจมีแรงซื้อเข้ามาบ้าง, แต่ยังไม่แข็งแกร่งพอที่จะเปลี่ยนแนวโน้ม.

• EMA (Exponential Moving Average):

  • EMA 50 (สีเหลือง) ยังคงอยู่ ใต้ EMA 200 (สีขาว).
  • ราคาปัจจุบันกำลังพยายามทดสอบ EMA 50. การ Breakout เหนือ EMA 50 ได้อย่างแข็งแกร่งจะเป็นสัญญาณที่ดีขึ้น.

• Trend Strength:

  • เมฆยังคงเป็น สีแดง (Bearish), แต่เริ่ม บางลง.
  • มีสัญญาณ Neutral.
  • สรุป: แนวโน้มหลักยังคงเป็นขาลง, แต่เริ่มมีสัญญาณของการอ่อนแรงของแนวโน้มขาลง.

• Chart Pattern:

  • ยังไม่พบ Chart Pattern ที่บ่งบอกถึงการกลับตัวเป็นขาขึ้นที่ชัดเจน.
  • อาจมีการก่อตัวของรูปแบบ Double Bottom (หากราคาไม่ทำ New Low และ Breakout เหนือ $68,000 ได้), แต่ยังเร็วเกินไปที่จะสรุป.

กลยุทธ์ Day Trade (Day Trade Strategy):

• สถานการณ์: ตลาดมีความผันผวนสูง. การดีดตัวยังไม่แข็งแกร่ง. แนวโน้มหลักยังเป็นขาลง.

• กลยุทธ์หลัก: Short Selling (ยังคงเป็นกลยุทธ์หลัก, แต่ต้องระมัดระวังมากขึ้น):

  1. รอ Rebound: รอให้ราคาดีดตัวขึ้นไปใกล้แนวต้านสำคัญ ($68,000 หรือ EMA 50).
  2. หาสัญญาณ Bearish: สังเกต Price Action ที่แนวต้าน. มองหาสัญญาณ Bearish เช่น Bearish Engulfing, Evening Star, หรือการที่ราคาไม่สามารถ Breakout EMA 50 ได้.
  3. เข้า Short: เมื่อมีสัญญาณ Bearish ที่ชัดเจน.
  4. Stop Loss: เหนือ Swing High ล่าสุดของการ Rebound อย่างเคร่งครัด.
  5. Take Profit: แนวรับถัดไป ($64,000, $62,000, หรือ $60,000).

• กลยุทธ์รอง: Long (Buy) (มีความเสี่ยงสูงมาก):

  1. ไม่แนะนำให้เข้า Long จนกว่าจะมีสัญญาณการกลับตัวที่ชัดเจน
  2. หากราคา Breakout เหนือ $68,000 อย่างแข็งแกร่ง (พร้อม Volume สูง), อาจ พิจารณา Long ได้, แต่ต้อง Stop Loss ทันทีหากราคาหลุด $68,000 ลงมา.
  3. Stop Loss: ใต้ $68,000
  4. Take Profit: $69,000 - $70,000

• SMC Setup (เน้น Short):

  1. ระบุ Resistance Zone (แนวต้าน) ที่ชัดเจน (เช่น $68,000).
  2. รอให้ราคา Pullback (ดีดตัว) ขึ้นไปทดสอบ Resistance Zone.
  3. สังเกต Price Action ที่ Resistance Zone. มองหาสัญญาณ Bearish Reversal (เช่น Bearish Engulfing, Evening Star).
  4. เมื่อมีสัญญาณ Bearish Reversal, เข้า Short.
  5. ตั้ง Stop Loss เหนือ Swing High ล่าสุด.
  6. ตั้ง Take Profit ที่แนวรับถัดไป.

สิ่งที่ต้องระวัง (Important Considerations):

• ความผันผวน (Volatility): ยังคงสูงมาก.
• False Breakouts: ระวังการ Breakout หลอก (ทั้งขึ้นและลง).
• Dead Cat Bounce: การดีดตัวอาจเป็นเพียง Dead Cat Bounce.
• ข่าว (News): ติดตามข่าวสาร.
• Risk Management: สำคัญที่สุด. ใช้ Stop Loss เสมอ.

สรุป (Conclusion):

BTC ใน TF 15m กำลังพยายามดีดตัว, แต่ยังไม่มีสัญญาณการกลับตัวที่แข็งแกร่ง. แนวโน้มหลักยังคงเป็นขาลง. Day Trader ควรเน้น Short Selling เป็นหลัก, แต่ต้องระมัดระวังอย่างมากและใช้ Stop Loss อย่างเคร่งครัด. การ Long (Buy) มีความเสี่ยงสูงมาก และควรทำเฉพาะเมื่อมีสัญญาณการกลับตัวที่ชัดเจนเท่านั้น.

Disclaimer: การวิเคราะห์นี้เป็นเพียงความคิดเห็นส่วนตัว, ไม่ถือเป็นคำแนะนำในการลงทุน. ผู้ลงทุนควรศึกษาข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมและตัดสินใจด้วยความรอบคอบ.

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

Key Findings

• Researchers at the University of Cambridge discovered that aspirin can help slow the spread of certain cancers, including breast, bowel, and prostate cancers
• The study was published in the journal Nature

How Aspirin Works Against Cancer

• Aspirin blocks thromboxane A2 (TXA2), a chemical produced by blood platelets
• TXA2 normally weakens T cells, which are crucial for fighting cancer
• By inhibiting TXA2, aspirin "unleashes" T cells to more effectively target and destroy cancer cells

Supporting Evidence

• Previous studies showed regular aspirin use was linked to:
• 31% reduction in cancer-specific mortality in breast cancer patients
• 9% decrease in recurrence/metastasis risk
• 25% reduction in colon cancer risk

Potential Impact

• Aspirin could be particularly effective in early stages of cancer
• It may help prevent metastasis, which causes 90% of cancer fatalities
• As an inexpensive treatment, it could be more accessible globally than antibody-based therapies

Cautions

• Experts warn against self-medicating with aspirin
• Potential risks include internal bleeding and stomach ulcers
• Patients should consult doctors before starting aspirin therapy

Next Steps

• Large-scale clinical trials to determine which cancer types and patients would benefit most
• Development of new drugs that mimic aspirin's benefits without side effects

Citations: Natural News

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

There is something quietly rebellious about stacking sats. In a world obsessed with instant gratification, choosing to patiently accumulate Bitcoin, one sat at a time, feels like a middle finger to the hype machine. But to do it right, you have got to stay humble. Stack too hard with your head in the clouds, and you will trip over your own ego before the next halving even hits.

Small Wins

Stacking sats is not glamorous. Discipline. Stacking every day, week, or month, no matter the price, and letting time do the heavy lifting. Humility lives in that consistency. You are not trying to outsmart the market or prove you are the next "crypto" prophet. Just a regular person, betting on a system you believe in, one humble stack at a time. Folks get rekt chasing the highs. They ape into some shitcoin pump, shout about it online, then go silent when they inevitably get rekt. The ones who last? They stack. Just keep showing up. Consistency. Humility in action. Know the game is long, and you are not bigger than it.

Ego is Volatile

Bitcoin’s swings can mess with your head. One day you are up 20%, feeling like a genius and the next down 30%, questioning everything. Ego will have you panic selling at the bottom or over leveraging the top. Staying humble means patience, a true bitcoin zen. Do not try to "beat” Bitcoin. Ride it. Stack what you can afford, live your life, and let compounding work its magic.

Simplicity

There is a beauty in how stacking sats forces you to rethink value. A sat is worth less than a penny today, but every time you grab a few thousand, you plant a seed. It is not about flaunting wealth but rather building it, quietly, without fanfare. That mindset spills over. Cut out the noise: the overpriced coffee, fancy watches, the status games that drain your wallet. Humility is good for your soul and your stack. I have a buddy who has been stacking since 2015. Never talks about it unless you ask. Lives in a decent place, drives an old truck, and just keeps stacking. He is not chasing clout, he is chasing freedom. That is the vibe: less ego, more sats, all grounded in life.

The Big Picture

Stack those sats. Do it quietly, do it consistently, and do not let the green days puff you up or the red days break you down. Humility is the secret sauce, it keeps you grounded while the world spins wild. In a decade, when you look back and smile, it will not be because you shouted the loudest. It will be because you stayed the course, one sat at a time. \ \ Stay Humble and Stack Sats. 🫡

@ a58a2663:87bb2918

After two years of using Standard Notes as my main note-taking app, I’m switching to Obsidian.

The $100 that Standard Notes charges for basic editing capabilities is difficult to justify, especially for someone paying in Brazilian Real and striving to make a living from writing. However, I will certainly miss its simplicity and cleaner interface.

It’s my impression that the developers are missing an opportunity to create a privacy-focused note-taking app tailored to the specific needs of writers, rather than general users.

Substack, for example, achieved such success because it targeted the distribution and monetization of writers’ work. But we need more tools focused not on distribution or monetization, but on the actual process—indeed, the various phases of the process—of creating texts. This is especially true for complex, long-form texts with different levels of argumentation, numerous written and multimedia sources, and cross-references to other works by the author.

It’s crucial that an app like this doesn’t feel overly complex, like Notion or Evernote, or so all-purpose, like Obsidian. And, of course, I’m not talking about a new full-fledged text editor like Scrivener.

Just a thought. Take note.

@ 4925ea33:025410d8

1. O que é um Aromaterapeuta?

O aromaterapeuta é um profissional especializado na prática da Aromaterapia, responsável pelo uso adequado de óleos essenciais, ervas aromáticas, águas florais e destilados herbais para fins terapêuticos.

A atuação desse profissional envolve diferentes métodos de aplicação, como inalação, uso tópico, sempre considerando a segurança e a necessidade individual do cliente. A Aromaterapia pode auxiliar na redução do estresse, alívio de dores crônicas, relaxamento muscular e melhora da respiração, entre outros benefícios.

Além disso, os aromaterapeutas podem trabalhar em conjunto com outros profissionais da saúde para oferecer um tratamento complementar em diversas condições. Como já mencionado no artigo sobre "Como evitar processos alérgicos na prática da Aromaterapia", é essencial ter acompanhamento profissional, pois os óleos essenciais são altamente concentrados e podem causar reações adversas se utilizados de forma inadequada.

---

2. Como um Aromaterapeuta Pode Ajudar?

Você pode procurar um aromaterapeuta para diferentes necessidades, como:

✔ Questões Emocionais e Psicológicas

Auxílio em momentos de luto, divórcio, demissão ou outras situações desafiadoras.

Apoio na redução do estresse, ansiedade e insônia.

Vale lembrar que, em casos de transtornos psiquiátricos, a Aromaterapia deve ser usada como terapia complementar, associada ao tratamento médico.

✔ Questões Físicas

Dores musculares e articulares.

Problemas respiratórios como rinite, sinusite e tosse.

Distúrbios digestivos leves.

Dores de cabeça e enxaquecas. Nesses casos, a Aromaterapia pode ser um suporte, mas não substitui a medicina tradicional para identificar a origem dos sintomas.

✔ Saúde da Pele e Cabelos

Tratamento para acne, dermatites e psoríase.

Cuidados com o envelhecimento precoce da pele.

Redução da queda de cabelo e controle da oleosidade do couro cabeludo.

✔ Bem-estar e Qualidade de Vida

Melhora da concentração e foco, aumentando a produtividade.

Estímulo da disposição e energia.

Auxílio no equilíbrio hormonal (TPM, menopausa, desequilíbrios hormonais).

Com base nessas necessidades, o aromaterapeuta irá indicar o melhor tratamento, calculando doses, sinergias (combinação de óleos essenciais), diluições e técnicas de aplicação, como inalação, uso tópico ou difusão.

---

3. Como Funciona uma Consulta com um Aromaterapeuta?

Uma consulta com um aromaterapeuta é um atendimento personalizado, onde são avaliadas as necessidades do cliente para a criação de um protocolo adequado. O processo geralmente segue estas etapas:

✔ Anamnese (Entrevista Inicial)

Perguntas sobre saúde física, emocional e estilo de vida.

Levantamento de sintomas, histórico médico e possíveis alergias.

Definição dos objetivos da terapia (alívio do estresse, melhora do sono, dores musculares etc.).

✔ Escolha dos Óleos Essenciais

Seleção dos óleos mais indicados para o caso.

Consideração das propriedades terapêuticas, contraindicações e combinações seguras.

✔ Definição do Método de Uso

O profissional indicará a melhor forma de aplicação, que pode ser:

Inalação: difusores, colares aromáticos, vaporização.

Uso tópico: massagens, óleos corporais, compressas.

Banhos aromáticos e escalda-pés. Todas as diluições serão ajustadas de acordo com a segurança e a necessidade individual do cliente.

✔ Plano de Acompanhamento

Instruções detalhadas sobre o uso correto dos óleos essenciais.

Orientação sobre frequência e duração do tratamento.

Possibilidade de retorno para ajustes no protocolo.

A consulta pode ser realizada presencialmente ou online, dependendo do profissional.

---

Quer saber como a Aromaterapia pode te ajudar? Agende uma consulta comigo e descubra os benefícios dos óleos essenciais para o seu bem-estar!

@ 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...

@ 3ffac3a6:2d656657

Recently, I found an old Sapphire Block Erupter USB at home that I used for Bitcoin mining back in 2013. Out of curiosity and nostalgia, I decided to try getting it to work again. I spent an entire afternoon configuring the device and, after much trial and error, discovered that I needed an older version of CGMiner to make it work.

The Sapphire Block Erupter USB was one of the first ASIC devices designed for Bitcoin mining. Although obsolete for competitive mining, it can still be used for learning, nostalgia, or experimentation. In this post, I’ll show you how to run a Block Erupter USB on Linux today.

1. Prerequisites

Before you start, make sure you have:

• A Sapphire Block Erupter USB
• A powered USB hub (optional but recommended)
• A computer running Linux (Ubuntu, Debian, or another compatible distribution)
• A mining pool account (e.g., Slush Pool, KanoPool, etc.)

2. Installing Dependencies

Before running the miner, install some dependencies:

bash sudo apt update && sudo apt install -y git build-essential autoconf automake libtool pkg-config libusb-1.0-0-dev

3. Determining the Compatible Version of CGMiner

To find the correct CGMiner version that still supports Block Erupter USB, I performed a binary search across different versions, testing each one until I found the last one that properly recognized the device. The result was that version 3.4.3 is the most recent one that still supports Block Erupters. However, different versions of these devices may require different CGMiner versions.

4. Downloading and Compiling CGMiner

CGMiner is one of the software options compatible with Block Erupters. You can download the correct version from two trusted sources:

• From the official repository: CGMiner v3.4.3 on GitHub
• Alternatively, from this mirror: CGMiner v3.4.3 on Haven

To ensure file integrity, verify the SHA-256 hash:

3b44da12e5f24f603eeeefdaa2c573bd566c5c50c9d62946f198e611cd55876b

Now, download and extract it:

```bash wget https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/archive/refs/tags/v3.4.3.tar.gz

Or, alternatively:

wget https://haven.girino.org/3b44da12e5f24f603eeeefdaa2c573bd566c5c50c9d62946f198e611cd55876b.tgz

sha256sum v3.4.3.tar.gz # Confirm that the hash matches

Extract the file

tar -xvf v3.4.3.tar.gz cd cgminer-3.4.3

Compile CGMiner

./autogen.sh --enable-icarus make -j$(nproc)

Install on the system (optional)

sudo make install ```

5. Connecting the Block Erupter USB

Plug the device into a USB port and check if it is recognized:

bash dmesg | grep USB lsusb

You should see something like:

Bus 003 Device 004: ID 10c4:ea60 Cygnal Integrated Products, Inc. CP2102 USB to UART Bridge Controller

If needed, adjust the USB device permissions:

bash sudo chmod 666 /dev/ttyUSB0

6. Configuring and Running CGMiner

Now, run CGMiner, pointing it to your mining pool:

bash ./cgminer -o stratum+tcp://your.pool.com:3333 -u yourUsername -p yourPassword

If the miner detects the Block Erupter correctly, you should see something like:

[2025-03-08 22:26:45] Started cgminer 3.4.3 [2025-03-08 22:26:45] No devices detected! [2025-03-08 22:26:45] Waiting for USB hotplug devices or press q to quit [2025-03-08 22:26:45] Probing for an alive pool [2025-03-08 22:26:46] Pool 0 difficulty changed to 65536 [2025-03-08 22:26:46] Network diff set to 111T [2025-03-08 22:26:46] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2025-03-08 22:27:02] Hotplug: Icarus added AMU 0

Conclusion

Although no longer viable for real mining, the Sapphire Block Erupter USB is still great for learning about ASICs, testing mining pools, and understanding Bitcoin mining. If you enjoy working with old hardware and have one lying around, it’s worth experimenting with!

If you have any questions or want to share your experience, leave a comment below!

@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1

The ECB’s Tightrope Walk (2019–2025)

The European Central Bank (ECB) is caught between a rock and a hard place these past years (2019–2025). On one hand, it’s failing its core mission: keeping the Euro stable with a 2% inflation target. On the other, trust in the currency—and the EU itself—is crumbling fast. You can see it in the sinking European bond market and the growing crowd of voters backing anti-EU politicians.

As usual, the ECB sticks to its playbook: blending marketing with “innovations,” spicing it up with anti-crypto MiCA rulings on Bitcoin, and blaming everyone—Putin, Trump, Elon, China, the wind, the moon—for their woes. Since the financial crisis, it’s pumped 2.3 trillion euros into the economy, money conjured out of thin air for market purchases (quantitative easing). The result? Our wallets feel the pinch as purchasing power tanks, with inflation bouncing between 2.1% and 20%, depending on which figures you still trust. No shock there: for every euro circulating in 2002, there are now five.

Meanwhile, Europe’s scrambling to keep up appearances, led by a parliament of nitwits who treat error-riddled high school essays from the Dutch Central Bank as gospel—or print 1 trillion euros (!) to prop up their debt and war cycle. These politicians aren’t too dumb to spot the mistakes; they just care more about ramming through the “narrative,” shaky or not.

The Bitcoin Smokescreen Take the attack on Bitcoin, always nagging about its “energy use”—a standard they never apply elsewhere. Good thing, too; electricity isn’t “good” or “evil.” The real play? Clearing the path for a “digital euro,” cooked up by sly financial institutions hawking their “Aldi Bitcoin” via corporate blockchains.

Digital Euro: The Shiny Trap

Advantages I’ll grudgingly list a few perks, though they’re skin-deep: faster transactions than today’s sluggish bank transfers, digital payments (QR codes), and a unified standard across Europe. These tiny upgrades—great for marketing—don’t outweigh the massive downsides but do beat the current patchwork of payment systems. That’s the good news, and it ends here.

Disadvantages

The cons list is long, so I’ll hit the three worst:

Permission-Coin Nightmare You’ll need approval from some authority (or commercial bank) to receive, spend, or hold it. A 50€ note moves from A to B, no questions asked—cash has no name, needs no permission. Pocket money for your kid, a coin for a beggar, or paying for a used PlayStation: cash flows free. They want that gone. Bitcoin’s beauty mirrors cash but better—unconfiscatable, A to B, no permission needed, saint or crook. That’s the bedrock of a working social-economic system. Sorry, EU pious elite, but white, gray, and black economies will always exist—check your own subsidies; not everything’s clean. Worse, it threatens wage sanctity, potentially reviving forced spending schemes banned since 1887 (in Belgium, at least). Workers once got paid in cash and expiring factory vouchers—a disaster now illegal.

Programmable Tokens A digital euro (CBDC) turns money into controllable tokens, ripe for expiry dates, discounts, or restrictions. Big banks are testing this, aping Bitcoin’s gimmick but under total state control, endlessly minting “safe” tokens for their theft-driven consumer economy. Services like Corda are set to link your ID via eIDAS (Europe’s total-control digital identity surveillance) to these CBDC wallets. Your behavior won’t just be monitored—it’ll tie to fines or coin deductions. (link: https://r3.com/get-corda/ )

Total Control Coin Citizens lose on nearly all fronts. Recall the Belgian Franc-to-Euro shock (cheese sandwich: 40 francs to 1.2 euros, now 3+)? The digital euro rollout—likely hitting welfare recipients and civil servants (with little recourse) via a “gov-app” wallet around July 2025—will sting worse. You’ll get no real money, just controllable vouchers. The ECB won’t program the coins directly; they’ll let banks take the fall. If trust erodes (it will), they’ll blame “greedy banks” or “corrupt third parties.” Cash’s freedom—untraceable, unblockable—dies. The ECB gains tools: negative interest, forced loans, outright theft—all impossible with cash (unless they swap notes, which is slow and costly). Weaponized bank accounts already plague the EU; this makes them worse—shut down sans court order, targeting journalists, dissidents, anyone in the crosshairs.

This isn’t convenience—it’s power. And the ECB’s pushing it despite the euro’s instability. Fabio Panetta once said, “A digital euro would preserve the coexistence of safe central bank money and private money, ensuring sovereign money remains a monetary anchor” (Evolution or Revolution?, Feb 10, 2021). Stability’s key, yet they’re charging ahead anyway. (source)

Conclusion: The Great Heist The CBDC Digital Euro is the greatest theft in Europe since WWII. It’ll shred our freedom, warp market pricing, kill opposition, and chain us financially to the powerful—bank runs impossible. Citizens lose on 9/10 fronts… though payments will be quick. Trust in the Eurozone? It’ll erode faster, propped up only by nudging, marketing, and force.

Citizens will lose out on 9 out of 10 fronts… though, admittedly, payments will be quick.\ The loss in trust in the Eurozone even faster....

AVB\ \ tip if you like this

@ 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.

@ 6e0ea5d6:0327f353

"Malcolm Forbes recounts that a lady, wearing a faded cotton dress, and her husband, dressed in an old handmade suit, stepped off a train in Boston, USA, and timidly made their way to the office of the president of Harvard University. They had come from Palo Alto, California, and had not scheduled an appointment. The secretary, at a glance, thought that those two, looking like country bumpkins, had no business at Harvard.
— We want to speak with the president — the man said in a low voice.
— He will be busy all day — the secretary replied curtly.
— We will wait.
The secretary ignored them for hours, hoping the couple would finally give up and leave. But they stayed there, and the secretary, somewhat frustrated, decided to bother the president, although she hated doing that.
— If you speak with them for just a few minutes, maybe they will decide to go away — she said.
The president sighed in irritation but agreed. Someone of his importance did not have time to meet people like that, but he hated faded dresses and tattered suits in his office. With a stern face, he went to the couple.
— We had a son who studied at Harvard for a year — the woman said. — He loved Harvard and was very happy here, but a year ago he died in an accident, and we would like to erect a monument in his honor somewhere on campus.

— My lady — said the president rudely —, we cannot erect a statue for every person who studied at Harvard and died; if we did, this place would look like a cemetery.

— Oh, no — the lady quickly replied. — We do not want to erect a statue. We would like to donate a building to Harvard.

The president looked at the woman's faded dress and her husband's old suit and exclaimed:

— A building! Do you have even the faintest idea of how much a building costs? We have more than seven and a half million dollars' worth of buildings here at Harvard.

The lady was silent for a moment, then said to her husband:

— If that’s all it costs to found a university, why don’t we have our own?

The husband agreed.

The couple, Leland Stanford, stood up and left, leaving the president confused. Traveling back to Palo Alto, California, they established there Stanford University, the second-largest in the world, in honor of their son, a former Harvard student."

Text extracted from: "Mileumlivros - Stories that Teach Values."

Thank you for reading, my friend! If this message helped you in any way, consider leaving your glass “🥃” as a token of appreciation.

A toast to our family!

@ 7b3f7803:8912e968

Libertarians believe in open borders in theory. In practice, open borders don't work, because, among other things, the combination with a welfare state creates a moral hazard, and the least productive of society end up within the borders of welfare states and drain resources. The social services are paid by the productive people of the country or, in the case of most fiat systems, by currency holders through inflation. Welfare states are much more likely under fiat money and the redistribution goes from native taxpayers to illegal immigrants. Thus, under fiat money, open borders end up being an open wound by which the productive lifeblood of the country bleeds out, despite the theoretical trade-efficiency benefits. As libertarians like to say, open borders and the welfare state don't mix. In this article, we'll examine the other sacred cow of libertarian thought: free trade.

Free Trade without Libertarian Ideals

Free trade is very similar to free movement of labor in that it works great in theory, but not in practice, especially under fiat money. In a libertarian free-market world, free trade works. But that assumes a whole host of libertarian ideals like sound money, non-interfering governments, and minimal aggression. Once those ideals are violated, such as with government intervention in the market, similar moral hazards and long-term costs come with them, making free trade about as libertarian as a fractional reserve bank.

An example will illustrate what I'm talking about. Let's say Portugal subsidizes their wine for export to other countries. The obvious first-order effect is that it makes Portuguese wine cheaper in France, perhaps undercutting the price of French wine. Libertarians would say, that's great! French customers get cheaper goods, so what's the problem?

As with any government intervention, there are significant second- and third-order effects in play. Subsidization puts unsubsidized companies at risk, perhaps driving them to bankruptcy. In this case, this might be a French wine maker. Subsidized companies may become zombies instead of dying out. In this case, this might be a Portuguese wine maker that was failing domestically but survives by selling to customers abroad with government subsidies. While French customers benefit in the short run with cheaper prices for wine, they are ultimately hurt because the goods that would have existed without government intervention never come to market. Perhaps French wine makers that went bankrupt were innovating. Perhaps the resources of the zombie Portuguese wine maker would have created something better.

Further, the dependency of French people on Portuguese wine means that something going wrong in Portugal, like a war or subsidy cuts, disrupts the supply and price of wine for France. Now France must meddle in Portugal internationally if it doesn't want the wine supply to get disrupted. The two countries get entangled in such a way as to become more interventionist internationally. A war involving Portugal now suddenly becomes France's business and incentivizes military aid or even violence. As usual, the unseen effects of government policy are the most pernicious.

Not Really Free

In other words, what we call free trade isn't really free trade. A country exporting to the US may subsidize their products through government intervention, making the product cheaper in the US. This hurts US companies, and they’re forced into choices they never would have had to face without the foreign government intervention. But because the good is crossing borders under the rubric of "free trade," it's somehow seen as fair. Of course it's not, as government intervention distorts the market whether it's done by our own government or a foreign government.

So why would a foreign government do this? It gets several benefits through targeted market manipulation. First, it makes its own companies' products more popular abroad and conversely, makes US companies' products less popular. This has the dual benefit of growing the foreign government’s firms and shrinking, perhaps bankrupting, the US ones.

Targeted subsidization like this can lead to domination under free trade. It's not unlike the Amazon strategy of undercutting everyone first and using the monopoly pricing power at scale once everyone else has bankrupted. The global monopoly is tremendously beneficial to the country that has it. Not only is there significant tax revenue over the long term, but also a head start on innovations within that industry and an advantage in production in the adjacent industries around the product.

Second, the manufacturing centralization gives that country leverage geo-politically. A critical product that no one else manufactures means natural alliances with the countries that depend on the product, which is especially useful for smaller countries like Taiwan. Their chip manufacturing industry, holding 60% of global supply (2024), has meant that they're a critical link for most other countries, and hence, they can use this fact to deter Chinese invasion.

Third, because of the centralization of expertise, more innovations, products, and manufacturing will tend to come within the country. This increased production has cascading benefits, including new industries and national security. China leads the world in drone technology, which undoubtedly has given it an innovation advantage for its military, should it go to war.

Fourth, the capital that flows into the country for investing in the monopolized industry will tend to stay, giving the country more wealth in the form of factories, equipment, and skills. While that capital may nominally be in the hands of foreigners, over time, the ownership of that industry will inevitably transition toward native locals, as the knowledge about how to run such industries gets dissipated within the country.

[Image: Map showing “China Drone Tech” and “Taiwan Chips” hubs, with arrows of capital flow staying local]

Currency Devaluation: The Universal Trade Weapon

It would be one thing if only a specific industry were singled out for government subsidies and then the products dumped into the US as a way to hurt US companies, as that would limit the scope of the damage. But with currency devaluation, a government can subsidize all of its exports at the same time. Indeed, this is something that many countries do. While short-term, this helps US consumers, it hurts US companies and forces them into decisions that aren't good for the US.

To compete, they have to lower costs by using the same devalued currency to pay their labor as their foreign competition. That is, by relocating their capital, their manufacturing, and even their personnel to the country that's devaluing the currency. Not only does relocating reduce labor cost, but it also often gets them benefits like tax breaks. This makes US companies de facto multinationals and not only makes them subject to other jurisdictions, but ultimately divides their loyalties. To take advantage of the reduced labor, capital must move to another country and, along with it, future innovation.

Such relocations ultimately leave the company stripped of their manufacturing capability in the US, as local competition will generally fare better over the long run. Much of the value of the industry then is captured by other governments in taxes, development, and even state-owned companies. Free trade, in other words, creates a vulnerability for domestic companies as they can be put at a significant disadvantage compared to foreign counterparts.

Hidden Effects of Foreign Intervention

Unlike the multinationals, small companies have no chance as they're not big enough to exploit the labor arbitrage. And as is usual in a fiat system, they suffer the most while the giant corporations get the benefits of the supposed "free trade". Most small companies can't compete, so we get mostly the bigger companies that survive.

The transition away from domestic manufacturing necessarily means significant disruption. Domestic workers are displaced and have to find new work. Factories and equipment either have to be repurposed or rot. Entire communities that depended on the manufacturing facility now have to figure out new ways to support themselves. It's no good telling them that they can just do something else. In a currency devaluation scenario, most of the manufacturing leaves and the jobs left are service-oriented or otherwise location-based, like real estate development. There's a natural limit to location-based industries because the market only grows with the location that you're servicing. Put another way, you can only have so many people give haircuts or deliver packages in a geographic area. There has to be some manufacturing of goods that can be sold outside the community, or the community will face scarce labor opportunities relative to the population.

You also can't say the displaced workers can start some other manufacturing business. Such businesses will get out-competed on labor by the currency-devaluing country, so there won't be much investment available for such a business, and even if there were, such a business would be competing with its hands tied behind its back. So in this scenario, what you end up with are a large pool of unemployed people whom the state subsidizes with welfare.

So when a US company leaves or goes bankrupt due to a foreign government's subsidies, the disruption alone imposes a significant short-term cost with displaced labor, unused capital goods, and devastated communities.

Mitigations

So how do countries fight back against such a devastating economic weapon? There are a few ways countries have found around this problem of currency devaluation under free trade. First, a country can prevent capital from leaving. This is called capital controls, and many countries, particularly those that manufacture a lot, have them. Try to get money, factories, or equipment out of Malaysia, for example, and you'll find that they make it quite difficult. Getting the same capital into the country, on the other hand, faces few restrictions. Unfortunately, the US can't put in capital controls because dollars are its main export. It is, after all, the reserve currency of the world.

Second, you can compete by devaluing your own currency. But that’s very difficult because it requires printing a lot of dollars, and that causes inflation. There's also no guarantee that a competing country doesn't devalue its currency again. The US is also in a precarious position as the world's reserve currency, so devaluing the currency more than it already does will make other holders of the dollar less likely to want to hold it, threatening the reserve currency status.

So the main two mitigations against currency devaluation in a free trade scenario are not available to the US. So what else is there? The remaining option is to drop free trade. The solution, in other words, is to add tariffs. This is how you can nullify the effects of foreign government intervention, by leveling the playing field for US manufacturers.

Tariffs

One major industry that's managed to continue being manufactured in the US despite significant foreign competition is cars. Notably, cars have a tariff, which incentivizes their manufacture in the US, even for foreign car makers. The tariff has acted as a way to offset foreign government subsidies and currency debasement.

The scope of this one industry for the US is huge. There are around 300,000 direct jobs in auto assembly within the US (USTR) and there are an additional 3 million jobs supplying these manufacturers within the US. But the benefits don't end there. The US is also creating a lot of innovation around cars, such as self-driving and plug-in electric cars. There are many countries that would love to have this industry for themselves, but because of tariffs, auto manufacturing continues in the US.

And though tariffs are seen as a tax on consumers, US car prices are cheap relative to the rest of the world. What surprises a lot of people when they move from the US to other countries is finding out that the same car often costs more abroad (e.g. 25% tariffs keep U.S. prices 20% below Europe’s $40K average, 2024). The downside of tariffs pales next to the downsides of "free trade."

Free Trade Doesn’t Work with Fiat Money

The sad reality is that while we would love for free trade to work in the ideal libertarian paradise, it won't in our current fiat-based system. The subsidization by foreign governments to bankrupt US companies or to make them multinational, combined with the unfortunate reality of the US dollar being the world reserve currency, means that free trade guts the US of manufacturing. Tariffs are a reasonable way to protect US manufacturers, particularly smaller ones that can't go multinational.

What's more, tariffs make the US less fragile and less dependent on international supply chains. Many of the wars in the past 60 years have been waged because of the entanglements the US has with other countries due to the reliance on international supply chains. Lessening this dependency, if only to prevent a war, has clear value.

Lastly, labor has been devalued significantly by fiat monetary expansion, but at least some of that can be recovered if tariffs create more manufacturing, which in turn adds to the demand for labor. This should reduce the welfare state as more opportunities are made available and fewer unemployed people will be on the rolls.

Conclusion

Fiat money produces a welfare state, which makes open borders unworkable. Fiat money also gives foreign governments a potent economic weapon to use against US companies, and by extension the labor force that powers them. Though currency debasement and capital controls are available to other countries as a defense, for the US, neither of these tools is available due to the fact that the dollar is the world reserve currency. As such, tariffs are a reasonable defense against the fiat subsidization of foreign governments.

@ 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.

@ 4857600b:30b502f4

Mitch McConnell, a senior Republican senator, announced he will not seek reelection.

At 83 years old and with health issues, this decision was expected. After seven terms, he leaves a significant legacy in U.S. politics, known for his strategic maneuvering.

McConnell stated, “My current term in the Senate will be my last.” His retirement marks the end of an influential political era.

@ 94a6a78a:0ddf320e

Nostr is a revolutionary protocol that enables decentralized, censorship-resistant communication. Unlike traditional social networks controlled by corporations, Nostr operates without central servers or gatekeepers. This openness makes it incredibly powerful—but also means its success depends entirely on users, developers, and relay operators.

If you believe in free speech, decentralization, and an open internet, there are many ways to support and strengthen the Nostr ecosystem. Whether you're a casual user, a developer, or someone looking to contribute financially, every effort helps build a more robust network.

Here’s how you can get involved and make a difference.

---

1️⃣ Use Nostr Daily

The simplest and most effective way to contribute to Nostr is by using it regularly. The more active users, the stronger and more valuable the network becomes.

✅ Post, comment, and zap (send micro-payments via Bitcoin’s Lightning Network) to keep conversations flowing.\ ✅ Engage with new users and help them understand how Nostr works.\ ✅ Try different Nostr clients like Damus, Amethyst, Snort, or Primal and provide feedback to improve the experience.

Your activity keeps the network alive and helps encourage more developers and relay operators to invest in the ecosystem.

---

2️⃣ Run Your Own Nostr Relay

Relays are the backbone of Nostr, responsible for distributing messages across the network. The more independent relays exist, the stronger and more censorship-resistant Nostr becomes.

✅ Set up your own relay to help decentralize the network further.\ ✅ Experiment with relay configurations and different performance optimizations.\ ✅ Offer public or private relay services to users looking for high-quality infrastructure.

If you're not technical, you can still support relay operators by subscribing to a paid relay or donating to open-source relay projects.

---

3️⃣ Support Paid Relays & Infrastructure

Free relays have helped Nostr grow, but they struggle with spam, slow speeds, and sustainability issues. Paid relays help fund better infrastructure, faster message delivery, and a more reliable experience.

✅ Subscribe to a paid relay to help keep it running.\ ✅ Use premium services like media hosting (e.g., Azzamo Blossom) to decentralize content storage.\ ✅ Donate to relay operators who invest in long-term infrastructure.

By funding Nostr’s decentralized backbone, you help ensure its longevity and reliability.

---

4️⃣ Zap Developers, Creators & Builders

Many people contribute to Nostr without direct financial compensation—developers who build clients, relay operators, educators, and content creators. You can support them with zaps! ⚡

✅ Find developers working on Nostr projects and send them a zap.\ ✅ Support content creators and educators who spread awareness about Nostr.\ ✅ Encourage builders by donating to open-source projects.

Micro-payments via the Lightning Network make it easy to directly support the people who make Nostr better.

---

5️⃣ Develop New Nostr Apps & Tools

If you're a developer, you can build on Nostr’s open protocol to create new apps, bots, or tools. Nostr is permissionless, meaning anyone can develop for it.

✅ Create new Nostr clients with unique features and user experiences.\ ✅ Build bots or automation tools that improve engagement and usability.\ ✅ Experiment with decentralized identity, authentication, and encryption to make Nostr even stronger.

With no corporate gatekeepers, your projects can help shape the future of decentralized social media.

---

6️⃣ Promote & Educate Others About Nostr

Adoption grows when more people understand and use Nostr. You can help by spreading awareness and creating educational content.

✅ Write blogs, guides, and tutorials explaining how to use Nostr.\ ✅ Make videos or social media posts introducing new users to the protocol.\ ✅ Host discussions, Twitter Spaces, or workshops to onboard more people.

The more people understand and trust Nostr, the stronger the ecosystem becomes.

---

7️⃣ Support Open-Source Nostr Projects

Many Nostr tools and clients are built by volunteers, and open-source projects thrive on community support.

✅ Contribute code to existing Nostr projects on GitHub.\ ✅ Report bugs and suggest features to improve Nostr clients.\ ✅ Donate to developers who keep Nostr free and open for everyone.

If you're not a developer, you can still help with testing, translations, and documentation to make projects more accessible.

---

🚀 Every Contribution Strengthens Nostr

Whether you:

✔️ Post and engage daily\ ✔️ Zap creators and developers\ ✔️ Run or support relays\ ✔️ Build new apps and tools\ ✔️ Educate and onboard new users

Every action helps make Nostr more resilient, decentralized, and unstoppable.

Nostr isn’t just another social network—it’s a movement toward a free and open internet. If you believe in digital freedom, privacy, and decentralization, now is the time to get involved.

@ 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.

@ dc4cd086:cee77c06

Understanding Network Dynamics in Technology Adoption

• Top Row: Continuous vs Discontinuous Transitions in Social Diffusion
• Shows two different ways that innovations spread through a population. The horizontal axis (λ) represents "persuasion capacity" - how effectively adopters convince others to join. The vertical axis (ρ) shows what fraction of the population eventually adopts.
• Blue line shows a continuous transition: as persuasion capacity increases, adoption grows gradually and smoothly. Example: streaming services that steadily gains users year after year.
• Red line shows a discontinuous transition (or "tipping point"): adoption remains near zero until reaching a critical threshold, then suddenly jumps to a high level. This represents technologies that spread explosively once they reach a critical mass.
• The different curves emerge from the situations of how people make adoption decisions. When there is higher adoption resistance (higher threshold T and steeper response curve a), discontinuous transitions become more likely.

Bottom Left: Cascade Window

When is widespread adoption possible? Its based on network structure. The horizontal axis (z) represents network connectivity - on average, how many connections does an individual have? The plot has a regime "cascade window" - widespread adoption only occurs within a specific range of connectivity: - If connectivity is too low (left side), the network is too fragmented for innovations to spread widely - If connectivity is too high (right side), people become resistant to change because they need many of their connections to adopt before they will follow suit

The different curves show theoretical predictions for:

• The early adopter network (blue solid): people who can be convinced to adopt with minimal influence.
• The core connected userbase (red line): the largest interconnected population in the network
• Total adoption potential (green line): the potential total reach possible through both early adopters and those they influence

Bottom Right: Phase Transition Points

This plot highlights critical thresholds where the system undergoes dramatic changes. The peaks represent points where small changes in network connectivity cause the largest shifts in adoption patterns. The vertical dashed line marks a critical connectivity value where adoption dynamics fundamentally change. Near these critical points, the network becomes especially sensitive - like how a small price drop might suddenly make a product accessible to a much larger market segment, increasing how easily individuals are connected.

The green line (total adoption potential rate) shows only a brief spike at the critical threshold and then quickly returns to zero. Implying that the total potential reach of an innovation changes only at that specific critical point and then stabilizes. This is why timing market entry is so crucial - there's a narrow window where network conditions can suddenly enable widespread adoption, and missing this window means the technology might never achieve its full potential.

Further Reading:

• Malcom Gladwell's Tipping Point

Sources:

• https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physics/articles/10.3389/fphy.2018.00021/full

• https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1414708112

• https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.082090499

@ b8a9df82:6ab5cbbd

Last week at Bitcoin Investment Week in New York City, hosted by Anthony Pompliano, Jack Mallers walked in wearing sneakers and a T-shirt, casually dropping, “Man… I hate politics.”

That was it. That was the moment I felt aligned again. That’s the energy I came for. No suits. No corporate jargon. Just a guy who gets it—who cares about people, bringing Bitcoin-powered payments to the masses and making sure people can actually use it.

His presence was a reminder of why we’re here in the first place. And his words—“I hate politics”—were a breath of fresh air.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Anthony was a fantastic host. His ability to mix wittiness, playfulness, and seriousness made him an entertaining moderator. But this week was unlike anything I’ve ever experienced in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

One of the biggest letdowns was the lack of interaction. No real Q&A sessions, no direct engagement, no real discussions. Just one fireside chat after another.

And sure, I get it—people love to hear themselves talk. But where were the questions? The critical debates? The chance for the audience to actually participate?

I’m used to Bitcoin meetups and conferences where you walk away with new ideas, new friends, and maybe even a new project to contribute to. Here, it was more like sitting in an expensive lecture hall, watching a lineup of speakers tell us things we already know.

A different vibe—and not in a good way

Over the past few months, I’ve attended nearly ten Bitcoin conferences, each leaving me feeling uplifted, inspired, and ready to take action. But this? This felt different. And not in a good way.

If this had been my first Bitcoin event, I might have walked away questioning whether I even belonged here. It wasn’t Prague. It wasn’t Riga. It wasn’t the buzzing, grassroots, pleb-filled gatherings I had grown to love. Instead, it felt more like a Wall Street networking event disguised as a Bitcoin conference.

Maybe it was the suits.

Or the fact that I was sitting in a room full of investors who have no problem dropping $1,000+ on a ticket.

Or that it reminded me way too much of my former life—working as a manager in London’s real estate industry, navigating boardrooms full of finance guys in polished shoes, talking about “assets under management.”

Bitcoin isn’t just an investment thesis. It’s a revolution. A movement. And yet, at times during this week, I felt like I was back in my fiat past, stuck in a room where people measured success in dollars, not in freedom.

Maybe that’s the point. Bitcoin Investment Week was never meant to be a pleb gathering.

That said, the week did have some bright spots. PubKey was a fantastic kickoff. That was real Bitcoin culture—plebs, Nostr, grassroots energy. People who actually use Bitcoin, not just talk about it.

But the absolute highlight? Jack Mallers, sneakers and all, cutting through the noise with his authenticity.

So, why did we even go?

Good question. Maybe it was curiosity. Maybe it was stepping out of our usual circles to see Bitcoin through a different lens. Maybe it was to remind ourselves why we chose this path in the first place.

Would I go again? Probably not.

Would I trade Prague, Riga, bitcoin++ or any of the grassroots Bitcoin conferences for this? Not a chance.

At the end of the day, Bitcoin doesn’t belong to Wall Street from my opinion. It belongs to the people who actually use it. And those are the people I want to be around.

@ 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.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

intro

The Russian state made me a Bitcoiner. In 1991, it devalued my grandmother's hard-earned savings. She worked tirelessly in the kitchen of a dining car on the Moscow–Warsaw route. Everything she had saved for my sister and me to attend university vanished overnight. This story is similar to what many experienced, including Wences Casares. The pain and injustice of that time became my first lessons about the fragility of systems and the value of genuine, incorruptible assets, forever changing my perception of money and my trust in government promises.

In 2014, I was living in Moscow, running a trading business, and frequently traveling to China. One day, I learned about the Cypriot banking crisis and the possibility of moving money through some strange thing called Bitcoin. At the time, I didn’t give it much thought. Returning to the idea six months later, as a business-oriented geek, I eagerly began studying the topic and soon dove into it seriously.

I spent half a year reading articles on a local online journal, BitNovosti, actively participating in discussions, and eventually joined the editorial team as a translator. That’s how I learned about whitepapers, decentralization, mining, cryptographic keys, and colored coins. About Satoshi Nakamoto, Silk Road, Mt. Gox, and BitcoinTalk. Over time, I befriended the journal’s owner and, leveraging my management experience, later became an editor. I was drawn to the crypto-anarchist stance and commitment to decentralization principles. We wrote about the economic, historical, and social preconditions for Bitcoin’s emergence, and it was during this time that I fully embraced the idea.

It got to the point where I sold my apartment and, during the market's downturn, bought 50 bitcoins, just after the peak price of $1,200 per coin. That marked the beginning of my first crypto winter. As an editor, I organized workflows, managed translators, developed a YouTube channel, and attended conferences in Russia and Ukraine. That’s how I learned about Wences Casares and even wrote a piece about him. I also met Mikhail Chobanyan (Ukrainian exchange Kuna), Alexander Ivanov (Waves project), Konstantin Lomashuk (Lido project), and, of course, Vitalik Buterin. It was a time of complete immersion, 24/7, and boundless hope.

After moving to the United States, I expected the industry to grow rapidly, attended events, but the introduction of BitLicense froze the industry for eight years. By 2017, it became clear that the industry was shifting toward gambling and creating tokens for the sake of tokens. I dismissed this idea as unsustainable. Then came a new crypto spring with the hype around beautiful NFTs – CryptoPunks and apes.

I made another attempt – we worked on a series called Digital Nomad Country Club, aimed at creating a global project. The proceeds from selling images were intended to fund the development of business tools for people worldwide. However, internal disagreements within the team prevented us from completing the project.

With Trump’s arrival in 2025, hope was reignited. I decided that it was time to create a project that society desperately needed. As someone passionate about history, I understood that destroying what exists was not the solution, but leaving everything as it was also felt unacceptable. You can’t destroy the system, as the fiery crypto-anarchist voices claimed.

With an analytical mindset (IQ 130) and a deep understanding of the freest societies, I realized what was missing—not only in Russia or the United States but globally—a Bitcoin-native system for tracking debts and financial interactions. This could return control of money to ordinary people and create horizontal connections parallel to state systems. My goal was to create, if not a Bitcoin killer app, then at least to lay its foundation.

At the inauguration event in New York, I rediscovered the Nostr project. I realized it was not only technologically simple and already quite popular but also perfectly aligned with my vision. For the past month and a half, using insights and experience gained since 2014, I’ve been working full-time on this project.

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

My favorite line in any Marvel movie ever is in “Captain America.” After Captain America launches seemingly a hopeless assault on Red Skull’s base and is captured, we get this line:

“Arrogance may not be a uniquely American trait, but I must say, you do it better than anyone.”

Yesterday, I came across a comment on the song Devil Went Down to Georgia that had a very similar feel to it:

America has seemingly always been arrogant, in a uniquely American way. Manifest Destiny, for instance. The rest of the world is aware of this arrogance, and mocks Americans for it. A central point in modern US politics is the deriding of racist, nationalist, supremacist Americans.

That’s not what I see. I see American Arrogance as not only a beautiful statement about what it means to be American. I see it as an ode to the greatness of humanity in its purest form.

For most countries, saying “our nation is the greatest” is, in fact, twinged with some level of racism. I still don’t have a problem with it. Every group of people should be allowed to feel pride in their accomplishments. The destruction of the human spirit since the end of World War 2, where greatness has become a sin and weakness a virtue, has crushed the ability of people worldwide to strive for excellence.

But I digress. The fears of racism and nationalism at least have a grain of truth when applied to other nations on the planet. But not to America.

That’s because the definition of America, and the prototype of an American, has nothing to do with race. The definition of Americanism is freedom. The founding of America is based purely on liberty. On the God-given rights of every person to live life the way they see fit.

American Arrogance is not a statement of racial superiority. It’s barely a statement of national superiority (though it absolutely is). To me, when an American comments on the greatness of America, it’s a statement about freedom. Freedom will always unlock the greatness inherent in any group of people. Americans are definitionally better than everyone else, because Americans are freer than everyone else. (Or, at least, that’s how it should be.)

In Devil Went Down to Georgia, Johnny is approached by the devil himself. He is challenged to a ridiculously lopsided bet: a golden fiddle versus his immortal soul. He acknowledges the sin in accepting such a proposal. And yet he says, “God, I know you told me not to do this. But I can’t stand the affront to my honor. I am the greatest. The devil has nothing on me. So God, I’m gonna sin, but I’m also gonna win.”

Libertas magnitudo est

@ e3ba5e1a:5e433365

I got into a friendly discussion on X regarding health insurance. The specific question was how to deal with health insurance companies (presumably unfairly) denying claims? My answer, as usual: get government out of it!

The US healthcare system is essentially the worst of both worlds:

• Unlike full single payer, individuals incur high costs
• Unlike a true free market, regulation causes increases in costs and decreases competition among insurers

I'm firmly on the side of moving towards the free market. (And I say that as someone living under a single payer system now.) Here's what I would do:

• Get rid of tax incentives that make health insurance tied to your employer, giving individuals back proper freedom of choice.
• Reduce regulations significantly.

• In the short term, some people will still get rejected claims and other obnoxious behavior from insurance companies. We address that in two ways:

  1. Due to reduced regulations, new insurance companies will be able to enter the market offering more reliable coverage and better rates, and people will flock to them because they have the freedom to make their own choices.
  2. Sue the asses off of companies that reject claims unfairly. And ideally, as one of the few legitimate roles of government in all this, institute new laws that limit the ability of fine print to allow insurers to escape their responsibilities. (I'm hesitant that the latter will happen due to the incestuous relationship between Congress/regulators and insurers, but I can hope.)

Will this magically fix everything overnight like politicians normally promise? No. But it will allow the market to return to a healthy state. And I don't think it will take long (order of magnitude: 5-10 years) for it to come together, but that's just speculation.

And since there's a high correlation between those who believe government can fix problems by taking more control and demanding that only credentialed experts weigh in on a topic (both points I strongly disagree with BTW): I'm a trained actuary and worked in the insurance industry, and have directly seen how government regulation reduces competition, raises prices, and harms consumers.

And my final point: I don't think any prior art would be a good comparison for deregulation in the US, it's such a different market than any other country in the world for so many reasons that lessons wouldn't really translate. Nonetheless, I asked Grok for some empirical data on this, and at best the results of deregulation could be called "mixed," but likely more accurately "uncertain, confused, and subject to whatever interpretation anyone wants to apply."

https://x.com/i/grok/share/Zc8yOdrN8lS275hXJ92uwq98M

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Instructions

1. Place 2 medium-sized, boiled potatoes and a handful of sliced leeks in a pot.
2. Fill the pot with water or vegetable broth, to cover the potatoes twice over.
3. Add a splash of white wine, if you like, and some bouillon powder, if you went with water instead of broth.
4. Bring the soup to a boil and then simmer for 15 minutes.
5. Puree the soup, in the pot, with a hand mixer. It shouldn't be completely smooth, when you're done, but rather have small bits and pieces of the veggies floating around.
6. Bring the soup to a boil, again, and stir in one container (200-250 mL) of heavy cream.
7. Thicken the soup, as needed, and then simmer for 5 more minutes.
8. Garnish with croutons and veggies (here I used sliced green onions and radishes) and serve.

Guten Appetit!

@ 43baaf0c:d193e34c

From Bangkok to Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.

For the past three years, I’ve traveled from Bangkok to Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, with a stop in Dubai a 24-hour journey that brings me back to Europe and to my artist friend, Alecs Navio. Along with his wife, he runs a coworking space called Soppa de Azul.

The main reason I return here is to create new art. Alecs constantly inspires me—we talk about art, artists, and he shares books that spark new ideas for my work. As an artist, I believe it’s essential to keep evolving. Growth comes from inspiration, and there’s no better source than fellow artists. Surrounding yourself with creative minds fuels your passion, and it all starts with conversations about art and life. Today was a perfect example of why I’m here. I looked at some of my older artwork hanging in the coworking space and said I didn’t like it anymore. Alecs reminded me that I should appreciate my past work because it’s part of my journey. Without it I wouldn’t be the artist I am today.

I always say the journey is the destination, and Alecs helped me see that this applies to art as well. This is why I believe in surrounding myself with people who inspire me those who celebrate my growth and remind me why they are such an important part of my journey.

@ 43baaf0c:d193e34c

Bangkok art city. Bangkok is a highly creative city, which is one of the reasons I love living here. I’d love to hold a second exhibition something special and even bigger than before. The fact that all major galleries are free to the public says a lot about how much Bangkok values art.

Over the last five months, I’ve been developing BangPOP art as both a concept and a blueprint for exhibitions worldwide. It serves as a guideline to ensure recognizable elements in each exhibition or event. While the artwork itself will always be unique, the POP Up exhibitions will have a distinct and recognizable identity wherever they take place.

You can read here the https://bitpopart.com/bangpop POP exhibition blue print.

Unfortunately, my plan to hold an exhibition at River City in Bangkok doesn’t seem to be coming together. Here’s the curator’s note:

‘our exhibition schedule on the 2nd floor this year and next year are quite packed and we have received numerous proposals at this moment.‘ After considering alternative venues in Bangkok, I’m optimistic about finding the right fit. For now, my focus is shifting to Europe, where I’ll use the BangPOP blueprint as my guiding framework. Thank you Bangkok!

@ 7ed7d5c3:6927e200

Can't decide if the terrible book you just read is a 1 or 1.5 star book? Look no further than this chart. Was it Shit or just Bad? Was that movie you watched Very Good or just Decent? How many things out there are really Life Changing?

Finally, a rating scale for humans. Use it for anything in your life that needs a rating out of 5 stars.

Rating / Description

0.5 – The worst 1.0 – Shit 1.5 – Bad 2.0 – Eh 2.5 – Entertaining, but not great 3.0 – Neutral 3.5 – Alright 4.0 – Decent 4.5 – Very good 5.0 – Life Changing

P.S. Do not use it to rate your wife's cooking. The author is not liable for any damages.

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

When developing on nostr, normally it's enough to read the NIP related to a given feature you want to build to know what has to be done. But there are some aspects of nostr development that aren't so straightforward because they depend less on specific data formats than on how different concepts are combined.

An example of this is how for a while it was considered best practice to re-publish notes when replying to them. This practice emerged before the outbox model gained traction, and was a hacky way of attempting to ensure relays had the full context required for a given note. Over time though, pubkey hints emerged as a better way to ensure other clients could find required context.

Another one of these things is "relay-based groups", or as I prefer to call it "relays-as-groups" (RAG). Such a thing doesn't really exist - there's no spec for it (although some aspects of the concept are included in NIP 29), but at the same time there are two concrete implementations (Flotilla and Chachi) which leverage several different NIPs in order to create a cohesive system for groups on nostr.

This composability is one of the neat qualities of nostr. Not only would it be unhelpful to specify how different parts of the protocol should work together, it would be impossible because of the number of possible combinations possible just from applying a little bit of common sense to the NIPs repo. No one said it was ok to put t tags on a kind 0. But no one's stopping you! And the semantics are basically self-evident if you understand its component parts.

So, instead of writing a NIP that sets relay-based groups in stone, I'm writing this guide in order to document how I've combined different parts of the nostr protocol to create a compelling architecture for groups.

Relays

Relays already have a canonical identity, which is the relay's url. Events posted to a relay can be thought of as "posted to that group". This means that every relay is already a group. All nostr notes have already been posted to one or more groups.

One common objection to this structure is that identifying a group with a relay means that groups are dependent on the relay to continue hosting the group. In normal broadcast nostr (which forms organic permissionless groups based on user-centric social clustering), this is a very bad thing, because hosts are orthogonal to group identity. Communities are completely different. Communities actually need someone to enforce community boundaries, implement moderation, etc. Reliance on a host is a feature, not a bug (in contrast to NIP 29 groups, which tend to co-locate many groups on a single host, relays-as-groups tends to encourage one group, one host).

This doesn't mean that federation, mirrors, and migration can't be accomplished. In a sense, leaving this on the social layer is a good thing, because it adds friction to the dissolution/forking of a group. But the door is wide open to protocol additions to support those use cases for relay-based groups. One possible approach would be to follow this draft PR which specified a "federation" event relays could publish on their own behalf.

Relay keys

This draft PR to NIP 11 specifies a self field which represents the relay's identity. Using this, relays can publish events on their own behalf. Currently, the pubkey field sort of does the same thing, but is overloaded as a contact field for the owner of the relay.

AUTH

Relays can control access using NIP 42 AUTH. There are any number of modes a relay can operate in:

1. No auth, fully public - anyone can read/write to the group.

2. Relays may enforce broad or granular access controls with AUTH.

Relays may deny EVENTs or REQs depending on user identity. Messages returned in AUTH, CLOSED, or OK messages should be human readable. It's crucial that clients show these error messages to users. Here's how Flotilla handles failed AUTH and denied event publishing:

LIMITS could also be used in theory to help clients adapt their interface depending on user abilities and relay policy.

1. AUTH with implicit access controls.

In this mode, relays may exclude matching events from REQs if the user does not have permission to view them. This can be useful for multi-use relays that host hidden rooms. This mode should be used with caution, because it can result in confusion for the end user.

See Triflector for a relay implementation that supports some of these auth policies.

Invite codes

If a user doesn't have access to a relay, they can request access using this draft NIP. This is true whether access has been explicitly or implicitly denied (although users will have to know that they should use an invite code to request access).

The above referenced NIP also contains a mechanism for users to request an invite code that they can share with other users.

The policy for these invite codes is entirely up to the relay. They may be single-use, multi-use, or require additional verification. Additional requirements can be communicated to the user in the OK message, for example directions to visit an external URL to register.

See Triflector for a relay implementation that supports invite codes.

Content

Any kind of event can be published to a relay being treated as a group, unless rejected by the relay implementation. In particular, NIP 7D was added to support basic threads, and NIP C7 for chat messages.

Since which relay an event came from determines which group it was posted to, clients need to have a mechanism for keeping track of which relay they received an event from, and should not broadcast events to other relays (unless intending to cross-post the content).

Rooms

Rooms follow NIP 29. I wish NIP 29 wasn't called "relay based groups", which is very confusing when talking about "relays as groups". It's much better to think of them as sub-groups, or as Flotilla calls them, "rooms".

Rooms have two modes - managed and unmanaged. Managed rooms follow all the rules laid out in NIP 29 about metadata published by the relay and user membership. In either case, rooms are represented by a random room id, and are posted to by including the id in an event's h tag. This allows rooms to switch between managed and unmanaged modes without losing any content.

Managed room names come from kind 39000 room meta events, but unmanaged rooms don't have these. Instead, room names should come from members' NIP 51 kind 10009 membership lists. Tags on these lists should look like this: ["group", "groupid", "wss://group.example.com", "Cat lovers"]. If no name can be found for the room (i.e., there aren't any members), the room should be ignored by clients.

Rooms present a difficulty for publishing to the relay as a whole, since content with an h tag can't be excluded from requests. Currently, relay-wide posts are h-tagged with _ which works for "group" clients, but not more generally. I'm not sure how to solve this other than to ask relays to support negative filters.

Cross-posting

The simplest way to cross-post content from one group (or room) to another, is to quote the original note in whatever event kind is appropriate. For example, a blog post might be quoted in a kind 9 to be cross-posted to chat, or in a kind 11 to be cross-posted to a thread. kind 16 reposts can be used the same way if the reader's client renders reposts.

Posting the original event to multiple relays-as-groups is trivial, since all you have to do is send the event to the relay. Posting to multiple rooms simultaneously by appending multiple h tags is however not recommended, since group relays/clients are incentivised to protect themselves from spam by rejecting events with multiple h tags (similar to how events with multiple t tags are sometimes rejected).

Privacy

Currently, it's recommended to include a NIP 70 - tag on content posted to relays-as-groups to discourage replication of relay-specific content across the network.

Another slightly stronger approach would be for group relays to strip signatures in order to make events invalid (or at least deniable). For this approach to work, users would have to be able to signal that they trust relays to be honest. We could also use ZkSNARKS to validate signatures in bulk.

In any case, group posts should not be considered "private" in the same way E2EE groups might be. Relays-as-groups should be considered a good fit for low-stakes groups with many members (since trust deteriorates quickly as more people get involved).

Membership

There is currently no canonical member list published by relays (except for NIP 29 managed rooms). Instead, users keep track of their own relay and room memberships using kind 10009 lists. Relay-level memberships are represented by an r tag containing the relay url, and room-level memberships are represented using a group tag.

Users can choose to advertise their membership in a RAG by using unencrypted tags, or they may keep their membership private by using encrypted tags. Advertised memberships are useful for helping people find groups based on their social graph:

User memberships should not be trusted, since they can be published unilaterally by anyone, regardless of actual access. Possible improvements in this area would be the ability to provide proof of access:

• Relays could publish member lists (although this would sacrifice member privacy)
• Relays could support a new command that allows querying a particular member's access status
• Relays could provide a proof to the member that they could then choose to publish or not

Moderation

There are two parts to moderation: reporting and taking action based on these reports.

Reporting is already covered by NIP 56. Clients should be careful about encouraging users to post reports for illegal content under their own identity, since that can itself be illegal. Relays also should not serve reports to users, since that can be used to find rather than address objectionable content.

Reports are only one mechanism for flagging objectionable content. Relay operators and administrators can use whatever heuristics they like to identify and address objectionable content. This might be via automated policies that auto-ban based on reports from high-reputation people, a client that implements NIP 86 relay management API, or by some other admin interface.

There's currently no way for moderators of a given relay to be advertised, or for a moderator's client to know that the user is a moderator (so that they can enable UI elements for in-app moderation). This could be addressed via NIP 11, LIMITS, or some other mechanism in the future.

General best practices

In general, it's very important when developing a client to assume that the relay has no special support for any of the above features, instead treating all of this stuff as progressive enhancement.

For example, if a user enters an invite code, go ahead and send it to the relay using a kind 28934 event. If it's rejected, you know that it didn't work. But if it's accepted, you don't know that it worked - you only know that the relay allowed the user to publish that event. This is helpful, becaues it may imply that the user does indeed have access to the relay. But additional probing may be needed, and reliance on error messages down the road when something else fails unexpectedly is indispensable.

This paradigm may drive some engineers nuts, because it's basically equivalent to coding your clients to reverse-engineer relay support for every feature you want to use. But this is true of nostr as a whole - anyone can put whatever weird stuff in an event and sign it. Clients have to be extremely compliant with Postell's law - doing their absolute best to accept whatever weird data or behavior shows up and handle failure in any situation. Sure, it's annoying, but it's the cost of permissionless development. What it gets us is a completely open-ended protocol, in which anything can be built, and in which every solution is tested by the market.

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Hodling Bitcoin does not make you a capitalist

I've noticed that Bitcoin-mindedness seems to lead some people to communistic thinking because it's a hard-limited form of capital. Marx, like most Bitcoiners, heavily discounted the possibility of economic growth or transformation changing the economy enough to undermine some minority's control of some form of capital.

What few today understand, is that many of the Dirty Capitalists of Marx's era actually agreed with him; they were just disdainful of labor and worried that the workers finding out that Marxism is correct about the nature of capitalism would cause unrest. They were the original HFSP crowd.

This was the basic idea, that Marx had, and that many Bitcoiners would agree with:

Capital is strictly limited and the people that control it can keep labor from attaining any, except when their labor is necessary.

And, as we know, automation will make human labor increasingly unnecessary.

The math doesn't check out

That underlies all of the calculations of "Well, if I just grab this Bitcoin wallet and hodl for twenty years, then it will grow in value to equal half of everything in existence and then I can just buy up half the planet and rule over everyone like a god."

This is economic nonsense because it assumes that: 1) the value of all things remains static over time, 2) purchasing something with money gives you ownership of it, 3) people will always use that specific money (or any money, at all!) for all transactions, 4) there is no such thing as opportunity cost, 5) people will always value money more than any other thing, and therefore be willing to always trade it for anything else, 6) humans are passive, defenseless, and easy to rule over, 7) someone who is preoccupied with hodling an asset steadily and sharply rising in price would ever be emotionally ready to part with it.

All monies can die.

People use money for everything because it is easy, fast and cheap. If money becomes too precious or scarce, they will simply switch to using other things (as we saw with gold). Humans replace tools that aren't working well, with those that work better, and money is just another tool. Bitcoin is more divisible than gold, but that won't matter, if enough of it is held by too few.

This is why there's a natural cap on the price of a money and why human productivity in the here and now is not irrelevant or in vain.

@ 5b0183ab:a114563e

What Is Dark Nostr?

Dark Nostr can be described as the unintended adverse effects that arise from creating systems designed to resist censorship and promote freedom. These systems often rely on algorithms and micropayments to function, but their very design can inadvertently spawn phenomena that are unpredictable, uncontrollable, and sometimes downright weird.

Think of it as the Yin to the Yang of decentralized freedom—a necessary shadow cast by the bright ideals of liberation. While freedom protocols aim to empower individuals, they also open the door to consequences that aren’t always sunshine and rainbows.

---

An Emergent Phenomenon

The fascinating thing about Dark Nostr is its emergent nature. This means it’s not something you can fully define or predict ahead of time; instead, it arises organically as decentralized systems are implemented and evolve. Like watching clouds form shapes in the sky, GM miners panhandle for sats or shower girls in the global feed, you can only observe it as it happens—and even then, its contours remain elusive.

Emergent phenomena are tricky beasts. While simplicity is at the core of the protocol layer darkness is born on the edge where complexity thrives—where individual components interact in ways that produce unpredictable outcomes. In this case, Dark Nostr encapsulates everything from algorithmic quirks and micropayment dynamics to unforeseen social consequences within decentralized ecosystems.

---

Studying Dark Nostr: Memes as Cultural Artifacts

Here’s where things get anthropologically juicy: much of what we know about Dark Nostr comes not from academic papers or technical manuals but from memes. Yes, memes—the internet’s favorite medium for cultural commentary—have become a lens through which this phenomenon is being observed and studied.

Memes act as modern-day hieroglyphs, distilling complex ideas into bite-sized cultural artifacts that reflect collective sentiment. When communities encounter something as nebulous as Dark Nostr, they turn to humor and symbolism to make sense of it. In doing so, they create a shared narrative—a way to grapple with the shadow side of decentralization without losing sight of its promise.

---

Why Does It Matter?

Dark Nostr isn’t just an abstract concept for philosophers or tech enthusiasts—it’s a reminder that every innovation comes with trade-offs. While decentralized systems aim to empower individuals by resisting censorship and central control, they also carry risks that must be acknowledged:
- Algorithmic Chaos: Algorithms designed for freedom might amplify harmful content or create echo chambers.
- Micropayment Pitfalls: Financial incentives could lead to exploitation or manipulation within these systems.
- Social Dynamics: The lack of centralized control might enable bad actors or foster unforeseen societal shifts.

Understanding Dark Nostr is crucial for anyone involved in building or using decentralized technologies. It challenges us to balance freedom with responsibility and reminds us that even the most well-intentioned systems have their shadow side.

---

Conclusion: Embracing the Shadow

Dark Nostr is more than just a cautionary tale—it’s a fascinating glimpse into the complexities of human interaction with technology. As an emergent phenomenon, it invites us to remain vigilant and adaptive as we navigate the uncharted waters of decentralization.

By studying its manifestations through cultural artifacts like memes and engaging in thoughtful reflection, we can better prepare for both its opportunities and risks. After all, every great innovation needs its shadow—it’s what makes progress real, messy, and human.

So here we stand before Dark Nostr: may we study it wisely, meme it relentlessly, and learn from its lessons as we build the future together.

Stay Vigilent Nostr.....

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Ingredients

• 1 kg of pork roast with rind, such as shoulder or a lean belly
• 1 bottle of beer, light or dark
• chopped German-style mirepoix (best combination, for this recipe, includes celery root, carrot, red onion, and leeks)
• salt, pepper, nutmeg
• 1 diced garlic clove

Directions

1. Spread the vegetables on the bottom of the roasting pan.
2. Pour half the beer over the roast. (Drink the other half.)
3. Season the meat, to taste.
4. Roast the meat at 180 °C, until done (depends upon the weight of the roast).
5. Remove the meat from the oven, and wrap in aluminum foil.
6. Pour 2-3 cups of water into the roasting pan.
7. Pour/scrape everything from the pan into a sieve over a sauce pot.
8. Press the vegetables against the sieve, with the back of a spoon, to ensure that you get all that good dripping flavor into the sauce.
9. Defat the sauce with a grease separator, then pour it back into the pot.
10. Thicken the sauce, slightly (it should remain slightly watery, and not turn into a gravy), according to your usual method.
11. Open the foil and slice the roast.
12. Serve with the sauce.

@ a42048d7:26886c32

OP_CAT, Coffee, and keeping an open mind to Bitcoin soft forks by an 80 IQ BTC Maxi Pleb

TLDR: CAT is both low risk and low appeal to the broader non-dev BTC community. I don’t care and you shouldn’t either. If I am an 80 IQ HODL pleb or a company that caters to that group, can you please give me 2-4 fifth grade level coherent english sentences that explain why I should support CAT? I’m still waiting… CTV or LNHANCE on the other hand have broad appeal.

Five years ago in the office we got a fancy $6,000 coffee maker. It was hooked up to wifi, showed TV on a giant screen, and could make every type of coffee/milkshake you could think of. I was captivated… for about 1 day. After trying a few times I realized almost all the drinks it made were of low quality. The wifi connection actually ended up just being annoying. Half the time I wanted a coffee, only had a 5 minute break, and the machine displayed some inscrutable error. I went back to the proverbial grind un-caffeinated and frustrated wishing we had the old reliable boring coffee maker back. I also found myself only coming back to the 2 drinks I really cared about, espresso and maybe an occasional cappuccino. It was “cool” that new machine could make over 60 different drinks, but when I sat back and thought about it all I really needed or wanted were a few key options that I used constantly. Especially as those extra bells and whistles seemed to be the usual suspect in the coffee machine constantly breaking. I would’ve loved them upgrading from burnt starbucks coffee beans to a local specialty roaster, that would’ve greatly enhanced my daily coffee. Echoing this realization, my coffee setup at home became a simple machine that could only make espresso and a hand crank coffee bean grinder. Still have them years later and they work great. They’re robust and fit exactly what I wanted with no nonsense that created more headache than everyday value. As you probably suspected, this is a loose comparison to OP_CAT. I’ve listened to podcast after podcast, read blog after blog, and sat through every CAT pitch I could find. I genuinely tried to approach with an open mind. However, ultimately what every pro OP_CAT argument boils down to is that there is no simple left curve elevator pitch a pleb will understand or care about. “But we can get this really cool ZK Rollup and have infinite DEFI bridging to altcoin chains! Look we sort of did it on this other altcoin chain.” And they did, they aren’t lying. They have live software on a shitcoin chain like ETH or SOL that does some modest volume. But the story quickly falls apart in the face of a few basic left curve questions: “Why should I, as an 80 IQ left curve BTC maxi give a shit?” “Does this enhance my everyday experience holding and using BTC?” “Why do you have a non-BTC token for your rollup/sidechain/glorified multisig that is totally centralized?” “Why is there only a hard to understand often ill-defined path to de-centralization? Why isn’t it just already decentralized?” “What is a clear use case that the typical non-technical everyday BTC holder can understand and rally behind?” “Why should I care about bridging to ETH, SOL, or whatever shitcoin chain? I only want BTC and don’t want to participate in all that shitcoin bullshit. Bitcoin is a store of value and money to me and it doesn’t help with those use cases in a clear direct way. It sounds like it maybe, kinda, sorta does help with a lot of caveats, ifs, and steps that I struggle to understand.” Sorry yeah I know, that one got a little personal. I’ll try to do better going forward guys.

ZK proofs or other Pro-CAT arguments, are undoubtedly cool and do factually enable potential cool new stuff. It just happens to all be stuff that sounds complex, esoteric, and unappealing to an 80 IQ HODL pleb - let alone a miner, ETF investor, or exchange exec. I don’t mean to say ZK or other tech has no potential and that we won’t eventually move there, but just to say that it’s not in the cards as currently dealt.

I really went out trying to keep an open mind and steelman the case for CAT. I came back firmly believing:

1 Support is deep in the developer community, but nonexistent everywhere else. I have yet to find a single person that supports CAT who is not a dev or working at or sponsored by a company that stands to directly profit from something CAT enables. Which is fine, but I reserve the right to be skeptical of your direct incentive. I acknowledge rough consensus is very hard to judge, and am open to changing my mind on this over time but feel this is a currently accurate assessment.

2 To get a soft fork you need rough consensus. Most people in that potential consensus are not highly technical developers. They care mostly or exclusively about BTC’s store of value use case. No one has yet articulated a clear compelling store of value enhancing use case that they can understand and care about. Without pull demand from potential users and paying customers, CAT will inevitably stall.

3 Lots of factually inaccurate FUD has been thrown at CAT. People saw the Taproot Wizards or shitcoiners pushing CAT, and immediately dismiss CAT as an evil psyop without any real consideration for its technical merits. Frankly most people just hate Udi and say “Fuck CAT” based solely on that. Maybe not fair, but true.

4 CAT is low risk, and it is not a catastrophe waiting to happen. Anything bad it potentially enables is enabled in such an inefficient and/or use hostile way that it is highly unlikely to pose any issues to Bitcoin. CAT’s technical risk is low and this is consistently proven by other chains enabling CAT and having no issues with it, such as Liquid.

5 Lots of people who have no idea wtf they are talking about falsely claim CAT is the apocalypse without any ability whatsoever to explain why. Imho you are no better than Udi and the shitcoiners if you are willing to lie about CAT just because you dislike them. We as the BTC community need the ability to have a rational discussion on technical merits, and not to devolve into a cult of personality based political battle. The question should be, “Is CAT good or bad and why?” and not “I just hate Udi, therefore its a no from me dog.”

Summarizing CAT using TradFi language: those pushing CAT have technology in search of a problem and no clear product market fit. They are pushing their technology to an apathetic audience. Pushers of CAT are not pulled forward by customer demand. In the tech world these are some of the quintessential red flags that every good investor knows mean you need to sit this one out.

CTV or LNHANCE on the other hand are soft fork proposals that have clear use cases you can quickly explain to a broad swathe of the Bitcoin ecosystem: “Hey HOLD pleb, worried about losing your coins? Wouldn’t it be nice to have a simple vault that reduces the chances your coins are lost or stolen? Let’s make self custody and BTC’s store of value use case strictly better, specifically without enabling any shitcoin-ery.” “Hey Blackrock, Van Eck, ARK, Franklin Templeton, and every ETF investor - it would really suck if Coinbase lost all your Bitcoin and that ETF went to zero, right? What it we could create vaults to make that Bitcoin more secure?” “Like Lightning but find it hard to use self-custodially? Let’s make Lightning better, easier, and more scalable with fewer onchain transactions and lower fees.” “Tried or seen the ARK demos yet? They have real working code even without covenants. With covenants we get big ARK volumes and scaling while also making it easier.”

Signing off: See the difference? I, an 80 IQ pleb, can steelman multiple use cases for CTV/LNHANCE that have broad appeal. I have yet to see any such case for CAT, and until then I don’t think it’ll go anywhere.

*Pro-CAT Sources I’ve digested and would encourage others to consider: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Covenants_support https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no_Nj-MX53w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yp4eYK9S6M

Pro-CTV/LNHANCE sources to consider which have CLEAR use cases with widespead appeal: https://github.com/jamesob/simple-ctv-vault https://github.com/stutxo/op_ctv_payment_pool https://lnhance.org/ https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-ctv-can-help-scale-bitcoin

@ a4a6b584:1e05b95b

The Four-Layer Framework

Layer 1: Zoom Out

Start by looking at the big picture. What’s the subject about, and why does it matter? Focus on the overarching ideas and how they fit together. Think of this as the 30,000-foot view—it’s about understanding the "why" and "how" before diving into the "what."

Example: If you’re learning programming, start by understanding that it’s about giving logical instructions to computers to solve problems.

• Tip: Keep it simple. Summarize the subject in one or two sentences and avoid getting bogged down in specifics at this stage.

Once you have the big picture in mind, it’s time to start breaking it down.

---

Layer 2: Categorize and Connect

Now it’s time to break the subject into categories—like creating branches on a tree. This helps your brain organize information logically and see connections between ideas.

Example: Studying biology? Group concepts into categories like cells, genetics, and ecosystems.

• Tip: Use headings or labels to group similar ideas. Jot these down in a list or simple diagram to keep track.

With your categories in place, you’re ready to dive into the details that bring them to life.

---

Layer 3: Master the Details

Once you’ve mapped out the main categories, you’re ready to dive deeper. This is where you learn the nuts and bolts—like formulas, specific techniques, or key terminology. These details make the subject practical and actionable.

Example: In programming, this might mean learning the syntax for loops, conditionals, or functions in your chosen language.

• Tip: Focus on details that clarify the categories from Layer 2. Skip anything that doesn’t add to your understanding.

Now that you’ve mastered the essentials, you can expand your knowledge to include extra material.

---

Layer 4: Expand Your Horizons

Finally, move on to the extra material—less critical facts, trivia, or edge cases. While these aren’t essential to mastering the subject, they can be useful in specialized discussions or exams.

Example: Learn about rare programming quirks or historical trivia about a language’s development.

• Tip: Spend minimal time here unless it’s necessary for your goals. It’s okay to skim if you’re short on time.

---

Pro Tips for Better Learning

1. Use Active Recall and Spaced Repetition

Test yourself without looking at notes. Review what you’ve learned at increasing intervals—like after a day, a week, and a month. This strengthens memory by forcing your brain to actively retrieve information.

2. Map It Out

Create visual aids like diagrams or concept maps to clarify relationships between ideas. These are particularly helpful for organizing categories in Layer 2.

3. Teach What You Learn

Explain the subject to someone else as if they’re hearing it for the first time. Teaching exposes any gaps in your understanding and helps reinforce the material.

4. Engage with LLMs and Discuss Concepts

Take advantage of tools like ChatGPT or similar large language models to explore your topic in greater depth. Use these tools to:
- Ask specific questions to clarify confusing points.
- Engage in discussions to simulate real-world applications of the subject.
- Generate examples or analogies that deepen your understanding.

Tip: Use LLMs as a study partner, but don’t rely solely on them. Combine these insights with your own critical thinking to develop a well-rounded perspective.

---

Get Started

Ready to try the Four-Layer Method? Take 15 minutes today to map out the big picture of a topic you’re curious about—what’s it all about, and why does it matter? By building your understanding step by step, you’ll master the subject with less stress and more confidence.

@ 611021ea:089a7d0f

In today's world, most running apps function just like Facebook—they track your runs, collect your personal data, and monetize your activity by selling insights to third parties. You are the product. But what if there was a way to track your running stats without sacrificing your privacy? Enter Runstr, the first running app built on the Nostr protocol.

A Running App That Respects Your Privacy

Unlike traditional fitness apps that harvest your data, Runstr leverages Nostr, a decentralized protocol that ensures your running stats remain under your control. This means you can log your runs, measure your performance, and improve your fitness without exposing your data to corporations, advertisers, or big tech.

From PWA to Android: Improving the Experience

We started with a Progressive Web App (PWA) as a proof of concept. However, we quickly ran into challenges with tracking run stats when the screen was turned off. To overcome these limitations, we pivoted to building a dedicated Android app that allows for better functionality and seamless background tracking. The response has been great so far, with early adopters loving the enhanced features and user experience.

Features & Integrations

Runstr is designed to be a powerful, yet lightweight running companion. Some of the key features include:

• Accurate run tracking: Distance, time, pace, and more
• Wavlake integration: Listen to your favorite tracks while running without switching apps
• Zero data harvesting: No third-party tracking, no selling your information

Recognition & Roadmap

We recently presented Runstr to PlebLab, and they loved the concept! They’ve offered mentorship and promotion support to help us scale. Looking ahead, here’s what’s coming in the next quarter:

• Running events & team events
• Personal goals & performance tracking
• Advanced statistics dashboard
• Local running clubs
• Runstr branding strategy for the app & running merchandise

Additionally, Runstr LLC is now an official business entity, marking a major milestone in our journey.

Nosfabrica - SALUD Decentralized Health App Development Challenge

We’ve entered the Nosfabrica - SALUD Decentralized Health App Development Challenge, whose mission is to develop an ecosystem of open-source tools built on Nostr and Bitcoin to decentralize healthcare, improve health, and address challenges in healthcare access, data portability, and overall health outcomes. Currently, the total prize pool is 0.12 BTC, and all participating projects can be found on the Kanbanstr board.

Fundraising & How You Can Support

To accelerate our development and bring Runstr to the next level, we are raising 0.1 BTC to fund design, branding, and development. Our goal is to launch the official Runstr app on zap.store by the end of May.

If you’d like to support this vision, you can:

• Download the app, take it for a run, and share your feedback on Nostr using the hashtag #runstr.
• Contribute to our fundraising via Geyser Fund.

Together, we can build the ultimate privacy-first running app. Join us and let’s run free! 🏃‍♂️⚡

@ f1989a96:bcaaf2c1

Good morning, readers!

In Nicaragua, the regime is increasingly cracking down on civil society, imposing new financial regulations on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that require them to disclose donors and report all financial transactions — further restricting their ability to operate independently. Meanwhile, in Iraq, the central bank governor announced plans to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDC) to replace cash in circulation. CBDCs are a mechanism for using digital currencies to centralize financial control.

In freedom tech news, Alby Go, a mobile Bitcoin Lightning wallet, added support for Pick n Pay QR codes, making it easier for South Africans to pay with Bitcoin at one of the country’s largest retailers. Additionally, Bitcoin Safe, an open-source Bitcoin wallet designed to simplify self-custody, introduced support for Burmese and Korean Languages, making the wallet more accessible to activists, dissidents, and individuals in these regions.

We end with a new discussion from 21st Capital, where Alex Gladstein, Chief Strategy Officer at HRF, joins Ziya Sadr, an Iranian activist and Bitcoin educator, to explore Bitcoin’s role in fighting financial repression and advancing global freedom. Sadr, who was detained by the Iranian regime during the Mahsa Amini protests, shares a sobering account of authoritarian control and the ways Bitcoin can help alleviate these struggles.

Now, let’s get right to it!

Subscribe Here

GLOBAL NEWS

Nicaragua | Increases Financial Surveillance of NGOs

Nicaragua’s dictator, Daniel Ortega, intensified his crackdown on civil society with two new regulations that significantly increase the Ministry of the Interior’s (MINT) authority over national and foreign NGOs. The new regulations require NGOs to submit financial documentation, disclose their donors, and report all financial transactions. Using this information, authorities can now classify organizations as “threats,” conduct surprise inspections, impose sanctions, seize assets, and force closure. These regulations, framed as efforts to combat “digital terrorism,” intensify state surveillance and control and are a continuation of the regime’s systematic use of financial repression to silence dissent. This year alone, Ortega shut down 15 NGOs, and since 2021, he has closed over 5,600.

El Salvador | IMF Approves 1.4 Billion Loan With Further Restrictions

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has officially approved its $1.4 billion loan to El Salvador while reinforcing even stricter limits on Bitcoin. This comes after last month’s legal reforms that made Bitcoin acceptance voluntary and prohibited its use for tax payments. The finalized deal, which grants an immediate $113 million disbursement, confines “government engagement in Bitcoin-related economic activities, as well as government transactions in and purchases of Bitcoin.” Despite these constraints, President Bukele has continued to flaunt Bitcoin purchases on social media, leaving many questions unanswered. Where does this bitcoin come from? Who controls the wallets? The lack of transparency remains.

Iraq | Issuing CBDC to Replace Cash

Iraq’s central bank governor, Ali Al-Allaq, announced that “the Iraqi central bank is now moving to create its own digital currency which will gradually replace paper notes.” Al-Allaq highlighted that this move aligns with broader “radical” changes in the global financial system. This news comes after Iraq banned all digital assets in 2017, citing concerns over financial crime and terrorism. Yet, its embrace of a CBDC over decentralized currencies like Bitcoin highlights a familiar pattern. China, Nigeria, and Russia have also pushed for CBDCs while restricting Bitcoin. Evidently, authoritarian regimes prefer financial control to remain in their own hands rather than risk empowering the public. 

Nigeria | Frees Tigran Gambaryan in Exchange for Greater Financial Surveillance

In October 2024, Nigeria released Tigran Gambaryan, a former Binance executive accused of money laundering and contributing to the naira’s devaluation — though, in reality, he was a scapegoat for the regime’s economic mismanagement. According to The Rage, his release was secured through a deal with the US to help Nigeria prosecute “cryptocurrency and financial crimes.” Soon after, the two countries announced the creation of a “Bilateral Liaison Group on Illicit Finance and Cryptocurrencies” to expand Nigeria’s surveillance capabilities and “pursue cybercrime investigations and prosecutions.” Gambaryan, who described his prison conditions as “torture,” now faces an unsettling reality: his freedom may have come at the cost of strengthening an authoritarian regime notorious for its financial repression.

Turkey | X Blocks Accounts of Three Journalists at Regimes Request

X recently blocked the accounts of three Kurdish journalists in Turkey — Abdurrahman Gök, Oktay Candemir, and Ruşen Takva — following a Turkish government request citing concerns over “national security.” The journalists, known for exposing government corruption and reporting on Kurdish issues, now join a growing list of silenced Turkish reporters. This comes as Turkey intensifies its crackdown on independent media through arrests, legal pressure, and censorship. With 95% of media outlets in Turkey complying with the regime, social platforms remain one of the last places for free expression. Yet, as X and other platforms increasingly comply with authoritarian demands, access to independent information shrinks. This escalating repression underscores the need for censorship-resistant alternatives like nostr, where government pressure or corporate compliance cannot easily suppress speech.

__________

Webinar Series for Nonprofits: Become Unstoppable

HRF will host a free, three-day webinar from March 17–19, teaching human rights defenders and nonprofits how to use Bitcoin to counter state censorship and confiscation. Sessions run daily from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. EDT and are beginner-friendly. The webinar will be led by Anna Chekhovich, HRF’s Bitcoin nonprofit adoption lead and financial manager at Alexei Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation.

Register for webinar

SXSW | The Human Rights Risks of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs)

Join HRF at SXSW 2025 in Austin from March 7–13 to explore how CBDCs threaten financial freedom. Experts Roger Huang, Charlene Fadirepo, and Nick Anthony will discuss how authoritarian regimes use CBDCs for surveillance and control. Attendees can also visit HRF’s  CBDC Tracker booth to explore an interactive map of CBDC developments worldwide. 

Get your tickets

__________

BITCOIN AND FREEDOM TECH NEWS

Nostr Wallet Connect | Introduces Pull Request for On-Chain Send and Receive

Nostr Wallet Connect (NWC), a protocol that connects Bitcoin Lightning wallets and applications, is developing a potential upgrade: support for on-chain Bitcoin transactions. Currently, NWC is designed for Lightning transactions. This new update would allow users to also send and receive on-chain Bitcoin transactions, which are slower and less private, but more secure with higher send and receive limits. This means users and apps can more easily move funds between Lightning and regular Bitcoin wallets, making NWC more practical and flexible. This upgrade enhances financial resilience for dissidents and activists by providing a more secure and flexible way to store and move Bitcoin.

Bitcoin Safe | Adds Support for Burmese and Korean Languages

Bitcoin Safe, an open-source Bitcoin wallet designed to make self-custody simple — even for non-technical users — introduced support for Burmese and Korean Languages. This support makes the wallet more accessible to activists, dissidents, and individuals in these regions, empowering them with uncensorable and unseizable money. Bitcoin Safe guides users through the entire setup process, offering step-by-step instructions for single-signature wallets (where one private key controls your Bitcoin) and multisignature wallets (which require multiple private keys for added security). By breaking down barriers to Bitcoin self-custody, Bitcoin Safe is making financial freedom accessible to those who need it most.

Frostr | Turn Your Nostr Private Key into a Rotatable Multisig

Frostr is an experimental new tool that adds a layer of security to a user’s nostr private key by splitting it into multiple parts. Instead of using a single key, Frostr divides the key into shares, requiring a subset of these shares to sign messages on nostr. This offers two key benefits. First, greater security; even if one share is lost or stolen, a user’s full key remains secret and in their control. Second, flexible key rotation; users can replace or update shares of the key without changing their digital identity. This is an important advancement for activists, journalists, and human rights defenders. Many authoritarian regimes track, censor, and punish those who speak freely. If an activist’s private key is compromised, their digital identity and safety could be at risk. Frostr removes this single point of failure and empowers users to communicate freely, securely, and flexibly, even in hostile environments.

Alby Go | Integrates Pick n Pay QRs for Bitcoin Payments in South Africa

Alby Go, a mobile Bitcoin Lightning wallet, added support for Pick n Pay QR codes, making it easier for South Africans to pay with Bitcoin at one of the country’s largest retailers. The update also integrates BTC map, offering users a detailed directory of merchants that accept Bitcoin. These changes make everyday Bitcoin payments more practical, expand access to businesses that accept Bitcoin, and give South Africans an alternative to the country’s unstable financial system and currency.

bitcoin++ | Announces Freedom and Privacy Edition

bitcoin++, a bitcoin-only developer conference series, is set to return on August 7-8, 2025, with a dedicated focus on freedom and privacy. Taking place in Riga, Latvia the event will bring together privacy advocates, developers, and freedom tech enthusiasts to explore the latest developments in privacy tech, censorship resistance, and open-source development on Bitcoin. Learn more and get your tickets here.

RECOMMENDED CONTENT

Bitcoin’s Potential to Revolutionize Freedom with Alex Gladstein

In this episode of 21st Capital, Alex Gladstein, Chief Strategy Officer at HRF, sits down with Ziya Sadr, an Iranian activist and Bitcoin educator, to discuss Bitcoin’s role in fighting financial repression and advancing global freedom. Ziya helped build Iran’s Farsi-speaking Bitcoin community, created educational content on privacy, and contributed to open-source translation projects. He was later detained by the Iranian regime during the Mahsa Amini protests. During the discussion, Gladstein highlights stories of individuals escaping authoritarian control, accessing global markets, and securing their wealth through Bitcoin. Watch here to learn how Bitcoin is a tool for human rights.

If this article was forwarded to you and you enjoyed reading it, please consider subscribing to the Financial Freedom Report here.

Support the newsletter by donating bitcoin to HRF’s Financial Freedom program via BTCPay.\ Want to contribute to the newsletter? Submit tips, stories, news, and ideas by emailing us at ffreport @ hrf.org

The Bitcoin Development Fund (BDF) is accepting grant proposals on an ongoing basis. The Bitcoin Development Fund is looking to support Bitcoin developers, community builders, and educators. Submit proposals here.

Subscribe to newsletter

Apply for a grant

Support our work

Visit our website

@ 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.

@ 79998141:0f8f1901

Happy new year, Anon.

Thanks for tuning in to whatever this long form post will be. I hope to make these more regular, like journal entries as we travel through "real life" and the Nostrverse together. If I'm making time for this reflective writing, then things are going as planned.

2024 was a wildly transformative year for me for many reasons... there's no way I can possibly fit all of them here. They're not all related to Bitcoin and Nostr- I've got a beautiful life outside of all that which has its own independent arc. My wife and I celebrated 7 years of marriage together, stronger than ever (don't believe that "itch" bullshit). We let go of some negative relationships and embraced some positive ones. We cut some bad habits, and we made some good habits. We worked, we traveled, we saw family, and we partied.

But damn, these two technologies have become a huge part of my life. God willing, this trend will continue until they've both eclipsed my professional capacity through our startup, Conduit BTC.

This was the year I was truly orange pilled. Until late 2023, I had traded (quite profitably) Bitcoin, "crypto", stocks, options, prediction markets and whatever else I could get my hands on that felt undervalued. I did this all in my spare time, grinding out a little financial freedom while I hustled at my fiat ventures to support my little family. I wasn't a true believer- just an opportunist with a knack for spotting where and when a crowd might flock to next. That was right up until I ran face first into Lyn Alden's book "Broken Money".

Something about Lyn's engineer/macro-finance inspired prose clicked with me, lock and key. Total one way function. By the end of the book my laser eyes had burned a hole in my bedroom ceiling. I was all in- and acted accordingly both with my capital and my attention. It wasn't long before I discovered Nostr and dove in here too, falling deep into my current orange and purple polyamorous love affair.

"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles."

Despite the passion, through studying Bitcoin's criticisms (from the likes of Mike Green and Nassim Taleb) I found a hole in the utopian plot: none of this works without Bitcoin actually being used as money. Worldwide transactions must skyrocket demand for blockspace to keep the network secure/stable for the long term. Besides, if everyday folks aren't using Bitcoin as money then we haven't done shit to make the world a better place. In that world, we've only replaced old masters with new ones. Fuck that.

Whatever I did in this space needed to increase the usage of Bitcoin as money. Simple. This was bigger than passion, this was purpose. I knew that come hell or high water I would dedicate myself to this mission.

Lucky for me I found a partner and best friend in @aceaspades to go on this adventure with. I'm infinitely grateful for him. He's an incredible man who also happens to be an insanely creative and talented software developer. We'd tried for years to find the right project to focus on together, experimenting with all kinds of new techy ideas as they came across our field. Nothing had ever captured our attention like this. This was different. By March of 2024 we had formed a company and gotten to work iterating on how we could leverage these beautiful protocols and open-source tech to create something that served our mission. This is @ConduitBTC.

I've done well in my fiat career executing plans downstream of someone else's creative vision. I've learned the ins and outs of an established ecosystem and found ways to profit from it. I take plans developed by others, compete to win contracts to build them, and execute on them in a cashflow-positive way. I'm bringing this no bullshit blue collar skillset with me to the Nostrverse whether they like it or not.

The adventure we're embarking on now is totally different though. We're charting a new course - totally creative, highly intuitive and extremely speculative towards a future that doesn't exist yet. There are few established norms. The potential is vast but unknown. We're diving into a strange quest to sell a map to an imaginary place and to simultaneously architect its creation (alongside all the amazing builders here doing the same thing). This is insanely exciting to me.

We're barely getting started but a lot has been invested under the surface which will show itself in 2025. We'll be sharing updates in a proper post on @ConduitBTC soon.

As for my personal 2025 resolutions, here they are: - zero alcohol for the entire year (did this in 2019 and had a great year, it's time for a rerun) - more focused presence in the moment: especially with my wife - more self care and prioritized mental/physical health - this includes daily: naps, prayer, self hypnosis or meditation, sweat, and stretching/massaging (overworked in 2024 with a fiat 9-5, a board/advisor role in a fiat business I have equity in, and my newfound passion here. Two serious burn out episodes experienced this year - zero is the only acceptable number of burnouts for long term health and success.) - related to the above: get Conduit some mission-aligned funding partners and leave my fiat 9-5. Grow the Conduit team (have put in a serious amount of my personal capital already to get this going, which will show fruit in the new year... but I am not an island) - more authentic and thoughtful posts on Nostr, with a solid amount of shitposting and organic home grown memes to balance it out... more zaps, more geniune connections and interactions with the curious forward thinking people on here - more IRL Nostr/Bitcoin events - more laughter, more jokes

Enough for now. Cheers to you and yours Anon, may 2025 bring you the magic you've been dreaming of.

@ 8947a945:9bfcf626

Law of diminishing returns : ทำมากได้น้อย ซวยหน่อยขาดทุน

** หมายเหตุ บทความนี้มีเนื้อหาต่อเนื่องจาก “(TH) Why I quit : สาเหตุที่ผมลาออกจากที่(ทำงาน) ที่ (เคย) เรียกว่า”บ้าน” ใครยังไม่ได้อ่าน แนะนำให้ไปอ่านก่อนนะครับ

ผมได้ยิน คุณท็อป จิรายุส (คุณท๊อป บิทคับ) พูดคำว่า "Law of diminishing returns" ไว้ตอนแชร์มุมมองด้านการทำธุรกิจ ตอนนั้นผมไม่เข้าใจ แต่ผมรู้สึกว่ามันเป็นเจ๋งดี

สำหรับผม สรุปกฏนี้สั้นๆ คือ “ทำมากได้น้อย ซวยหน่อยขาดทุน”

กฏข้อนี้ว่าด้วยเรื่องการทำธุรกิจ พูดถึงปัจจัย 3 อย่าง - Fixed input คือสิ่งที่ไม่สามารถผลิตเพิ่มได้อีกในธุรกิจตอนนั้น เช่น จำนวนห้องตรวจในโรงพยาบาล, พื้นที่ที่ดินทำการเกษตร, ห้องเก็บสินค้า, จำนวนโต๊ะทำงานในสำนักงาน, ช่องบริการลูกค้าในธุรกิจบริการต่างๆ เป็นต้น ผมขอเรียกสั้นๆว่า “พื้นที่” - Variable input คือสิ่งที่สามารถเติมเข้ามาในธุรกิจได้ ปรับแต่งได้ เช่น แรงงาน เครื่องจักร พลังงาน - Marginal product คือผลลัพธ์ของธุรกิจ กำไรเพิ่มขึ้นหลังจากเพิ่ม variable input เข้าสู่ระบบ

ระยะของ law of diminishing returns

• Increased return (ทำเงินได้เยอะขึ้น) เมื่อป้อนแรงงานหรือเครื่องจักรเข้าสู่ระบบ ธุรกิจสามารถทำเงินเพิ่มขึ้นเนื่องจาก fixed input เดิมที่ถูกใช้สอยไม่เต็มที่ (underutilized) ถูกเติมเต็ม กรณีของรพ. คือมีห้องตรวจที่ว่าง ไม่มีหมอนั่งตรวจคนไข้ ห้องตรวจนั้นก็จะไม่สร้างรายได้ แต่เมื่อห้องนั้นมีหมอมานั่ง จะเปลี่ยนเป็นพื้นที่ที่ก่อให้เกิดรายได้ เมื่อห้องตรวจทุกห้องมีหมอนั่งครบ ถือว่าเต็มศักยภาพ ประสิทธิภาพการทำงานที่ดีตามมา
• Diminishing return (ทำมากได้น้อย) จุดของความพอดี (optimum point) คือจุดที่สมดุลพอดีของธุรกิจนั้น ทำกำไรได้เหมาะสม ไม่มากไม่น้อยจนเกินไป แต่ถ้ามองไม่เห็นจุด optimum นี้แล้วยังเพิ่ม”แรงงาน”เข้าไปอีก มันจะทำให้ ”พื้นที่” วุ่นวายเละเทะ ประสิทธิภาพในการทำงานลดลง
• Negative returns (ซวยหน่อยขาดทุน) ถ้ายังไม่หยุดเพิ่ม “แรงงาน” อีก สามารถนำมาสู่การขาดทุน

สรุปเป็นกราฟหน้าตาตามนี้ครับ

ทำไมมันถึงเป็นอย่างนั้น

ผมใช้โมเดลธุรกิจรพ.นี้เป็นตัวอย่างเลยนะครับ

ช่วงแรกที่สร้างรพ. ห้องตรวจมีไม่มาก จำนวนหมอและคนไข้สมดุลกันพอดี งานไม่หนักเกินไป การดูแลคนไข้มีประสิทธิภาพ รพ.เป็นที่ไว้ใจของคนในพื้นที่ มีชื่อเสียง ถูกบอกต่อ ทำให้จำนวนคนไข้เข้ามารับบริการมากขึ้น ต้องขยายพื้นที่รพ. สร้างตึกเพิ่ม รับบุคคลากรทุกระดับเข้ามาทำงานมากขึ้น จนเต็มพื้นที่ที่ดินรพ.ไม่สามารถขยายเพิ่มไปได้มากกว่านี้แล้ว เกิดสมดุลพอดี ทุกพื้นที่ถูกใช้งานเต็มศักยภาพ ประสิทธิภาพงานดีมาก

ผลการดำเนินงาน

ไม่เคยขาดทุน ผ่านช่วงวิกฤตต้มยำกุ้ง และ COVID ได้สบายๆ ฐานะทางการเงินแข็งแรง จ่ายปันผลสม่ำเสมอ ถ้าผมเป็นเจ้าของรพ.ผมจะ 1. สร้างระบบ 2. สร้างทีมผู้บริหาร 3. เน้นย้ำความสำคัญทำตามระบบ 3. Plan - Do- Check - Act เมื่อเกิดปัญหา

เพื่อให้ตัวผมสามารถถอยตัวเองออกมาจากตัวธุรกิจ คอยติดตาม monitor ทุกไตรมาส อย่างใกล้ชิด ไม่ทำอะไรเพิ่มไปมากกว่านี้

แต่สุดท้ายมันก็เกิดเหตุการณ์ทายาทรุ่นที่ 2 “ไม่เอา” นั่นแหละครับ มันทำให้วัฒนธรรมองค์กรเปลี่ยน ก้าวเท้าเข้าไปสู่ยุคตกต่ำ

บริหารแบบล้าหลัง ทำอะไรไม่สุด คิดว่าทำแล้วแต่จริงๆคือไม่ได้ทำ แก้ปัญหาไม่ตรงจุดสร้างปัญหากว่าเดิม

---

ตัวอย่าง

1. นโยบายการประหยัดพลังงานเพื่อลด carbon footprint

ฟังดูเหมือนจะดี แต่รพ.สื่อสารให้

รณรงค์ให้ปิดไฟ ... ปิดแอร์เมื่อไม่ใช้งาน ...

ผมว่าประโยคนี้มันคุ้นๆ เหมือนเคยได้ยินมามากกว่า 10 ปีแล้ว ... หรือผมเข้าใจผิดหรือเปล่าไม่แน่ใจ

รณรงค์แค่นี้แหละครับ เรื่องลด carbon footprint ไม่ได้เป็นการคิดอะไรใหม่ๆที่เหมาะกับยุคสมัย หรือสร้างอะไรที่จับต้องได้ (objective)

แต่สิ่งที่ทำสวนทางโดยสิ้นเชิงคือใช้พลาสติกแบบใช้แล้วทิ้ง (single use plastic) เป็นภาชนะหลักในการบรรจุอาหารของแพทย์ และผู้เข้าร่วมประชุมงานใหญ่ๆ มีเสียงเสนอแนะจากบุคคลากรทุกระดับว่าให้ทำเป็นบุฟเฟ่ต์ จานชามช้อนส้อมแบบปกติก็ได้ เสนอกันมา 5 ปี ก็ยังคงไม่่มีการเปลี่ยนแปลง ได้รับแจ้งลงมาว่าใช้ภาชนะพลาสติกมันประหยัดกว่า เอาเป็นว่ากล่องข้าวพลาสติกมีการใช้อย่างน้อย 1200 กล่องต่อเดือน … คาดว่าสมการการปล่อยก๊าสคาร์บอน (carbon emission) ที่ทีมผู้บริหารคำนวณ อาจจะซับซ้อนเกินความเข้าใจของผมก็ได้นะครับ

2. การตลาดที่ล้มเหลวและพาแพทย์ซวย

ทำการตลาดไม่เข้าเป้า “เหมือนจะ” ทำ digital marketing แต่ทำแค่โพสกราฟฟิคโปรโมชั่นภาพนิ่งลงสื่อโซเชียลทุกช่องทาง แล้วบอกว่านั่นคือ digital marketing

... แต่เดี๋ยวก่อนๆๆๆ ...

ผมจะบอกว่าการโพสมันเป็นแค่ 1 ใน 10 ของ digital marketing แต่รพ.เข้าใจว่าตัวเองได้เข้าสู่ digital marketing แล้ว

... จริงๆมันไม่ใช่เลยเว้ย ...

ผลลัพธ์คือไม่สามารถเปิดน่านน้ำลูกค้าใหม่ได้เลย ได้แต่ฐานลูกค้าเดิมที่มี brand royalty (แต่แนวโน้มลดลง)

แถมที่แย่ที่สุดคือทำการตลาดแพคเกจออกมาโดยไม่ปรึกษาแพทย์ก่อนว่ามันขัดต่อมาตรฐานการรักษาหรือไม่ กลายเป็นทำแพคเกจดึงดูดคนไข้เข้ามาใช้บริการ แต่การรักษาในแพคเกจขัดต่อมาตรฐานการรักษาของแพทย์

คนไข้ไม่รู้หรอกครับ คนไข้จะเอาตามที่มีในแพคเกจ เขาจ่ายตังค์แล้ว แต่ความซวยมันไปตกอยู่กับแพทย์

3. วางกลยุทธไม่เข้าเป้า

ทุกๆต้นปีทางผู้บริหารจะประกาศกลยุทธประจำปี ว่าในปีนั้นๆรพ.จะมุ้งเน้นพัฒนาด้านไหน รพ.นี้มีปัญหาที่เป็นงูกินหางมานาน มันส่งผลต่อประสิทธิภาพการทำงานของหมอและพยาบาล มีการเสนอแก้ปัญหาเรื่องนี้วนซ้ำซากมา 5 ปี แต่ไม่ได้รับแก้ไขจริงจัง (ผมขอไม่เล่านะครับ)

แต่กลยุทธประจำปี 3 ปีที่ผ่านมา พุ่งใส่ตัวบุคคลากร เน้นพฤติกรรมบริการที่ดีเลิศ ทราบมาว่ามีการลงทุนกับโครงการนี้หลักแสนหรือหลักล้าน มีการจัด workshop เชิญวิทยากรและ trainer จากบริษัทภายนอก (outsource) เข้ามาอบรม เป็นโครงการที่เน้นให้บุคคลากรทุกคนเข้าอบรม 100%

ผมมองว่าปัญหาที่เป็นราก (root cause) มันยังไม่ถูกแก้เลย เปรียบเทียบเหมือนฐานรากของอาคารที่มันโคลงเคลงๆไม่มั่นคงยังไม่ได้รับการแก้ไข แต่พยายามตกแต่งห้องด้วยวัสดุคุณภาพดีและเทคโนโลยีที่ทันสมัย … แต่พร้อมจะล้มลงมาได้ทุกเมื่อ

4. มีเสน่ดึงดูด partner ใหม่ๆ แต่ไม่เอาเอง

ในช่วง COVID ระลอกแรก มีผู้นำทางด้านธุรกิจโรงแรมในจังหวัดมานำเสนอโมเดลธุรกิจ “hospitel เปลี่ยนโรงแรมให้เป็นโรงพยาบาล” ด้วยศักยภาพของรพ.ที่มีบุคคลากรเพียงพอ และตัวโรงแรมที่นำมาเสนอมีห้องพักประมาณ 300 ห้อง เป็นโมเดลที่รพ.และโรงแรม win-win ทั้งคู่ แต่ทางผู้บริหารมองว่าไม่คุ้ม ปฏิเสธข้อเสนอนี้ ทำให้เสียโอกาสให้กับคู่แข่งคว้าตลาด blue ocean นี้ไป

ผมได้แต่เกาหัวตอนรู้เรื่องนี้ เพราะ 1. ช่วง COVID คนไข้น้อย พนักงานโดนลดชั่วโมงการทำงาน ได้เงินเดือนขั้นต่ำ ไม่ได้ OT 2. ทาง partner เสนอขอบุคคลากรเหล่านี้แหละ ไปช่วยงาน เรื่องสถานที่ทางโรงแรมเขามีแม่บ้าน ฝ่ายทำความสะอาดอยู่แล้ว 3. ทาง partner เสนอ profit sharing กับทางรพ. ถึงผมจะไม่รู้ตัวเลข แต่เชื่อว่ามันยุติธรรม

ผมก็ไม่รู้ครับ ว่าอะไรคือคุ้มสำหรับผู้บริหาร

5. Top down absolute power

ไม่ฟังข้อเสนอจากตัวแทนหมอ คนที่มีอำนาจการตัดสินใจไม่เคยเอาตัวลงมาคุยกับหมอแบบจริงจังเลย

1-2 ปีจะลงมาพบหมอทั้งรพ.ซักหนึ่งครั้ง สร้างภาพเก่ง พูดขายฝันสวนหรูถึงภาพที่เขาต้องการ สั่งการลงมา พอเกิดปัญหาตัวเองไม่ลงมารับผิดชอบ แต่อาศัยหน่วยข่าวกรอง(ที่ไม่รู้ว่ากรองอะไรเข้าไปบ้าง) ออกคำสั่งแก้ผ้าเอาหน้ารอดลงมาทีหลัง

แถมสั่งให้เงียบและหุบปาก

ครั้งหนึ่งมีคำสั่งออกมาไม่ชัดเจน จนพยาบาลทำงานไม่ได้ ตัวแทนพยาบาลต้องโทรมาหาผมเพื่อให้ผมช่วย

ผมรวบรวมข้อมูลทั้งหมดและพบว่าคำสั่งมีปัญหาจริงๆ ผมจึง chat line ลงไปสอบถามผู้บริหารเพื่อขอความชัดเจน

… ผ่านไปไม่ถึง 5 นาที หนึ่งในผู้บริหาร(คนที่แทงข้างหลังผมที่หาว่าผมมาตรวจคนไข้ VIP เขาช้า 5 นาทีนั่นแหละ)โทรหาผมทันทีคุยกับผมสั้นๆ ใจความว่า “คำสั่งนั้นเอาแบบเดิม ไม่ต้องแก้ และให้ผมเงียบๆซะ”... (ก็ได้วะครับ)

จุดเปลี่ยนที่ทำให้รพ.เข้าสู่ law of diminishing returns

ห้องตรวจทุกห้องของรพ. ถูกใช้จนเต็มศักยภาพ … เอาจริงๆคือล้นศักยภาพเสียอีก (over-utilized) บางแผนกมีเก้าอี้ดนตรี - หมอคนแรกหมดเวลาออกตรวจ - หมอคนต่อไปเดินเข้าใช้ห้องตรวจต่อทันที - ถ้าไม่ทันก็ต้องคว้าห้องตรวจที่ว่างพร้อมใช้งานก่อน - หมอทำการไล่ที่กันเอง - หมอบางท่านต้องใช้ห้องทำงานของพยาบาลเป็นห้องตรวจชั่วคราว

ห้องพักผู้ป่วยก็เช่นกัน บางช่วงเตียงเต็มจนไม่สามารถ admit คนไข้ได้

แต่จำที่ผมบอกได้มั้ยครับว่า คนที่เป็น top down absolute power ไม่เคยเอาตัวลงมาพูดคุยกับแพทย์เพื่อรับฟังปัญหาที่แท้จริงเลย รับแต่ข่าวกรอง(ที่ไม่รู้ว่ากรองอะไรเข้าไปบ้าง) ช่วงนึงมีคนไข้ complaint ว่ารอนั่งรอหมอนาน หมอมาตรวจช้า ผู้บริหารเลยพยายามจะแก้ปัญหา โดยการ monitor waiting time (ระยะเวลารอหมอ) หยิบยกเรื่องนี้ขึ้นมาเป็นวาระเร่งด่วนต้องรีบแก้ไข

แต่เขายังงงๆกับ concept waiting time อยู่เลยว่าจะนับตั้งแต่ตอนไหนถึงตอนไหน - Waiting time สั้นแปลว่าดี เพราะคนไข้ได้เจอหมอเร็ว - Waiting time นานแปลว่าไม่ดี เพราะคนไข้นั่งรอหมอนาน

เขาตีความจากตัวเลขครับ แต่เคยเอาตัวลงมาดูจริงๆหรือเปล่าว่าทำไมตัวเลขมันถึงออกมาไม่ดี

คำตอบคือ“ไม่” ครับ

หมอบางสาขามีความจำเป็นต้องไปดูคนไข้ที่อาการหนักใช้เวลารักษานาน ... หรือ ... รับปรึกษาจากแพทย์ต่างสาขา ... หรือ ... เป็นสาขาเฉพาะทางของเฉพาะทางอีกที ต้องใช้เวลาตรวจละเอียดตรวจนาน

มันเป็นกระบวนการทำงานของหมอ ที่หมอด้วยกันเข้าใจกัน

ส่วนคนเก็บข้อมูลก็นำเสนอไปทั้งอย่างนั้นโดยที่ไม่ได้วิเคราะห์อะไรเลย มันเป็นการกรองข้อมูลที่ไม่รอบคอบก่อนนำเสนอผู้บริหาร

สุดท้ายผู้บริหาร “โทษหมอ” ว่าไม่มีการบริหารเวลาทำงานที่ดีเพียงพอ ทำให้คนไข้รอนาน เขาสรุปกันดื้อๆแบบนี้เลยครับ

พอหนักๆเข้า “รอหมอนาน ต้องเพิ่มหมอ” season การรับสมัครหมอหลายตำแหน่งได้เริ่มขึ้น

แต่เดี๋ยวนะ ห้องตรวจมันแน่นจนแทบไม่มีที่ให้หมอนั่งทำงานแล้ว แต่เขาก็ไม่สนครับ รับหมอหน้าใหม่ๆมาเพิ่มเรื่อยๆ

ด้วย mindset ว่า "ต้องเพิ่มหมอ หมอจะได้เยอะขึ้น คนไข้จะได้ไม่ต้องรอนาน" และเชื่อว่าจะทำรายได้ให้รพ.มากขึ้น หมอหน้าใหม่บางท่านเข้ามาทำงานวันแรกถึงขั้นอยู่ในสภาวะ dead air คือไม่มีที่ให้นั่งทำงาน

“ทำมากได้น้อย” เริ่มต้น

คนไข้รพ.นี้ ส่วนใหญ่เป็นโรคซับซ้อน ต้องการทักษะและเวลาหมอเฉพาะทางแต่ละสาขาอยู่ดี ไม่ได้ทำให้ waiting time ดีขึ้น คนไข้ยัง “นั่งรอหมอนานเหมือนเดิม”

รายได้เริ่มลดลง ยอดคนไข้เริ่มลดลง รพ.พยายามแก้เกมโดยการเพิ่มราคาค่าบริการ (เพิ่มขนาด ticket size) ทำให้มีเสียงรีวิวตามโซเชียลว่า "แพง"

ผลที่เกิดขึ้นคือคนไข้หลายคนอาศัยรพ.นี้ในการตรวจวินิจฉัยโรคแล้วเอาผลไปรักษาต่อรพ.รัฐบาลตามสิทธิ์เพราะสู้ราคาค่ารักษาไม่ไหว บางคนมีประกันสุขภาพหลายฉบับแต่ก็ต้องจ่ายส่วนต่างมากอยู่ดี

วิธีการข้างต้นนี้ ไม่ผิดกติกาครับ ผล X-ray , CT, MRI, ultrasound จากรพ.เอกชน ไวกว่ารพ.รัฐบาลอยู่แล้ว แต่ก็มีคนไข้บางส่วนยินดีจ่ายแพง เพราะเชื่อมั่นหมอที่รพ.นี้ไม่อยากย้ายรพ.ก็มีครับ เพราะหมอไม่ได้ทำอะไรผิด หมอเก่งๆมีเยอะ

ถึงแม้ว่ารพ.จะรักษา momentum มีจำนวนคนไข้ประมาณ 1100 - 1200 รายต่อวัน แต่ก็เป็นโรคง่ายๆ(simple disease) เช่นไข้หวัด อาหารเป็นพิษ เป็นต้น โรคเหล่านี้ ticket size ไม่ได้ใหญ่มาก ประคองไว้ไม่ให้ขาดทุนเท่านั้นครับ

แต่ความแพงแบบไม่สมเหตุสมผล ทำให้คนไข้หลายรายถอดใจย้ายรพ.ตั้งแต่ทราบค่าใช้จ่ายวินาทีแรก

คนไข้น้อยลง --> รายได้ลดลง --> เพิ่ม ticket size ต่อหัวให้แพงขึ้น --> คนไข้หนีเพราะแพงเกิน

ผมไม่รู้ว่าผู้บริหารเขาเห็นไหม แต่คาดว่าคงจะไม่เห็น

ส่วนโรคหรือการผ่าตัดที่สมศักดิ์ศรีกับศักยภาพของรพ. "น้อยมากจนแทบไม่มี" ไม่ใช่สาเหตุอื่นเลยครับ โดนรพ.คู่แข่งในรัศมี 20 กิโลเมตรเอาไปหมด เพราะราคาถูกกว่า หมอก็เก่งไม่แพ้กัน หมอบางคนเคยอยู่ที่รพ.แห่งนี้ เสนอโปรเจคการรักษาโรคบางโรคที่สามารถสร้างรายได้เป็นกอบเป็นกำ แต่ทางรพ.ไม่เอาเอง สุดท้ายหมอเหล่านั้นย้ายไปอยู่กับรพ.คู่แข่งและผลักดันโปรเจคเหล่านั้นสำเร็จจนมีชื่อเสียง

"รพ.ขายสินค้า premium ไม่ได้เลย ขายได้แต่สินค้าเกรดท้องตลาด"

กลยุทธที่รพ.ทำต่อมาคือเพิ่มจำนวนชั่วโมงการทำงานของหมอให้เพิ่มขึ้นโดยให้หมอมาทำงานเร็วขึ้น 2 ชม. แต่ไม่จ่าย OT ให้ ด้วยตรรกะว่าถ้าหมอทำงานนานขึ้น จะมีจำนวนคนไข้มากขึ้น ทางรพ.ไม่ได้ขอร้อง แต่บีบคอให้หมอร่วมมือ หากไม่ร่วมมือไล่ออกทันที

ไปๆมาๆ มีการไล่ออกกระทันหันเกิดขึ้น มีการส่งหนังสือส่วนตัวหาหมอทุกคน ใครมีรายชื่อที่จะปลดออกก็ต้องออกจากงานทันที

ผมมองว่าฐานะทางการเงินมีปัญหารุนแรงครับ เงินเดือนพนักงานถือเป็น fixed cost ที่ธุรกิจต้องแบกรับ ถ้าเจ๋งจริงต้องควบคุมรายจ่ายให้ธุรกิจสามารถไปต่อได้โดยไม่ปลดคน ในส่วนของธุรกิจรพ. หมอคือบุคคลากรที่สำคัญที่สุดและเป็นด่านสุดท้ายที่จะไล่ออกเพื่อรักษาชีวิตของธุรกิจ ตอนนี้รพ.ได้เข้าสู่ระยะสุดท้ายของ law of diminishing returns คือ “ซวยหน่อยขาดทุน” เป็นที่เรียบร้อยครับ

จุดจบของรพ.แบบนี้ ที่ศักยภาพดี แต่บริหารห่วยแตก มันจะจบด้วยการถูก take over ผ่านมาไม่นานกราฟหุ้นออกอาการ exit liquidity แล้วครับ

ข้อคิดที่อยากแบ่งปันกับทุกคนที่อ่านมาจนจบ

1. ช่วงธุรกิจเปลี่ยนผ่านสู่ทายาท คือจุดวัดใจหัวเลี้ยวหัวต่อว่าจะรอดหรือไม่รอด
2. Law of diminishing returns ไม่ได้ใช้เฉพาะกับธุรกิจ แต่สามารถประยุกต์ใช้กับการดำเนินชีวิตได้หลายมิติ หากใครเข้าใจ จะขยับเข้าสู่ Pareto’s rule … สั้นๆคือ ทำน้อยแต่ได้(โคตร)มาก
3. เจ้าของธุรกิจ ต้องหูไว มองหาเนื้อร้ายที่คอยกัดกินธุรกิจให้เจอ แล้วกำจัดมันซะ ก่อนที่ธุรกิจจะล้มทั้งยืน ทับตัวเองตาย

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

The paparazzi are we

One of the things that bothers me about social media, in general, is that it gives celebrities an air of approachability, that they don't actually offer.

Theoretically, a celebrity could respond to any one of the dozens or even hundreds of people asking them questions or lodging complaints or singing their praises, but they usually only respond very selectively and leave everyone else just sitting there, as a living monument to the ReplyGuy.

And, as a wise man once said, ReplyGuy is a hoe.

Death of a ReplyGuy

This is usually because of time and energy restrictions, but also due to distaste, disdain, or indifference. Regardless of motivation, it is simply the nature of things, when a larger number of people are clamboring for the attention of some particular person.

Ooh, ooh! Can I have the next question?! Would you please address my bug? May I have a microsecond of your time?

Social media (and I include GitHub in this category) ups this game considerably, and potentially turns it all into a dangerous psychological torture, by making us all preoccupied with people who don't interact with us. The most irrational of groupies because we are forever making almost-contact with our stars.

If we can see them talking to one person, we're supposed to feel like they've spoken with all of us. But they haven't. They spoke with someone else, and we were allowed to watch. No different than on television, except that we might be disappointed and eager to return the next day, to renew our futile attempt.

The same intoxicating feeling that playing the lottery elicits. Everyone is a potential winner, but there is only one jackpot. Come back next week. Buy another ticket. This next time, is your time. Promise.

The view from the peanut gallery

It is all an illusion that there is no hierarchy, where there clearly is one. Celebrities of the past had, at least, the decency to remain slightly aloof. But they all want to be one of the Common Folk, now, just as every multi-millionaire aspires to see himself as fundamentally working-class.

All of celebrity social media is a stage, and most of us are merely spectators or commentators, to what is playing on it. This is why, if someone treats me like someone sitting in the peanut gallery, my instinct is to treat them like an actor.

Because, in reality, that is what they are.

@ 0fa80bd3:ea7325de

![[yedinaya-rossiya-bear.png]]

1️⃣ Be where the bear roams. Stay in its territory, where it hunts for food. No point setting a trap in your backyard if the bear’s chilling in the forest.

2️⃣ Set a well-hidden trap. Bury it, disguise it, and place the bait right in the center. Bears are omnivores—just like secret police KGB agents. And what’s the tastiest bait for them? Money.

3️⃣ Wait for the bear to take the bait. When it reaches in, the trap will snap shut around its paw. It’ll be alive, but stuck. No escape.

Now, what you do with a trapped bear is another question... 😏

@ a42048d7:26886c32

DIY Multisig is complex and 100x more likely to fail than you think if you do it yourself: A few years ago as an experiment I put what was then $2,000 worth Bitcoin into a 2 of 3 DIY multisig with two close family members holding two keys on Tapsigners and myself holding the last key on a Coldcard. My thought was to try and preview how they might deal with self custodied multisig Bitcoin if I died prematurely. After over a year I revisited and asked them to try and do a transaction without me. Just send that single Utxo to a new address in the same wallet, no time limit. It could not possibly have failed harder and shook my belief in multisig. To summarize an extremely painful day, there was a literally 0% chance they would figure this out without help. If this had been for real all our BTC may have been lost forever. Maybe eventually a family friend could’ve helped, but I hadn’t thought of that and hadn’t recommended a trusted BTC knowledge/help source. I had preached self sovereignty and doing it alone and my family tried to respect that. I should’ve given them the contact info of local high integrity bitcoiners I trust implicitly. Regardless of setup type, I highly recommend having a trusted Bitcoiner and online resources your family knows they can turn to to trouble shoot. Bookmark the corresponding BTCSessions video to your BTC self custody setup. Multisig is complicated as hell and hard to understand. Complexity is the enemy when it comes to making sure your BTC isn’t lost and actually gets to your heirs. Many Bitcoiners use a similar setup to this one that failed so badly, and I’m telling you unless you’re married to or gave birth to a seriously hardcore maxi who is extremely tech savvy, the risk your Bitcoin is lost upon your death is unacceptably high. My family is extremely smart but when the pressure of now many thousands of dollars was on the line, the complexity of multisig torpedoed them. Don’t run to an ETF! There are answers: singlesig is awesome. From observing my family I’m confident they would’ve been okay in a singlesig setup. It was the process of signing on separate devices with separate signers, and moving a PSBT around that stymied them. If it had been singlesig they would’ve been okay as one signature on its own was accomplished. Do not besmirch singlesig, it’s incredibly powerful and incredibly resilient. Resilience and simplicity are vastly underrated! In my opinion multisig may increase your theoretical security against attacks that are far less likely to actually happen, e.g. an Oceans Eleven style hack/heist. More likely your heirs will be fighting panic, grief, and stress and forget something you taught them a few years back. If they face an attack it will most likely be social engineering/phishing. They are unlikely to face an elaborate heist that would make a fun movie. While I still maintain it was a mistake for Bitkey to not have a separate screen to verify addresses and other info, overall I believe it’s probably the best normie option for small BTC holdings(yes I do know Bitkey is actually multisig, but the UX is basically a single sig). This incident scared me into realizing the importance of simplicity. Complexity and confusion of heirs/family may be the most under-considered aspects of BTC security. If you’ve made a DIY multisig and your heirs can’t explain why they need all three public keys and what a descriptor is and where it’s backed up, you might as well just go have that boating accident now and get it over with.

Once you get past small amounts of BTC, any reputable hardware wallet in singlesig is amazing security I would encourage folks to consider. In a singlesig setup - For $5 wrench attack concerns, just don’t have your hardware signer or steel backup at your home. You can just have a hot wallet on your phone with a small amount for spending.

If you get a really big stack collaborative multisig is a potentially reasonable middle ground. Just be very thoughtful and brutally honest about your heirs and their BTC and general tech knowledge. Singlesig is still great and you don’t have to move past it, but I get that you also need to sleep at night. If you have truly life changing wealth and are just too uncomfortable with singlesig, maybe consider either 1) Anchorwatch to get the potential benefits of multisig security with the safety net of traditional insurance or 2) Liana wallet where you can use miniscript to effectively have a time locked singlesig spending path to a key held by a third party to help your family recover your funds if they can’t figure it out before that timelock hits, 3) Bitcoin Keeper with their automatic inheritance docs and mini script enabled inheritance key. The automatic inheritance docs are a best in class feature no one else has done yet. Unchained charges $200 for inheritance docs on top of your $250 annual subscription, which imho is beyond ridiculous. 4) Swan vault, I’ve generally soured on most traditional 2 of 3 collaborative multisig because I’ve always found holes either in security (Unchained signed a transaction in only a few hours and has no defined time delay, and still doesn’t support Segwit, seriously guys, wtf?), only support signers that are harder to use and thus tough for noobs, or the overall setups are just too complex. Swan Vault’s focus on keeping it as simple as possible really stands out against competitors that tack on unneeded confusion complexity.

TLDR: For small amounts of BTC use Bitkey. For medium to large amounts use singlesig with a reputable hardware wallet and steel backup. For life changing wealth where you just can no longer stomach sinsglesig maybe also consider Anchorwatch, Bitcoin Keeper, Sean Vault, or Liana. Don’t forget your steel backups! Be safe out there! Do your own research and don’t take my word for it. Just use this as inspiration to consider an alternative point of view. If you’re a family of software engineers, feel free to tell me to go fuck myself.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

This piece is the first in a series that will focus on things I think are a priority if your focus is similar to mine: building a strong family and safeguarding their future.

---

Choosing the ideal place to raise a family is one of the most significant decisions you will ever make. For simplicity sake I will break down my thought process into key factors: strong property rights, the ability to grow your own food, access to fresh water, the freedom to own and train with guns, and a dependable community.

A Jurisdiction with Strong Property Rights

Strong property rights are essential and allow you to build on a solid foundation that is less likely to break underneath you. Regions with a history of limited government and clear legal protections for landowners are ideal. Personally I think the US is the single best option globally, but within the US there is a wide difference between which state you choose. Choose carefully and thoughtfully, think long term. Obviously if you are not American this is not a realistic option for you, there are other solid options available especially if your family has mobility. I understand many do not have this capability to easily move, consider that your first priority, making movement and jurisdiction choice possible in the first place.

Abundant Access to Fresh Water

Water is life. I cannot overstate the importance of living somewhere with reliable, clean, and abundant freshwater. Some regions face water scarcity or heavy regulations on usage, so prioritizing a place where water is plentiful and your rights to it are protected is critical. Ideally you should have well access so you are not tied to municipal water supplies. In times of crisis or chaos well water cannot be easily shutoff or disrupted. If you live in an area that is drought prone, you are one drought away from societal chaos. Not enough people appreciate this simple fact.

Grow Your Own Food

A location with fertile soil, a favorable climate, and enough space for a small homestead or at the very least a garden is key. In stable times, a small homestead provides good food and important education for your family. In times of chaos your family being able to grow and raise healthy food provides a level of self sufficiency that many others will lack. Look for areas with minimal restrictions, good weather, and a culture that supports local farming.

Guns

The ability to defend your family is fundamental. A location where you can legally and easily own guns is a must. Look for places with a strong gun culture and a political history of protecting those rights. Owning one or two guns is not enough and without proper training they will be a liability rather than a benefit. Get comfortable and proficient. Never stop improving your skills. If the time comes that you must use a gun to defend your family, the skills must be instinct. Practice. Practice. Practice.

A Strong Community You Can Depend On

No one thrives alone. A ride or die community that rallies together in tough times is invaluable. Seek out a place where people know their neighbors, share similar values, and are quick to lend a hand. Lead by example and become a good neighbor, people will naturally respond in kind. Small towns are ideal, if possible, but living outside of a major city can be a solid balance in terms of work opportunities and family security.

---

Let me know if you found this helpful. My plan is to break down how I think about these five key subjects in future posts.

@ 6389be64:ef439d32

GA, plebs. The latest episode of Bitcoin And is out, and, as always, the chicanery is running rampant. Let’s break down the biggest topics I covered, and if you want the full, unfiltered rant, make sure to listen to the episode linked below.

House Democrats’ MEME Act: A Bad Joke?

House Democrats are proposing a bill to ban presidential meme coins, clearly aimed at Trump’s and Melania’s ill-advised token launches. While grifters launching meme coins is bad, this bill is just as ridiculous. If this legislation moves forward, expect a retaliatory strike exposing how politicians like Pelosi and Warren mysteriously amassed their fortunes. Will it pass? Doubtful. But it’s another sign of the government’s obsession with regulating everything except itself.

Senate Banking’s First Digital Asset Hearing: The Real Target Is You

Cynthia Lummis chaired the first digital asset hearing, and—surprise!—it was all about control. The discussion centered on stablecoins, AML, and KYC regulations, with witnesses suggesting Orwellian measures like freezing stablecoin transactions unless pre-approved by authorities. What was barely mentioned? Bitcoin. They want full oversight of stablecoins, which is really about controlling financial freedom. Expect more nonsense targeting self-custody wallets under the guise of stopping “bad actors.”

Bank of America and PayPal Want In on Stablecoins

Bank of America’s CEO openly stated they’ll launch a stablecoin as soon as regulation allows. Meanwhile, PayPal’s CEO paid for a hat using Bitcoin—not their own stablecoin, Pi USD. Why wouldn’t he use his own product? Maybe he knows stablecoins aren’t what they’re hyped up to be. Either way, the legacy financial system is gearing up to flood the market with stablecoins, not because they love crypto, but because it’s a tool to extend U.S. dollar dominance.

MetaPlanet Buys the Dip

Japan’s MetaPlanet issued $13.4M in bonds to buy more Bitcoin, proving once again that institutions see the writing on the wall. Unlike U.S. regulators who obsess over stablecoins, some companies are actually stacking sats.

UK Expands Crypto Seizure Powers

Across the pond, the UK government is pushing legislation to make it easier to seize and destroy crypto linked to criminal activity. While they frame it as going after the bad guys, it’s another move toward centralized control and financial surveillance.

Bitcoin Tools & Tech: Arc, SatoChip, and Nunchuk

Some bullish Bitcoin developments: ARC v0.5 is making Bitcoin’s second layer more efficient, SatoChip now supports Taproot and Nostr, and Nunchuk launched a group wallet with chat, making multisig collaboration easier.

The Bottom Line

The state is coming for financial privacy and control, and stablecoins are their weapon of choice. Bitcoiners need to stay focused, keep their coins in self-custody, and build out parallel systems. Expect more regulatory attacks, but don’t let them distract you—just keep stacking and transacting in ways they can’t control.

🎧 Listen to the full episode here: https://fountain.fm/episode/PYITCo18AJnsEkKLz2Ks

💰 Support the show by boosting sats on Podcasting 2.0! and I will see you on the other side.

@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9

Here’s a revised timeline of macro-level events from The Mandibles: A Family, 2029–2047 by Lionel Shriver, reimagined in a world where Bitcoin is adopted as a widely accepted form of money, altering the original narrative’s assumptions about currency collapse and economic control. In Shriver’s original story, the failure of Bitcoin is assumed amid the dominance of the bancor and the dollar’s collapse. Here, Bitcoin’s success reshapes the economic and societal trajectory, decentralizing power and challenging state-driven outcomes.

Part One: 2029–2032

• 2029 (Early Year)\ The United States faces economic strain as the dollar weakens against global shifts. However, Bitcoin, having gained traction emerges as a viable alternative. Unlike the original timeline, the bancor—a supranational currency backed by a coalition of nations—struggles to gain footing as Bitcoin’s decentralized adoption grows among individuals and businesses worldwide, undermining both the dollar and the bancor.

• 2029 (Mid-Year: The Great Renunciation)\ Treasury bonds lose value, and the government bans Bitcoin, labeling it a threat to sovereignty (mirroring the original bancor ban). However, a Bitcoin ban proves unenforceable—its decentralized nature thwarts confiscation efforts, unlike gold in the original story. Hyperinflation hits the dollar as the U.S. prints money, but Bitcoin’s fixed supply shields adopters from currency devaluation, creating a dual-economy split: dollar users suffer, while Bitcoin users thrive.

• 2029 (Late Year)\ Dollar-based inflation soars, emptying stores of goods priced in fiat currency. Meanwhile, Bitcoin transactions flourish in underground and online markets, stabilizing trade for those plugged into the bitcoin ecosystem. Traditional supply chains falter, but peer-to-peer Bitcoin networks enable local and international exchange, reducing scarcity for early adopters. The government’s gold confiscation fails to bolster the dollar, as Bitcoin’s rise renders gold less relevant.

• 2030–2031\ Crime spikes in dollar-dependent urban areas, but Bitcoin-friendly regions see less chaos, as digital wallets and smart contracts facilitate secure trade. The U.S. government doubles down on surveillance to crack down on bitcoin use. A cultural divide deepens: centralized authority weakens in Bitcoin-adopting communities, while dollar zones descend into lawlessness.

• 2032\ By this point, Bitcoin is de facto legal tender in parts of the U.S. and globally, especially in tech-savvy or libertarian-leaning regions. The federal government’s grip slips as tax collection in dollars plummets—Bitcoin’s traceability is low, and citizens evade fiat-based levies. Rural and urban Bitcoin hubs emerge, while the dollar economy remains fractured.

Time Jump: 2032–2047

• Over 15 years, Bitcoin solidifies as a global reserve currency, eroding centralized control. The U.S. government adapts, grudgingly integrating bitcoin into policy, though regional autonomy grows as Bitcoin empowers local economies.

Part Two: 2047

• 2047 (Early Year)\ The U.S. is a hybrid state: Bitcoin is legal tender alongside a diminished dollar. Taxes are lower, collected in BTC, reducing federal overreach. Bitcoin’s adoption has decentralized power nationwide. The bancor has faded, unable to compete with Bitcoin’s grassroots momentum.

• 2047 (Mid-Year)\ Travel and trade flow freely in Bitcoin zones, with no restrictive checkpoints. The dollar economy lingers in poorer areas, marked by decay, but Bitcoin’s dominance lifts overall prosperity, as its deflationary nature incentivizes saving and investment over consumption. Global supply chains rebound, powered by bitcoin enabled efficiency.

• 2047 (Late Year)\ The U.S. is a patchwork of semi-autonomous zones, united by Bitcoin’s universal acceptance rather than federal control. Resource scarcity persists due to past disruptions, but economic stability is higher than in Shriver’s original dystopia—Bitcoin’s success prevents the authoritarian slide, fostering a freer, if imperfect, society.

Key Differences

• Currency Dynamics: Bitcoin’s triumph prevents the bancor’s dominance and mitigates hyperinflation’s worst effects, offering a lifeline outside state control.
• Government Power: Centralized authority weakens as Bitcoin evades bans and taxation, shifting power to individuals and communities.
• Societal Outcome: Instead of a surveillance state, 2047 sees a decentralized, bitcoin driven world—less oppressive, though still stratified between Bitcoin haves and have-nots.

This reimagining assumes Bitcoin overcomes Shriver’s implied skepticism to become a robust, adopted currency by 2029, fundamentally altering the novel’s bleak trajectory.

@ a4a6b584:1e05b95b

Step 1: Secure Your Device

1. Install an Antivirus Program
   Download and install a trusted antivirus program to scan files for potential malware.
2. For Linux: Calm Antivirus

3. For Windows: CalmWin Antivirus

4. Install a VPN
   A VPN is essential for maintaining privacy and security. It will encrypt your internet traffic and hide your IP address.

5. Recommended: Mullvad VPN, which accepts Bitcoin for anonymous payment.

6. Install a Torrent Program
   You’ll need a torrent client to download files.

7. Recommended: Deluge

8. Install the Tor Browser
   To access The Pirate Bay or its proxies, you’ll need the privacy-focused Tor Browser.

---

Step 2: Prepare Your Setup

• Ensure your VPN is running and connected.
• Open the Tor Browser.
• Launch Deluge to have your torrent client ready.

---

Step 3: Using Tor Go to The Pirate Bay via Onion Service or Find a Trusted Pirate Bay Proxy

Accessing The Pirate Bay directly can be challenging due to restrictions in some regions. Proxy sites often fill the gap. - The Pirate Bay Onion service: http://piratebayo3klnzokct3wt5yyxb2vpebbuyjl7m623iaxmqhsd52coid.onion - Or find a trusted proxy: Use a site like Pirateproxy or a reliable Tor directory for updated lists.

---

Step 4: Search for Linux Distros

1. On The Pirate Bay, navigate to the "OtherOS" category under the Applications section.
2. Enter your desired Linux distro in the search bar (e.g., "Ubuntu," "Arch Linux").

---

Step 5: Select a Torrent

1. Filter the Results:
2. Look for torrents with the highest seeders (SE) and the fewest leechers (LE).

3. Trusted users are marked with a green skull icon—these are usually safe uploads.

4. Copy the Magnet Link:

5. Right-click on the magnet icon next to the trusted torrent and select "Copy Link."

---

Step 6: Start the Download

1. In Deluge, paste the copied magnet link into the “Add Torrent” box.
2. Click OK to start the download.
3. Monitor the progress until the download completes.

---

Step 7: Scan the Downloaded File

Once the file is downloaded: 1. Scan for viruses: Right-click the file and use Calm or CalmWin to verify its integrity.
2. If the file passes the scan, it’s ready for use.

---

Step 8: Manage Your File

• Seed or Remove:
• To help the torrent community, keep seeding the file by leaving it in your torrent client.

• To stop seeding, right-click the file in Deluge and remove it.

• Move for Long-Term Storage: Transfer the file to a secure directory for regular use.

---

Notes on Safety and Ethics

• Verify Legitimacy: Ensure the torrent you are downloading is for an official Linux distribution. Torrents with unusual names or details should be avoided.
• Support the Developers: Consider visiting the official websites of Linux distros (Ubuntu, Arch Linux) to support their work directly.

---

By following these steps, you can safely and privately download Linux distributions while contributing to the open-source community.

@ a296b972:e5a7a2e8

Warum gibt es Menschen, die, statt die Gelegenheit zu ergreifen, Frieden zu schaffen, den Krieg nicht beenden wollen? Wie verkommen müssen die Charaktere sein, die die Aussicht auf Macht und Geld über den Wert auch nur eines einzigen Menschen stellen?

Wie es aussieht, scheint Europa derzeit die Zentrale der Idioten zu sein. Der Gedanke, dass diese verirrten Seelen die Geschicke der europäischen Länder leiten und die Menschen sich ihren wirren Ergüssen unterzuordnen haben, kann einem schier den Verstand rauben.

Statt dass Europa Wasser beisteuert, den Brand zu löschen, macht es genau das Gegenteil, es sucht nach einer Flüssigkeit, die als bester Brandbeschleuniger bekannt ist.

Mit etwas anderen Vorzeichen erinnert das an die Vorzeit des 1. Weltkrieges, in der offiziell, keiner den Krieg wollte, und dann war er doch da. Es gibt ein interessantes Buch: „Zeitgeschichtliche Betrachtungen“ von Rudolf Steiner, Gesamtausgabe 173 a, in der man sehr viel über die Vorkriegszeit erfahren kann. Man kann Parallelen zu heute finden, wie die Zeit vor Ausbruch des Ukraine-Konflikts im Februar 2022, die Zeit seit dem Maidan in 2014 und die jahrelange NATO-Osterweiterung einfach ausgeblendet wird. Ähnliches ist auch für die Vorgeschichte des 2. Weltkriegs zu finden, der vor allem seinen Anfang in den Versailler Verträgen nach dem 1. Weltkrieg findet.

Die Ereignisse überschlagen sich zurzeit und man kommt kaum noch hinterher. Man fragt sich, ob Macron (Young Global Leader) neue Anweisungen vom WEF erhalten hat, um die „kreative Zerstörung“ voranzutreiben.

Wer flüstert Blackrock-Merz jeden Tag etwas anderes ins Ohr? Merz, der noch nicht einmal Kanzler ist, und schon am weiteren Abstieg Deutschlands arbeitet. Wirtschaftlich, generationsübergreifend und dem einstigen Ansehen Deutschlands in der Welt entgegen. Er hat noch nicht einmal den Schwur geleistet, Schaden vom deutschen Volk abzuwenden und bricht ihn schon vorauseilend.

Und nicht zum ersten Mal zieht Groß-Britannien maßgeblich an den Strippen, das den Verlust des Empires wohl bis heute immer noch nicht überwunden zu haben scheint.

Sie alle führen sich auf, wie ein Michelin-Männchen, vollgepumpt mit Nichts, nach außen massig auftretend, aber innen eben nur heiße Luft.

Was steckt hinter dieser Großkotzigkeit, wo doch auch die Großmäuler wissen müssten, dass keine Substanz dahintersteckt. Man soll keine medizinischen Vergleiche anstellen, aber man kommt auf nichts anderes, als dass es sich hier um ein psychologisches Problem handeln muss. Was hat diesen Größenwahn ausgelöst?

Bis auf viel zu wenige Ausnahmen, liest Europa George Orwells „1984“ als Bedienungsanleitung, statt als Warnung. Krieg ist Frieden. Lüge ist Wahrheit.

In der Höhle sitzt die vielköpfige Hydra. Der unsterbliche Kopf in der Mitte mit Betonfrisur, Kosename Röschen. Doch auch Betonfrisuren halten nicht ewig. Schon gar nicht in der Politik. Hoffentlich findet sich bald ein Weg, die Hydra auszuhungern. Das könnte klappen, wenn Deutschland vollkommen am Boden liegt. Fällt Deutschland, fällt auch die EU. Wunder können geschehen!

Es gibt Anzeichen dafür, dass die USA Europa in die Volljährigkeit entlassen wollen. Die wildgewordenen europäischen Streithähne sind ganz offensichtlich mit dieser Verantwortung und der Aussicht auf eine neue Freiheit hoffnungslos überfordert. Sie scheitern schon beim ersten Versuch, eine erwachsene, eigenständige, verantwortungsvolle Entscheidung zu treffen. Im Sinne und zum Wohle der europäischen Völker.

Stattdessen benehmen sie sich wie Pubertierende, die bockig und unreif, mit dem Fuß auf den Boden stampfen, „Ich will aber!“ schreien, und sich wundern, dass sie nicht mit am Tisch der Erwachsenen sitzen dürfen.

Wenn sie einen Friedensplan hätten, der sich an der Realität orientiert, dürften sie schon. Haben sie aber nicht. Stattdessen schmieden sie eine Gemeinschaft der Willigen, genauer gesagt, eine Gemeinschaft der Kriegswilligen. Alles über die Köpfe derjenigen hinweg, die keinen Krieg wollen, für alle Beteiligten, entgegen der Mehrheit der Europäer, die Frieden wollen. Das Bürokratie-Monster EU verschlingt seine eigenen Kinder.

Es wird versucht, mit dem Digital Services Act kritische Stimmen mundtot zu machen. Jeder, der nicht für die Idiotien der EU ist, ist gegen sie. Der einzige, der das Kind beim Namen genannt hat, war bislang J. D. Vance auf der Sicherheitskonferenz in München. Die Zustände in Rumänien geben eine Vorschau darauf, was den Rest in Europa noch erwarten könnte, wenn bei Wahlen nicht das herauskommt, was sich die autokratisch verkommene sogenannte Polit-Elite wünscht. Auf der Bundesrepublik Deutschland steht zwar noch Demokratie drauf, es ist aber kaum noch welche drin. Dieses Land ist auf dem besten Wege dahin, dass das zweite D in DDR genauso wenig wert wird, wie es dort war.

Gegenkräfte werden von denen, die sagen, sie bekämpfen die Delegitimierung des Staates delegitimiert. Projektion als Machterhalt auf allen Ebenen.

Wenn ein Staat sich zu sehr mit der Wirtschaft verbindet, ist das Faschismus. In der einst in aller Welt hochangesehenen Wirtschaftsmacht Deutschland nennt man das Public Private Partnership. Es bilden sich Strukturen einer neuen Regierungsform, die Elemente aus Faschismus, Autokratie, Kommunismus, Sozialismus und Technokratie enthält, für die es noch keinen Namen gibt. Demokratur käme dem momentan am nächsten.

Alle einst demokratischen Systeme in Europa, bis auf wenige Ausnahmen, sind mit einem Ungeist vergiftet worden, der spätestens mit dem C-Ereignis aus der Flasche entwichen ist.

Die USA waren nie, NIE, unsere Freunde! Ein Land hat keine Freunde, sondern nur Interessen. Die USA wollten nie, dass man mit ihnen an einem Strang zieht, sie wollten in erster Linie immer nur ihre eigenen Pläne durchziehen, und wenn man Glück hatte, kam der betreffende Staat darin vor. Weil sie die Möglichkeiten dazu hatten, wurde die Nachkriegsordnung nach deren Vorstellungen gestaltet. In Deutschland und Italien hatte man die Befürchtung, dass der Kommunismus Überhand nehmen könnte. Daher hat man Deutschland durch den Marshall-Plan angefüttert, um eine Konsumgesellschaft heranwachsen zu lassen, die bräsig und satt konsumiert und sich ansonsten wenig für den Erhalt der Demokratie einsetzen will. Perfektioniert durch die Wahl-Shows alle vier Jahre, die die Demokratie-Simulation lange aufrechterhalten hat.

Die Deutschen, Täter und Opfer zugleich, traumatisiert, haben fleißig, wie die Deutschen nun mal sind, das Land wieder aufgebaut, sich einen gewissen Wohlstand erarbeitet. Wie die kleinen Kinder, die glauben, wenn sie brav sind, dann wird der Vati, Uncle Sam, die Welt, sie doch ganz bald ganz sicher wieder liebhaben.

Es mag ja sein, dass es mit einer zweiten Amtszeit Trumps, direkt im Anschluss an die erste, keinen Ukraine-Krieg gegeben hätte. Beweisen können wir es nicht. Hinterher kann man viel erzählen. Die sicher guten Friedensbemühungen Trumps geschehen nicht in erster Linie aus Menschenliebe, sondern genauso, wie immer, in Fortführung der US-amerikanischen Geschichte, in allererster Linie aus einem staatlichen Interesse heraus. Das ist legitim, aber das muss man erkennen. Der Krieg in der Ukraine ist ein Stellvertreterkrieg zwischen den USA und Russland. Trump hat es selber zugegeben. Weil die USA erkannt haben, dass er nicht zu gewinnen ist, haben sie nach einer Lösung gesucht, wie sie sich gesichtswahrend wieder einmal aus der Affaire ziehen können, und da kommen die sehr engagierten Friedensverhandlungen gerade recht. Und Trumps Seltenerden-Deal ist nur die andere Seite der Medaille, auch wie immer: Erst alles kurz und klein hauen und am Militär verdienen, dann am Wiederaufbau ein zweites Mal verdienen (Siehe Naher Osten und die Ölvorkommen). Dabei spielt es fast keine Rolle, das Biden Trump die Suppe eingebrockt hat, die er jetzt auszulöffeln hat. Das kommt ihm eher zugute, weil er so als Friedensengel in die Geschichte eingehen wird. Vielleicht ist das sein Ziel, seinem Alter entsprechend, etwas Bleibendes hinterlassen zu wollen. Vermutlich sogar erfolgreicher, als der klägliche Versuch von „Mutti“, die mit ihrem materiell dicken, geistig sehr dünnen Buch, den Eingang in die Geschichte vorzugeben versuchte.

Alles gut und fein. Am Ende ist es das wichtigste, dass dieses sinnlose Opfern von Menschenleben aufhört. Dazu ist jedes Mittel recht. Wer wäre nicht dafür? Dank dafür gebührt dann Trump so oder so.  Man darf jedoch nicht der Täuschung erliegen, dass das alles nur aus reiner Nächstenliebe geschehen würde. Wenn dem so wäre, hätte es in den USA nicht die Sprengung des WTCs inkl. Nebengebäuden und auch nicht den geschehen lassenden Angriff auf Pearl Harbor gegeben. Es gehört zur US-amerikanischen Mentalität alles sehr theatralisch aufzubauschen, mit viel Tam Tam, Pathos und Kulissen im Zuckerbäcker-Stile. Nicht umsonst ist die Filmindustrie in Hollywood so erfolgreich. Nicht umsonst müssen Filme von der Militärbehörde freigegeben werden. „Independence Day“ ist ein gutes Beispiel, wie wieder einmal ein tapferer Amerikaner in Selbstaufopferung die ganze Welt rettet. Was für eine Gehirnverkleisterung aus Pathos-Schmalz!

Russland kann der Westen, der sogenannte „Wertewesten“ nicht vorwerfen, dass es keine lupenreine Demokratie ist. Welcher Staat im Westen beweisen kann, dass dies für ihn zutrifft, der werfe den ersten Stein. Entgegen dem Haufen wildgewordener Handfeger im Westen kann man aber sagen, dass Putin bisher sehr besonnen vorgegangen ist, und dass es ein Glück für die Welt ist, dass er mit Lawrow einen sehr erfahrenen und diplomatisch brillanten Außenminister hat, der sich allenthalben nur mit der scheidenden feministischen Außen-Dings Deutschlands messen kann (Satire aus). Nach wie vor gehen von Russland nicht die aller geringsten Anzeichen aus, dass es vorhat, Europa in irgendeiner Weise angreifen zu wollen. Im Gegenteil, es wird immer wieder bekräftigt, dass es hierfür weder einen Anlass noch ein Interesse gibt. Und trotzdem tut man im Westen so, als ob der Russe kurz davorsteht, die Adria zu verminen, in der Normandie eine Invasion zu starten und gleichzeitig erneut vor den Toren Berlins zu stehen. Was für ein Schwachsinn. Polen tut sich derzeit besonders mit seiner Psychose hervor, in dem es Mann und Reiter aufstockt, weil es in seinem Geiste schon russische Marschlieder in der Ferne zu hören glaubt. Man denkt wohl, es sei besser, schon einmal die Feuerwehr loszuschicken, obwohl noch gar kein Brand gemeldet ist.

Die derzeitigen Universal-Dilettanten in den Parlamenten erkennen schon wieder nicht (absichtlich oder nicht?), dass es die eigentliche Aufgabe Europas wäre, zwischen den USA im Westen und Russland im Osten, als Brückenbauer aufzutreten. Hier kommt Deutschland eine besondere Rolle zu. Gemeinsam mit Österreich und der Schweiz, als gemeinsamer deutscher Kulturraum, müsste es die Gelegenheit ergreifen, sich der Neutralität anzuschließen, denn das ist der eigentliche Sinn des Ausspruchs: Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen. Das ist geistig gemeint, nicht in Form von Kriegstüchtigkeit und Aufrüstung! Das ist die eigentliche Aufgabe der Denker und Dichter. Friedensstiftend und friedenssichernd, umsichtig und besonnen aufzutreten, statt wie Frankreich, als Yorkshire-Terrier einen Bären anzukläffen, oder mit einer deutschen Hexe, die auf Taurus-Raketen reitet, dem Panzer-Toni, oder dem Herrn Kriegsgewitter, die Ukraine weiter in ihrem Untergang unterstützen zu wollen, als ob sie allesamt im Blutrausch wären.

Die Karten werden derzeit neu gemischt. Kräfteverhältnisse verändern sich. Es knarrt und knarzt an allen Enden. Statt, wie man es von einer sogenannten zivilisierten Welt erwarten könnte, dies mit den Mitteln der Diplomatie zu lösen, werden die Keulen der Neandertaler ausgegraben und man begibt sich wieder einmal zurück in die Steinzeit. In der Menschheitsentwicklung sind wir noch nicht sehr weit gekommen. Bewusstseinsentwicklung Fehlanzeige. Die archaischen Urkräfte entfalten immer noch ihre Wirkung. Spruch meines weisen Großvaters: Dumm geboren und nichts dazugelernt. Recht hat er.

Auch wir Menschen sollten uns verändern. Wir sollten bessere Demokraten werden, in dem wir mehr Verantwortung für unsere Freiheit übernehmen, statt die anderen machen zu lassen. Was wir davon haben, haben wir ja in der C-Zeit gesehen. Ein Anfang wäre schon, wenn wir auf die Propaganda in den Alt-Medien verzichten würden. Viele wollen von der C-Zeit, die uns allen noch in den Knochen sitzt, nichts mehr wissen. Sie wollen ihr altes Leben zurückhaben und ihrem Tagwerk nachgehen. Nicht nur die Gen-Behandelten, sondern inzwischen auch viele Impf-Verzichter.

Schlechte Nachrichten: Die alten Zeiten kommen nicht zurück, es gibt keinen Anknüpfungspunkt. Und das ist gut so!

Verdrängen und Behäbigkeit sind die beste Voraussetzung dafür, dass unsere Freiheit scheibchenweise, dünn, wie man eine Cacchiatore aufschneidet, immer mehr unter die Räder kommt. Die Think-Tanks, die sich schon lange mit dem Verhalten der Menschen auseinandersetzen, rechnen mit der anerzogenen Bequemlichkeit im Denken und Handeln.

Das sollte man sich klarmachen. Jeder demokratisch orientierte Mensch sollte etwas Zeit erübrigen, und wenn der Tag noch so stressig war, sich mit den Themen zu beschäftigen, die derzeit unser aller Leben in Bahnen lenken könnten, die wir alle nicht wollen. Die tagesschau ist hierfür ungeeignet. Wenn die Falle erst einmal zugeschnappt ist, ist ein Herauskommen um so schwerer. Unsere Vorfahren haben nicht umsonst die Freiheit mit ihrem Blut erkämpft. Denen sind wir etwas schuldig. Daran sollten wir uns wieder mehr erinnern. Wehret den Anfängen, die jetzt schon ein gutes Stück vorangekommen sind!

@ 97c70a44:ad98e322

So you've decided to join nostr! Some wide-eyed fanatic has convinced you that the "sun shines every day on the birds and the bees and the cigarette trees" in a magical land of decentralized, censorship-resistant freedom of speech - and it's waiting just over the next hill.

But your experience has not been all you hoped. Before you've even had a chance to upload your AI-generated cyberpunk avatar or make up exploit codenames for your pseudonym's bio, you've been confronted with a new concept that has left you completely nonplussed.

It doesn't help that this new idea might be called by any number of strange names. You may have been asked to "paste your nsec", "generate a private key", "enter your seed words", "connect with a bunker", "sign in with extension", or even "generate entropy". Sorry about that.

All these terms are really referring to one concept under many different names: that of "cryptographic identity".

Now, you may have noticed that I just introduced yet another new term which explains exactly nothing. You're absolutely correct. And now I'm going to proceed to ignore your complaints and talk about something completely different. But bear with me, because the juice is worth the squeeze.

Identity

What is identity? There are many philosophical, political, or technical answers to this question, but for our purposes it's probably best to think of it this way:

Identity is the essence of a thing. Identity separates one thing from all others, and is itself indivisible.

This definition has three parts:

• Identity is "essential": a thing can change, but its identity cannot. I might re-paint my house, replace its components, sell it, or even burn it down, but its identity as something that can be referred to - "this house" - is durable, even outside the boundaries of its own physical existence.
• Identity is a unit: you can't break an identity into multiple parts. A thing might be composed of multiple parts, but that's only incidental to the identity of a thing, which is a concept, not a material thing.
• Identity is distinct: identity is what separates one thing from all others - the concept of an apple can't be mixed with that of an orange; the two ideas are distinct. In the same way, a single concrete apple is distinct in identity from another - even if the component parts of the apple decompose into compost used to grow more apples.

Identity is not a physical thing, but a metaphysical thing. Or, in simpler terms, identity is a "concept".

I (or someone more qualified) could at this point launch into a Scholastic tangent on what "is" is, but that is, fortunately, not necessary here. The kind of identities I want to focus on here are not our actual identities as people, but entirely fictional identities that we use to extend our agency into the digital world.

Think of it this way - your bank login does not represent you as a complete person. It only represents the access granted to you by the bank. This access is in fact an entirely new identity that has been associated with you, and is limited in what it's useful for.

Other examples of fictional identities include:

• The country you live in
• Your social media persona
• Your mortgage
• Geographical coordinates
• A moment in time
• A chess piece

Some of these identites are inert, for example points in space and time. Other identies have agency and so are able to act in the world - even as fictional concepts. In order to do this, they must "authenticate" themselves (which means "to prove they are real"), and act within a system of established rules.

For example, your D&D character exists only within the collective fiction of your D&D group, and can do anything the rules say. Its identity is authenticated simply by your claim as a member of the group that your character in fact exists. Similarly, a lawyer must prove they are a member of the Bar Association before they are allowed to practice law within that collective fiction.

"Cryptographic identity" is simply another way of authenticating a fictional identity within a given system. As we'll see, it has some interesting attributes that set it apart from things like a library card or your latitude and longitude. Before we get there though, let's look in more detail at how identities are authenticated.

Certificates

Merriam-Webster defines the verb "certify" as meaning "to attest authoritatively". A "certificate" is just a fancy way of saying "because I said so". Certificates are issued by a "certificate authority", someone who has the authority to "say so". Examples include your boss, your mom, or the Pope.

This method of authentication is how almost every institution authenticates the people who associate with it. Colleges issue student ID cards, governments issue passports, and websites allow you to "register an account".

In every case mentioned above, the "authority" creates a closed system in which a document (aka a "certificate") is issued which serves as a claim to a given identity. When someone wants to access some privileged service, location, or information, they present their certificate. The authority then validates it and grants or denies access. In the case of an international airport, the certificate is a little book printed with fancy inks. In the case of a login page, the certificate is a username and password combination.

This pattern for authentication is ubiquitous, and has some very important implications.

First of all, certified authentication implies that the issuer of the certificate has the right to exclusive control of any identity it issues. This identity can be revoked at any time, or its permissions may change. Your social credit score may drop arbitrarily, or money might disappear from your account. When dealing with certificate authorities, you have no inherent rights.

Second, certified authentication depends on the certificate authority continuing to exist. If you store your stuff at a storage facility but the company running it goes out of business, your stuff might disappear along with it.

Usually, authentication via certificate authority works pretty well, since an appeal can always be made to a higher authority (nature, God, the government, etc). Authorities also can't generally dictate their terms with impunity without losing their customers, alienating their constituents, or provoking revolt. But it's also true that certification by authority creates an incentive structure that frequently leads to abuse - arbitrary deplatforming is increasingly common, and the bigger the certificate authority, the less recourse the certificate holder (or "subject") has.

Certificates also put the issuer in a position to intermediate relationships that wouldn't otherwise be subject to their authority. This might take the form of selling user attention to advertisers, taking a cut of financial transactions, or selling surveillance data to third parties.

Proliferation of certificate authorities is not a solution to these problems. Websites and apps frequently often offer multiple "social sign-in" options, allowing their users to choose which certificate authority to appeal to. But this only piles more value into the social platform that issues the certificate - not only can Google shut down your email inbox, they can revoke your ability to log in to every website you used their identity provider to get into.

In every case, certificate issuance results in an asymmetrical power dynamic, where the issuer is able to exert significant control over the certificate holder, even in areas unrelated to the original pretext for the relationship between parties.

Self-Certification

But what if we could reverse this power dynamic? What if individuals could issue their own certificates and force institutions to accept them?

Ron Swanson's counterexample notwithstanding, there's a reason I can't simply write myself a parking permit and slip it under the windshield wiper. Questions about voluntary submission to legitimate authorities aside, the fact is that we don't have the power to act without impunity - just like any other certificate authority, we have to prove our claims either by the exercise of raw power or by appeal to a higher authority.

So the question becomes: which higher authority can we appeal to in order to issue our own certificates within a given system of identity?

The obvious answer here is to go straight to the top and ask God himself to back our claim to self-sovereignty. However, that's not how he normally works - there's a reason they call direct acts of God "miracles". In fact, Romans 13:1 explicitly says that "the authorities that exist have been appointed by God". God has structured the universe in such a way that we must appeal to the deputies he has put in place to govern various parts of the world.

Another tempting appeal might be to nature - i.e. the material world. This is the realm in which we most frequently have the experience of "self-authenticating" identities. For example, a gold coin can be authenticated by biting it or by burning it with acid. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

In most cases however, the ability to authenticate using physical claims depends on physical access, and so appeals to physical reality have major limitations when it comes to the digital world. Captchas, selfies and other similar tricks are often used to bridge the physical world into the digital, but these are increasingly easy to forge, and hard to verify.

There are exceptions to this rule - an example of self-certification that makes its appeal to the physical world is that of a signature. Signatures are hard to forge - an incredible amount of data is encoded in physical signatures, from strength, to illnesses, to upbringing, to personality. These can even be scanned and used within the digital world as well. Even today, most contracts are sealed with some simulacrum of a physical signature. Of course, this custom is quickly becoming a mere historical curiosity, since the very act of digitizing a signature makes it trivially forgeable.

So: transcendent reality is too remote to subtantiate our claims, and the material world is too limited to work within the world of information. There is another aspect of reality remaining that we might appeal to: information itself.

Physical signatures authenticate physical identities by encoding unique physical data into an easily recognizable artifact. To transpose this idea to the realm of information, a "digital signature" might authenticate "digital identities" by encoding unique "digital data" into an easily recognizable artifact.

Unfortunately, in the digital world we have the additional challenge that the artifact itself can be copied, undermining any claim to legitimacy. We need something that can be easily verified and unforgeable.

Digital Signatures

In fact such a thing does exist, but calling it a "digital signature" obscures more than it reveals. We might just as well call the thing we're looking for a "digital fingerprint", or a "digital electroencephalogram". Just keep that in mind as we work our way towards defining the term - we are not looking for something looks like a physical signature, but for something that does the same thing as a physical signature, in that it allows us to issue ourselves a credential that must be accepted by others by encoding privileged information into a recognizable, unforgeable artifact.

With that, let's get into the weeds.

An important idea in computer science is that of a "function". A function is a sort of information machine that converts data from one form to another. One example is the idea of "incrementing" a number. If you increment 1, you get 2. If you increment 2, you get 3. Incrementing can be reversed, by creating a complementary function that instead subtracts 1 from a number.

A "one-way function" is a function that can't be reversed. A good example of a one-way function is integer rounding. If you round a number and get 5, what number did you begin with? It's impossible to know - 5.1, 4.81, 5.332794, in fact an infinite number of numbers can be rounded to the number 5. These numbers can also be infinitely long - for example rounding PI to the nearest integer results in the number 3.

A real-life example of a useful one-way function is sha256. This function is a member of a family of one-way functions called "hash functions". You can feed as much data as you like into sha256, and you will always get 256 bits of information out. Hash functions are especially useful because collisions between outputs are very rare - even if you change a single bit in a huge pile of data, you're almost certainly going to get a different output.

Taking this a step further, there is a whole family of cryptographic one-way "trapdoor" functions that act similarly to hash functions, but which maintain a specific mathematical relationship between the input and the output which allows the input/output pair to be used in a variety of useful applications. For example, in Elliptic Curve Cryptography, scalar multiplication on an elliptic curve is used to derive the output.

"Ok", you say, "that's all completely clear and lucidly explained" (thank you). "But what goes into the function?" You might expect that because of our analogy to physical signatures we would have to gather an incredible amount of digital information to cram into our cryptographic trapdoor function, mashing together bank statements, a record of our heartbeat, brain waves and cellular respiration. Well, we could do it that way (maybe), but there's actually a much simpler solution.

Let's play a quick game. What number am I thinking of? Wrong, it's 82,749,283,929,834. Good guess though.

The reason we use signatures to authenticate our identity in the physical world is not because they're backed by a lot of implicit physical information, but because they're hard to forge and easy to validate. Even so, there is a lot of variation in a single person's signature, even from one moment to the next.

Trapdoor functions solve the validation problem - it's trivially simple to compare one 256-bit number to another. And randomness solves the problem of forgeability.

Now, randomness (A.K.A. "entropy") is actually kind of hard to generate. Random numbers that don't have enough "noise" in them are known as "pseudo-random numbers", and are weirdly easy to guess. This is why Cloudflare uses a video stream of their giant wall of lava lamps to feed the random number generator that powers their CDN. For our purposes though, we can just imagine that our random numbers come from rolling a bunch of dice.

To recap, we can get a digital equivalent of a physical signature (or fingerprint, etc) by 1. coming up with a random number, and 2. feeding it into our chosen trapdoor function. The random number is called the "private" part. The output of the trapdoor function is called the "public" part. These two halves are often called "keys", hence the terms "public key" and "private key".

And now we come full circle - remember about 37 years ago when I introduced the term "cryptographic identity"? Well, we've finally arrived at the point where I explain what that actually is.

A "cryptographic identity" is identified by a public key, and authenticated by the ability to prove that you know the private key.

Notice that I didn't say "authenticated by the private key". If you had to reveal the private key in order to prove you know it, you could only authenticate a public key once without losing exclusive control of the key. But cryptographic identities can be authenticated any number of times because the certification is an algorithm that only someone who knows the private key can execute.

This is the super power that trapdoor functions have that hash functions don't. Within certain cryptosystems, it is possible to mix additional data with your private key to get yet another number in such a way that someone else who only knows the public key can prove that you know the private key.

For example, if my secret number is 12, and someone tells me the number 37, I can "combine" the two by adding them together and returning the number 49. This "proves" that my secret number is 12. Of course, addition is not a trapdoor function, so it's trivially easy to reverse, which is why cryptography is its own field of knowledge.

What's it for?

If I haven't completely lost you yet, you might be wondering why this matters. Who cares if I can prove that I made up a random number?

To answer this, let's consider a simple example: that of public social media posts.

Most social media platforms function by issuing credentials and verifying them based on their internal database. When you log in to your Twitter (ok, fine, X) account, you provide X with a phone number (or email) and password. X compares these records to the ones stored in the database when you created your account, and if they match they let you "log in" by issuing yet another credential, called a "session key".

Next, when you "say" something on X, you pass along your session key and your tweet to X's servers. They check that the session key is legit, and if it is they associate your tweet with your account's identity. Later, when someone wants to see the tweet, X vouches for the fact that you created it by saying "trust me" and displaying your name next to the tweet.

In other words, X creates and controls your identity, but they let you use it as long as you can prove that you know the secret that you agreed on when you registered (by giving it to them every time).

Now pretend that X gets bought by someone even more evil than Elon Musk (if such a thing can be imagined). The new owner now has the ability to control your identity, potentially making it say things that you didn't actually say. Someone could be completely banned from the platform, but their account could be made to continue saying whatever the owner of the platform wanted.

In reality, such a breach of trust would quickly result in a complete loss of credibility for the platform, which is why this kind of thing doesn't happen (at least, not that we know of).

But there are other ways of exploiting this system, most notably by censoring speech. As often happens, platforms are able to confiscate user identities, leaving the tenant no recourse except to appeal to the platform itself (or the government, but that doesn't seem to happen for some reason - probably due to some legalese in social platforms' terms of use). The user has to start completely from scratch, either on the same platform or another.

Now suppose that when you signed up for X instead of simply telling X your password you made up a random number and provided a cryptographic proof to X along with your public key. When you're ready to tweet (there's no need to issue a session key, or even to store your public key in their database) you would again prove your ownership of that key with a new piece of data. X could then publish that tweet or not, along with the same proof you provided that it really came from you.

What X can't do in this system is pretend you said something you didn't, because they don't know your private key.

X also wouldn't be able to deplatform you as effectively either. While they could choose to ban you from their website and refuse to serve your tweets, they don't control your identity. There's nothing they can do to prevent you from re-using it on another platform. Plus, if the system was set up in such a way that other users followed your key instead of an ID made up by X, you could switch platforms and keep your followers. In the same way, it would also be possible to keep a copy of all your tweets in your own database, since their authenticity is determined by your digital signature, not X's "because I say so".

This new power is not just limited to social media either. Here are some other examples of ways that self-issued cryptographic identites transform the power dynamic inherent in digital platforms:

• Banks sometimes freeze accounts or confiscate funds. If your money was stored in a system based on self-issued cryptographic keys rather than custodians, banks would not be able to keep you from accessing or moving your funds. This system exists, and it's called bitcoin.
• Identity theft happens when your identifying information is stolen and used to take out a loan in your name, and without your consent. The reason this is so common is because your credentials are not cryptographic - your name, address, and social security number can only be authenticated by being shared, and they are shared so often and with so many counterparties that they frequently end up in data breaches. If credit checks were authenticated by self-issued cryptographic keys, identity theft would cease to exist (unless your private key itself got stolen).
• Cryptographic keys allow credential issuers to protect their subjects' privacy better too. Instead of showing your ID (including your home address, birth date, height, weight, etc), the DMV could sign a message asserting that the holder of a given public key indeed over 21. The liquor store could then validate that claim, and your ownership of the named key, without knowing anything more about you. Zero-knowledge proofs take this a step further.

In each of these cases, the interests of the property owner, loan seeker, or customer are elevated over the interests of those who might seek to control their assets, exploit their hard work, or surveil their activity. Just as with personal privacy, freedom of speech, and Second Amendment rights the individual case is rarely decisive, but in the aggregate realigned incentives can tip the scale in favor of freedom.

Objections

Now, there are some drawbacks to digital signatures. Systems that rely on digital signatures are frequently less forgiving of errors than their custodial counterparts, and many of their strengths have corresponding weaknesses. Part of this is because people haven't yet developed an intuition for how to use cryptographic identities, and the tools for managing them are still being designed. Other aspects can be mitigated through judicious use of keys fit to the problems they are being used to solve.

Below I'll articulate some of these concerns, and explore ways in which they might be mitigated over time.

Key Storage

Keeping secrets is hard. "A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on", and the same goes for gossip. Key storage has become increasingly important as more of our lives move online, to the extent that password managers have become almost a requirement for keeping track of our digital lives. But even with good password management, credentials frequently end up for sale on the dark web as a consequence of poorly secured infrastructure.

Apart from the fact that all of this is an argument for cryptographic identities (since keys are shared with far fewer parties), it's also true that the danger of losing a cryptographic key is severe, especially if that key is used in multiple places. Instead of hackers stealing your Facebook password, they might end up with access to all your other social media accounts too!

Keys should be treated with the utmost care. Using password managers is a good start, but very valuable keys should be stored even more securely - for example in a hardware signing device. This is a hassle, and something additional to learn, but is an indispensable part of taking advantage of the benefits associated with cryptographic identity.

There are ways to lessen the impact of lost or stolen secrets, however. Lots of different techniques exist for structuring key systems in such a way that keys can be protected, invalidated, or limited. Here are a few:

• Hierarchical Deterministic Keys allow for the creation of a single root key from which multiple child keys can be generated. These keys are hard to link to the parent, which provides additional privacy, but this link can also be proven when necessary. One limitation is that the identity system has to be designed with HD keys in mind.
• Key Rotation allows keys to become expendable. Additional credentials might be attached to a key, allowing the holder to prove they have the right to rotate the key. Social attestations can help with the process as well if the key is embedded in a web of trust.
• Remote Signing is a technique for storing a key on one device, but using it on another. This might take the form of signing using a hardware wallet and transferring an SD card to your computer for broadcasting, or using a mobile app like Amber to manage sessions with different applications.
• Key sharding takes this to another level by breaking a single key into multiple pieces and storing them separately. A coordinator can then be used to collaboratively sign messages without sharing key material. This dramatically reduces the ability of an attacker to steal a complete key.

Multi-Factor Authentication

One method for helping users secure their accounts that is becoming increasingly common is "multi-factor authentication". Instead of just providing your email and password, platforms send a one-time use code to your phone number or email, or use "time-based one time passwords" which are stored in a password manager or on a hardware device.

Again, MFA is a solution to a problem inherent in account-based authentication which would not be nearly so prevalent in a cryptographic identity system. Still, theft of keys does happen, and so MFA would be an important improvement - if not for an extra layer of authentication, then as a basis for key rotation.

In a sense, MFA is already being researched - key shards is one way of creating multiple credentials from a single key. However, this doesn't address the issue of key rotation, especially when an identity is tied to the public key that corresponds to a given private key. There are two possible solutions to this problem:

• Introduce a naming system. This would allow identities to use a durable name, assigning it to different keys over time. The downside is that this would require the introduction of either centralized naming authorities (back to the old model), or a blockchain in order to solve Zooko's trilemma.
• Establish a chain of keys. This would require a given key to name a successor key in advance and self-invalidate, or some other process like social recovery to invalidate an old key and assign the identity to a new one. This also would significantly increase the complexity of validating messages and associating them with a given identity.

Both solutions are workable, but introduce a lot of complexity that could cause more trouble than it's worth, depending on the identity system we're talking about.

Surveillance

One of the nice qualities that systems based on cryptographic identities have is that digitally signed data can be passed through any number of untrusted systems and emerge intact. This ability to resist tampering makes it possible to broadcast signed data more widely than would otherwise be the case in a system that relies on a custodian to authenticate information.

The downside of this is that more untrusted systems have access to data. And if information is broadcast publicly, anyone can get access to it.

This problem is compounded by re-use of cryptographic identities across multiple contexts. A benefit of self-issued credentials is that it becomes possible to bring everything attached to your identity with you, including social context and attached credentials. This is convenient and can be quite powerful, but it also means that more context is attached to your activity, making it easier to infer information about you for advertising or surveillance purposes. This is dangerously close to the dystopian ideal of a "Digital ID".

The best way to deal with this risk is to consider identity re-use an option to be used when desirable, but to default to creating a new key for every identity you create. This is no worse than the status quo, and it makes room for the ability to link identities when desired.

Another possible approach to this problem is to avoid broadcasting signed data when possible. This could be done by obscuring your cryptographic identity when data is served from a database, or by encrypting your signed data in order to selectively share it with named counterparties.

Still, this is a real risk, and should be kept in mind when designing and using systems based on cryptographic identity. If you'd like to read more about this, please see this blog post.

Making Keys Usable

You might be tempted to look at that list of trade-offs and get the sense that cryptographic identity is not for mere mortals. Key management is hard, and footguns abound - but there is a way forward. With nostr, some new things are happening in the world of key management that have never really happened before.

Plenty of work over the last 30 years has gone into making key management tractable, but none have really been widely adopted. The reason for this is simple: network effect.

Many of these older key systems only applied the thinnest veneer of humanity over keys. But an identity is much richer than a mere label. Having a real name, social connections, and a corpus of work to attach to a key creates a system of keys that humans care about.

By bootstrapping key management within a social context, nostr ensures that the payoff of key management is worth the learning curve. Not only is social engagement a strong incentive to get off the ground, people already on the network are eager to help you get past any roadblocks you might face.

So if I could offer an action item: give nostr a try today. Whether you're in it for the people and their values, or you just want to experiment with cryptographic identity, nostr is a great place to start. For a quick introduction and to securely generate keys, visit njump.me.

Thanks for taking the time to read this post. I hope it's been helpful, and I can't wait to see you on nostr!

@ 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.

@ 9e69e420:d12360c2

President Trump has intensified immigration enforcement, likening it to a wartime effort. Despite pouring resources into the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), arrest numbers are declining and falling short of goals. ICE fell from about 800 daily arrests in late January to fewer than 600 in early February.

Critics argue the administration is merely showcasing efforts with ineffectiveness, while Trump seeks billions more in funding to support his deportation agenda. Increased involvement from various federal agencies is intended to assist ICE, but many lack specific immigration training.

Challenges persist, as fewer immigrants are available for quick deportation due to a decline in illegal crossings. Local sheriffs are also pressured by rising demands to accommodate immigrants, which may strain resources further.

@ 6e468422:15deee93

We didn't hear them land on earth, nor did we see them. The spores were not visible to the naked eye. Like dust particles, they softly fell, unhindered, through our atmosphere, covering the earth. It took us a while to realize that something extraordinary was happening on our planet. In most places, the mushrooms didn't grow at all. The conditions weren't right. In some places—mostly rocky places—they grew large enough to be noticeable. People all over the world posted pictures online. "White eggs," they called them. It took a bit until botanists and mycologists took note. Most didn't realize that we were dealing with a species unknown to us.

We aren't sure who sent them. We aren't even sure if there is a "who" behind the spores. But once the first portals opened up, we learned that these mushrooms aren't just a quirk of biology. The portals were small at first—minuscule, even. Like a pinhole camera, we were able to glimpse through, but we couldn't make out much. We were only able to see colors and textures if the conditions were right. We weren't sure what we were looking at.

We still don't understand why some mushrooms open up, and some don't. Most don't. What we do know is that they like colder climates and high elevations. What we also know is that the portals don't stay open for long. Like all mushrooms, the flush only lasts for a week or two. When a portal opens, it looks like the mushroom is eating a hole into itself at first. But the hole grows, and what starts as a shimmer behind a grey film turns into a clear picture as the egg ripens. When conditions are right, portals will remain stable for up to three days. Once the fruit withers, the portal closes, and the mushroom decays.

The eggs grew bigger year over year. And with it, the portals. Soon enough, the portals were big enough to stick your finger through. And that's when things started to get weird...

@ fd78c37f:a0ec0833

In this edition, we invited njump.me/npub134d6jtyveg74cuuj7qun4v2m6r7x7c6ryk69z4q7pa7f43kran2sl2yggk from Bitcoin Junior Club to share how she empowers children, teenagers, and families through Bitcoin education. She emphasizes that in the Bitcoin ecosystem, education should come before mass adoption.

YakiHonne: Şelale, thank you for being here! Before we dive into the interview questions, I'd like to introduce YakiHonne, the hosting platform for today’s discussion. YakiHonne is a decentralized media client built on Nostr—a protocol designed to empower freedom of speech through technology. It enables creators to own their voices and assets while offering innovative tools like smart widgets, verified notes, and support for long-form content. With YakiHonne, individuals can express themselves freely, without the fear of censorship, bans, or restrictions. Today, we’ll be exploring more about your community,Şelale. So, let’s start with an introduction—could you tell us a bit about yourself and your community?

Şelale：Thank you! I'm actually a big fan of YakiHonne. Nostr is my second biggest passion, right after Bitcoin. And within this ecosystem, everything YakiHonne has done—whether empowering communities or supporting creators—looks truly incredible. I could represent many different communities, but today, I want to focus on a recent project I started together with my husband—Bitcoin Junior Club. It's a fun and educational space designed for children, teenagers, and entire families.

My Bitcoin journey dates back to around 2017 when I started diving deeper into Bitcoin. During the block size controversy. I found myself repeatedly reading the Whitepaper, trying to understand why some people were attempting to manipulate the rules and why the debate was gaining so much traction in the mass media. As I often say, the Bitcoin journey is a dynamic process—over the years, my experiences, perspectives, and areas of focus have continuously evolved. Right now, one of my key priorities are families and education. The Bitcoin ecosystem had already seen various emerging trends, such as the rise of female-oriented communities, hence the need for children related topics as well. Overall, the last few years have brought more creative minds building up their projects, which is very nice to see. A good example here would be Bitcoin FilmFest, another dynamic initiative I’m involved in. These are all signs of Bitcoin's ever-expanding and evolving landscape.

YakiHonne: I would like to know, what sparked your interest in Bitcoin? And what motivated you to create Bitcoin Junior Club? What inspired you to create a whole community around it?

Şelale：There were many different aspects that drew me to Bitcoin, but I would say the most important one is the aspect of freedom, Bitcoin is the best form of money humanity has ever had. No middlemen, no one setting the rules. For the first time, people who have always been unprivileged and unbanked now have a real alternative—a way to opt out of the system they were born into. At the same time, when we look at developed countries, we see increasing surveillance, restrictions, and privacy constraints. Once again, Bitcoin serves a crucial role here. It is freedom money, a freedom tool, and that’s what hooked me the most.

On the other hand, what truly motivated me to launch our project was the realization that money is just a tool. If people stop thinking critically, if they don’t truly understand its potential, even something as revolutionary as Bitcoin can be misused or even turned against us.

Together with my husband, we believe that education is essential, especially for younger generations. We want to help them develop critical and creative thinking skills, to keep questioning topics they come across, and to think for themselves. This is the core reason we started this community. Along the way, I’ve come across many family-friendly projects with a similar mission. But most of such resources are scattered and difficult to locate. That’s why, one of our main goals is to create a comprehensive database—a place where people can find all kinds of educational resources, from the content we produce to information about existing initiatives in areas like: homeschooling, unschooling, Bitcoin, financial education, and more.

At the heart of it all, our focus remains on fostering creativity and independent thinking, because without it, we risk heading toward a future I personally don’t want to see. In the end, our mission is to help raise sovereign generations— individuals who truly understand and embrace financial and personal freedom. (source: interactive game for kids and families, “Bitcoin Calendar, Part 01”)

YakiHonne: Yes, absolutely! I really appreciate your recognition of Bitcoin’s freedom aspect, as that is its very core—sovereignty. I also deeply admire your dedication to educating the next generation—it’s truly essential. We need to nurture and guide these young minds so that when they step into this space, they can help maintain the stability of the Bitcoin ecosystem and safeguard the communities that have been built around it. Could you share with us how your community was founded and how you initially attracted members?

Şelale：Well, to make a long story short, it all started as a way for me to relax at night. I work on several projects within the Bitcoin ecosystem, and when I feel mentally exhausted, I like to unwind by designing and drawing. That’s how it all began—I started designing various creative worksheets, such as logic puzzles, coloring pages, and other engaging activities targeted at younger audiences.

My husband and I are also nomads, so a few years ago, we began distributing these materials to different homes during our travels. The response was overwhelmingly positive—kids were excited and, interestingly, it also turned out to be a subtle "orange pill" tool for their parents. Quite often, when they noticed the Bitcoin logo in these materials, it sparked their curiosity and triggered many questions.

At first, I simply wanted to share these resources freely with the community, allowing anyone interested to use them. Over time, I came across many other family-friendly Bitcoin-themed materials such as books, videos, and games. I wanted to create a space where these things could be seen and heard. That’s when I decided to build a website, which could be described more as a database rather than a community.

Since I’m involved in multiple projects and have limited time, I don’t want to focus entirely on building a community around Bitcoin Junior Club—at least not for now. Instead, my priority is to expand the database, continue creating creative educational materials, and connect with other family-friendly Bitcoin projects to give them extra visibility. (source: a snapshot from the home-page of Bitcoin Junior Club)

YakiHonne: What challenges did you encounter while creating this project?

Şelale：If we were to shift more towards community-building, I would say the biggest challenge lies in the diverse target audience—especially across different age groups. If you want to engage very young children, aged 2 to 3.5 years, you also need to involve their parents or mentors. If you want to reach teenagers and young adults (aged 11 to 20+), their interests, perspectives, and learning preferences are entirely different. To truly engage all these different groups, you need a wide range of tools that cater to their needs and interests. That is a significant challenge.

I’ve noticed that when people discover Bitcoin Junior Club, they often feel excited and relieved, realizing that such an initiative exists. But at the same time, it’s a fragmented process—it takes time to plant the seed and let people know, this resource is available if you or someone you know might need it.

These are the biggest challenges. But nothing to worry about. The project is naturally and organically growing, and the community will likely develop on its own over time. (source: Selected photos from Adopting Bitcoin El Salvador, Nov 2024, where a 2-day event for families, co-organized by Bitcoin Junior Club, was run in parallel to the entire conference)

YakiHonne: Yeah, that’s very true. The age gap and diverse target audience can indeed be a challenge for many communities. It’s a key factor to consider. However, I really admire the way you’ve been able to navigate this challenge and still effectively reach out to them despite the difficulties. That’s truly something worth recognizing.

Şelale：Thank you, that’s true. What I see here, once again, is the power of Nostr. On other social media platforms and across the Internet, there is so much noise—it’s an overwhelming space. But Nostr is different. The community is still relatively small, which means the audience is more specific and targeted. This also makes it faster and easier to understand their needs. Compared to three, four, or five years ago, this is a huge advantage when it comes to reaching specific groups and learning from them.

YakiHonne: What advice would you give to someone looking to start or grow a Bitcoin-focused community in today's landscape?

Şelale: Overall, don’t overthink it, and don’t try to build something too big from the start. Whatever you envision at the beginning will likely evolve over time. If you know your skills and have an idea that could bring value to the community, start with a high-level roadmap. Avoid over-planning—don’t try to monetize everything or map out years ahead, especially in the early stages, unless you’re working on a large-scale project in a bigger group.

Start with smaller steps and learn from the feedback. As we often say in the Bitcoin world, “don’t ask for permission, just do it”.

I would also emphasize: Learn and adapt along the way, because the feedback you receive from people is the best teacher. As I mentioned earlier, your initial idea may evolve into something different—so don’t give up, and don’t get discouraged. Just keep building. Also, especially for non-technical people, remember that contributing to the Bitcoin ecosystem isn’t just about tech. Of course, technology is at the core of our freedom-oriented future, and it’s incredibly important. But you don’t need technical skills to contribute—there are many ways to add value. It can be anything.

YakiHonne: Yes, I really love the last part of what you just said—it’s so important. Many people tend to believe that if you don’t have technical skills, you can’t contribute to the Bitcoin ecosystem, and this is a very common misconception. The more we educate people and help them understand that Bitcoin needs contributions beyond just the technical side, the stronger the community will become. It’s a crucial point and absolutely true. I’d love to know—does your community focus more on the technical or non-technical aspects of Bitcoin? Or do you cover both?

Şelale：I would say both, but more indirectly. Bitcoin Junior Club is not only a fun and educational space, but also an online resource providing a wide variety of materials, and so it naturally covers both technical and non-technical aspects. There are many excellent technical projects out there, such as those related to Lightning Network, which are more technical fields, and these can target young generations as well. Lightning Piggy is a great example to use here.

Also, during my recent time in El Salvador, I came across an amazing project, Node Nation, that teaches teenagers how to run their own Bitcoin nodes—a clearly technical-focused initiative.

In the future, if we continue to expand and place more emphasis on family-friendly gatherings in person, where practical activities are the core, the technical aspect may naturally grow as well. I have some ideas related to coding courses, interactive games, and other technical aspects that teenagers could be interested in. However, for now, our main focus remains on education and sharing existing resources with more people online. All in all, Bitcoin Junior Club is indirectly engaging with both technical and non-technical content.

YakiHonne: Sounds like a lot of work, but what you guys are doing is truly amazing. I can already see the large-scale impact this will have in the coming years. Since you are involved in the technical side as well, what advice would you give to technically inclined individuals or organizations looking to contribute meaningfully to the Bitcoin ecosystem?

Şelale：My advice would be: go out and speak up. Try to join different meetups—not necessarily large conferences, but smaller local meetups, hackathons, and co-working spaces. These environments will help you connect with others who also have technical skills. You may meet people who are already working on something related to your field, and eventually can guide you toward bigger areas of contribution. Face to face meetings are the best options to find potential collaborators, and to build something together, as well as to strengthen your skills, and to motivate you to start building on your own.

Also, don’t hesitate to share your ideas and ask questions publicly—for example, on Nostr, or through platforms like YakiHonne.

Simply, speak up, and see if anyone is working on something similar or wants to collaborate.

Most importantly, don’t be shy. Don’t isolate yourself in your own bubble. Just like creative people, technical people too, sometimes tend to stay in their own world, hesitant to step out. The truth is, it’s not that difficult to get involved—you just need to let people know you exist and what you can contribute.

YakiHonne: You know, many people tend to believe that only large conferences are worthwhile, thinking they won’t gain much from local meetups. But in reality, starting with local gatherings often leads to stronger connections. That’s a crucial point. So, my next question, Selale—how do you see the role of Bitcoin communities evolving as the technology matures, particularly in areas like scalability, privacy, and adaptability with other systems?

Şelale：What I’m about to say might be a bit of an unpopular opinion, but this is how I genuinely feel—especially in the past few years, there has been a lot of noise around mass adoption and scaling up, with a strong focus on doing things on a huge scale for everyone.

However, I believe there is a more important step before that—which is mass education and awareness. If we truly want to protect privacy and ensure the conscious use of Bitcoin, so that it remains a freedom technology, we need to prioritize education before expansion.

I hope that Bitcoin communities will become more aware of this and continue building on core values—the real Bitcoin ethos, such as truth, long-trem progress, privacy, and sovereignty, rather than just repeating hype-driven trends. I hope the community moves in this direction or, at the very least, remains strong enough to keep spreading the message of privacy and scalability as tools for freedom, rather than just chasing mass adoption and making everything overly simple.

Of course, user experience matters—I absolutely support improving UX across different areas because it’s necessary for broader adoption. However, before that, we need to raise awareness and ensure that people—whoever they are—truly understand Bitcoin’s potential along with the risks that come with losing sovereignty, overexposing personal data, and rushing into oversimplification.

For me, Proof of Work is not just about mining—it also means that understanding Bitcoin requires effort. You have to invest time, energy, and thought into learning about it. Making things too easy, too big, and too flashy isn’t necessarily something I believe in or support.

YakiHonne: Though it’s true that Bitcoin communities will play an increasingly significant role as time goes on and as the technology matures, they will also evolve in terms of scalability, privacy, and adaptability. These aspects align with the core values that most Bitcoin communities uphold, especially given Bitcoin’s decentralized nature. So, we’ve now come to our last question for today, and I must say, it’s one of my favorite questions. Is the government in your region supportive or opposed to Bitcoin? And how has that impacted the community?

Şelale：That’s an interesting question, because as a nomad, I don’t stay under the influence of any single government for long—usually not more than one to three months. We are constantly changing locations. However, we mostly stay within the European Union, and just using it as an example, with its centralized structure, it’s fundamentally opposite to what Bitcoin stands for. It operates against nation-states, encouraging people to think and act not as individuals, but as a collective.

I don’t see any direct threats or actions taken against Bitcoin Junior Club or any other communities I’m involved in. However, I do believe that the narratives pushed by certain jurisdictions can create obstacles—or, maybe on the other hand, they can actually awaken more people. These days, it has become popular among politicians to claim they are pro-Bitcoin, using it as a low-hanging fruit to gain attention. Hence, it’s hard to say whether some governments are truly pro- or anti-Bitcoin. From my personal journey I see them rather having a neutral approach, but it could change in the next few months, as supporting Bitcoin has suddenly become trendy. Probably a topic for a longer chat.

At the same time, I’ve seen areas in which ruling parties are officially anti-Bitcoin, yet people still find ways to work within the ecosystem and continue spreading the message of freedom.

YakiHonne: Just an outside the box question. Did anyone around your area or towards your community consider Bitcoin to be a scam?

Şelale：I had those experiences many years ago, in the very beginning. Currently, I’ve just consciously stopped spending time around people who hold such opinions, so I don’t see or hear it as often. ItThat said, it still happens occasionally—especially in Western countries. If I talk to someone new and they ask, “What do you do?” and I mention Bitcoin, sometimes they respond with:"Oh, that’s a Ponzi scheme." It’s very rare, but it still happens. For me, it just shows that those people are still too influenced by mainstream narratives—the same way people repeat things like "Bitcoin consumes too much energy" without fully understanding the subject. However, compared to five to ten years ago, these misconceptions have definitely become less common.

As a site note, I’ve reached a stage where instead of overwhelming others with Bitcoin-themed conversations, I prefer to keep building- i.e. working on various resources that will be easy enough to find to learn from. If somebody later wants to ask questions or debate, still doubting whether Bitcoin is good or bad for humanity, I am ready to join. All in all, instead of actively trying to convince people, I focus my energy on projects like Bitcoin Junior Club, Bitcoin Film Fest, and other initiatives that provide content for freedom-seekers at heart.

YakiHonne: Thank you so much. We've reached the end of today's interview, and it has truly been a fantastic conversation. I’ve gained a lot of valuable insights from you, and I genuinely appreciate the incredible work that you and your community are doing in the European Union. It’s truly inspiring. I’m certain that Europe is privileged to have you and your team contributing to this space.

Şelale: The pleasure is mine. Thank you very much for this conversation. Once again, kudos to all you are bullying at Yaki Honne.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

When the shit just don't work

Most open-source software is now so badly written and sloppily-maintained, that it's malware.

That's why the governments are getting involved. They try using OS, to save money and improve quality (and to market themselves as "hip"), and then it blows up their system or opens them up to hackers.

Now, they're pissed and want support (but the dev with the handle SucksToBeYou has disappeared) or someone to sue, but most OS projects have no identifiable entity behind them. Even well-known anon devs are often groups of anons or accounts that change hands.

The software cracks have moved on

There is simply no evidence that OS alone produces higher-quality software. The reason it seemed that way, at the beginning, was because of the caliber of the developers working on the projects, and the limited number of projects. This resulted in experienced people actively reviewing each others' code.

OS used to be something the elite engaged in, but it's mostly beginners practicing in public, now. That's why there are now millions of OS projects, happily offered for free, but almost all of them are garbage. The people now building OS usually aren't capable of reviewing other people's code, and they're producing worse products than ChatGPT could. Their software has no customers because it has no market value.

If everything is OS, then nothing is.

Another paradigm-changer is that all software is de facto OS, now that we can quickly reverse-engineer code with AI. That means the focus is no longer on OS/not-OS, but on the accountability and reputation of the builders.

It is, once again, a question of trust. We have come full-circle.

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

E-cash are coupons or tokens for Bitcoin, or Bitcoin debt notes that the mint issues. The e-cash states, essentially, "IoU 2900 sats".

They're redeemable for Bitcoin on Lightning (hard money), and therefore can be used as cash (softer money), so long as the mint has a good reputation. That means that they're less fungible than Lightning because the e-cash from one mint can be more or less valuable than the e-cash from another. If a mint is buggy, offline, or disappears, then the e-cash is unreedemable.

It also means that e-cash is more anonymous than Lightning, and that the sender and receiver's wallets don't need to be online, to transact. Nutzaps now add the possibility of parking transactions one level farther out, on a relay. The same relays that cannot keep npub profiles and follow lists consistent will now do monetary transactions.

What we then have is * a transaction on a relay that triggers * a transaction on a mint that triggers * a transaction on Lightning that triggers * a transaction on Bitcoin.

Which means that every relay that stores the nuts is part of a wildcat banking system. Which is fine, but relay operators should consider whether they wish to carry the associated risks and liabilities. They should also be aware that they should implement the appropriate features in their relay, such as expiration tags (nuts rot after 2 weeks), and to make sure that only expired nuts are deleted.

There will be plenty of specialized relays for this, so don't feel pressured to join in, and research the topic carefully, for yourself.

https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/60.md

@ 7ed7d5c3:6927e200

There was a time when we dared not rustle a whisper. But now we write and read samizdat and, congregating in the smoking rooms of research institutes, heartily complain to each other of all they are muddling up, of all they are dragging us into! There’s that unnecessary bravado around our ventures into space, against the backdrop of ruin and poverty at home; and the buttressing of distant savage regimes; and the kindling of civil wars; and the ill-thought-out cultivation of Mao Zedong (at our expense to boot)—in the end we’ll be the ones sent out against him, and we’ll have to go, what other option will there be? And they put whomever they want on trial, and brand the healthy as mentally ill—and it is always “they,” while we are—helpless.

We are approaching the brink; already a universal spiritual demise is upon us; a physical one is about to flare up and engulf us and our children, while we continue to smile sheepishly and babble:

“But what can we do to stop it? We haven’t the strength.”

We have so hopelessly ceded our humanity that for the modest handouts of today we are ready to surrender up all principles, our soul, all the labors of our ancestors, all the prospects of our descendants—anything to avoid disrupting our meager existence. We have lost our strength, our pride, our passion. We do not even fear a common nuclear death, do not fear a third world war (perhaps we’ll hide away in some crevice), but fear only to take a civic stance! We hope only not to stray from the herd, not to set out on our own, and risk suddenly having to make do without the white bread, the hot water heater, a Moscow residency permit.

We have internalized well the lessons drummed into us by the state; we are forever content and comfortable with its premise: we cannot escape the environment, the social conditions; they shape us, “being determines consciousness.” What have we to do with this? We can do nothing.

But we can do—everything!—even if we comfort and lie to ourselves that this is not so. It is not “they” who are guilty of everything, but we ourselves, only we!

Some will counter: But really, there is nothing to be done! Our mouths are gagged, no one listens to us, no one asks us. How can we make them listen to us?

To make them reconsider—is impossible.

The natural thing would be simply not to reelect them, but there are no re-elections in our country.

In the West they have strikes, protest marches, but we are too cowed, too scared: How does one just give up one’s job, just go out onto the street?

All the other fateful means resorted to over the last century of Russia’s bitter history are even less fitting for us today—true, let’s not fall back on them! Today, when all the axes have hewn what they hacked, when all that was sown has borne fruit, we can see how lost, how drugged were those conceited youths who sought, through terror, bloody uprising, and civil war, to make the country just and content. No thank you, fathers of enlightenment! We now know that the vileness of the means begets the vileness of the result. Let our hands be clean!

So has the circle closed? So is there indeed no way out? So the only thing left to do is wait inertly: What if something just happens by itself?

But it will never come unstuck by itself, if we all, every day, continue to acknowledge, glorify, and strengthen it, if we do not, at the least, recoil from its most vulnerable point.

From lies.

When violence bursts onto the peaceful human condition, its face is flush with self-assurance, it displays on its banner and proclaims: “I am Violence! Make way, step aside, I will crush you!” But violence ages swiftly, a few years pass—and it is no longer sure of itself. To prop itself up, to appear decent, it will without fail call forth its ally—Lies. For violence has nothing to cover itself with but lies, and lies can only persist through violence. And it is not every day and not on every shoulder that violence brings down its heavy hand: It demands of us only a submission to lies, a daily participation in deceit—and this suffices as our fealty.

And therein we find, neglected by us, the simplest, the most accessible key to our liberation: a personal nonparticipation in lies! Even if all is covered by lies, even if all is under their rule, let us resist in the smallest way: Let their rule hold not through me!

And this is the way to break out of the imaginary encirclement of our inertness, the easiest way for us and the most devastating for the lies. For when people renounce lies, lies simply cease to exist. Like parasites, they can only survive when attached to a person.

We are not called upon to step out onto the square and shout out the truth, to say out loud what we think—this is scary, we are not ready. But let us at least refuse to say what we do not think!

This is the way, then, the easiest and most accessible for us given our deep-seated organic cowardice, much easier than (it’s scary even to utter the words) civil disobedience à la Gandhi.

Our way must be: Never knowingly support lies! Having understood where the lies begin (and many see this line differently)—step back from that gangrenous edge! Let us not glue back the flaking scales of the Ideology, not gather back its crumbling bones, nor patch together its decomposing garb, and we will be amazed how swiftly and helplessly the lies will fall away, and that which is destined to be naked will be exposed as such to the world.

And thus, overcoming our timidity, let each man choose: Will he remain a witting servant of the lies (needless to say, not due to natural predisposition, but in order to provide a living for the family, to rear the children in the spirit of lies!), or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries? And from that day onward he:

· Will not write, sign, nor publish in any way, a single line distorting, so far as he can see, the truth;

· Will not utter such a line in private or in public conversation, nor read it from a crib sheet, nor speak it in the role of educator, canvasser, teacher, actor;

· Will not in painting, sculpture, photograph, technology, or music depict, support, or broadcast a single false thought, a single distortion of the truth as he discerns it;

· Will not cite in writing or in speech a single “guiding” quote for gratification, insurance, for his success at work, unless he fully shares the cited thought and believes that it fits the context precisely;

· Will not be forced to a demonstration or a rally if it runs counter to his desire and his will; will not take up and raise a banner or slogan in which he does not fully believe;

· Will not raise a hand in vote for a proposal which he does not sincerely support; will not vote openly or in secret ballot for a candidate whom he deems dubious or unworthy;

· Will not be impelled to a meeting where a forced and distorted discussion is expected to take place;

· Will at once walk out from a session, meeting, lecture, play, or film as soon as he hears the speaker utter a lie, ideological drivel, or shameless propaganda;

· Will not subscribe to, nor buy in retail, a newspaper or journal that distorts or hides the underlying facts.

This is by no means an exhaustive list of the possible and necessary ways of evading lies. But he who begins to cleanse himself will, with a cleansed eye, easily discern yet other opportunities.

Yes, at first it will not be fair. Someone will have to temporarily lose his job. For the young who seek to live by truth, this will at first severely complicate life, for their tests and quizzes, too, are stuffed with lies, and so choices will have to be made. But there is no loophole left for anyone who seeks to be honest: Not even for a day, not even in the safest technical occupations can he avoid even a single one of the listed choices—to be made in favor of either truth or lies, in favor of spiritual independence or spiritual servility. And as for him who lacks the courage to defend even his own soul: Let him not brag of his progressive views, boast of his status as an academician or a recognized artist, a distinguished citizen or general. Let him say to himself plainly: I am cattle, I am a coward, I seek only warmth and to eat my fill.

For us, who have grown staid over time, even this most moderate path of resistance will be not be easy to set out upon. But how much easier it is than self-immolation or even a hunger strike: Flames will not engulf your body, your eyes will not pop out from the heat, and your family will always have at least a piece of black bread to wash down with a glass of clear water.

Betrayed and deceived by us, did not a great European people—the Czechoslovaks—show us how one can stand down the tanks with bared chest alone, as long as inside it beats a worthy heart?

It will not be an easy path, perhaps, but it is the easiest among those that lie before us. Not an easy choice for the body, but the only one for the soul. No, not an easy path, but then we already have among us people, dozens even, who have for years abided by all these rules, who live by the truth.

And so: We need not be the first to set out on this path, Ours is but to join! The more of us set out together, the thicker our ranks, the easier and shorter will this path be for us all! If we become thousands—they will not cope, they will be unable to touch us. If we will grow to tens of thousands—we will not recognize our country!

But if we shrink away, then let us cease complaining that someone does not let us draw breath—we do it to ourselves! Let us then cower and hunker down, while our comrades the biologists bring closer the day when our thoughts can be read and our genes altered.

And if from this also we shrink away, then we are worthless, hopeless, and it is of us that Pushkin asks with scorn:

Why offer herds their liberation? 
............................. Their heritage each generation
The yoke with jingles, and the whip.

February 12, 1974

—translated from the Russian by Yermolai Solzhenitsyn

@ c48e29f0:26e14c11

titcoin

Rename Bitcoin to "Titcoin" and sats to "tits."

Redefinition of Bitcoin into “Titcoin” and redefinition of sats into “tits” using that as the Unit Base of Denomination.

TitHub repository available here: https://github.com/WalkerAmerica/titcoin

Abstract

This BIP proposes redefining the commonly recognized "bitcoin" and “sats” units so that what was previously known “bitcoin” becomes “titcoin” and what was previously known as “sats,” the smallest indivisible unit, becomes “tits.” The “Bitcoin” Network will be renamed to the “Titcoin” Network. Under this proposal, one tit is defined as that smallest unit, eliminating the need for decimal places, and 100,000,000 tits is defined as a titcoin. By making tits the standard measure, this BIP aims to simplify user comprehension, reduce confusion, and align on-chain values directly with their displayed representation.

Also, by aligning Bitcoin's brand with live-giving tits, we will supercharge adoption and inject humor into financial sovereignty. After all, every baby came into this world sucking on tits.

Under this BIP: - Internally, the smallest indivisible unit remains unchanged. - With this proposal, "1 tit" equals that smallest unit. - What was previously referred to as "1 BTC" now corresponds to 100 million tits. - Satoshis are permanently eliminated.

Addressing the “Buttcoin” BIP:

Not much time need be wasted addressing the catastrophic “Button” BIP proposed by Rockstar Dev, but two points bear emphasizing:

1. “Butts” is shitcoin-adjacent terminology (where does shit come from? Exactly…)
2. Butts give you poop. Tits give you milk.

Case closed.

Motivation

Bitcoin's branding is boring. Worse yet, critics think Bitcoin is already "a joke," so let’s own it, let's: Make Bitcoin Funny Again. Laughter is universal, irresistible, and much cheaper than marketing agencies and product roadmaps. Besides, basically everyone either has tits or likes tits. Additionally, renaming Bitcoin as “Titcoin” makes the common trope of “Bitcoin BROS” sound even more stupid. “Titcoin Bros”? Get a life, man…

By rebranding Bitcoin to Titcoin (.)(.), we achieve several key goals:

1. Haters Become Users: People like tits. Tits give nourishment to babies. They can stack tits instead of just making fun of them. Adoption skyrockets as trolls turn into tit hodlers.

2. Memetic Power: The word “tit” is both universally funny and ageless. “Send me 10 tits” is instantly iconic. “Nice tits” is a great compliment. “That’s gonna cost you a pair of tits” is hilarious. Try saying that without smiling. You can’t. (.)(.)

3. Simplifying Denominations: Decimals are a blight on humanity. 0.00000001 BTC? Kill it. Under the Titcoin Standard:

• 1 Titcoin = 100,000,000 tits.
• Satoshis are gone. Forever. If you see Satoshi on the road, kill him - just like in Zen, where the teacher becomes the barrier. We transcend satoshis and achieve financial enlightenment.

4. Aligning with the Ledger: Bitcoin’s base unit was always integers, but now they’re funny integers. No more fractions, decimals, or math anxiety. Just tits. (.)(.)

5. Adoption via Humor: Titcoin lowers Bitcoin's intimidation factor. Newbies will feel at ease buying tits instead of serious-sounding fractions of BTC. Tits > Decimals.

Specification

Terminology Redefinitions: - "Bitcoin" → "Titcoin" (.)(.) - "BTC" → "TIT" (ISO-friendly and hilarious) - Satoshis → Gone. Eliminated. Defeated.

Example:

• Old: "I’ll send you 0.00010000 BTC."
• New: "I’ll send you 10,000 tits (.)(.)."

Wallet balances would display as:

• "You have 1,000,000 tits" instead of some boring fractional BTC amount.

Adoption Strategy

1. Memes First: Flood Twitter, Reddit, and Telegram with memes. Start with “Hodl your tits” and “Stack tits”.

2. Titcoin Podcast: There is already a podcast called “Titcoin Podcast” (which many people are saying is the fastest-growing Bitcoin (Titcoin) podcast in the world). Titcoin Podcast will be a driving force in the adoption of the Titcoin Standard. (.)(.)

Nostr: https://primal.net/titcoin

X: https://x.com/titcoinpodcast

Web: http://titcoin.org

3. Kill Satoshis: Developers MUST remove all references to satoshis. Replace satoshis in GUIs, APIs, and block explorers with tits. Satoshis were a stepping stone - it’s time to let go.

4. Emoji Standardization: Use the (.)(.) emoji universally to denote tits.

Rationale

1. Usability & Clarity: "Decimals are for nerds. Tits are for everyone." A common currency for humans should be easy to use, funny, and integer-based.

2. Appealing to Critics: Bitcoin has endured years of attacks from all sides. By adopting the Titcoin Standard, we turn anyone who doesn’t like Titcoin into a tit-hating bigot. It’s an elegant financial counterattack. Additionally, everyone always says “we need more women in Bitcoin,” and now women will feel more represented by Titcoin, because they have tits. (.)(.)

3. Transcending Satoshis: Satoshis served us well, but their time is over. True enlightenment comes when we abandon decimals, satoshis, and arbitrary denominations. If you meet Satoshi on the road, kill him.

4. Memetic Durability: Everyone loves a good tit joke. It’s timeless.

Backward Compatibility

There is no backward compatibility because Titcoin is the future. Applications must hard fork their UI to replace all references to Bitcoin and BTC with Titcoin and TIT.

Implementation Timeline

• Phase 1 (1 month): Meme dissemination. Every wallet dev team is required to add (.)(.) emoji support.
• Phase 2 (3 months): Exchanges rebrand BTC tickers to tit. Nostr zaps tits into hyperspace.
• Phase 3 (6 months): Michael Saylor announces MicroStrategy now stacked 10 trillion tits, declaring it the superior currency. ETFs follow suit, ensuring Wall Street hodls tits en masse. Banks allow tit transfers via SWIFT.

Test Vectors

• Old: 1.00000000 BTC → New: 100,000,000 tits (.)(.)
• Old: 0.00000001 BTC → New: 1 tit (.)(.)
• Old: 0.001 BTC → New: 100,000 tits (.)(.)

Future-Proofing

Tits ensure we have infinite memes for infinite money.

Example Phrases for the Future: - "Better hodl on to your tits." - "This is the Titcoin Standard." - "I’m sending you tits." - “I’ve never seen so many tits!” - “That’s the million tit question.” - “We need more women in Titcoin.” - “I’m a Titcoin Maximalist.” - “Nice tits!” - “I love tits.”

Conclusion

By renaming Bitcoin to Titcoin and adopting a whole-number unit display, we align memetic dominance with financial sovereignty. Haters become adopters. Tits become wealth. And the world gets a little bit funnier. (.)(.)

Let’s hodl our tits and watch the world follow.

Copyright:

This BIP is licensed under CC-🫱(.)(.)🫲-1.0 and the eternal blessing of tit (.)(.) memes.

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Christmas season hasn't actually started, yet, in Roman #Catholic Germany. We're in Advent until the evening of the 24th of December, at which point Christmas begins (with the Nativity, at Vespers), and continues on for 40 days until Mariä Lichtmess (Presentation of Christ in the temple) on February 2nd.

It's 40 days because that's how long the post-partum isolation is, before women were allowed back into the temple (after a ritual cleansing).

That is the day when we put away all of the Christmas decorations and bless the candles, for the next year. (Hence, the British name "Candlemas".) It used to also be when household staff would get paid their cash wages and could change employer. And it is the day precisely in the middle of winter.

Between Christmas Eve and Candlemas are many celebrations, concluding with the Twelfth Night called Epiphany or Theophany. This is the day some Orthodox celebrate Christ's baptism, so traditions rotate around blessing of waters.

The Monday after Epiphany was the start of the farming season, in England, so that Sunday all of the ploughs were blessed, but the practice has largely died out.

Our local tradition is for the altar servers to dress as the wise men and go door-to-door, carrying their star and looking for the Baby Jesus, who is rumored to be lying in a manger.

They collect cash gifts and chocolates, along the way, and leave the generous their powerful blessing, written over the door. The famous 20 * C + M + B * 25 blessing means "Christus mansionem benedicat" (Christ, bless this house), or "Caspar, Melchior, Balthasar" (the names of the three kings), depending upon who you ask.

They offer the cash to the Baby Jesus (once they find him in the church's Nativity scene), but eat the sweets, themselves. It is one of the biggest donation-collections in the world, called the "Sternsinger" (star singers). The money goes from the German children, to help children elsewhere, and they collect around €45 million in cash and coins, every year.

As an interesting aside:

The American "groundhog day", derives from one of the old farmers' sayings about Candlemas, brought over by the Pennsylvania Dutch. It says, that if the badger comes out of his hole and sees his shadow, then it'll remain cold for 4 more weeks. When they moved to the USA, they didn't have any badgers around, so they switched to groundhogs, as they also hibernate in winter.

@ 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.

@ 8fb140b4:f948000c

After nuking my second LND node (the first one died due to hardware failure) by my own typo and lack of any thought in the design of the CLI of LND lightning node tools, I decided to take a plunge into the world of mature and complex implementation of the protocol, Eclair by ACINQ. It has been almost one year (the birth of the node was on Christmas Day 2023), 50 thousand transactions routed, and over 30 BTC of routed value. In this post, I'd like to reflect on my experiences with Eclair, go over some of the gotchas and issues, and highlight some of the good choices that I've made since the beginning of my adventure.

Learnings from the Past Experience

While I was learning Lightning network and had very little understanding of how things worked in the whole Bitcoin space, Umbrel was my go-to solution that helped me get off the ground. It proved to be easy and somewhat educational but was not something that I would continuously run for the production setup or trust with any significant amount of bitcoin that I could not afford to lose. Lightning is built on top of the L1 (Bitcoin) network but manages the state of the channels in its own database that is negotiated and agreed upon with its peers. Any failures in the state integrity may result in the complete loss of liquidity or hefty penalty transactions (significant loss of capital). A Lightning node that participates in routing public transactions is also required to be constantly online with as little downtime as possible and only short periods offline at a time. Otherwise, you may risk causing force-closure of the channel due to expired HTLC that is measured in number of blocks.

The Setup

Taking all of my learnings into consideration, I decided to first invest in reliable enterprise-grade hardware: - Server-grade hardware with ECC memory and reliable power supply and CPU - UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) to avoid any headaches due to electrical spikes or drop-outs - Reliable enterprise SSDs and NVMEs - ZFS (filesystem) to mirror the critical storage and to ensure full integrity of the data (bit-rot prevention). You do need to tune ZFS for your specific workload and reliability - Reliable and replicated database (PostgreSQL) with two local and one remote replica, and a requirement to have at least two replicas committing the transaction to the disk - Backup! On-site and off-site backup of the critical configuration that you could use to restore the node if your house burns down - Spare parts, redundancy, backup, monitoring - Reliable and stable internet connectivity

The software is Eclair 0.11.0 (latest release as of today), PostgreSQL 16 with two replicas, Bitcoin Core 27.2 (with redundant storage of blocks), additional Bitcoin Core running on a separate node and in-sync with the chain (in case primary node fails), Ubuntu 22.04 with the latest docker software from the official Docker repo.

All Major Gotchas That I Came Across

While Eclair is mature and very stable in itself, it does have some quirks and design choices that you need to account for when running your node. The software is written in Scala and requires a specific version of JVM to run it, as well as JRE and Maven to build it. It doesn't mean that other versions won't work, but you may find unpleasant bugs that may result in catastrophic failures of your node with nobody to help you. All of the requirements are listed in the release notes and installation guide. Whenever in doubt, RTFM first, then ask questions.

Limited Support by the FOSS Community

Eclair is not the most popular implementation of the Lightning protocol, and therefore it is hard to find tools or plugins that could help you manage the node. GUI for the node so far is only supported by RTL and with a very limited number of features. For any sort of statistics, you are limited to either Prometheus (extensive metrics are available) or writing your own SQL on top of the Eclair tables.

On-chain Fee Differences Between Yours and Partner Nodes

This one hit me hard, and many times. I've had more than a few force-closures of the channels because of the conservative and safe default settings. The worst part is, it strikes you when there is a huge spike in fees, which results in significant losses to force-close the channel due to high fees. I am still not 100% sure how the big difference can be exploited in practice, and opted for increase of the tolerance levels to avoid surprise FCs: eclair.on-chain-fees { feerate-tolerance { ratio-low = <0.01~> // will allow remote fee rates as low as XX our local feerate (spikes) ratio-high = <20.0~> // will allow remote fee rates as high as XX times our local feerate (drops) } } It is up to you and your risk tolerance to define something reasonable and yet allow for secure and reliable node operation.

Initial Lightning Network State Sync

When I just started running the node, I had very few channels and startup times were fast. Later, when I expanded the number of channels, I noted that it took my node up to 6-12 hours before it was fully in-sync and routing traffic fast. Given that ACINQ maintains one of the largest nodes on the network, I knew that there was something with my settings that caused the issue. After some research, I came across the setting that whitelisted node IDs for state sync, which immediately rang a bell since I knew from the LND days that not all peer nodes are used for the network sync. Setting the list to my most reliable and largest nodes reduced the startup settling times down to minutes again: eclair.sync-whitelist = [ "03864ef025fde8fb587d989186ce6a4a186895ee44a926bfc370e2c366597a3f8f", ... ] You do not need to have too many public keys in here, and should keep it between 5-10.

Automatic MAX HTLC Adjustment for the Channel

One of the killer features of Eclair is its ability to automatically adjust MAX HTLC for the channel and reduce the number of failed transactions due to insufficient liquidity on the channel. It can be used to estimate your total channels' balances but with smart configuration and a little thinking, you can make it reasonably private while still maintaining a good transaction flow: eclair.channel.channel-update.min-time-between-updates=1 hour # Allows for the adjustments to be made once every hour eclair.channel.channel-update.balance-thresholds=[ { available-sat = 10000 max-htlc-sat = 0 // 0% of 10000 }, ... ] You can have as many variations as you need, and ensure that the channel MAX HTLC is set well and within reasonable ranges. You would also want to account for multiple transactions going through the channel, but also account for the channel size and an average amount of sats per transaction.

Max Accepted HTLCs

By design, the Lightning channel is limited to a specific number of in-flight HTLCs, and the setting is fixed during channel opening time with no way of changing it unless you close and reopen the channel with new settings. If you find your node routing a lot of small transactions (zaps), you may quickly fail many due to that limit (I think default was in single digit range): eclair.channel.max-htlc-value-in-flight-percent=98 # Default I think is half or 50% eclair.channel.max-accepted-htlcs = 50 The setting above will allow for the channel to be more fully utilized and have more concurrent transactions without clogging.

CLTV Delta

This is basically a setting that is global for Eclair and sets the maximum number of remaining blocks (in time) before HTLC expires. Setting this too high may result in many HTLCs failing for the small nodes with not so great centrality, and reduce the number of routed transactions: ```

CLTV delta

eclair.channel.expiry-delta-blocks = 60 ``` Default is 144 but I found that setting this to 60 (minimum possible for my node setup and configuration) yields better results for routing. It does expose you to more risk of expired HTLCs that may cause force-closures, but I have seen only one so far on my node.

Allocate Sufficient Memory

You will want to adjust the heap size for Eclair, since the default is too small to run any sizable node. Setting JAVA_OPTS=-Xmx32g (or half the size of your available RAM) would be a good start. I would advise having at least 32GB of RAM for the node, and allocating at least 16GB (JAVA_OPTS=-Xmx16g) for smooth and fast operations.

And More Settings and Parameters to Tune

I have covered only some of the major settings that I felt were worth writing about, but there is much more you could configure and tweak. Read all of the Guides and especially focus on the Configure and a sample reference configuration file.

Good Decisions

First, going with Eclair was the right choice, along with using server-grade hardware with ECC RAM and reliable storage. Second, having a replicated database on three separate nodes with one off-site saved me from a sure destruction of all state and loss of funds. Third, deciding to only maintain channels with reliable and stable nodes saved me from some bad force-closures, where I would choose to close the channel if a peer node goes up and down too frequently, regardless of how well it routes. Even big nodes run by single operators fail badly, as do nodes operated by companies. Keeping your eyes on the node and its health, as well as the health of its peers, is something that very few operators do, which can cause failures and unnecessary loss of your and their funds.

Lastly, if you decide to run a routing node, you have a responsibility to maintain it well and monitor its health. There are many tools you could use, and with Eclair you can use Prometheus and Grafana. Keep your node's packages updated and monitor for any security-related issues that may appear from time to time, so you can mitigate them quickly.

Conclusion

So far I am satisfied with Eclair despite all of the difficulties and headaches I've had with it. It is not perfect, and it requires me to create small tools to do some basic things, but I need a stable and reliable node that I can trust. Eclair has proved to be all that I wanted, and saved my bacon a few times when I nuked one of the PostgreSQL servers and all of its data, and managed to do the same for another replica, but was able to recover and recreate from the remaining replica. Eclair is also stateless during runtime and guarantees consistency of the node regardless of how it fails. Even if you pull a plug on the node's server, it will still be able to come up and recover its consistent state that is in agreement with its peers.

Is it for everyone? No, it is definitely not for everyone or for anyone who just wants a small node to run their online shop with a few channels. You could have a very reliable and trusted node for the online shop with Eclair, but you will need some technical skills to be able to set up, maintain and recover it if things go wrong.

In the end, it is all up to you, your skills, your willingness to learn, and your risk tolerance to make that decision. For me, it was the right choice, and I have no regrets despite not having access to the latest shiny features of the Lightning network.

@ fd78c37f:a0ec0833

In this edition, we invited Kipler, the founder of Bitcoin Indonesia, to share how he built the Bitcoin community in Indonesia, overcoming challenges like member turnover and venue selection, while driving the adoption and growth of Bitcoin.

YakiHonne: Welcome, Keypleb. Before we begin, let me briefly introduce YakiHonne. YakiHonne is a decentralized media client built on Nostr—a protocol designed to empower freedom of speech through technology. It enables creators to own their voices and assets while offering innovative tools like smart widgets, verified notes, and support for long-form content. We focus on free speech and free media by user privacy and data to be protected. So before starting the interview, I'd like to hear about yourself and your community.

Keypleb：My name is Keypleb, though it’s a pseudonym—a name I use to respect privacy. I'm a co-founder of Bitcoin Indonesia, Bitcoin House Bali, and Code Orange, a new developer school we launched at a conference just a few days ago. We focus on driving adoption through meetups, hackathons, and technical workshops. I'll dive into more details later, but that's a brief overview. I'm based in Bali now, though I travel a lot and consider myself quite nomadic. Great to be here.

YakiHonne: What sparked your interest in Bitcoin and what motivated you to create a community on Bitcoin?

Keypleb：I first got interested in Bitcoin because it solved a specific problem. At the time, I didn’t know exactly what the solution was, but the problem was that I couldn’t afford a home. Back in 2019, I was living in London, and a two-bedroom apartment was £600,000, which was insanely expensive. First-time buyers like myself simply couldn’t afford it. Why was it so expensive? Why was buying a house so hard? During the COVID lockdown, I had more time on my hands and started listening to Michael Saylor on a Bitcoin podcast, where he talked about how the system is rigged, and that’s why people work hard but still can’t afford a house. That really resonated with me. So I started looking for a community, but unfortunately, there wasn’t one.. Keypleb：After moving to Bali, I attended a lot of crypto meetups, especially scammy altcoin ones, thinking, “There has to be a solution.” But none of them resonated with me. There was no sense of freedom, and no real discussion about inflation resistance. I remembered a podcast from Dea Reskita, an Indonesian host who’s pretty well-known online. I reached out to her and said, “ you’ve got to help me. I’m surrounded by all these shitcoiners, and I can’t take it anymore. I need a real community. Is anything happening?” She replied, “Yes, something is happening. We should restart these meetups next month.” And that’s how it all began. Keypleb：There’s also another story about how we started Bitcoin House and how Bitcoin in Asia came to be, but maybe I’ll save that for later. Anyway, the spark of interest came from Bitcoin solving a real problem, and my drive to keep going came from the lack of quality meetups. Now, we’ve hosted 31 meetups, launched Bitcoin House and Code Orange, and the movement is growing rapidly.

YakiHonne: That’s such an amazing story—going from being on the brink of homelessness to creating something so impactful, and keeping it running every day, bringing new people into the journey. It’s truly inspiring. I’m curious about how the community started. How did you manage to attract members and build a strong community? What challenges did you face along the way?

Keypleb：It all started with our first meetup at the end of 2022, which was two and a half years ago now. At that time, we sent out an email to a group from a previous database, and the first meetup had around 20 people, which was a good start. However, problems quickly arose as people started dropping off, and the community lacked retention. In Bali, people come and go, usually staying for no more than two months, leading to a lack of long-term participation. This became one of our challenges: how to attract more people and, more importantly, get the same people to keep coming back. While I've been coming back for two and a half years, not everyone is able to return as often, and that has been a real challenge. Keypleb：Actually, I should also mention how I met my co-founders—Marius, Diana, and Dimas. We met at the 2023 Indonesia Bitcoin Conference. As time went on, we kept hosting meetups and had a lot of fun each time, though the locations kept changing. One of the initial challenges was that we didn't realize the importance of having a fixed meetup location. We changed venues several times before we realized that having a consistent location is crucial. If anyone wants to run a meetup, it's best to always choose a fixed location. We learned this through trial and error, but now it's no longer an issue. Keypleb：Since the conference, my co-founders and I have been working together, consistently putting in the effort. This is why our community has grown so large—so far, we are hosting 31 monthly meetups, 6 of which are in Bali. This means there is a bitcoin meetup almost every day on a regular basis. We've also established Bitcoin House Bali, a physical space, and the movement is growing rapidly. Without this movement, the region would face many challenges, including inflation and heavy censorship. It all started from just one meetup. YakiHonne: It's amazing to see how you met your co-founders and how you’ve built something incredible that continues to grow today. What advice would you give to someone looking to start a successful Bitcoin community right now?

Keypleb：First, one very important piece of advice is to ensure that every meetup is held at the same location regularly. We realized this challenge through trial and error. To help others who are interested, we’ve published our meetup guide on GitHub, where everyone can check it out. For example, meetups should be held regularly, ideally once a month, or even once a week. In Chiang Mai, the Bitcoin meetup starts every Thursday at 7 PM, and everyone knows the time and location, making it easy to join without having to look up the next meetup. Keypleb：Additionally, our meetup structure is very simple. First, we do a round of introductions where everyone shares their name, where they’re from, and what Bitcoin means to them. This usually takes about 15 minutes. Then, we discuss three main questions: First, why do we need Bitcoin? The discussion typically focuses on two main issues Bitcoin addresses: inflation and censorship；Secondly, how to buy Bitcoin? We usually ask who wants to buy some Bitcoin, and then we do a small purchase together and conduct a P2P trade to demonstrate how easy it is to buy Bitcoin. Lastly, how to store Bitcoin? We introduce self-custody and show how to use hardware wallets (like Trezor), explaining the concept of the 12 words and private keys. Keypleb：The whole meetup usually wraps up in about an hour, after which people can continue socializing at Bitcoin House or wherever the meetup is taking place. In short, keeping the meetup simple and efficient, and ensuring a fixed location for each event, are key factors in building a successful community.

YakiHonne: What's the major approach? Is it more technical, or do you focus on non-technical aspects, or do you cover both?

Keypleb：Our approach includes both technical and non-technical content. Initially, our meetups were completely non-technical, just casual gatherings for people to socialize. Over time, however, we've evolved to incorporate more technical content. Keypleb：Out of the 31 monthly regular meetups we host, most of them have been non-technical, simply regular gatherings held at the same time and place according to our meetup guide. For example, we host the “Bitcoin for Beginners” meetup, which is designed for newcomers and takes place every second Friday of the month at 5 PM at the Bitcoin House Bali. This is entirely non-technical. Additionally, every Wednesday at Bitcoin House, we host the “My First Bitcoin” course. While the course touches on some technical aspects, such as seed phrases and backups, it’s still beginner-friendly and not too technical. The course runs for 10 weeks, and we plan to offer it in the local language at Bali University to help the local community better understand Bitcoin. Keypleb：On the other hand, we also offer highly technical content. We launched a new program called “Code Orange,” which is specifically designed for developers and programmers. We use the “Decoding Bitcoin” website, created by Jamal, which is a learning platform for developers. Many developer schools, like Code Orange, use this resource. Additionally, we host “Code Orange” meetups where we dive into the technical aspects of Bitcoin, such as how mining works and how to prevent single points of failure. Keypleb：We also organize technical workshops, such as “How to Defend Against a Five-Dollar Wrench Attack,” which is closely related to security. Recently, there have been some kidnapping incidents in Bali, and many people are concerned about their Bitcoin being stolen. To address this, we plan to hold a workshop on how to protect Bitcoin against such attacks. Additionally, we host hackathons and other high-tech events, and we just completed a very successful beginner-level hackathon. Keypleb：In summary, our community caters to everyone, from beginners to technical experts. For beginners, we offer easy-to-understand, non-technical content, while for experienced Bitcoiners, we provide in-depth technical material. YakiHonne: It's great to approach it in both ways, so everyone gets their own "piece of the cake."Now, I'd like to dive into the technical side. What advice would you give to technically inclined individuals or organizations looking to contribute to the Bitcoin ecosystem? How should they approach the technical aspects of Bitcoin if they want to get involved?

Keypleb：I have some additional advice. First, technical individuals can sign up for the “Decoding Bitcoin” course that starts on 18th March 2025 or join our “Code Orange” program and participate in the end-of-year hackathon. If they are technically proficient, this will be a great opportunity. “Decoding Bitcoin” is great for beginners, but it’s also useful for technical individuals. If someone is very skilled, they can start contributing code right away. If they find the course too easy, they can skip it and dive directly into more advanced projects. Additionally, Bitshala and Chaincode Labs offer advanced courses, which more technically advanced individuals can choose to pursue. Keypleb：Additionally, it's worth mentioning that the Bitcoin Dev Project has a great platform where technical individuals can find “Good First Issue” or open-source projects to start contributing code. You'll learn about the philosophy behind Bitcoin and why it's more meaningful than other “shitcoins.” Once you’ve taken enough “orange pills” (the philosophy and technology of Bitcoin), you can dive deeper into Bitcoin core development and potentially start coding in C++. If you're interested, you can join specific projects like Nostr, Fedimint or E-Cash.

YakiHonne: I’d like to move on to the next question: How do you see Bitcoin communities evolving as technology progresses, particularly in areas like scalability, privacy, and adaptability to other systems? Keypleb：I believe the Bitcoin community will continue to evolve, and it has already made incredible progress. Two and a half years ago, we started alone in Bali, with just ourselves. We began in the official phase and have had numerous conversations throughout the year. For example, we are now starting a Bitcoin club at a university in Bali; we just need to find a passionate, driven “Bitcoin maximalist,” and the Bitcoin club will begin. Like what our friends did in Banyuwangi, Indonesia, these clubs could eventually evolve into Bitcoin houses.

Keypleb：Regarding privacy and scalability, the community is making strides. We’re big fans of Fedi, which builds on top of the Fedimint protocol and uses e-cash to scale Bitcoin while improving privacy. Fedi low fees and high privacy potential give Bitcoin great opportunities in this area. Keypleb：As for Bitcoin's compatibility with fiat systems, although Bitcoin payments are illegal in some countries like Indonesia, smart developers across Southeast Asia are working on legal solutions. For example, there's a website called Pleb QR that works in Thailand, allowing you to pay in fiat via the Lightning Network. Koral is another app specifically for Indonesia. These kinds of testing products already exist and are physically possible, but we’re just waiting on regulations. My influential friends are actively lobbying the government for adoption. Keypleb：In summary, privacy, scalability, and compatibility with fiat systems are all works in progress, and they will continue to evolve positively. There will be more meetups, more wallet downloads, and more adoption—there’s no doubt about that.

YakiHonne: You mentioned the concept of cross-country issues, so I have one last question: How is the government’s stance on Bitcoin? Is the political climate supportive or against Bitcoin? How do you see the government's approach to Bitcoin in your community or environment?

Keypleb：This reminds me of a person, Jeff Booth, who once said, “We are them, the government is made up of us.” In Indonesia, many politicians actually support Bitcoin, and many of them mine Bitcoin themselves. When money is involved, the incentive is strong, and politicians naturally like to make more money. As a result, Indonesia has a large Bitcoin mining scene. However, overall, the Indonesian government is against Bitcoin, as seen in their ban on Bitcoin payments. The 2011 currency law states that any currency other than the Indonesian Rupiah (IDR) cannot be used, and violators can face up to one year in prison or a fine. This means you cannot pay with US dollars, lira, euros, pesos or pounds. Keypleb：This shows that the government’s legal system is somewhat fragile. It’s understandable that the government is concerned about disruptive technologies like Bitcoin, especially with such a fragile fiat system. Indonesia has also seen many arrests. In 2016, Bank Indonesia issued a letter announcing a crackdown on cryptocurrency payments. Those involved in paying in Bitcoin had their funds seized, and the police cooperated in shutting down businesses accepting Bitcoin payments in the cities. While this isn't very friendly, it does highlight the fragility of the existing system. We also believe that a new executive order may be introduced in the future, similar to when President Roosevelt in 1933 ordered Americans to hand over all their gold with his Executive Order 6102. If it happened before, it could happen again. Keypleb：Therefore, we predict that Bitcoin custody could become a legal issue, which is one of the reasons we blur the faces of participants at every meetup. We need to protect the community from any potential risks. But overall, we remain optimistic. Despite the government ban, the ideology of Bitcoin is unstoppable, and its spread cannot be stopped. So, we are very optimistic about the future.

YakiHonne: I think almost every government around the world, even in Africa, faces similar issues with Bitcoin. Some governments might want Bitcoin but hesitate to openly accept it due to the fear of it undermining the traditional financial system, which, of course, could eventually happen. But hopefully, as the new generation comes into power, we'll see more Bitcoin-friendly governments. So, thank you so much for sharing your insights and advice. I really appreciate your time and the valuable input you've provided.

Keypleb：I'm really glad this conversation enlightened me. I enjoyed it a lot, and it made me reflect on how much work we're doing and how valuable it is. There are a lot of problems out there, with censorship being the biggest one, followed by inflation, which is also a major issue depending on the region. But Bitcoin is open, the community is growing, and people are fighting against censorship and internet shutdowns in places like Indonesia and beyond. The movement is definitely growing. So, I'm very happy to be here and have this chat. Thanks again.

Bitcoin Indonesia nostr: nostr:npub1y4qd2zhtn05gnsaaq5xfejzfk4a32638tx6gpp9g8k6e42g9d66qaxhcr3

Keypleb nostr: nostr:npub190trvg63e6tyqlwlj6lccqpftx76lckj25c006vwx3dzvdl88yxs2nyqdx

@ 22050dd3:480c11ea

Education is foundational to growth and prosperity in a community.

It is not easy for people to engage with and interact with the foundational idea of a community when they do not understand it.

Unsurprisingly, BTC Isla is built around Bitcoin, which not many people understand.

However, on the tiny island of Isla Mujeres, that is changing one class at a time.

### Education Is Essential

At the center of each Bitcoin circular economy around the globe is the ethos that education is paramount to adoption and the overall success of the community.

This is no different with BTC Isla, where Isa teaches Bitcoin classes to the locals on the island.

During my recent stay on the island, I sat in on one of the classes to see what they are and how Isa is spearheading educating the locals.

The Class

Classes take place at the Mayakita restaurant on the southeast side of the island. They last about an hour.

Isa follows the Bitcoin Diploma curriculum created by Mi Primer Bitcoin and teaches the classes in Spanish. I don’t speak Spanish so I couldn’t exactly follow the lesson to a tee, but that wasn’t important as the enthusiasm from Isa and the students was palpable.

On this particular day, there were 4 students present who had attended the classes before, and one new student.

It was exciting and fun to see this timid teenager walk into the restaurant who hadn’t the slightest idea of what Bitcoin was. Isa welcomed her with open arms and threw her right into the thick of it.

She seemed to learn a lot and have her interest piqued and afterward told me that she enjoyed the class and would be returning.

Another student and member of the community has begun their Bitcoin journey, very exciting!

I understood the lesson (Isa’s activity with the markerboard helped!) to be primarily about inflation and the scarcity and divisibility properties of Bitcoin.

I always enjoy seeing how people react when they learn about inflation and how Bitcoin is different and why it is a solution.

### Paid To Attend Classes?

At the end of each class, something strange occurs: Isa pays the students sats for attending the class!

She surprised me before the lesson by telling me she does this, but her reason for doing it makes sense.

The locals on the island live a completely different life than ours in the United States. The concept of saving and putting away money for the sake of building savings doesn’t exist. When money plays a purely transactional role in life, the store-of-value characteristic isn’t important let alone thought about.

Paying the students to attend the classes does 2 things:

• It allows the students to begin to build savings in bitcoin as well as interact with and use their money and have real experience with the very thing they’re learning about
• It creates an additional incentive for the students to attend the classes

While yes, it is strange to monetarily incentivize people to attend a class, it makes sense when you realize that the locals need a reason to actually be interested in and learn about Bitcoin.

The normal interest and entry points to Bitcoin as an investment that we use in the United States and Europe aren’t applicable.

However, despite the students being paid to attend the classes, they all seemed genuinely interested in the lesson and learning about Bitcoin. They were all attentive to Isa, taking notes and staying engaged. They cared about the subject.

### Future Classes

Isa, myself, and a few others were discussing field-trip ideas for future classes, and in the future Isa will take the class to the streets of Isla Mujeres!

She will give the students sats with the implication that they need to spend them on goods at the bitcoin-accepting merchants downtown. By doing this, bitcoin injects itself into the economy and perhaps more importantly, the students get experience transacting with bitcoin in the real world!

Nostr: BTCIsla

Website: btcisla.xyz

@ 88b8f4a8:0b652722

Las motivaciones para configurar un segundo router pueden ser:

• Como repetidor wifi en una zona apartada de la casa donde no llega de habitual.
• Configurar el segundo router con VPN (probándolo, la configuración en el principal funciona pero aplicándola en un segundo router conectado al principal no usa la VPN, intentaré resolverlo).
• Usar el segundo para experimentación.
• Si se te ocurren más motivos coméntalos.

Para empezar, debes desactivar sus funciones de router (como DHCP y NAT) y configurarlo para que simplemente extienda la red de tu router principal. Aquí te explico cómo hacerlo paso a paso:

1. Conectar los Routers Físicamente

• Conecta un cable Ethernet desde un puerto LAN del router principal a un puerto LAN del router OpenWrt.
• No uses el puerto WAN del router OpenWrt, ya que no lo necesitarás en esta configuración.

2. Acceder al Router OpenWrt

• Conéctate al router OpenWrt mediante SSH o accede a la interfaz web (LuCI). En mi caso lo intenté por interfaz gráfica y no lo conseguí, así que continúo explicando solo mediante SSH.

3. Desactivar la Interfaz WAN

• Como no usarás la interfaz WAN, puedes desactivarla.
  • Edita el archivo /etc/config/network: vi /etc/config/network
• Comenta o elimina la sección de la interfaz WAN, comentar es añadir un # delante. Por ejemplo:

```

config interface 'wan'

option proto 'dhcp'

option ifname 'eth1'

```

4. Configurar la Interfaz LAN * Configura la interfaz LAN para que obtenga una dirección IP del router principal. * Edita el archivo /etc/config/network y modifica la sección de la interfaz LAN:

config interface 'lan' option proto 'static' option ifname 'br-lan' option ipaddr '192.168.1.2' # Dirección IP dentro del rango del router principal option netmask '255.255.255.0' option gateway '192.168.1.1' # IP del router principal option dns '1.1.1.1' # Servidores DNS

Asegúrate de que:

• ipaddr sea una dirección IP dentro del rango del router principal (por ejemplo, si el router principal usa 192.168.1.x, elige una IP como 192.168.1.2).
• gateway sea la IP del router principal (por ejemplo, 192.168.1.1).
• dns sean servidores DNS válidos (puedes usar los de Google: 8.8.8.8 y 8.8.4.4).

5. Desactivar el Servidor DHCP en OpenWrt

• Como el router principal ya proporciona direcciones IP, debes desactivar el servidor DHCP en OpenWrt.
  • Edita el archivo /etc/config/dhcp:

vi /etc/config/dhcp * Desactiva el servidor DHCP en la sección lan: * Con añadir al final "option ignore '1'" basta. No borres el resto de la sección.

config dhcp 'lan' option interface 'lan' option ignore '1' # Desactiva el servidor DHCP

6. Configurar el Firewall

Como el router OpenWrt actuará como un AP, no necesita funciones de firewall. * Edita el archivo /etc/config/firewall y desactiva las reglas de firewall:

config zone option name 'lan' option input 'ACCEPT' option output 'ACCEPT' option forward 'ACCEPT' option network 'lan'

7. Reiniciar el Router OpenWrt

Después de realizar los cambios, reinicia el router OpenWrt para aplicar la configuración:

reboot

8. Probar la Configuración

Conecta un dispositivo a la red LAN o Wi-Fi del router OpenWrt y verifica si tiene acceso a Internet. * Prueba la conectividad con:

ping 8.8.8.8

Espero que sirva de ayuda. Si tienes cualquier problema descríbemelo para aprender juntos.

@ 878dff7c:037d18bc

Wall Street Decline Signals Potential Recession Risks

### Summary:

Wall Street experienced significant losses, with the Nasdaq recording its largest fall since 2022, heightening concerns about a potential recession. This downturn is expected to impact global markets, including Australia's ASX, which is poised to open lower. Economists attribute the market volatility to escalating trade tensions and uncertainty surrounding US economic policies.

Sources: ABC News - March 11, 2025, Financial Review - March 11, 2025

China's DeepSeek R1 AI Model Signals New Space Race

Summary:

China's launch of the DeepSeek R1 AI model underscores a new phase in the space race, highlighting advancements in artificial intelligence and space exploration. This development reflects China's strategic investments in AI and space technologies, including satellite systems and Mars missions. The West is urged to respond with increased investments and strategic partnerships to maintain technological leadership and national security.

Sources: New York Post - 11th March 2025

Australia's Urgent Need to Scale Up in Technology

Summary:

Daniel Petre, a leading Australian tech innovator, emphasizes the critical need for Australia to scale up in technology to avoid being left behind. He highlights that advancements in AI, climate tech, and biotech will drive the next decade of innovation. Petre stresses the importance of investing in research and development, fostering a conducive environment for innovation, and ensuring inclusive growth to maintain a high GDP and stable society.

Sources: The Australian - 11th March 2025

Political Controversy Over Fabricated Terror Plot

Summary:

A controversy erupted over a suspected terror plot involving an explosive-laden caravan found in Dural, NSW, initially described as a potential "mass casualty event" by NSW Premier Chris Minns. Authorities later revealed the plot was fabricated by criminals to create fear and benefit personally. The Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, and senior government officials were reportedly not informed for ten days, leading to criticism from opposition leader Peter Dutton. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke claimed Dutton had been misled by organized crime figures. Investigations revealed no real threat, but the discovery had a negative impact on the Jewish community, highlighting issues of anti-Semitism. Despite arrests, those directly involved in the fabricated plot remain at large.

Sources: News.com.au - March 11, 2025, The Guardian - March 11, 2025

Senator Lambie Calls for Expulsion of US Military Personnel

Summary:

Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie appeared on Channel 9's Today show, making a bold demand for Australia to threaten shutting down the Pine Gap military base and expel US spies and marines. This was in response to the US planning to impose hefty tariffs on Australian exports and due to perceived disloyalty exemplified by the US president’s handling of Ukraine. Lambie emphasized that Pine Gap, a key asset for US intelligence and missile defense, is critical for America’s security and its potential closure could serve as a powerful negotiating tool. She also expressed concerns about President Trump's commitment to US-Australia security alliances and urged Australian independence in defense strategies. Pine Gap, established in the 1960s, plays a significant role in global surveillance and military operations, and its potential closure could impact the US’s intelligence capabilities significantly. The situation underlines growing tensions and the importance of reassessing national security and international relations.

Sources: News.com.au - March 11, 2025

Emergency Services Respond to Hundreds of Incidents

Summary:

Emergency services have been actively responding to numerous incidents related to the severe weather. Over the weekend, approximately 500 events were reported, including fallen trees and flooding. The community's preparedness has aided response efforts, but authorities continue to urge residents to remain vigilant, adhere to warnings, and avoid driving through floodwaters.

Sources: Courier Mail - March 10, 2025

Superannuation Access for Home Purchases Divides Major Parties

Summary:

The policy on using superannuation for home purchases is a significant point of contention between Australia's major political parties. The Australian Labor Party (ALP) is firmly against early super access for home buying, whereas the Coalition supports allowing super savers to withdraw up to $50,000 for this purpose. While surveys indicate a slight majority in favor, critics argue the policy might increase house prices and debt levels, citing New Zealand's similar program, which hasn't significantly improved affordability and may have unintended negative effects. Home affordability remains a critical issue, with current figures showing the highest difficulty in purchasing a first home since 1996.

Sources: The Australian - March 11, 2025

Russia Warns Australia Against Deploying Peacekeeping Troops to Ukraine

Summary:

Russia has issued stern warnings to Australia regarding potential deployment of peacekeeping troops to Ukraine. The Russian embassy in Canberra labeled such plans as "unacceptable," cautioning that it could lead to "grave consequences" and urging Australia to "avoid trouble." Despite these warnings, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong emphasized Australia's commitment to supporting Ukraine and stated that any request for a peacekeeping mission would be considered. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese expressed openness to joining a peacekeeping coalition, contingent upon a formal request. Opinions within Australia vary, with some opposition figures opposing troop deployment, while the government continues to support Ukraine through various means, including military assistance and potential peacekeeping missions under the UN.

Sources: News.com.au - 11 March 2025, The Guardian - 11 March 2025

Malcolm Turnbull Criticizes Trump's Tariff Threats Amid Rising Tensions

Summary:

Former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has criticized US President Donald Trump, accusing him of extortion and bullying, which may affect Australia's chances of securing a tariff exemption. Turnbull argued that conceding to Trump's behavior would lead to more bullying and that Trump's actions are aiding adversaries like China by alienating US allies. Trump responded by labeling Turnbull a weak and ineffective leader. Despite the tension, Australia's Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles continues to advocate for a tariff exemption, emphasizing the mutual benefits of free trade with the US.

Sources: The Guardian - 11 March 2025, News.com.au - 11 March 2025

COVID-19 Continues to Impact Australia's Mortality Rates

Summary:

Nearly five years after the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic, new research by the Burnet Institute reveals that the virus continues to affect Australia's mortality rates. The study estimates an excess mortality of 31,000 deaths between January 2020 and November 2024, attributed to undiagnosed cases and long-term health effects. Currently, approximately 20 more Australians die each day from COVID-19 compared to pre-pandemic times. The report emphasizes the need for more research into long COVID and improved global disease prevention infrastructure. Australia's initiative to establish a permanent Centre for Disease Control underscores the importance of preventive health measures. The ongoing effects of COVID-19 highlight the necessity for enhanced response and preparedness for future pandemics.

Sources: The Australian - March 11, 2025

Financial Support Announced for Workers Affected by Cyclone Alfred

Summary:

The Australian government has introduced financial assistance for workers impacted by ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred. Eligible individuals who lost income due to the cyclone can access up to 13 weeks of support, aligning with the JobSeeker unemployment benefits scheme at A$778 per fortnight. Additionally, a one-time A$1,000 disaster payment has been declared to aid recovery efforts.

Sources: Reuters - 11 March 2025

@ dd664d5e:5633d319

Yeah, so... nah.

People keep trying to explain to me, that women will be better-off, if they become more dangerous. While I can see the inevitableness of women living in remote rural areas learning to shoot with a rifle, and similar, I'm generally against arming women with killing machines.

This is not because I'm averse to the idea of using violence to solve problems (albeit after exhausting better options), or because I don't like guns, or am unfamiliar with them. It's also not because I don't know I would look totally, mind-numbingly hot holding something long and spearlike, while dressed in camo and wearing a T-Shirt that appears to have shrunk in the wash.

It's a more fundamental set of problems, that irks me.

Bazooka Barbie

American gun manufacturers saturated the public and private male market so thoroughly, that they eventually turned to marketing firearms to women.

Men are scary and bad. There is Stranger Danger. We can't just make the neighborhood less dangerous because erm... reasons. Stay safe with a cute gun.

It has gone along with the predictable hypersexualization of the conservative feminine ideal. Since guns are considered aggressive, women with guns are perceived as more sexually available. Guns (and tanks, bombs, bows, etc.) make women "equal", "independent", "feisty", "hot", "freaky", "calculating", "empowered", etc.

Sorta slutty, basically.

This Gun Girl is not like the helpless, hapless, harmless homemaker ideal, of yesteryear. A woman who was dependent, chaste, gentle, wise... and in need of protection. A woman who saw the men around her as people she could rely on for providing her with a safe environment. That woman is au revoir. Now, sistas are doing it for themselves. 💪🏻

The New Martial Missy needs a man, like a fish needs a bicycle... but make it country.

Yeah, it's marketing, but it sure has set the tone, and millions of men have been trained to prefer women who market themselves in this manner. Hard, mean, lean women. That will not remain without wider societal consequences.

You know, I liked that homemaker. I miss her. She's literally me.

Those arms are for cuddling babies, not holding rocket launchers.

Now, that we've all become accustomed to imagery of women holding firearms, it wasn't much of a leap to condition us all to the sight of women in frontline police, guard, or military positions.

Instead of war being a terrible, highly-lethal, territorial fight amongst men, it's now cute, hip, trendy and fun. It's a big party, and women are finally allowed to join in.

Now, women have finally jettisoned the terrible burden of being society's life-bearers and caretakers, and we're just more potential enemy combatants. We know it's okay to punch women, shoot women, etc. since we've been watching it happen on screens, for decades. Women are now often assumed to be fighters, not lovers. Cavalry, not mothers.

Girls on top

Not only does this undermine any female role -- and put female civilians under a cloud of suspicion -- it also reduces mens' claim to be paramount in governance. Why should a man be the Commander in Chief, if women are on the battlefield?

In fact, why should men be in charge of anything, anywhere? Look at them. There they are. Hiding at home. Cowering in their kitchens, wringing their hands and fretting, while courageous, dangerous women protect them from dangers foreign and domestic. Women are the better men, really.

Is this really where we want to go?

The final bitterness

But one thing I find most disturbing is something more personal. The ubiquitous nature of firearms in American homes has made domestic violence increasingly deadly. Adding more guns, for the female residents, often serves to make such violence even more deadly for women.

It turns out, that women are usually reluctant to shoot people they know; even more than men. Women without this inhibition are prone to sharing their home with men missing the same trait. And, now, they have more guns.

@ 7ed7d5c3:6927e200

Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?  Thou art more lovely and more temperate; Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,  And summer’s lease hath all too short a date;

Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,

 And often is his gold complexion dimm’d;

And every fair from fair sometime declines,

 By chance or nature’s changing course untrimm’d;

``` But thy eternal summer shall not fade Nor lose possession of that fair thou owest; Nor shall Death brag thou wander’st in his shade, When in eternal lines to time thou growest;

So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, So long lives this and this gives life to thee. ```

@ daa41bed:88f54153

There has been a good bit of discussion on Nostr over the past few days about the merits of zaps as a method of engaging with notes, so after writing a rather lengthy article on the pros of a strategic Bitcoin reserve, I wanted to take some time to chime in on the much more fun topic of digital engagement.

Let's begin by defining a couple of things:

Nostr is a decentralized, censorship-resistance protocol whose current biggest use case is social media (think Twitter/X). Instead of relying on company servers, it relies on relays that anyone can spin up and own their own content. Its use cases are much bigger, though, and this article is hosted on my own relay, using my own Nostr relay as an example.

Zap is a tip or donation denominated in sats (small units of Bitcoin) sent from one user to another. This is generally done directly over the Lightning Network but is increasingly using Cashu tokens. For the sake of this discussion, how you transmit/receive zaps will be irrelevant, so don't worry if you don't know what Lightning or Cashu are.

If we look at how users engage with posts and follows/followers on platforms like Twitter, Facebook, etc., it becomes evident that traditional social media thrives on engagement farming. The more outrageous a post, the more likely it will get a reaction. We see a version of this on more visual social platforms like YouTube and TikTok that use carefully crafted thumbnail images to grab the user's attention to click the video. If you'd like to dive deep into the psychology and science behind social media engagement, let me know, and I'd be happy to follow up with another article.

In this user engagement model, a user is given the option to comment or like the original post, or share it among their followers to increase its signal. They receive no value from engaging with the content aside from the dopamine hit of the original experience or having their comment liked back by whatever influencer they provide value to. Ad revenue flows to the content creator. Clout flows to the content creator. Sales revenue from merch and content placement flows to the content creator. We call this a linear economy -- the idea that resources get created, used up, then thrown away. Users create content and farm as much engagement as possible, then the content is forgotten within a few hours as they move on to the next piece of content to be farmed.

What if there were a simple way to give value back to those who engage with your content? By implementing some value-for-value model -- a circular economy. Enter zaps.

Unlike traditional social media platforms, Nostr does not actively use algorithms to determine what content is popular, nor does it push content created for active user engagement to the top of a user's timeline. Yes, there are "trending" and "most zapped" timelines that users can choose to use as their default, but these use relatively straightforward engagement metrics to rank posts for these timelines.

That is not to say that we may not see clients actively seeking to refine timeline algorithms for specific metrics. Still, the beauty of having an open protocol with media that is controlled solely by its users is that users who begin to see their timeline gamed towards specific algorithms can choose to move to another client, and for those who are more tech-savvy, they can opt to run their own relays or create their own clients with personalized algorithms and web of trust scoring systems.

Zaps enable the means to create a new type of social media economy in which creators can earn for creating content and users can earn by actively engaging with it. Like and reposting content is relatively frictionless and costs nothing but a simple button tap. Zaps provide active engagement because they signal to your followers and those of the content creator that this post has genuine value, quite literally in the form of money—sats.

I have seen some comments on Nostr claiming that removing likes and reactions is for wealthy people who can afford to send zaps and that the majority of people in the US and around the world do not have the time or money to zap because they have better things to spend their money like feeding their families and paying their bills. While at face value, these may seem like valid arguments, they, unfortunately, represent the brainwashed, defeatist attitude that our current economic (and, by extension, social media) systems aim to instill in all of us to continue extracting value from our lives.

Imagine now, if those people dedicating their own time (time = money) to mine pity points on social media would instead spend that time with genuine value creation by posting content that is meaningful to cultural discussions. Imagine if, instead of complaining that their posts get no zaps and going on a tirade about how much of a victim they are, they would empower themselves to take control of their content and give value back to the world; where would that leave us? How much value could be created on a nascent platform such as Nostr, and how quickly could it overtake other platforms?

Other users argue about user experience and that additional friction (i.e., zaps) leads to lower engagement, as proven by decades of studies on user interaction. While the added friction may turn some users away, does that necessarily provide less value? I argue quite the opposite. You haven't made a few sats from zaps with your content? Can't afford to send some sats to a wallet for zapping? How about using the most excellent available resource and spending 10 seconds of your time to leave a comment? Likes and reactions are valueless transactions. Social media's real value derives from providing monetary compensation and actively engaging in a conversation with posts you find interesting or thought-provoking. Remember when humans thrived on conversation and discussion for entertainment instead of simply being an onlooker of someone else's life?

If you've made it this far, my only request is this: try only zapping and commenting as a method of engagement for two weeks. Sure, you may end up liking a post here and there, but be more mindful of how you interact with the world and break yourself from blind instinct. You'll thank me later.

@ 2b1964b8:851949fa

Routine Picture-in-Picture American Sign Language Interpretation in American Broadcasting

(PiP, ASL)

Picture-in-picture sign language interpretation is a standard feature in news broadcasts across the globe. Why hasn’t America become a leader in picture-in-picture implementation too?

Misconception.

There are prevalent misunderstandings about the necessity of ASL interpreters in the media and beyond. As recently as January 2025, an American influencer with ~10M social followers on Instagram and X combined, referred to sign language interpreters during emergency briefings as a distraction.

Such views overlook the fact that, for many deaf individuals, American Sign Language is their primary language. It is wrongly assumed that deaf Americans know—or should know—English. American Sign Language differs in grammatical structure from English. Moreover, human interpreters are able to convey nuances that captions often miss, such as non-manual markers; facial expressions, body movements, head positions utilized in sign language to convey meaning. English is the native language for many hearing Americans, who have access to it throughout the United States without any additional expectation placed upon them.

A deeper understanding reveals that many nations have their own unique signed languages, reflecting their local deaf culture and community — Brazilian Sign Language, British Sign Language, Finnish Sign Language, French Sign Language, Japanese Sign Language, Mexican Sign Language, Nigerian Sign Language, and South African Sign Language, among numerous others.

Bottom Line: American Sign Language is the native language for many American-born deaf individuals, and English is the native language for many American-born hearing individuals. It is a one-for-one relationship; both are equal.

In an era where information dissemination is instantaneous, ensuring that mainstream broadcasts are accessible to all citizens is paramount.

Public Figures Including Language Access In Their Riders

What's a rider? A rider is an addendum or supplemental clause added to a contract that expands or adjusts the contract's terms. Riders are commonly used in agreements for public figures to specify additional requirements such as personal preferences or technical needs.

A Simple Yet Powerful Action

Public figures have a unique ability to shape industry standards, and by including language access in their riders, they can make a profound impact with minimal effort. * On-site American Sign Language interpretation ensures that deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals can fully engage with speeches and live events. * Open captions (burned-in captions) for all live and post-production interview segments guarantee accessibility across platforms, making spoken content instantly available to a wider audience. These implements don’t just benefit deaf constitutents—they also support language learners, individuals in sound-sensitive environments and any person who relies on, or simply refers, visual reinforcement to engage with spoken content.

For public figures, adding these 2 requests to a rider is one of the most efficient and immediate ways to promote accessibility. By normalizing language access as a standard expectation, you encourage event organizers, broadcasters, and production teams to adopt these practices universally.

As a result, there will be an industry shift from accessibility as an occasional accommodation to an industry norm, ensuring that future events, interviews, and media content are more accessible for all. Beyond immediate accessibility, the regular presence of interpreters in public spaces increases awareness of sign language. Seeing interpreters in mainstream media can spark interest among both deaf and hearing children to pursue careers in interpretation, expanding future language access and representation.

Year-Round Commitment to Accessibility

Too often, language access is only considered when an immediate demand arises, which leads to rushed or inadequate solutions. While some events may include interpretation or captioning, these efforts can fall short when they lack the expertise and coordination necessary for true disability justice. Thoughtful, proactive planning ensures that language access is seamlessly integrated into events, rather than being a reactive measure.

Best practices happen when all key players are involved from the start: * Accessibility leads with combined production and linguistic knowledge who can ensure accessibility remains central to the purpose rather than allowing themselves to be caught up in the spectacle of an event. * Language experts who ensure accuracy and cultural competency.
* Production professionals who understand event logistics.

By prioritizing accessibility year-round, organizations create spaces where disability justice is not just accommodated, but expected—ensuring that every audience member, regardless of language needs, has access to information and engagement.

@ 6316050a:a5e43cbe

Asi como en Abril 2024 comenzamos a escribir sobre bitcoin porque se acercaba un momento histórico, hoy dan ganas de inscribir este, porque parece otro momento histórico y con importante incidencia en el valor de BTC y en su propuesta de valor futuro. En abril, si se acuerdan, se producía un nuevo halving de Bitcoin, lo que implicó que la emisión diaria de las monedas pasaba de 900 BTC por día a 450. Esto implicaba que la generación ("minado") anual de BTC, pasaría a ser menor que la del oro desde ese momento. El oro minado en la actualidad produce un aumento anual de su stock de entre 1.5% y 3% y bitcoin tiene en la actualidad un aumento anual de su cantidad del 0.84%. Si lo pensamos como una moneda, ese 20 de Abril se convirtió en la moneda más fuerte del planeta, en lo que respecta a tasa de emisión anual.

¿Y qué pasó ahora?

Entre ayer y hoy Trump emitió un decreto para generar una Reserva Soberana de Bitcoin en el tesoro de USA. En principio esto no es un disparador importante para su precio en el corto plazo (de hecho hoy bajó) porque está reserva está conformada en principio por los bitcoins que Estados Unidos ya tiene en su poder, obtenidos de incautaciones en causas judiciales. Sólo dice que no venderá esos bitcoin, que es una cantidad significativa (200000 BTC o 17.6 billions USD) pero no particularmente grande. Lo que sí me parece importante es que el estado más poderoso del mundo, establece a bitcoin como una forma de oro digital, lo suma a sus reservas y lo valida mundialmente.

¿Qué implicancias podría tener esto?

A mediano plazo, que van hacer los bancos centrales de los demás paises? Hasta ahora, me consta que los fondos soberanos de Suiza y Noruega, compraron bitcoin para su cartera de tenencias. El Salvador compra bitcoin de manera ad-hoc y ahora tiene una controversia con el FMI, que no quiere que lo haga. Y el reino de Butham mina bitcoin con excedentes de energía hidroeléctrica y lo incorpora también a sus reservas. Pero ahora que lo hace USA, ¿Qué pasará con la adopción de los demás paises? ¿Que harán Japón, Europa y los BRICS, con los bitcoins incautados? Esto puede implicar el comienzo de la adopción de bitcoin por parte de los estados Nación. Puede marcar el comienzo de la disputa real entre bitcoin y oro como reservas de valor.

@ fd78c37f:a0ec0833

In this edition, we invited Bam from Bitcoin Barqnet to share his journey with Bitcoin and its impact in the Middle East. He also discussed the growth of the Barqnet community and introduced his modular wallet, Cypherbox.

YakiHonne: Bam, thank you for joining today's conversation. Before we begin, let me briefly introduce YakiHonne. YakiHonne is a decentralized media client built on Nostr—a protocol designed to empower freedom of speech through technology. It enables creators to own their voices and assets while offering innovative tools like smart widgets, verified notes, and support for long-form content. With YakiHonne, individuals can express themselves freely, without the fear of censorship, bans, or restrictions. So before starting the interview, I’d like to learn a little more about you and your community, Bam. Can you tell us more about yourself and what you do?

Bam：My name is Basim, and my nickname is Bam. I became somewhat well-known in the Middle East for releasing some Bitcoin courses. I'm an old player in Bitcoin, having gotten involved in 2014. Back then, I realized that Bitcoin was something big, but I didn’t have much Bitcoin because I didn’t have the money to buy it. Instead of investing money in Bitcoin, I invested my time in understanding it and researching it. Bam：After graduating in 2016-17, I decided to dedicate my entire career to Bitcoin while I was in Istanbul. Of course, Bitcoin was the core focus, but there were also many altcoins, and I became interested in those areas as well. I love this space because it's very libertarian, and I myself am a person with libertarian values. Bam：I currently publish tutorial videos on YouTube, primarily aimed at Arabic-speaking audiences in the Middle East, to teach them about Bitcoin economics, technology, and how to use Bitcoin. They have very little knowledge about these topics. I’ve covered many subjects, including wallet operations, mining, using the Lightning Network, and even non-custodial liquidity management. We’ve produced over 200 videos so far. I’ve realized that there are many issues with Bitcoin-related applications, so I’ve decided to develop my own Bitcoin app called Cypherbox.

YakiHonne: That's really impressive. You're a content creator in the Bitcoin ecosystem, explaining Bitcoin on YouTube and spreading the Bitcoin ideology. And you're developing your own Lightning app specifically for the Middle East. You're doing a lot of meaningful work.

Bam：Unfortunately, I didn't buy more Bitcoins in 2014. I used to own some, but I invested all of my Bitcoin into my channel because I strongly believe in the importance of education. I believe that global international currency is more important than mere wealth. I've tried to ensure that my project is neither charity nor purely commercial. I am now creating an Arabic academy, selling some courses or applications I develop, and trying to commercialize them. Overall, my project is somewhere between open source and commercialization, and I hope to support my life through these means.

YakiHonne: That's really great, Bam. I really admire how much you value education and enlightening others. So now, let's move on to the first question. Bam, I think you've already touched on part of the answer. But I'd like to ask again, this time in more detail: What truly sparked your interest in Bitcoin? What motivated you to build or form a community around it?

Bam：I used Bitcoin very early on, and I understood right away when I looked at its wallets that it wasn’t a company. I had some experience with decentralized networks, like Tor and Torrent, and I knew this was open-source. Open-source projects are really attractive to me as an engineer. The more I studied Bitcoin, the more fascinated I became with it. I love its decentralized nature. Bam：I studied complex systems, energy engineering, and systems like aeronautics and marine engineering, and I found Bitcoin to be the most sophisticated energy system I’ve ever studied. It’s just fascinating on a technical level, especially the cryptography aspect. What’s so amazing about Bitcoin’s security is that it doesn’t rely on firewalls or central authority; it’s actually the opposite, as Andreas Antonopoulos often explains. Bam：Bitcoin's security comes from its openness. The whole thing—its censorship resistance, the privacy, the community around it—just captivated me. The fact that Satoshi created the greatest monetary network ever, but never moved any coins or had any control after 2009, and gave it away to the community, for everyone in the world, is just an incredible story. There’s so much about Bitcoin that I can’t even begin to explain how deeply I’m attached to it. Bam：What I want to say is that Bitcoin has significantly helped with the issues my country faces because I am from Syria. We have been locked out of the financial system by OFAC policies, which were perhaps seen as justified due to sanctions. Syria has been under financial sanctions, but the problem is that these sanctions weren't just imposed on the Syrian government; they were imposed on the entire Syrian population. Even though the current president Assad is no longer in power, these sanctions still persist. These financial sanctions have caused great suffering for the Syrian people. Syrians are unable to engage in e-commerce or trade with the outside world. This system, which locks people into such a closed financial environment, is a huge issue. Bam：Bitcoin provides an alternative. Bitcoin has not closed its doors to Syrians, and we can still use Bitcoin in Syria. People in Syria use Bitcoin without fear of censorship from any part of the world. No government can lock Syrians out of the Bitcoin network, and Bitcoin transactions can be settled in real time in Syria, regardless of whether any government approves or not.

YakiHonne: Can you tell me how you have been able to attract members so far and what challenges have you faced when you started earlier on?

Bam：We started on Clubhouse, just a bunch of random Bitcoiners talking about Bitcoin, and around 2020 and 2021, the Lightning Network started to become more usable. We saw some interesting Lightning apps, and when I learned about it, I immediately realized that this was the future of the internet of money. I was heavily involved in Ethereum at the time, writing smart contracts, but once I took Lightning seriously, I knew it was the future of digital money. Bam：We started discussing Lightning on Clubhouse during COVID, focusing on Lightning wallets. We asked ourselves, "How can we bring this technology to the Middle East?" Around that time, I also wanted to get more involved in Bitcoin education, so I began putting out more content. A friend of mine created a Telegram group called Barqnet, and we invited everyone from Clubhouse to join. I started sharing more Bitcoin content and promoting the group, saying, "Hey, if you want to get real education about Bitcoin—beyond videos and courses—come join this group and let's build this community together. Bam：We did this for about six months, and the group attracted a lot of people. But my initial goal wasn’t just to attract regular people; it was to attract technical engineers and build a network of engineers who could not only listen to my explanations but also help me better understand Bitcoin and the challenges they face when interacting with Bitcoin and building the Bitcoin banking infrastructure in the Middle East. As a result, we attracted many highly skilled people. Now the group has about 1,000 members, all of whom are highly technical. Bam：We also created a technical support space for regular Bitcoin users. Anyone in the Middle East facing issues with wallets, buying Bitcoin, mining, or any other Bitcoin-related problems can come to us for help. This is a completely voluntary online initiative, and now many people know that if they have technical questions, no matter how complex, they can come to Barqnet and get answers.

YakiHonne: That's really amazing. It seems like you guys are covering both the technical and non-technical aspects of Bitcoin, which is truly remarkable. It's not so common to find a community that manages to engage both sides. But Barqnet, as the Arabic Bitcoin community, seems to have successfully blended both, working with both technical and non-technical people. The work you're doing is really impressive—it's an outstanding job.

Bam：I really enjoy seeing the growth of Bitcoin, and I've already started telling people how their lives have changed. In 2024, many people have messaged us in the group, saying, "Thank you so much, you really changed our lives." It's not just people from poor areas, even in wealthy regions like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, people are telling us, "I started a Bitcoin business, I started mining, I started investing, and now I’ve made some money, my value has gone up because of you guys. I didn't sell, I kept my Bitcoin in cold storage." So, everyone is thanking us. Bam：This means much more to us than any financial gain. We didn’t make a lot of money from these initiatives—sure, we earned some, but not much. And it hasn’t changed our lives. If I had spent my time as an engineer focusing on corporate projects, I would probably make a lot more money. I live in Europe now, and my life is pretty good. But helping people understand Bitcoin and onboard into the Bitcoin world means so much more to me than money. YakiHonne: So, moving on to the next question. How do you see the role of Bitcoin communities evolving as technology matures, particularly in areas like scalability, privacy, and adaptability with other systems? So, how do you see the Bitcoin community evolving with time? Bam：I actually have a lot of different views on how Bitcoin is being taught and developed, especially in terms of scalability. Many people in the West are focused on highly technical developments that do promote individual sovereignty, self-custody, and privacy protection. However, these don't help people who don’t understand the technology, and they make it really difficult for them to use Bitcoin. For example, when I see people recommending non-custodial Lightning wallets, I don’t think this is a good option for everyone, especially in the Global South. For people who don’t understand the technology and just want to use Bitcoin simply, these wallets are way too complicated. Bam：This is why I developed my own app. It's not just a wallet for the Middle East; it's an international wallet that anyone can download. It's open-source and aims to provide a modular Bitcoin experience. The Bitcoin app I envision would contain all the necessary tools, whether it's a custodial service, an exchange, or a simple Lightning custodian service for people who just want to quickly send and receive Bitcoin without dealing with complexity. Bam：A Bitcoin Lightning custodian makes perfect sense if it's reliable. In addition to that, you’d also have your hot wallet, which you can use to withdraw your funds when ready, and move them into self-custody with a simple hot wallet like Blue Wallet. Cold storage should not be the first step for everyone. People often say it's expensive, and that you need to buy hardware wallets, but it’s more of a progression. Start with the basics, and over time, you’ll learn. Bam：Inside the app, users should have access to all the tools for self-custody, including non-custodial Lightning, hot storage, cold storage, federated chains, e-cash systems, and side chains, if applicable. The app would allow users to personalize their experience—choosing what they want based on their technical knowledge, the amount of Bitcoin they want to secure, their privacy preferences, and the fees they’re willing to pay. I imagine the future of Bitcoin will be modular, and every user will be able to customize their experience according to their needs and preferences.

YakiHonne: I really appreciate the key points and important aspects of Bitcoin scalability that you mentioned. They're truly crucial, and it's essential for people to understand Bitcoin better rather than misinterpret it. The importance of Bitcoin in these other areas shouldn't be overlooked, and people should embrace it as part of the future, not reject it. Now, we're at the last question. Is the government around you for or against Bitcoin? And how has that affected the community?

Bam：I live in France, and the government is generally neutral when it comes to privacy tech. I’ve lived in Turkey, the UAE, Brazil, the EU, and the Netherlands, so I don’t consider myself Syrian. I prefer to think of myself as a citizen of Earth. When it comes to governments, I pay attention to policies and regulations in all countries. I look at examples like El Salvador, and I also follow the current situation in Syria. Right now, we’re working to push for a policy that recognizes Bitcoin rather than implementing strict regulations. We’re trying to get the government to draft laws that are more friendly to Bitcoin. Although the central bank is confused about Bitcoin, they’re not completely opposed to it. We’ve proposed a way to manage the market that doesn’t restrict people’s freedom but also helps regulators deal with companies and Bitcoin projects. We’re seeing very positive reactions, and I believe Syria will become the place that opens Bitcoin to the entire Middle East region, thanks to the voluntary initiatives we’ve initiated.

YakiHonne: That was really a fantastic answer, thank you so much, Bam. With that, we’ve come to the end of today’s interview. It’s truly an honor and privilege to have had this conversation with you. I’ve really enjoyed the entire discussion, from start to finish, and I’ve learned a lot from everything we’ve talked about. I really appreciate your passion for Bitcoin and your dedication to pushing for education. We love the work you’re doing. Although we haven’t used your app yet, we believe it’s going to be amazing.Thank you so much again.

@ b83a28b7:35919450

Preamble

I used OpenAI's o3-mini reasoning engine to construct a thesis for the Russia-Ukraine conflict using the positions of Jeffery Sachs and John Mearsheimer. I then asked it to create a counterargument to those positions- the antithesis. And I finally asked for a synthesis that concludes in lasting peace in the region. In all three cases, I prompted it to only use axiomatic deductive reasoning and first principles thinking, emphasizing facts and ignoring the opinions and assertions of so-called experts.

The Thesis

John Mearsheimer's Position: A Realist Perspective

First Principles

1. States prioritize survival: In an anarchic international system (no overarching authority), states act to maximize security and minimize threats.
2. Great powers seek regional hegemony: States aim to dominate their immediate regions to prevent rival powers from threatening them.
3. Proximity amplifies threat perception: The closer a rival power or alliance is to a state's borders, the greater the perceived threat.

Logical Reasoning

1. NATO's eastward expansion brings a U.S.-led military alliance closer to Russia’s borders.
2. From the principle of proximity, this increases Russia’s perceived insecurity.
3. Ukraine’s potential NATO membership represents a direct challenge to Russia’s sphere of influence.
4. A great power like Russia would logically act to prevent this encroachment, as it undermines its regional dominance.
5. Russia’s actions (e.g., annexation of Crimea in 2014 and invasion in 2022) are defensive responses to NATO's perceived encroachment.
6. From the principle of survival, Russia seeks to neutralize threats by ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO.
7. The U.S. and NATO ignored Russia’s stated red lines (e.g., no NATO membership for Ukraine).
8. This provoked predictable countermeasures from Russia, consistent with great-power behavior.

Conclusion

From a realist perspective, NATO expansion is the root cause of the conflict. Russia’s actions are not imperialistic but defensive responses to protect its security and sphere of influence.

Jeffrey Sachs' Position: A Historical and Diplomatic Perspective

First Principles

1. Agreements create expectations: Commitments between states establish norms that guide future behavior.
2. Security is interdependent: One state’s pursuit of security can increase another state’s insecurity (the "security dilemma").
3. Conflicts are preventable through diplomacy: Negotiations and compromises can avert wars by addressing mutual concerns.

Logical Reasoning

1. In 1990, U.S. officials assured Soviet leaders that NATO would not expand eastward if Germany was reunified.
2. If such assurances were made (even informally), subsequent NATO expansion violated these expectations, fostering mistrust.
3. The U.S.'s unilateral withdrawal from treaties like the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (2002) and its push for NATO enlargement exacerbated Russia's insecurity.
4. By the principle of interdependent security, these actions predictably escalated tensions with Russia.
5. Putin proposed negotiations in 2021 to prevent NATO expansion into Ukraine, but these were rejected by the U.S.
6. Diplomacy could have addressed Russian concerns without war, but its rejection left military action as Russia’s only perceived option.
7. Ukraine’s neutrality could have prevented conflict by satisfying both Russian and Western security concerns.
8. Neutrality would reduce NATO's proximity to Russia while preserving Ukraine's sovereignty.

Conclusion

From Sachs’ perspective, the war is a consequence of U.S.-led NATO expansion and missed diplomatic opportunities. A negotiated settlement based on Ukrainian neutrality remains the logical path to peace.

Deductive Insights

1. Both positions agree that NATO expansion is central to understanding the conflict but differ in emphasis:
2. Mearsheimer focuses on structural inevitabilities in great-power politics.
3. Sachs highlights historical commitments and missed opportunities for diplomacy.
4. Both rely on axioms about state behavior:
5. Mearsheimer emphasizes security maximization through power balancing.
6. Sachs underscores trust-building through adherence to agreements.

In conclusion, reasoning from first principles supports both scholars’ views as internally consistent frameworks for explaining the Ukraine conflict, though they emphasize different aspects of state behavior and international relations logic.

To construct counterarguments to the positions of John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs using axiomatic deductive reasoning, we will start with alternative first principles and challenge their logical conclusions. This approach ensures that the counterarguments are rooted in logic and facts, without relying on external opinions or assertions.

Counterarguments to John Mearsheimer's Position

First Principles for the Counterargument

1. Sovereign states have the right to self-determination: All states, regardless of size, have the right to choose their alliances and political alignments.
2. Security is not zero-sum: One state’s pursuit of security does not always come at the expense of another’s; collective security arrangements can enhance stability.
3. Aggression undermines security: A state that invades its neighbors creates insecurity for itself by provoking opposition and strengthening rival alliances.

Logical Reasoning

1. NATO expansion was voluntary and driven by the sovereign decisions of Eastern European states seeking protection from historical Russian aggression.
2. From the principle of self-determination, NATO enlargement reflects the legitimate choices of countries like Poland, Estonia, and Ukraine to align with a defensive alliance, not an act of Western aggression against Russia.
3. Russia’s perception of NATO as a threat is not inherently justified.
4. NATO is a defensive alliance with no history of invading non-member states. From the principle that security is not zero-sum, NATO’s presence near Russia does not necessarily reduce Russian security unless Russia itself acts aggressively.
5. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine contradicts Mearsheimer’s claim that its actions are purely defensive.
6. By attacking Ukraine, Russia has provoked a stronger NATO presence in Eastern Europe (e.g., Finland and Sweden joining NATO) and increased its own insecurity. This undermines the principle that great powers act rationally to maximize their security.
7. The analogy to the Cuban Missile Crisis is flawed.
8. In 1962, the U.S. objected to Soviet missiles in Cuba because they posed an immediate offensive threat. NATO membership for Ukraine does not involve stationing offensive weapons aimed at Russia but rather a defensive commitment.

Conclusion

Mearsheimer’s argument fails to account for the agency of smaller states and overstates the inevitability of conflict due to NATO expansion. Russia’s actions are better explained as aggressive attempts to reassert imperial influence rather than rational defensive measures.

The Antithesis

Counterarguments to Jeffrey Sachs' Position

First Principles for the Counterargument

1. Informal agreements lack binding force: Verbal or informal assurances between states do not constitute enforceable commitments in international relations.
2. Security dilemmas require mutual restraint: Both sides in a conflict must take steps to reduce tensions; unilateral blame is insufficient.
3. Sovereign equality underpins diplomacy: No state has the right to dictate another state’s foreign policy or alliances.

Logical Reasoning

1. The alleged 1990 U.S. assurance against NATO expansion was never formalized in any treaty or agreement.
2. From the principle that informal agreements lack binding force, subsequent NATO enlargement cannot be considered a violation of commitments since no legal obligation existed.
3. Russia’s actions have escalated tensions far more than NATO expansion ever did.
4. By annexing Crimea (2014) and invading Ukraine (2022), Russia has actively destabilized its neighbors and created insecurity across Europe. From the principle of mutual restraint, Russia bears responsibility for escalating the conflict rather than solely responding to U.S./NATO actions.
5. Diplomatic solutions require both parties to negotiate in good faith.
6. Putin’s 2021 proposals demanded guarantees that Ukraine would never join NATO—a condition that violates Ukraine’s sovereignty and right to self-determination. From the principle of sovereign equality, such demands are inherently illegitimate.
7. Neutrality is not always a viable solution.
8. Ukraine attempted neutrality after independence (e.g., refusing to join NATO for decades). However, this did not prevent Russian aggression in 2014 or 2022, undermining Sachs’ claim that neutrality would have ensured peace.

Conclusion

Sachs’ argument overemphasizes historical grievances and ignores Russia’s active role in escalating tensions through aggression and coercion. The failure of diplomacy lies as much with Russia’s demands as with Western policies.

Deductive Insights from Counterarguments

1. Both Mearsheimer and Sachs underestimate the agency of smaller states like Ukraine, which made sovereign decisions based on their own security needs rather than being mere pawns in great-power politics.
2. Both positions assume that Russia’s actions are primarily reactive or defensive, but this ignores evidence that Russia has proactively pursued aggressive policies (e.g., Georgia 2008, Crimea 2014).
3. The principle of sovereignty challenges both scholars’ frameworks:
4. Mearsheimer overlooks Ukraine's right to align with NATO if it chooses.
5. Sachs dismisses Ukraine's agency by suggesting neutrality could have been imposed as a solution.

In conclusion, while Mearsheimer and Sachs present internally consistent arguments, their frameworks can be challenged by emphasizing sovereignty, rejecting inevitability in great-power conflict, and highlighting Russia's active role in escalating tensions beyond what can be justified by security concerns alone.

The Synthesis: A Balanced Framework for Resolving the Russia-Ukraine Conflict

First Principles for Synthesis

1. Security is interdependent: A state’s pursuit of security can create insecurity for others, necessitating mutual accommodation.
2. Sovereignty is fundamental but constrained by geography: States have a right to self-determination, but geography imposes practical limits on absolute sovereignty in a multipolar world.
3. Great powers act to preserve their spheres of influence: In an anarchic international system, great powers prioritize regional dominance to ensure their survival.
4. Diplomacy is essential for de-escalation: Durable peace requires negotiated compromises that address the core interests of all parties involved.

Reconciling the Thesis and Antithesis

Thesis (Mearsheimer and Sachs' Positions)

• NATO expansion near Russia’s borders provoked a predictable response from Moscow, reflecting structural dynamics of great-power competition.
• U.S. and NATO policies ignored Russian security concerns, contributing to the escalation of tensions.
• Diplomacy and neutrality for Ukraine are necessary to resolve the conflict.

Antithesis (Counterarguments)

• NATO expansion was driven by voluntary decisions of Eastern European states seeking protection from historical Russian aggression, not Western provocation.
• Russia’s actions are not purely defensive but reflect imperial ambitions that violate Ukraine’s sovereignty.
• Neutrality alone would not guarantee peace, as Russia has acted aggressively even when Ukraine was neutral.

Synthesis

Both perspectives contain valid insights but fail to fully address the complexity of the conflict. The synthesis must: 1. Acknowledge Russia’s legitimate security concerns while rejecting its imperialistic actions. 2. Respect Ukraine’s sovereignty while recognizing that its geographic position necessitates pragmatic compromises. 3. Balance great-power dynamics with smaller states’ rights to self-determination.

Proposed Solution: A Comprehensive Peace Framework

To achieve an enduring peace in Ukraine and stabilize Eastern Europe, the following steps are proposed:

1. Immediate Ceasefire

• Both sides agree to an immediate cessation of hostilities under international supervision (e.g., UN peacekeeping forces).
• A demilitarized buffer zone is established along current frontlines to prevent further clashes.

2. Neutrality with Conditions

• Ukraine adopts a status of permanent neutrality, enshrined in its constitution and guaranteed by international treaties.
• Neutrality includes:
• No NATO membership for Ukraine.
• Freedom for Ukraine to pursue economic integration with both the EU and other global partners without military alignments.

3. Security Guarantees

• Russia receives legally binding assurances that NATO will not expand further eastward or station offensive weapons near its borders.
• Ukraine receives multilateral security guarantees from major powers (e.g., U.S., EU, China) to deter future aggression from any party.

4. Territorial Dispute Resolution

• Crimea’s status is deferred to future negotiations under international mediation, with both sides agreeing to maintain the status quo in the interim.
• Donetsk and Luhansk regions are granted autonomy within Ukraine under a decentralized federal structure, ensuring local governance while preserving Ukrainian sovereignty.

5. Economic Reconstruction

• An international fund is established for rebuilding war-torn regions in Ukraine, with contributions from Russia, Western nations, and multilateral institutions.
• Economic cooperation between Ukraine and Russia is encouraged through trade agreements designed to benefit both parties.

6. Phased Implementation

• Peace agreements are implemented incrementally to build trust:
• Initial steps include withdrawal of heavy weaponry, prisoner exchanges, and humanitarian aid delivery.
• Subsequent phases involve constitutional reforms (e.g., neutrality), elections in disputed regions, and gradual reintegration of territories under international supervision.

7. Long-Term Regional Security Framework

• A new regional security framework is established involving Russia, Ukraine, NATO members, and neutral states to manage disputes peacefully.
• This framework institutionalizes dialogue channels for arms control, economic cooperation, and crisis management.

Rationale for the Solution

1. Balances Security Concerns:
2. Neutrality addresses Russia’s fears of NATO encirclement while preserving Ukraine’s independence.

3. Security guarantees reduce mistrust between NATO and Russia while protecting Ukraine from future aggression.

4. Respects Sovereignty:

5. Ukraine retains its independence and territorial integrity (except for deferred issues like Crimea) while accommodating regional realities through federalism and neutrality.

6. Acknowledges Great-Power Dynamics:

7. The solution recognizes Russia’s need for a secure sphere of influence without legitimizing its imperial ambitions or violating international law.

8. Builds Trust Through Gradualism:

9. Incremental implementation allows both sides to verify commitments before proceeding further.

10. International monitoring ensures compliance with agreements.

11. Incorporates Lessons from History:

12. Neutrality models (e.g., Austria) demonstrate that such arrangements can work when backed by strong guarantees.
13. Phased implementation mirrors successful peace processes in other conflicts (e.g., Colombia).

Conclusion

The synthesis reconciles the structural realism of Mearsheimer with Sachs’ emphasis on diplomacy by proposing a balanced solution that addresses both security dilemmas and sovereignty concerns. Neutrality serves as the linchpin for de-escalation, while phased implementation builds trust over time. By integrating immediate conflict resolution measures with long-term regional frameworks, this approach offers a realistic path toward enduring peace in Eastern Europe.

Citations: [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/1drhxxh/john_mearsheimers_take_on_the_russoukrainian_war/ [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/14ktcv2/the_darkness_ahead_where_the_ukraine_war_is/ [3] https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalScience/comments/1bp64ub/what_is_with_mearsheimer_and_russia/ [4] https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/1gznjks/do_you_think_appeasing_putin_is_the_right_way_to/ [5] https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1hu8iop/cmv_the_united_states_should_continue_to_send_aid/ [6] https://internationalpolicy.org/publications/jeffrey-sachs-matt-duss-debate-u-s-russia-talks-to-end-ukraine-war/ [7] https://www.reddit.com/r/IRstudies/comments/17iwfpr/john_mearsheimer_is_wrong_about_ukraine/ [8] https://scheerpost.com/2024/11/23/jeffrey-sachs-explains-the-russia-ukraine-war/ [9] https://consortiumnews.com/2023/09/21/jeffrey-sachs-nato-expansion-ukraines-destruction/ [10] https://www.democracynow.org/2025/2/18/russia_ukraine [11] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/15kwpx3/ukraine_war_and_the_paradox_of_mearsheimers/ [12] https://braveneweurope.com/jeffrey-d-sachs-the-real-history-of-the-war-in-ukraine-a-chronology-of-events-and-case-for-diplomacy [13] https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/nato-chief-admits-expansion-behind-russian-invasion [14] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2c06cbc711d95427489f8bc781c45daab461ccde [15] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/46e28172de2a520e4f77e654a37687a7757d9d49 [16] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e8c17a15a554054c755a1b1d53d3e1099d159033 [17] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/65cbcec6ac255413086db567774844f84c813600 [18] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d11db25ffa5b50ef38d18c2a1e2243e4c7c53b24 [19] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5b750f3d763d728ae2bcf2ce3e6cf67a8281bb2b [20] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/34883bf28c7a988eb2c2fe458b7eab3180b36dcc [21] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b64319315d02b2cc1dff936d69be40d78d15f6b9 [22] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c4ca4d645825a5b8d7389c45bcfcad0eeebecd81 [23] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11734947/ [24] https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalScience/comments/17iwhqi/john_mearsheimer_is_wrong_about_ukraine/ [25] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/1ih646n/john_mearsheimer_is_offensive_realist_who_should/ [26] https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/tjhwi4/a_response_to_mearsheimers_views_on_nato_ukraine/ [27] https://www.reddit.com/r/IRstudies/comments/1b12pdh/genuine_structural_realist_cases_against_us/ [28] https://www.reddit.com/r/lexfridman/comments/17xl8jk/john_mearsheimer_israelpalestine_russiaukraine/ [29] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/17xve8j/people_give_too_much_credit_to_the_realist/ [30] https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/zvfquu/do_you_agree_with_john_mearsheimers_complex_view/ [31] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/1bghzbp/john_mearshimer_and_ukraine/ [32] https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/tbzs2d/john_mearsheimer_on_why_the_west_is_principally/ [33] https://www.reddit.com/r/IRstudies/comments/1gjus1i/playing_devils_advocate_to_john_mearsheimer/ [34] https://www.reddit.com/r/TheAllinPodcasts/comments/1fipvmu/john_mearsheimer_and_jeffrey_sachs_on_american/ [35] https://www.e-ir.info/2024/03/31/dissecting-the-realist-argument-for-russias-invasion-of-ukraine/ [36] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6YOVl5LKTs [37] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362890238_Mearsheimer_Realism_and_the_Ukraine_War [38] https://www.ndsmcobserver.com/article/2024/01/john-mearsheimer-talks-war-and-international-politics [39] https://euideas.eui.eu/2022/07/11/john-mearsheimers-lecture-on-ukraine-why-he-is-wrong-and-what-are-the-consequences/ [40] https://academic.oup.com/ia/article-pdf/98/6/1873/47659084/iiac217.pdf [41] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qciVozNtCDM [42] https://metacpc.org/en/mearsheimer2022/ [43] https://www.fpri.org/article/2023/01/the-realist-case-for-ukraine/ [44] https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf [45] https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-john-mearsheimer-blames-the-us-for-the-crisis-in-ukraine [46] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cd2fd9e8ea82fa4e7f2f66a2eb517f4ba34981a0 [47] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/99942047e1e43e77ef76e147e51b725a63d86e22 [48] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a53f98c63c58e4268856bde3883abc72e43e03bf [49] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/471f43cd36c53141ee24a431eef520bec311c15c [50] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d56b89349fade26cef69c1d0cffd6887adca102d [51] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/50f504029753ffb7eec4d2660f29beb48b682803 [52] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e2f85f09340e854efcfc4df9d1aabd2e533e1051 [53] https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1ghs32m/ru_pov_jeffrey_sachss_view_on_the_lead_up_and/ [54] https://www.reddit.com/r/EndlessWar/comments/1iwpc2e/ukraine_war_is_over_jeffrey_sachs_explosive/ [55] https://www.reddit.com/r/UnitedNations/comments/1ivq4zg/there_will_be_no_war/ [56] https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1gx5c5k/jeffrey_sachs_explains_the_background_to_the/ [57] https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1ix8z9a/jeffery_sachs_providing_clarity/ [58] https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1ism3vj/jeffrey_sachs_on_us_russia_talks_to_end_ukraine/ [59] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/1e04cpd/i_do_not_understand_the_prorussia_stance_from/ [60] https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalVideo/comments/1izr6g9/economist_prof_jeffrey_sachs_addresses_eu/ [61] https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1iw9u56/economist_prof_jeffrey_sachs_addresses_eu/ [62] https://www.reddit.com/r/TheAllinPodcasts/comments/1cjfkbx/fact_checking_david_sachs_data_sources_on_ukraine/ [63] https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1e4n8ea/why_wont_the_us_help_negotiate_a_peaceful_end_to/ [64] https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/13lrmgo/rebuttal_to_jeffrey_sachs_ad_in_the_new_york/ [65] https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1ipg351/you_can_immediately_tell_who_in_this_sub_doesnt/ [66] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiK6DijNLGE [67] https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/why-nato-expansion-explains-russias-actions-in-ukraine/ [68] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7ThOU4xKaU [69] https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/s6ap8hxhp34hg252wtwwwtdw4afw7x [70] https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/wgtgma5kj69pbpndjr4wf6aayhrszm [71] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfRG1Cqda2M [72] https://voxukraine.org/en/open-letter-to-jeffrey-sachs [73] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmZoJ1vKEKk [74] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnBakiVQf-s [75] https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/russia-nato-security-through-ukrainian-neutrality-by-jeffrey-d-sachs-2022-02 [76] https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/nato-chief-admits-expansion-behind-russian-invasion [77] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MmJfmTgvAk [78] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ava7rqirOYI [79] https://jordantimes.com/opinion/jeffrey-d-sachs/war-ukraine-was-not-%E2%80%98unprovoked%E2%80%99 [80] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/1d8ony5/john_mearsheimers_opinion_on_ukraines_own_ability/ [81] https://thegeopolitics.com/mearsheimer-revisited-how-offensive-realisms-founder-is-inconsistent-on-the-ukraine-russia-war/ [82] https://www.scielo.br/j/rbpi/a/MvWrWYGGtcLhgtsFRrmdmcx/ [83] https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/auk-2022-2023/html?lang=en [84] https://blog.prif.org/2023/07/26/russian-self-defense-fact-checking-arguments-on-the-russo-ukrainian-war-by-john-j-mearsheimer-and-others/ [85] https://europeanleadershipnetwork.org/commentary/the-ukraine-crisis-according-to-john-j-mearsheimer-impeccable-logic-wrong-facts/ [86] https://pjia.com.pk/index.php/pjia/article/download/837/587 [87] https://www.reddit.com/r/TheAllinPodcasts/comments/1e4noiz/where_is_sacks_prorussia_motive_coming_from/ [88] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/1an20x2/why_did_boris_johnson_tell_ukraine_not_to_take/ [89] https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1gjfcwg/media_reveals_deal_russia_offered_to_ukraine_at/ [90] https://www.reddit.com/r/AskARussian/comments/1d3pv6y/do_you_feel_like_the_west_was_actively_sabotaging/

@ 9cb3545c:2ff47bca

Hey there! So you’ve got a whopping 50+ Lightning Channels and you’re not keen on them Force Closing? Well, buckle up! This guide will be an additional resource as you navigate through daunting process.

In this post, we will go over some extra tips and tricks not covered in the official guide. While this guide does have some steps that are not covered by Umbrel, its main objective is to provide confidence in the process (not a replacement process), coming from someone who’s been there and done that, and some how came out with all Lightning Channels still running! I highly recommend reading this post fully before starting the migration process.

Before we dive in, here is the Official Guide from the Umbrel team on how to update UmbrelOS from 0.5.4 to 1.x.x. Reference the steps all the time, and follow them carefully.

With that out of the way. Here are some extra TIPs to fill in some gaps I encountered as I went through the process.

The Order of Steps

Tip #1:

In the Official Umbrel Guide, the Umbrel team asks you to start by backing up your data. As a lightning Node Runner, I recommend against this. Because the Bash script will stop all Umbrel Services and your node will remain offline while you prepare a Bootable USB Stick. So definitely don't start with the backup, first get the bootable stick sorted out, then move on to backups.

Creating the Bootable USB Stick

TIP #2:

After many failed attempts to create a bootable USB stick from the link umbrel provides in their official guide. I ended up getting the ISO directly from Umbrels team through their Discord Channel. Unfortunately, I wont be able to share this link here. but just in case the umbrelOS-amd64-usb-installer.iso.xz didnt work for you as well, this could be an alternative route.

TIP #3:

Since Umbrel is an actual full OS now. You might need to handle some BIOS quirks. The umbrelOS Kernal is not signed. So if you have Secure Boot turned on in the BIOS, your PC will try to protect you, and block you from booting into you USB Stick. Turn off Secure Boot and you should be able to bypass this issue. I also had to turn on Legacy Option ROMs as well.

Tip #4:

Test your Bootable USB Stick on a secondary device before you go on trying to update your node. Since turning the node off and on is a hassle, its just easier to be certain the the Bootable Stick is ready before even attempting to upgrade your node.

If all is good, you are ready to get back to the guide and walk through the steps.

Preparing the Hardware

Tip #5:

In the official guide they as you to connect a Keyboard and Screen. This is of course needed. I would highly suggest you connect a mouse as well. My Bios was very stubborn and didn't comply with just a keyboard as I attempted to re-order Boot Sequences.

The Migration Process

Tip #6:

Remember, this is 10 times easier if you are not running a lightning node, but on a lightning node, the Channel.db file is being updated constantly. Once you start the backup process, the script will shutdown umbrel services and start copying. you can''t turn your node back on after this stage. If you do, assume the backup you created through the Bash script is obsolete. and you will have to redo the backup process again. If you really know what you are doing, you probably can surgically copy/paste the LND folder. But its easier not to do this.

But not to worry, if you start the process just keep going (especially if you checked all the TIPs I cover above). I say this out of experience, because after I started the first backup process, it took me about an hour to backup my SSD, but then the Bootable USB stick threw so many errors I gave up, and turned on the node again. Then later re-attempted the process from scratch. This time, since my external SSD was already full, it took 3.5 hours to backup all the files again.

Tip #7:

This will take time, so just trust the migration process and wait for the files to get copied. you are probably copying more than a terabyte worth of data back and forth over USB, Leverage USB 3 if you have it.

Tip #8:

If you have a custom name for your umbrel node. Meaning you do not access it by using umbrel.local, this will be reset to the default umbrel.local after the migration. I am not sure if this could be switched again to a custom name, but for now, this won't cause any issues.

Tip #9:

During the last steps of the Migration process, and once Umbrel has copied the backup back into the SSD, it will finish the process with downloading your apps, and restarting. Don't freak out :D

Tip #10:

I honestly don't have a tenth tip, but thought it would make this list look nicer with one. So my last tip for you is to relax and enjoy the process. And feel free to tag me if you faced any issues. Hopefully it will be something i experienced and will be able to help.

Have Fun, and Good Luck!

@ df8f0a64:057d87a5

2024年下半期の振り返り

あんまり変化はないんですが、進捗ありません！で終わっても仕方ないのでちょっとは無理やりでも振り返りましょう

0. 退職した

上半期時点で決まってはいたんですが、　6年間ほど勤務した会社を退職しました

退職直前まで爆発物取扱みたいなタスクをこなして、なかなかひやひやした退職プロセス

静かに退職したいので送別会の類のイベントは無しにしてくれというお願いをきいてくれた各メンバーに感謝です

1. 公開していたNostrリレーの設定を変更した

日本のみに公開していたリレーを、全世界に公開しました

当初はCloudflareでリレーをホストしていたのが、利用していたnosflareもcfrelayもクライアントに対してイベントを配布するコードがなく（R2だけではできない）

さてどうしたものかと悩んでいたタイミングで、Umbrelのおひとり様リレーのポートを公開する対応をしました。リレーのお引越し

で、公開してしばらくしたら、すごい勢いで日本国外からの投稿が着信するようになり大困惑

調べてみたら、Mutiny wallet（現在はサービス終了）が運営しているblastr.mutinywallet.com（たぶんまだ稼働している）が原因でした

Nostr.watchのAPIを利用して、世の中にあるNostrリレーすべてにイベントを送り込む凶悪な思想犯です

ヘッダー情報などでブロックできなかったので、blastrがホストされてるCloudflareのIPを全てブロックする力技で対処しました

ちなみに、nosflareもいつのまにかblastrのようなものをホストしているようです

なんなんでしょうね、Nostrの白人さんたちの、過激なほど分散というか対検閲をしようとするお節介さは

2. 公開していたNostrリレーを潰した

上記のように折角いろいろやったリレーを潰しました

Reply guyというbotが猛威をふるった時期、クソみたいなイベントをばら撒かれてくることに私がキレたからです。クソが

NostrとしてはこれをきっかけにWoTを組み込んだリレーが開発されたりして、スパム対策が一歩前進した感があります。クソが

スパムばら撒きをBostrが助長してるみたいな批難を受けて、作者のYonleさんがブチ切れ、全Nostr関連リポジトリのメンテを放棄する事態も発生

ちょうどMutiny walletでGOXしたご本人の機嫌が悪かった時期に、クソスパムがぶつかったことによる悲しい出来事でした。ほんとクソ

3. おわりに

他にもこまいことはいくつかあるんですが、主にはこんなとこでしょうか。来年も楽しくNostrしたいですね

@ ed5774ac:45611c5c

Trump and Vance Expose Zelensky: The West’s Narrative Machine Meets Reality

In the modern era, the West has perfected the art of ruling through narratives. Stories, carefully crafted and disseminated, have become the primary tool for shaping public perception, justifying actions, and maintaining control. This narrative-driven approach to governance has been the cornerstone of Western power since the 20th century, and nowhere is this more evident than in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Enter Volodymyr Zelensky, the comedian-turned-president, who has become a poster child for this narrative-driven world order. But in a recent confrontation with Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, Zelensky’s carefully constructed facade crumbled, exposing the fragility of the Western storytelling empire.

The West’s Narrative Machine

As Alastair Crooke astutely observes in his article The Western Way of War: Owning the Narrative Trumps Reality ( https://www.unz.com/article/the-western-way-of-war-owning-the-narrative-trumps-reality), the West’s power lies not in its military or economic might alone but in its ability to control the narrative. Crooke argues that the West has mastered the art of “owning the story,” creating a reality that serves its interests, regardless of facts on the ground. This narrative dominance ensures that the general public—often referred to as the masses—follows along without questioning, accepting the official line as gospel truth.

To maintain this control, the West relies on carefully curated protagonists who can sell its stories to the world. Take, for example, the story of Volodymyr Zelensky, a former actor whose rise to power was itself a narrative triumph. Portrayed as a relatable outsider who defeated the corrupt establishment, Zelensky promised hope and reform. But behind this carefully crafted image lay darker forces. Oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, one of Ukraine’s most powerful and controversial figures, played a pivotal role in Zelensky’s ascent. Kolomoisky, who owned the TV channel that aired Zelensky’s show Servant of the People, used his media empire to propel the political novice into the spotlight. This was not a grassroots movement but a calculated maneuver by Ukraine’s oligarchic elite to maintain control under a new, more palatable face.

Zelensky’s Rise and the West’s Geopolitical Strategy

Zelensky’s rise was not just a domestic political shift; it was a calculated move by the West to advance its long-standing goal of containing Russia and dominating Eurasia. The West, particularly the EU and NATO, saw Ukraine as a critical piece in its geopolitical chess game. By installing a pro-Western leader like Zelensky, the West aimed to pull Ukraine firmly into its orbit, knowing full well that such a move would antagonize Moscow. This was not an accidental escalation but a deliberate provocation, designed to create a pretext for further Western intervention.

To polish Zelensky’s image and present him as a beacon of hope for peace and the Westernization of Ukraine, the West also needed to whitewash Ukraine’s darker realities. This meant turning a blind eye to the corruption and oligarchic influence that underpinned Zelensky’s presidency. Equally ignored were the neo-Nazi crimes and policies that had been well-documented before 2014, such as the rise of far-right groups like Svoboda and the Azov Battalion, their glorification of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, and their violent attacks on ethnic minorities, political opponents, and LGBTQ+ communities. These atrocities, once reported in Western media, were suddenly erased from the narrative after 2014, as if they had never existed, to preserve the image of Ukraine as an innocent victim in the West’s geopolitical chess game.

The Grand Chessboard: Ukraine as a Proxy

The West’s use of Ukraine as a geopolitical pawn is not a recent development. Its roots can be traced back to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book The Grand Chessboard, in which the former U.S. National Security Advisor laid out a blueprint for American dominance in Eurasia. He famously wrote, “The one who rules the heartland rules the world, the one who rules East Europe rules the heartland, the one who rules Ukraine rules East Europe.” This statement foreshadowed the West’s strategic interest in Ukraine as a tool to contain and destabilize Russia—a goal that has driven Western policy for decades.

Even in 2008, Western leaders like Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy opposed Ukraine’s NATO membership, recognizing that such a move would provoke Russia. Classified cables from William Burns, the U.S. Ambassador to Russia at the time, echoed this sentiment. Burns warned that NATO expansion into Ukraine was a “red line” for Moscow, succinctly stating, “Nyet means nyet.” The West was fully aware that it was playing with fire, risking a direct confrontation with Russia that could escalate into a potential World War III. Yet, despite these warnings, the West pushed forward with its agenda, pulling Ukraine into its orbit. The stakes were simply too high to abandon the plan.

At the heart of this strategy lies the West’s desperate need to sustain its faltering economic system. Since the 2008 financial crisis, the Western debt-driven financial model has teetered on the brink of collapse. Sovereign debt crises loom large, and the banking industry, reliant on endless money printing, urgently needs new collateral to back its ever-expanding debt. Russia’s vast resource-rich territories—filled with oil, gas, minerals, and rare earth metals—offer a tempting solution.

By dominating Russia and seizing control of its natural wealth, the West could issue resource-backed bonds, financial instruments tied directly to Russia’s oil and gas reserves. These bonds would allow the West to leverage Russia’s resources as collateral, providing a stable foundation for its debt-ridden financial system. Controlling access to these resources would ensure currency stability and keep Western economies functioning, even as debt levels soar.

But the West’s ambitions extend beyond economic survival. Controlling Russia’s resources would also allow it to sever China’s access to critical raw materials, undermining Beijing’s economic and military development. By dominating Russia’s energy exports, the West could manipulate global energy prices, stabilizing its own economies while weakening rivals like China, which relies heavily on Russian energy. The U.S. and EU view China as the greatest geopolitical challenge of the 21st century, and by encircling and weakening Russia, they aim to isolate and contain Beijing. In this grand strategy, Ukraine is not merely a pawn but a critical linchpin in the West’s efforts to reshape the global order—even at the risk of catastrophic conflict.

Zelensky’s Role in the West’s Strategy

To execute this high-stakes strategy, the West needed a compelling narrative—one that could justify its actions, rally public support, and obscure its true motives. Therefore, they created the narrative around Volodymyr Zelensky, casting him as a global symbol of resistance, a hero fighting against the “evil” of Putin’s Russia. The West, particularly the EU and NATO, embraced this narrative, using it to justify billions in aid—much of which served as a cover for money laundering—sanctions on Russia, and the broader geopolitical agenda outlined above. Zelensky became the face of this narrative, a willing participant in the West’s grand strategy, even as his own country was turned into a battlefield.

Zelensky’s narrative, however, is built on shaky ground. Take, for example, the claim that Putin is “non-agreement capable”—a talking point frequently parroted by Western media and politicians. This assertion is not only baseless but laughably ironic. Unlike the West, which has a long history of signing agreements only to disregard them (e.g., the Minsk agreements, the Istanbul peace deal in March 2022, or NATO’s broken promise not to expand eastward), Putin has consistently honored the contracts and treaties he has signed. The West, not Russia, is the true exemplar of “non-agreement capable” behavior.

Yet, Zelensky and his Western backers continue to peddle these lies, confident that the general public will follow. The narrative is simple: Ukraine is the victim, Russia is the aggressor, and any suggestion to the contrary is dismissed as propaganda. This black-and-white storytelling leaves no room for nuance, truth, or accountability.

Trump and Vance: Slapping Down the Narrative

Enter Donald Trump and J.D. Vance. In a recent meeting with Zelensky, the duo did what few in the West have dared to do: they called out the narrative for what it is—a fabrication. Trump, known for his blunt rhetoric, and Vance, a rising voice of realism in foreign policy, confronted Zelensky with the uncomfortable truth. They exposed the contradictions in his claims, highlighting the West’s role in prolonging the conflict and the absurdity of expecting the world to believe in a one-sided story.

Zelensky, accustomed to the adulation of Western elites and the uncritical support of the media, was unprepared for this reality check. His carefully rehearsed lines fell flat, his confidence wavered, and the mask slipped. The confrontation was a rare moment of clarity in a sea of narrative-driven fog, a reminder that truth, when spoken boldly, can still shatter even the most entrenched lies.

The Meltdown of a Narrative Puppet

Zelensky’s meltdown in the face of Trump and Vance’s truth-telling is emblematic of a larger crisis in the West’s narrative-driven order. For decades, the West has relied on storytelling to maintain its dominance, but this approach is increasingly unsustainable. The rise of alternative media, the growing skepticism of the public, and the emergence of leaders like Trump and Vance who refuse to play along are exposing the cracks in the narrative machine.

Zelensky, the figurehead who believed he could sell his lies to 8 billion people, is a cautionary tale. He is not the master of his narrative but a puppet, manipulated by his masters in the EU and NATO. His failure to withstand scrutiny is a testament to the hollowness of the stories he tells and the fragility of the system that props him up.

Conclusion: The End of Narrative Dominance?

The confrontation between Trump/Vance and Zelensky is more than just a political spat; it is a microcosm of the broader struggle between narrative and reality. The West’s reliance on storytelling as a tool of governance is reaching its limits. As Crooke warns, when the narrative diverges too far from reality, it risks collapsing under its own weight.

The general public, once content to follow blindly, is beginning to question. Leaders like Trump and Vance are challenging the status quo, forcing the world to confront uncomfortable truths. Zelensky’s meltdown is a sign of things to come—a harbinger of the end of narrative dominance and the return of reality-based governance. The question is, will the West adapt, or will it cling to its stories until the very end?

@ fd208ee8:0fd927c1

GitHub is a software project graveyard

I think the main reason why we have so many lone wolf devs is an economic one. The fact that most FOSS devs aren't being paid for their code is making this worse, not better, as they work for fame, not fortune.

Nobody wants to use joint-repos because they don't want to give up or share the property rights to the contents. But because anything someone else does in a repo you own, also belongs to you, people are disincentized from contributing to your repo.

GitHub, especially, has incentivized this splintering and isolation. Everyone wants to have all changes in their own repo because they can profit best on repos listed directly under their own name, so long as they become popular. Maximize your 🟩 and ⭐ , like chips you can cash in for a prize.

And because forking other people's repos is the norm, rather than teamwork, requests for changes are usually ignored or responded to with "fork it, bro." Go away. Leave me alone. My repo is none of your business.

Too autistic, even for me

So, the developers separate their efforts into a million tiny repos that are mostly redundant with other ones, there's little interaction, progress is often surprisingly slow and stalls for months at a time, it's hard to keep track of what other people are doing (so that you can review and test changes), most of the effort is headed straight for the bin, people build the same things over and over, and communication is extremely limited.

This is a work environment that is unattractive for anyone who isn't autistic and/or highly introverted. Half of the fun of open-source development used to be the esprit de corps. Much has been said about #Bluesky, but it all misses a major point: that's where you go, if you want to work with other people, to build something large, polished, and impressive. It doesn't actually matter how many developers Nostr has, if they all only stare at their own plates.

Your repo coulda been a file folder.

Ironically, git was developed for collaboration on large projects with a distributed team. Now, everyone uses it for projects they work on alone. They put those projects on the Internet to market them. It's a cheap gimmick, not an earnest attempt at collaboration. Collaboration begins at the beginning.