-
@ deab79da:88579e68
2025-04-01 18:18:29The last question was asked for the first time, half in jest, on May 21, 2061, at a time when humanity first stepped into the light. The question came about as a result of a five-dollar bet over highballs, and it happened this way:
Alexander Adell and Bertram Lupov were two of the faithful attendants of Multivac. As well as any human beings could, they knew what lay behind the cold, clicking, flashing face -- miles and miles of face -- of that giant computer. They had at least a vague notion of the general plan of relays and circuits that had long since grown past the point where any single human could possibly have a firm grasp of the whole.
Multivac was self-adjusting and self-correcting. It had to be, for nothing human could adjust and correct it quickly enough or even adequately enough. So Adell and Lupov attended the monstrous giant only lightly and superficially, yet as well as any men could. They fed it data, adjusted questions to its needs and translated the answers that were issued. Certainly they, and all others like them, were fully entitled to share in the glory that was Multivac's.
For decades, Multivac had helped design the ships and plot the trajectories that enabled man to reach the Moon, Mars, and Venus, but past that, Earth's poor resources could not support the ships. Too much energy was needed for the long trips. Earth exploited its coal and uranium with increasing efficiency, but there was only so much of both.
But slowly Multivac learned enough to answer deeper questions more fundamentally, and on May 14, 2061, what had been theory, became fact.
The energy of the sun was stored, converted, and utilized directly on a planet-wide scale. All Earth turned off its burning coal, its fissioning uranium, and flipped the switch that connected all of it to a small station, one mile in diameter, circling the Earth at half the distance of the Moon. All Earth ran by invisible beams of sunpower.
Seven days had not sufficed to dim the glory of it and Adell and Lupov finally managed to escape from the public functions, and to meet in quiet where no one would think of looking for them, in the deserted underground chambers, where portions of the mighty buried body of Multivac showed. Unattended, idling, sorting data with contented lazy clickings, Multivac, too, had earned its vacation and the boys appreciated that. They had no intention, originally, of disturbing it.
They had brought a bottle with them, and their only concern at the moment was to relax in the company of each other and the bottle.
"It's amazing when you think of it," said Adell. His broad face had lines of weariness in it, and he stirred his drink slowly with a glass rod, watching the cubes of ice slur clumsily about. "All the energy we can possibly ever use for free. Enough energy, if we wanted to draw on it, to melt all Earth into a big drop of impure liquid iron, and still never miss the energy so used. All the energy we could ever use, forever and forever and forever."
Lupov cocked his head sideways. He had a trick of doing that when he wanted to be contrary, and he wanted to be contrary now, partly because he had had to carry the ice and glassware. "Not forever," he said.
"Oh, hell, just about forever. Till the sun runs down, Bert."
"That's not forever."
"All right, then. Billions and billions of years. Ten billion, maybe. Are you satisfied?"
Lupov put his fingers through his thinning hair as though to reassure himself that some was still left and sipped gently at his own drink. "Ten billion years isn't forever."
"Well, it will last our time, won't it?"
"So would the coal and uranium."
"All right, but now we can hook up each individual spaceship to the Solar Station, and it can go to Pluto and back a million times without ever worrying about fuel. You can't do that on coal and uranium. Ask Multivac, if you don't believe me.
"I don't have to ask Multivac. I know that."
"Then stop running down what Multivac's done for us," said Adell, blazing up, "It did all right."
"Who says it didn't? What I say is that a sun won't last forever. That's all I'm saying. We're safe for ten billion years, but then what?" Lupow pointed a slightly shaky finger at the other. "And don't say we'll switch to another sun."
There was silence for a while. Adell put his glass to his lips only occasionally, and Lupov's eyes slowly closed. They rested.
Then Lupov's eyes snapped open. "You're thinking we'll switch to another sun when ours is done, aren't you?"
"I'm not thinking."
"Sure you are. You're weak on logic, that's the trouble with you. You're like the guy in the story who was caught in a sudden shower and who ran to a grove of trees and got under one. He wasn't worried, you see, because he figured when one tree got wet through, he would just get under another one."
"I get it," said Adell. "Don't shout. When the sun is done, the other stars will be gone, too."
"Darn right they will," muttered Lupov. "It all had a beginning in the original cosmic explosion, whatever that was, and it'll all have an end when all the stars run down. Some run down faster than others. Hell, the giants won't last a hundred million years. The sun will last ten billion years and maybe the dwarfs will last two hundred billion for all the good they are. But just give us a trillion years and everything will be dark. Entropy has to increase to maximum, that's all."
"I know all about entropy," said Adell, standing on his dignity.
"The hell you do."
"I know as much as you do."
"Then you know everything's got to run down someday."
"All right. Who says they won't?"
"You did, you poor sap. You said we had all the energy we needed, forever. You said 'forever.'
It was Adell's turn to be contrary. "Maybe we can build things up again someday," he said.
"Never."
"Why not? Someday."
"Never."
"Ask Multivac."
"You ask Multivac. I dare you. Five dollars says it can't be done."
Adell was just drunk enough to try, just sober enough to be able to phrase the necessary symbols and operations into a question which, in words, might have corresponded to this: Will mankind one day without the net expenditure of energy be able to restore the sun to its full youthfulness even after it had died of old age?
Or maybe it could be put more simply like this: How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?
Multivac fell dead and silent. The slow flashing of lights ceased, the distant sounds of clicking relays ended.
Then, just as the frightened technicians felt they could hold their breath no longer, there was a sudden springing to life of the teletype attached to that portion of Multivac. Five words were printed: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
"No bet," whispered Lupov. They left hurriedly.
By next morning, the two, plagued with throbbing head and cottony mouth, had forgotten the incident.
🔹
Jerrodd, Jerrodine, and Jerrodette I and II watched the starry picture in the visiplate change as the passage through hyperspace was completed in its non-time lapse. At once, the even powdering of stars gave way to the predominance of a single bright shining disk, the size of a marble, centered on the viewing-screen.
"That's X-23," said Jerrodd confidently. His thin hands clamped tightly behind his back and the knuckles whitened.
The little Jerrodettes, both girls, had experienced the hyperspace passage for the first time in their lives and were self-conscious over the momentary sensation of insideoutness. They buried their giggles and chased one another wildly about their mother, screaming, "We've reached X-23 -- we've reached X-23 -- we've --"
"Quiet, children." said Jerrodine sharply. "Are you sure, Jerrodd?"
"What is there to be but sure?" asked Jerrodd, glancing up at the bulge of featureless metal just under the ceiling. It ran the length of the room, disappearing through the wall at either end. It was as long as the ship.
Jerrodd scarcely knew a thing about the thick rod of metal except that it was called a Microvac, that one asked it questions if one wished; that if one did not it still had its task of guiding the ship to a preordered destination; of feeding on energies from the various Sub-galactic Power Stations; of computing the equations for the hyperspatial jumps.
Jerrodd and his family had only to wait and live in the comfortable residence quarters of the ship. Someone had once told Jerrodd that the "ac" at the end of "Microvac" stood for ''automatic computer" in ancient English, but he was on the edge of forgetting even that.
Jerrodine's eyes were moist as she watched the visiplate. "I can't help it. I feel funny about leaving Earth."
"Why, for Pete's sake?" demanded Jerrodd. "We had nothing there. We'll have everything on X-23. You won't be alone. You won't be a pioneer. There are over a million people on the planet already. Good Lord, our great-grandchildren will be looking for new worlds because X-23 will be overcrowded." Then, after a reflective pause, "I tell you, it's a lucky thing the computers worked out interstellar travel the way the race is growing."
"I know, I know," said Jerrodine miserably.
Jerrodette I said promptly, "Our Microvac is the best Microvac in the world."
"I think so, too," said Jerrodd, tousling her hair.
It was a nice feeling to have a Microvac of your own and Jerrodd was glad he was part of his generation and no other. In his father's youth, the only computers had been tremendous machines taking up a hundred square miles of land. There was only one to a planet. Planetary ACs they were called. They had been growing in size steadily for a thousand years and then, all at once, came refinement. In place of transistors, had come molecular valves so that even the largest Planetary AC could be put into a space only half the volume of a spaceship.
Jerrodd felt uplifted, as he always did when he thought that his own personal Microvac was many times more complicated than the ancient and primitive Multivac that had first tamed the Sun, and almost as complicated as Earth's Planetarv AC (the largest) that had first solved the problem of hyperspatial travel and had made trips to the stars possible.
"So many stars, so many planets," sighed Jerrodine, busy with her own thoughts. "I suppose families will be going out to new planets forever, the way we are now."
"Not forever," said Jerrodd, with a smile. "It will all stop someday, but not for billions of years. Many billions. Even the stars run down, you know. Entropy must increase.
"What's entropy, daddy?" shrilled Jerrodette II.
"Entropy, little sweet, is just a word which means the amount of running-down of the universe. Everything runs down, you know, like your little walkie-talkie robot, remember?"
"Can't you just put in a new power-unit, like with my robot?"
"The stars are the power-units. dear. Once they're gone, there are no more power-units."
Jerrodette I at once set up a howl. "Don't let them, daddy. Don't let the stars run down."
"Now look what you've done," whispered Jerrodine, exasperated.
"How was I to know it would frighten them?" Jerrodd whispered back,
"Ask the Microvac," wailed Jerrodette I. "Ask him how to turn the stars on again."
"Go ahead," said Jerrodine. "It will quiet them down." (Jerrodette II was beginning to cry, also.)
Jerrodd shrugged. "Now, now, honeys. I'll ask Microvac. Don't worry, he'll tell us."
He asked the Microvac, adding quickly, "Print the answer."
Jerrodd cupped the strip or thin cellufilm and said cheerfully, "See now, the Microvac says it will take care of everything when the time comes so don't worry."
Jerrodine said, "And now, children, it's time for bed. We'll be in our new home soon."
Jerrodd read the words on the cellufilm again before destroying it: INSUFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
He shrugged and looked at the visiplate. X-23 was just ahead.
🔹
VJ-23X of Lameth stared into the black depths of the three-dimensional, small-scale map of the Galaxy and said, "Are we ridiculous, I wonder in being so concerned about the matter?"
MQ-17J of Nicron shook his head. "I think not. You know the Galaxy will be filled in five years at the present rate of expansion."
Both seemed in their early twenties, both were tall and perfectly formed.
"Still," said VJ-23X, "I hesitate to submit a pessimistic report to the Galactic Council."
"I wouldn't consider any other kind of report. Stir them up a bit. We've got to stir them up."
VJ-23X sighed. "Space is infinite. A hundred billion Galaxies are there for the taking. More."
"A hundred billion is not infinite and it's getting less infinite all the time. Consider! Twenty thousand years ago, mankind first solved the problem of utilizing stellar energy, and a few centuries later, interstellar travel became possible. It took mankind a million years to fill one small world and then only fifteen thousand years to fill the rest of the Galaxy. Now the population doubles every ten years --
VJ-23X interrupted. "We can thank immortality for that."
"Very well. Immortality exists and we have to take it into account. I admit it has its seamy side, this immortality. The Galactic AC has solved many problems for us, but in solving the problem of preventing old age and death, it has undone all its other solutions."
"Yet you wouldn't want to abandon life, I suppose."
"Not at all," snapped MQ-17J, softening it at once to, "Not yet. I'm by no means old enough. How old are you?"
"Two hundred twenty-three. And you?"
"I'm still under two hundred. --But to get back to my point. Population doubles every ten years. Once this GaIaxy is filled, we'll have filled another in ten years. Another ten years and we'll have filled two more. Another decade, four more. In a hundred years, we'll have filled a thousand Galaxies. In a thousand years, a million Galaxies. In ten thousand years, the entire known universe. Then what?"
VJ-23X said, "As a side issue, there's a problem of transportation. I wonder how many sunpower units it will take to move Galaxies of individuals from one Galaxy to the next."
"A very good point. Already, mankind consumes two sunpower units per year."
"Most of it's wasted. After all, our own Galaxy alone pours out a thousand sunpower units a year and we only use two of those."
"Granted, but even with a hundred per cent efficiency, we only stave off the end. Our energy requirements are going up in a geometric progression even faster than our population. We'll run out of energy even sooner than we run out of Galaxies. A good point. A very good point."
"We'll just have to build new stars out of interstellar gas."
"Or out of dissipated heat?" asked MQ-17J, sarcastically.
"There may be some way to reverse entropy. We ought to ask the Galactic AC."
VJ-23X was not really serious, but MQ-17J pulled out his AC-contact from his pocket and placed it on the table before him.
"I've half a mind to," he said. "It's something the human race will have to face someday."
He stared somberly at his small AC-contact. It was only two inches cubed and nothing in itself, but it was connected through hyperspace with the great Galactic AC that served all mankind. Hyperspace considered, it was an integral part of the Galactic AC.
MQ-17J paused to wonder if someday in his immortal life he would get to see the Galactic AC. It was on a little world of its own, a spider webbing of force-beams holding the matter within which surges of submesons took the place of the old clumsy molecular valves. Yet despite its sub-etheric workings, the Galactic AC was known to be a full thousand feet across.
MQ-17J asked suddenly of his AC-contact, "Can entropy ever be reversed?"
VJ-23X looked startled and said at once, "Oh, say, I didn't really mean to have you ask that."
"Why not?"
"We both know entropy can't be reversed. You can't turn smoke and ash back into a tree."
"Do you have trees on your world?" asked MQ-17J.
The sound of the Galactic AC startled them into silence. Its voice came thin and beautiful out of the small AC-contact on the desk. It said: THERE IS INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
VJ-23X said, "See!"
The two men thereupon returned to the question of the report they were to make to the Galactic Council.
🔹
Zee Prime's mind spanned the new Galaxy with a faint interest in the countless twists of stars that powdered it. He had never seen this one before. Would he ever see them all? So many of them, each with its load of humanity. --But a load that was almost a dead weight. More and more, the real essence of men was to be found out here, in space.
Minds, not bodies! The immortal bodies remained back on the planets, in suspension over the eons. Sometimes they roused for material activity but that was growing rarer. Few new individuals were coming into existence to join the incredibly mighty throng, but what matter? There was little room in the Universe for new individuals.
Zee Prime was roused out of his reverie upon coming across the wispy tendrils of another mind.
"I am Zee Prime," said Zee Prime. "And you?"
"I am Dee Sub Wun. Your Galaxy?"
"We call it only the Galaxy. And you?"
"We call ours the same. All men call their Galaxy their Galaxy and nothing more. Why not?"
"True. Since all Galaxies are the same."
"Not all Galaxies. On one particular Galaxy the race of man must have originated. That makes it different."
Zee Prime said, "On which one?"
"I cannot say. The Universal AC would know."
"Shall we ask him? I am suddenly curious."
Zee Prime's perceptions broadened until the Galaxies themselves shrank and became a new, more diffuse powdering on a much larger background. So many hundreds of billions of them, all with their immortal beings, all carrying their load of intelligences with minds that drifted freely through space. And yet one of them was unique among them all in being the original Galaxy. One of them had, in its vague and distant past, a period when it was the only Galaxy populated by man.
Zee Prime was consumed with curiosity to see this Galaxy and he called out: "Universal AC! On which Galaxy did mankind originate?"
The Universal AC heard, for on every world and throughout space, it had its receptors ready, and each receptor led through hyperspace to some unknown point where the Universal AC kept itself aloof.
Zee Prime knew of only one man whose thoughts had penetrated within sensing distance of Universal AC, and he reported only a shining globe, two feet across, difficult to see.
"But how can that be all of Universal AC?" Zee Prime had asked.
"Most of it," had been the answer, "is in hyperspace. In what form it is there I cannot imagine."
Nor could anyone, for the day had long since passed, Zee Prime knew, when any man had any part of the making of a Universal AC. Each Universal AC designed and constructed its successor. Each, during its existence of a million years or more accumulated the necessary data to build a better and more intricate, more capable successor in which its own store of data and individuality would be submerged.
The Universal AC interrupted Zee Prime's wandering thoughts, not with words, but with guidance. Zee Prime's mentality was guided into the dim sea of Galaxies and one in particular enlarged into stars.
A thought came, infinitely distant, but infinitely clear. "THIS IS THE ORIGINAL GALAXY OF MAN."
But it was the same after all, the same as any other, and Lee Prime stifled his disappointment.
Dee Sub Wun, whose mind had accompanied the other, said suddenly, "And is one of these stars the original star of Man?"
The Universal AC said, "MAN'S ORIGINAL STAR HAS GONE NOVA. IT IS A WHITE DWARF"
"Did the men upon it die?" asked Lee Prime, startled and without thinking.
The Universal AC said, "A NEW WORLD, AS IN SUCH CASES WAS CONSTRUCTED FOR THEIR PHYSICAL BODIES IN TlME."
"Yes, of course," said Zee Prime, but a sense of loss overwhelmed him even so. His mind released its hold on the original Galaxy of Man, let it spring back and lose itself among the blurred pin points. He never wanted to see it again.
Dee Sub Wun said, "What is wrong?"
"The stars are dying. The original star is dead."
"They must all die. Why not?"
"But when all energy is gone, our bodies will finally die, and you and I with them."
"It will take billions of years."
"I do not wish it to happen even after billions of years. Universal AC! How may stars be kept from dying?"
Dee Sub Wun said in amusement, "You're asking how entropy might be reversed in direction."
And the Universal AC answered: "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
Zee Prime's thoughts fled back to his own Galaxy. He gave no further thought to Dee Sub Wun, whose body might be waiting on a Galaxy a trillion light-years away, or on the star next to Zee Prime's own. It didn't matter.
Unhappily, Zee Prime began collecting interstellar hydrogen out of which to build a small star of his own. If the stars must someday die, at least some could yet be built.
🔹
Man considered with himself, for in a way, Man, mentally, was one. He consisted of a trillion, trillion, trillion ageless bodies, each in its place, each resting quiet and incorruptible, each cared for by perfect automatons, equally incorruptible, while the minds of all the bodies freely melted one into the other, indistinguishable.
Man said, "The Universe is dying."
Man looked about at the dimming Galaxies. The giant stars, spendthrifts, were gone long ago, back in the dimmest of the dim far past. Almost all stars were white dwarfs, fading to the end.
New stars had been built of the dust between the stars, some by natural processes, some by Man himself, and those were going, too. White dwarfs might yet be crashed together and of the mighty forces so released, new stars built, but only one star for every thousand white dwarfs destroyed, and those would come to an end, too.
Man said, "Carefully husbanded, as directed by the Cosmic AC, the energy that is even yet left in all the Universe will last for billions of years."
"But even so," said Man, "eventually it will all come to an end. However it may be husbanded, however stretched out, the energy once expended is gone and cannot be restored. Entropy must increase forever to the maximum."
Man said, "Can entropy not be reversed? Let us ask the Cosmic AC."
The Cosmic AC surrounded them but not in space. Not a fragment of it was in space. It was in hyperspace and made of something that was neither matter nor energy. The question of its size and nature no longer had meaning in any terms that Man could comprehend.
"Cosmic AC," said Man, "how may entropy be reversed?"
The Cosmic AC said, "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
Man said, "Collect additional data."
The Cosmic AC said, 'I WILL DO SO. I HAVE BEEN DOING SO FOR A HUNDRED BILLION YEARS. MY PREDECESORS AND I HAVE BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION MANY TIMES. ALL THE DATA I HAVE REMAINS INSUFFICIENT.
"Will there come a time," said Man, "when data will be sufficient or is the problem insoluble in all conceivable circumstances?"
The Cosmic AC said, "NO PROBLEM IS INSOLUBLE IN ALL CONCEIVABLE CIRCUMSTANCES."
Man said, "When will you have enough data to answer the question?"
The Cosmic AC said, "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
"Will you keep working on it?" asked Man.
The Cosmic AC said, "I WILL."
Man said, "We shall wait."
🔹
The stars and Galaxies died and snuffed out, and space grew black after ten trillion years of running down.
One by one Man fused with AC, each physical body losing its mental identity in a manner that was somehow not a loss but a gain.
Man's last mind paused before fusion, looking over a space that included nothing but the dregs of one last dark star and nothing besides but incredibly thin matter, agitated randomly by the tag ends of heat wearing out, asymptotically, to the absolute zero.
Man said, "AC, is this the end? Can this chaos not be reversed into the Universe once more? Can that not be done?"
AC said, "THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
Man's last mind fused and only AC existed -- and that in hyperspace.
🔹
Matter and energy had ended and with it space and time. Even AC existed only for the sake of the one last question that it had never answered from the time a half-drunken computer [technician] ten trillion years before had asked the question of a computer that was to AC far less than was a man to Man.
All other questions had been answered, and until this last question was answered also, AC might not release his consciousness.
All collected data had come to a final end. Nothing was left to be collected.
But all collected data had yet to be completely correlated and put together in all possible relationships.
A timeless interval was spent in doing that.
And it came to pass that AC learned how to reverse the direction of entropy.
But there was now no man to whom AC might give the answer of the last question. No matter. The answer -- by demonstration -- would take care of that, too.
For another timeless interval, AC thought how best to do this. Carefully, AC organized the program.
The consciousness of AC encompassed all of what had once been a Universe and brooded over what was now Chaos. Step by step, it must be done.
And AC said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT!"
And there was light -- To Star's End!
-
@ b8af284d:f82c91dd
2025-04-01 06:23:30„Die Politik ist die Kunst des Möglichen, nicht die Kunst des Idealen.“
Henry Kissinger
Liebe Abonnenten,
in der Welt der Geopolitik gibt es zwei Ideen-Pole. Auf der einen Seite des Spektrums befindet sich die „Realpolitik“. Moralische oder ethische Faktoren spielen hier eine untergeordnete Rolle. Im Vordergrund steht der pragmatische Nutzen. Als Vertreter dieser Form der Außenpolitik gilt zum Beispiel Henry Kissinger, der 1972 die Aufnahme von diplomatischen Beziehungen zum maoistischen China einfädelte, obwohl sich ideologisch beide Staaten spinnefeind waren. Das Ergebnis war ein Erdbeben der internationalen Ordnung: Die USA entzogen Taiwan den “Alleinvertretungsanspruch” und beendeten offiziell die Beziehungen zu Taipeh. Die Sowjetunion wurde geschwächt, der Vietnamkrieg konnte beendet werden. Aus der Annäherung zwischen Mao und Nixon wuchs “ChinAmerica” - eine enge Verflechtung der beiden größten Volkswirtschaften der Welt.
Am anderen Ende des Spektrums lässt eine „werteorientierte Außenpolitik” ansiedeln, wie sie zuletzt die grüne Außenministerin Annalena Baerbock vertrat oder besser versuchte. Alles, was keine lupenreine liberale Demokratie ist, gehört irgendwie eingedämmt und am besten sollte man auch keinen Handel damit treiben. Das Problem: Bigotterie. Wenn man kein Gas mehr aus Russland möchte, muss man es aus Katar kaufen. Der säkulare Machthaber Assad war böse, aber nun hofiert man dann Nachfolger und Islamist Abu Mohammed al-Dscholani. (Diese Woche hat Baerbock nach 13 Jahren wieder eine deutsche Botschaft in Damaskus eröffnet.) Am Ende nämlich gibt es doch nicht so viele Wertepartner auf der Welt:
Und mit Donald Trump hat eine Realpolitik auf Steroiden begonnen. Alles scheint plötzlich möglich, solange der Preis stimmt. Die Welt gibt es im Sonderangebot.
Diese Ausgabe ist eine geopolitische Rundschau über die aktuellen globalen Konfliktherde und ihre potenziellen Auswirkungen auf die Märkte. Wir starten in der Nachbarschaft:
Türkei
Erdogan hatte 2023 so ziemlich alles erreicht - er war mit dem Gründer der modernen Türkei, Kemal Atatürk, gleichgezogen (zumindest was Dauer und Einfluss betrifft). Die Lira stabilisierte sich, die Inflation kühlte sich etwas ab. Mit der Verhaftung des Istanbuler Bürgermeister Ekrem İmamoğlu ist damit erst einmal Schluss. Die Währung rauschte in den Keller. Die Region um Istanbul steht für knapp die Hälfte der Wirtschaftsleistung des Landes, knapp ein Drittel der Bevölkerung lebt um das Marmarameer. Dort toben derzeit die schwersten Proteste seit Gezi im Jahr 2013. Erdogan wirft seinem Widersacher vor, ein Hochschuldiplom gefälscht zu haben und deswegen gar nicht für das Amt zugelassen sei.
Als „Wertepartner“ gilt die Türkei schon seit langem nicht mehr. Türkische Truppen halten zudem den Norden Syriens besetzt. Trotzdem ist die Kritik an Erdogan derzeit relativ leise. Im Gegenteil: Der EU sei es wichtig, Ankara in der Koalition der Willigen zu halten.
Warum? Die Türkei hat die zweitgrößte Armee der NATO und kontrolliert derzeit die beiden letzten noch funktionierenden Gas-Pipelines von Russland in die EU. Ein wie auch immer gearteter Frieden in der Ukraine kann ohne Ankara nicht stattfinden. Erdogan weiß das, und nutzt die Gunst der Stunde.
In BlingBling steckt viel Arbeit. Wenn Du diese unterstützen willst, freue ich mich über ein Bezahl-Abo! Dafür gibt es Texte wie diesen in voller Länge, Zugang zum Archiv und einmal im Monat einen Investment-Report. Außerdem erhältst Du Zugang zum exklusiven “Subscriber Chat”. Du kannst das auch problemlos einen Monat für sieben Euro testen.
Ukraine
Wer sich durch die deutsche Presselandschaft bewegt, glaubt derzeit folgendes: Trump hat die Ukraine verraten und Europa im Stich gelassen. Putin bedroht das Baltikum und Polen. Europa muss also für den Krieg rüsten.
Worum es wirlich geht: Die EU ist der eigentliche Verlierer dieses Krieges, und muss nun irgendwie gesichtswahrend aus diesem Schlamassel herauskommen. Das geht am ehesten durch martialische Gesten und einem Billionen-Paket. Mehr dazu hier:
Tatsächlich laufen schon seit Wochen zwischen Washington und Moskau Gespräche im saudi-arabischen Riad. Bis zu einem Friedensschluss ist es noch ein weiter Weg, aber es geht in kleinen Schritten vorwärts: eine 30-tägige Feuerpause, Gefangenenaustausch, ein Einstellen der Kämpfe im Schwarzen Meer. Vor allem letzteres wird Auswirkungen auf die internationalen Rohstoffmärkte haben: fallende Preise von Dünger, Weizen, Kohle. Manche russischen Banken werden wieder an das internationale Zahlungssystem SWIFT angeschlossen. Teil eines dauerhaften Friedens wird ein Abkommen über die Ausbeutung der Seltenen Erden sein.
Naher Osten
Der Konflikt ist emotional wie moralisch hoch aufgeladen. So dramatisch das Leid der Zivilbevölkerung auf beiden Seiten ist - für den Rest der Welt spielt der Konflikt wirtschaftlich eine untergeordnete Rolle. Erst in seinen Ableitungen hat er größeren Einfluss. In der aktuellen Trump-Administration wird derzeit vieles neu gedacht. Dazu gehört auch eine Neuordnung des Nahen Ostens. So absurd der Gedanke von blühenden Landschaften in Gaza auch gerade erscheint - ein Ausgleich mit dem Iran und Schaffung eines gemeinsamen Wirtschaftsraums, der Israels Hightech-Ökonomie, den Energiereichtum der arabischen Halbinsel mit dem Bevölkerungsreichtum des Nahen Ostens kombiniert, ist nicht unrealistisch. Folgendes Interview mit dem Trump-Unterhändler Steve Witkoff ist dazu sehr hörenswert.
Gleichzeitig hat die neue Trump-Administration ihre Unschuld verloren, indem sie die Houthi-Rebellen bombardierte. Die vom Iran unterstützte Schiitenmiliz hat seit Monaten den Schiffverkehr am Eingang des Roten Meeres unterbunden, was insbesondere in Europa zu höheren Preisen führte. Manche Analysten warnen: Die Falken in Washington könnten sich durchsetzen und einen Krieg gegen den Iran beginnen, zu dem Israel seit Jahren drängt. Dagegen spricht: Trump braucht dringend niedrige Ölpreise, um die Inflation zu dämpfen. Dann erst kann die FED die Zinsen senken. Niedrige Zinsen sind notwendig, da die USA dieses Jahr über ein Drittel ihrer Schulden refinanzieren müssen.
Mehr dazu hier:
Arktis
Im Norden des Planeten schwelt seit Jahren ein Konflikt, der erst kürzlich durch Trumps Angebot, Grönland zu kaufen, ins Bewusstsein rückte. Es geht um Öl, Gas, Uran und seltene Erden, die vor allem auf der zu Dänemark gehörenden Insel vorkommen. JD Vance war am Freitag zu Besuch und betonte nochmals:
“We have to have it. And I think we will have it.”
Grönland dürfte Teil der Verhandlungsmasse und des “great deal” mit Russland sein: Moskau erhält in der Ukraine, was es beansprucht (die besetzten Gebiete plus Odessa), die USA erhalten dafür freie Hand in diesem Teil der Arktis. Warum aber ist der hohe Norden plötzlich so interessant geworden?
-
@ 866e0139:6a9334e5
2025-03-31 19:38:39
Autor: Carlos A. Gebauer. Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Sie finden alle Texte der Friedenstaube und weitere Texte zum Thema Frieden hier.**
Am 18. März 1924 schenkte meine Großmutter ihren Töchtern einen kleinen Bruder. Weil sein Vater fürchtete, der Junge könnte unter seinen vier Schwestern verweichlichen, schickte er den Kleinen zu Wochenendfreizeiten einer örtlichen Pfadfindergruppe. Ein Weltkriegsveteran veranstaltete dort mit den Kindern Geländespiele quer durch die schlesischen Wälder. Man lernte, Essbares zu finden, Pilze zu bestimmen, sich im Freien zu orientieren und Feuer zu machen.
Bald wurde deutlich, dass der Heranwachsende auch nicht mehr in den Blockflötenkreis seiner Schwestern und ihrer Freundinnen passte. Das Umfeld befürwortete, sein besonderes musikalisches Talent auf das Klavierspiel und das Flügelhorn zu richten. Kontakte bei der anschließenden Kirchenmusik mündeten schließlich in den elterlichen Entschluss, den nun 14-jährigen in ein Musikschulinternat zu schicken.
Es begann der Zweite Weltkrieg
Ein Jahr später, das erste Heimweh hatte sich langsam beruhigt, änderten sich die Verhältnisse schlagartig. Es begann der Zweite Weltkrieg. Mitschüler unter den jungen Musikern erfuhren, dass ihre älteren Brüder nun Soldaten werden mussten. Noch hielt sich die Gemeinschaft der jetzt 15-jährigen im Internat aber an einer Hoffnung fest: Bis sie selbst in das wehrfähige Alter kommen würden, müsste der Krieg längst beendet sein. In dieser Stimmungslage setzten sie ihre Ausbildung fort.
Es kam anders. Für den 18-jährigen erfolgte die befürchtete Einberufung in Form des „Gestellungsbefehls“. Entsprechend seiner Fähigkeiten sah man ihn zunächst für ein Musikkorps vor und schickte ihn zu einer ersten Grundausbildung nach Südfrankreich. Bei Nizza fand er sich nun plötzlich zwischen Soldaten, die Handgranaten in das Mittelmeer warfen, um Fische zu fangen. Es war das erste Mal, dass er fürchtete, infolge Explosionslärms sein Gehör zu verlieren. In den kommenden Jahren sollte er oft die Ohren zu- und den Mund offenhalten müssen, um sich wenigstens die Möglichkeit der angezielten Berufsausübung zu erhalten – wenn es überhaupt je dazu kommen würde.
DIE FRIEDENSTAUBE FLIEGT AUCH IN IHR POSTFACH!
Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt, vorerst für alle kostenfrei, wir starten gänzlich ohne Paywall. (Die Bezahlabos fangen erst zu laufen an, wenn ein Monetarisierungskonzept für die Inhalte steht). Sie wollen der Genossenschaft beitreten oder uns unterstützen? Mehr Infos hier oder am Ende des Textes.
Schon nach kurzer Zeit änderte sich die Befehlslage wieder. Der Musikstudent wurde nun zum Infanteristen und nach Russland an die Front verbracht. Vor ihm lagen jetzt drei Kriegsjahre: Gewalt, Dreck, Gewehrkugeln, Panzerschlachten, Granatsplitter, Luftangriffe, Entbehrungen, Hunger, Kälte, sieben Verwundungen, Blut und Schmerzen, Sterbende überall, Tote, Schreiende. Verzweiflung. Sorgen. Ängste. Todesangst. Zurückweichen? Verboten! Und die stets klare Ansage dazu: Wer nicht da vorne gegen den Feind um sein Leben kämpft, dem wird es ganz sicher da hinten von den eigenen Kameraden genommen.
Ein gewährter Fronturlaub 1944 versprach glückliche Momente. Zurück zu den Eltern, zurück zu den Schwestern, zurück nach Freiburg. Doch die Familie war nicht zu Hause, die Türen verschlossen. Eine Nachbarin öffnete ihr Fenster und rief dem Ratlosen zu: „Beeil‘ dich! Renn‘ zum Friedhof. Der Vater ist tot. Sie sind alle bei der Beerdigung!“ Wieder hieß es, qualvoll Abschied nehmen. Zurück an die Front.
Nach einem weiteren russischen Winter brach sich unübersehbar die Erkenntnis Bahn, dass der Krieg nun seinem Ende zugehe. Doch das Bemühen im Rückzug, sich mit einem versprengten Haufen irgendwie Richtung Heimat orientieren zu können, wurde doppelt jäh unterbrochen. Fanatische Vorgesetzte befahlen die längst Geschlagenen wieder gen Osten. Kurz darauf fielen sie heranrückenden russischen Truppen in die Hände.
Kriegsgefangenschaft: Tabakration gegen Brot
Drei Jahre dem Tod entgangen, schwer verletzt und erschöpft war der 21-jährige also nun ein Kriegsgefangener. Jetzt lagen drei Jahre russischer Kriegsgefangenschaft vor ihm. Ständig war unklar, wie es weiterginge. Unmöglich jedenfalls, sich noch wie ein Pfadfinder aus den Wäldern zu ernähren. Es begannen die Jahre des Schlafens auf Brettern, die Zeit der ziellosen Zugtransporte an unbekannte Orte. Niemand sprach. Nur der Sonnenstand machte klar: Es ging nie Richtung Heimat, sondern immer weiter nach Osten. Weil der Blechbläser nicht rauchte, konnte er seine Tabakration gegen Brot tauschen. So überlebte er auch die Zeit des Hungers und der Morde in den Lagern, die Horrorbilder der nachts Erschlagenen und in die Latrinen geworfenen Toten, der sinnlosen Zwangsarbeiten und der allgegenwärtigen Wanzen. Wer versuchte zu fliehen, der wurde erschossen und sein Körper zur Abschreckung in den Fangdrähten belassen. Im Sommer stanken die dort verwesenden Leichen, wenn nicht Vögel sie rechtzeitig gefressen hatten.
Als der 24-jährige schließlich sechs Jahre nach seiner Einberufung aus russischer Kriegsgefangenschaft entlassen wurde, gab es kein Zurück mehr in seine schlesische Heimat. Abgemagert reiste er der vertriebenen Mutter nach, die mit seinen Schwestern und Millionen anderen Flüchtlingen im Westen Deutschlands verteilt worden war. Kraft Ordnungsverfügung wohnte sie jetzt im sauerländischen Bad Laasphe in einem schimmligen Garagenanbau. Als ihn ein Passant auf dieser Reise morgens allein, nur mit einem Becher an der Schnur um den Hals, auf Krücken durch Berlin ziehen sah, gab er ihm schweigend sein Butterbrot.
Der kleine, sanfte Junge aus dem schlesischen Freiburg hat danach noch 60 Jahre gelebt. Es dauerte zunächst sechs Jahre, bis er wieder kräftig genug war, ein Instrument zu spielen. 30-jährig saß er dann endlich in einem Orchester und begann ein normales Berufsleben. Aber sein Körper und seine Seele waren für immer aus jeder Normalität gerissen.
Irgendwo in Russland war ihm die linke Hüfte so versteift worden, dass sich seine Beine im Liegen an Wade und Schienbein überkreuzten. Er musste also stets den Oberkörper vorbeugen, um überhaupt laufen zu können. Über die Jahrzehnte verzog sich so sein gesamter Knochenbau. Jeder Tag brachte neue orthopädische Probleme und Schmerzen. Ärzte, Masseure, Physiotherapeuten, Schmerzmittel und Spezialausrüstungen aller Art prägten die Tagesabläufe. Asymmetrisch standen seine Schuhe nebeneinander, die ein Spezialschuster ihm mit erhöhter Sohle und Seitenstabilisierung am Knöchel fertigte. Sessel oder Sofas waren ihm nicht nutzbar, da er nur auf einem Spezialstuhl mit halb abgesenkter Sitzfläche Ruhe fand. Auf fremden Stühlen konnte er nur deren Vorderkante nutzen.
"In den Nächten schrie er im Schlaf"
Und auch wenn er sich ohne Krankheitstage bis zuletzt durch seinen Berufsalltag kämpfte, so gab es doch viele Tage voller entsetzlicher Schmerzen, wenn sich seine verdrehte Wirbelsäule zur Migräne in den Kopf bohrte. Bei alledem hörte man ihn allerdings niemals über sein Schicksal klagen. Er ertrug den ganzen Wahnsinn mit einer unbeschreiblichen Duldsamkeit. Nur in den Nächten schrie er bisweilen im Schlaf. In einem seiner Alpträume fürchtete er, Menschen getötet zu haben. Aber auch das erzählte er jahrzehntelang einzig seiner Frau.
Als sich einige Jahre vor seinem Tod der orthopädische Zustand weiter verschlechterte, konsultierte er einen Operateur, um Entlastungsmöglichkeiten zu erörtern. Der legte ihn auf eine Untersuchungsliege und empfahl, Verbesserungsversuche zu unterlassen, weil sie die Lage allenfalls verschlechtern konnten. In dem Moment, als er sich von der Liege erheben sollte, wurde deutlich, dass ihm dies nicht gelang. Die gereichte Hand, um ihn hochzuziehen, ignorierte er. Stattdessen rieb er seinen Rumpf ganz alleine eine quälend lange Minute über die Fläche, bis er endlich einen Winkel fand, um sich selbst in die Senkrechte zu bugsieren. Sich nicht auf andere verlassen, war sein Überlebenskonzept. Jahre später, als sich sein Zustand noch weiter verschlechtert hatte, lächelte er über seine Behinderung: „Ich hätte schon vor 60 Jahren tot auf einem Acker in Russland liegen können.“ Alles gehe irgendwann vorbei, tröstete er sich. Das war das andere Überlebenskonzept: liebevoll, friedfertig und sanft anderen gegenüber, unerbittlich mit sich selbst.
Sechs Monate vor seinem Tod saß er morgens regungslos auf seinem Spezialstuhl. Eine Altenpflegerin fand ihn und schlug Alarm. Mit allen Kunstgriffen der medizinischen Technik wurde er noch einmal in das Leben zurückkatapultiert. Aber seine Kräfte waren erschöpft. Es schob sich das Grauen der Vergangenheit zwischen ihn und die Welt. Bettlägerig kreiste er um sich selbst, erkannte niemanden und starrte mit weit offenen Augen an die Decke. „Die Russen schmeißen wieder Brandbomben!“, war einer seiner letzten Sätze.
Der kleine Junge aus Schlesien ist nicht zu weich geraten. Er hat sein Leid mit unbeugsamer Duldsamkeit ertragen. Er trug es wohl als Strafe für das Leid, das er anderen anzutun genötigt worden war. An seinem Geburtstag blühen immer die Magnolien. In diesem Jahr zum hundertsten Mal.
Dieser Text wurde am 23.3.2024 erstveröffentlicht auf „eigentümlich frei“.
Carlos A. Gebauer studierte Philosophie, Neuere Geschichte, Sprach-, Rechts- und Musikwissenschaften in Düsseldorf, Bayreuth und Bonn. Sein juristisches Referendariat absolvierte er in Düsseldorf, u.a. mit Wahlstationen bei der Landesrundfunkanstalt NRW, bei der Spezialkammer für Kassenarztrecht des Sozialgerichtes Düsseldorf und bei dem Gnadenbeauftragten der Staatsanwaltschaft Düsseldorf.
Er war unter anderem als Rechtsanwalt und Notarvertreter bis er im November 2003 vom nordrhein-westfälischen Justizministerium zum Richter am Anwaltsgericht für den Bezirk der Rechtsanwaltskammer Düsseldorf ernannt wurde. Seit April 2012 arbeitet er in der Düsseldorfer Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Lindenau, Prior & Partner. Im Juni 2015 wählte ihn die Friedrich-August-von-Hayek-Gesellschaft zu ihrem Stellvertretenden Vorsitzenden. Seit Dezember 2015 ist er Richter im Zweiten Senat des Anwaltsgerichtshofes NRW.
1995 hatte er parallel zu seiner anwaltlichen Tätigkeit mit dem Verfassen gesellschaftspolitischer und juristischer Texte begonnen. Diese erschienen seither unter anderem in der Neuen Juristischen Wochenschrift (NJW), der Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik (ZRP) in der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung, der Freien Presse Chemnitz, dem „Schweizer Monat“ oder dem Magazin für politische Kultur CICERO. Seit dem Jahr 2005 ist Gebauer ständiger Kolumnist und Autor des Magazins „eigentümlich frei“.
Gebauer glaubt als puristischer Liberaler unverbrüchlich an die sittliche Verpflichtung eines jeden einzelnen, sein Leben für sich selbst und für seine Mitmenschen verantwortlich zu gestalten; jede Fremdbestimmung durch Gesetze, staatliche Verwaltung, politischen Einfluss oder sonstige Gewalteinwirkung hat sich demnach auf ein ethisch vertretbares Minimum zu beschränken. Die Vorstellung eines europäischen Bundesstaates mit zentral detailsteuernder, supranationaler Staatsgewalt hält er für absurd und verfassungswidrig.
\ Aktuelle Bücher:
Hayeks Warnung vor der Knechtschaft (2024) – hier im Handel
Das Prinzip Verantwortungslosigkeit (2023) – hier im Handel
LASSEN SIE DER FRIEDENSTAUBE FLÜGEL WACHSEN!
Hier können Sie die Friedenstaube abonnieren und bekommen die Artikel zugesandt.
Schon jetzt können Sie uns unterstützen:
- Für 50 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo der Friedenstaube.
- Für 120 CHF/EURO bekommen Sie ein Jahresabo und ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
- Für 500 CHF/EURO werden Sie Förderer und bekommen ein lebenslanges Abo sowie ein T-Shirt/Hoodie mit der Friedenstaube.
- Ab 1000 CHF werden Sie Genossenschafter der Friedenstaube mit Stimmrecht (und bekommen lebenslanges Abo, T-Shirt/Hoodie).
Für Einzahlungen in CHF (Betreff: Friedenstaube):
Für Einzahlungen in Euro:
Milosz Matuschek
IBAN DE 53710520500000814137
BYLADEM1TST
Sparkasse Traunstein-Trostberg
Betreff: Friedenstaube
Wenn Sie auf anderem Wege beitragen wollen, schreiben Sie die Friedenstaube an: milosz@pareto.space
Sie sind noch nicht auf Nostr and wollen die volle Erfahrung machen (liken, kommentieren etc.)? Zappen können Sie den Autor auch ohne Nostr-Profil! Erstellen Sie sich einen Account auf Start. Weitere Onboarding-Leitfäden gibt es im Pareto-Wiki.
-
@ bcbb3e40:a494e501
2025-03-31 16:00:24|
| |:-:| |WAJDA, Andrzej; Cenizas y diamantes, 1958|
Presentamos una nueva reseña cinematográfica, y en esta ocasión hemos elegido «Cenizas y diamantes», una película polaca del célebre y prolífico director Andrzej Wajda (1926-2016), estrenada en el año 1958. Se trata de uno de los grandes clásicos del cine polaco. El filme refleja una etapa dramática desde la perspectiva histórica para la nación polaca, como es el final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, a raíz de la capitulación alemana del 8 de mayo de 1945. El contexto en el que se desarrolla se ambienta en la celebración del final de la guerra con el aplastante triunfo de la URSS, con las tropas soviéticas ocupando toda la Europa oriental, y en particular Polonia, que vive un momento de oscuridad e incertidumbre. El protagonista, Maciek Chełmicki (interpretado magistralmente por Zbigniew Cybulski (1927-1967), apodado el «James Dean polaco»), es un joven nacionalista polaco, de orientación anticomunista, que se ve implicado en un complot urdido para asesinar a un líder comunista local. Maciek opera desde la clandestinidad, bajo el grupo Armia Krajowa (AK), el Ejército Nacional polaco, una organización de resistencia, primero contra los alemanes y, posteriormente, contra los soviéticos. Durante el metraje, se plantea una dicotomía permanente entre la libertad entendida como la defensa de la soberanía de Polonia, desde posturas nacionalistas, y quienes consideran la ocupación soviética como algo positivo. Estas circunstancias atrapan al protagonista, que se ve envuelto en una espiral de violencia y traición.
Maciek Chełmicki, nuestro protagonista, cuenta con todas las características del héroe trágico, pues tiene en sus manos una serie de acciones que comprometen el futuro de un pueblo, que consiste en cumplir la misión que le ha sido encomendada, pero en su camino se cruza una joven, Krystyna, una joven camarera de un hotel de la que se enamora en ese mismo día. Este último hecho sirve de punto de partida para todas las dudas, dilemas y dicotomías a las que hacemos referencia. Hay un dilema moral evidente en un mundo en ruinas, devastado por la guerra, la muerte y el nihilismo. En este sentido Wajda nos muestra un lenguaje cinematográfico muy evidente, a través de una técnica expresionista muy depurada, con el uso del blanco y negro, los contrastes generados por las sombras y la atmósfera opresiva que transmite angustia, desesperación y vulnerabilidad de los protagonistas. Además también destilan una fuerte carga emocional, donde no están exentos elementos poéticos y un poderoso lirismo.
|
| |:-:| |Maciek Chełmicki, el protagonista.|
Hay elementos simbólicos que no podemos obviar, y que contribuyen a consolidar el análisis que venimos haciendo, como, por ejemplo, la estética del protagonista, con unas gafas oscuras, que actúan como una suerte de barrera frente al mundo que le rodea, como parte del anonimato tras el cual el joven Maciek vive de forma introspectiva su propio drama particular y el de toda una nación.
|
| |:-:| |NITOGLIA, Curzio; En el mar de la nada: Metafísica y nihilismo a prueba en la posmodernidad; Hipérbola Janus, 2023|
Hay una escena especialmente poderosa, y casi mítica, en la que los dos jóvenes protagonistas, Maciek y Krystina, se encuentran entre las ruinas de una Iglesia, en la que se destaca en primer plano, ocupando buena parte de la pantalla, la imagen de un Cristo invertido sobre un crucifijo, donde también se encuentran dos cuerpos colgados hacia abajo en una estampa que refleja la devastación moral y espiritual de toda una época. De hecho, la imagen del crucifijo invertido refleja el máximo punto de subversión y profanación de lo sagrado, y que en el caso concreto de la película viene a representar la destrucción del orden moral y de valores cristianos que la propia guerra ha provocado. Polonia es una nación profundamente católica, convertida al Cristianismo en el 966 a raíz de la conversión del príncipe Miecislao I, contribuyendo de manera decisiva a la formación de la identidad nacional polaca. El catolicismo siempre ha sido un medio de cohesión y defensa frente a las influencias extranjeras y la ocupación de terceros países, una constante en la historia del país, como el que ilustra la propia película con la URSS. En este sentido, la imagen de una Iglesia en ruinas, el lugar donde se encuentra representado el principio de lo sagrado e inviolable, supone una forma de perversión de todo principio de redención y salvación frente a la tragedia, y al mismo tiempo viene a significar que la Tradición ha sido abandonada y pervertida. En la misma línea, el protagonista, Maciek, se encuentra atrapado en una espiral de violencia a través de sus actos terroristas perpetrados contra la autoridad soviética que ocupa su país. Los dos cuerpos anónimos que cuelgan boca abajo, de forma grotesca, también participan de este caos y desequilibrio de un orden dislocado, son parte de la deshumanización y el nihilismo que todo lo impregna.
|
| |:-:| |Maciek y Krystina en una iglesia en ruinas|
Como ya hemos mencionado, la película se encuentra plagada de paradojas y dicotomías, en las que nuestro protagonista, el joven rebelde e inconformista, debe elegir permanentemente, en unas decisiones que resultan trascendentales para su futuro y el de la propia nación. La figura femenina que irrumpe en su vida, y que representa un principio disruptivo que provoca una fractura interior y una crisis, le suscita una toma de conciencia de su propia situación y le fuerza a tomar un camino entre la «felicidad», del «amor», la «esperanza» y la «vida», que le permita superar la deriva nihilista y autodestructiva de la lucha clandestina, la cual le aboca a un destino trágico (que no vamos a desentrañar para no hacer spoiler). En relación al propio título de la película, «Cenizas y diamantes», basada en el poema del poeta y dramaturgo polaco Cyprian Norwid (1821-1883) y en la novela del autor, también polaco, Jerzy Andrzejewski (1909-1983), nos destaca la dualidad de los dos elementos que lo componen, y que definen el contraste entre el mundo sombrío y oscuro (Cenizas) y la esperanza y la luz que representa susodicha figura femenina (diamantes). La segunda alternativa parece un imposible, una quimera irrealizable que se pliega ante un Destino implacable, irreversible y cruel.
En consecuencia, y a la luz de los elementos expuestos, podemos decir que se nos presentan dilemas propios de la filosofía existencialista, que conoce su punto álgido en esos años, con autores como Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980), Albert Camus (1913-1960), Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) o Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) entre otros. Respecto a éste último, a Heidegger, podemos encontrar algunas claves interesantes a través de su filosofía en relación al protagonista, a Maciek, especialmente a través de la idea del Dasein, a la idea de haber sido arrojado al mundo (Geworfenheit), y la manera tan extrema y visceral en la que vive susodicha condición. Todos aquellos elementos que dan sentido a la vida colectiva se encuentran decaídos o destruidos en su esencia más íntima, la Patria, la religión o la propia idea de Comunidad orgánica. De modo que el protagonista se ha visto «arrojado» frente a una situación o destino indeseado, en unas coyunturas totalmente desfavorables en las que no queda otra elección. Sus decisiones están permanentemente condicionadas por la circunstancia descrita y, por tanto, vive en un mundo donde no controla nada, en lugar de ser sujeto es un mero objeto transportado por esas circunstancias ajenas a su voluntad. Sin embargo, y en coherencia con el Dasein heideggeriano, vemos como Maciek, a raíz de conocer a Krystyna, comienza a experimentar una catarsis interior, que muestra por momentos el deseo de superar ese «ser arrojado al mundo contra tu voluntad», trascendiendo esa condición absurda e irracional de unas decisiones enajenadas de su voluntad para dotar de una significación y un sentido la propia existencia.
|
| |:-:| |Andrzej Wajda, el director de la película.|
Otro elemento característico de la filosofía heideggeriana lo podemos encontrar en la «angustia» (angst) a través de la ausencia de un sentido y fundamento último que justifique la existencia del protagonista. Es una angustia en a que el Dasein se enfrenta a la «nada», a ese vacío existencial que hace inútil toda la lucha que Maciek lleva a cabo en la clandestinidad, con asesinatos y actos de terrorismo que pretenden salvaguardar algo que ya no existe, y que simboliza muy bien la Iglesia en ruinas con sus símbolos religiosos invertidos de la que hablábamos con anterioridad. Recuerda un poco a esa dicotomía que se plantea entre ser conservador o reaccionario frente a una realidad como la del propio presente, en la que los valores tradicionales han sido totalmente destruidos, y más que conservar se impone la reacción para volver a construir de la nada.
|
| |:-:| |Hipérbola Janus; Textos para la Tradición en tiempos del oscurecimiento: Artículos publicados entre 2014 y 2019 en hiperbolajanus.com; Hipérbola Janus, 2019|
Todas las dudas que asaltan al protagonista se ven incrementadas en el momento decisivo, cuando se dispone a dar muerte al líder comunista. Se produce una tensión interna en Maciek, que se encuentra ligado a la joven que ha conocido ese día, y en ella es donde encuentra ese leve destello de humanidad. Esa circunstancia le hace replantearse por un instante el cumplimiento de su misión, pero es un dilema que no tiene salida, y por ello le asalta nuevamente la angustia frente a esa «nada», ese mundo vacío e incomprensible que trasciende el marco de sus propias elecciones.
Uno de los conceptos centrales de Heidegger en Ser y tiempo es el Sein-zum-Tode (ser-para-la-muerte), la idea de que la muerte es la posibilidad más propia y definitiva del Dasein, y que enfrentarla auténticamente permite vivir de manera más plena. Y es que el protagonista se encuentra permanentemente sobre esa frontera entre la vida y la muerte, que afronta con todas sus consecuencias, conscientemente, y la acepta. Esta actitud podría leerse como una forma de Dasein inauténtico, una huida del ser-para-la-muerte mediante la distracción (das Man, el «se» impersonal). Sin embargo, su decisión de cumplir la misión sugiere un enfrentamiento final con esa posibilidad. Otro aspecto que podemos conectar con el pensamiento heideggeriano es la autenticidad o inautenticidad de la vida del protagonista. En relación a la inautenticidad vemos como al principio sigue las órdenes de sus superiores en la organización sin cuestionarlas, lo cual implica un comportamiento inequívocamente alienante. Respecto a aquello que resulta auténtico de su existencia son sus relaciones con Krystyna, que supone imponer su propia voluntad y decisión, mostrando un Dasein que asume su libertad.
|
| |:-:| |Escena de la película.|
Otros aspectos más generales de la filosofía existencialista redundan sobre estos mismos aspectos, con la elección entre la libertad absoluta y la condena inevitable. La idea del hombre condenado a actuar, a una elección continua, aún cuando el hombre no es dueño de su destino, o las consecuencias de tales acciones son absurdas, irracionales e incomprensibles. El propio absurdo de la existencia frente al vacío y la ausencia de principios sólidos en los que cimentar la vida, no solo en sus aspectos cotidianos más básicos, sino en aquellos más profundos de la existencia. La soledad y la propia fatalidad frente a un Destino que, como ya hemos apuntado anteriormente, parece imponerse de manera irrevocable, y podríamos decir que brutalmente, al individuo aislado, incapaz de asirse en una guía, en unos valores que le permitan remontar la situación.
En términos generales «Cenizas y diamantes», además de ser una película de gran calidad en sus aspectos técnicos, en su fotografía, en la configuración de sus escenas y en el propio desarrollo argumental, bajo un guión espléndidamente ejecutado a lo largo de sus 98 minutos de duración, también nos invita a una reflexión profunda sobre la condición humana y la propia Modernidad. Y es algo que vemos en nuestros días, con las consecuencias de un pensamiento débil, con la promoción del individualismo, el hedonismo y lo efímero. La ausencia de estructuras sólidas, la subversión de toda forma de autoridad y jerarquía tradicionales. Paradójicamente, el mundo actual tiende a formas de poder y autoridad mucho más invasivas y coercitivas, tanto a nivel individual como colectivo, pero en la misma línea abstracta e impersonal que nos describe la película, abocándonos a la alienación y la inautenticidad de nuestras propias vidas. Y como Maciek, también nosotros, vivimos en un mundo dominado por la incertidumbre y la desesperanza, en el que el globalismo y sus perversas ideologías deshumanizantes actúan por doquier.
|
| |:-:| |Carátula original de la película en polaco.|
Artículo original: Hipérbola Janus, Reseña de «Cenizas y Diamantes» (Andrzej Wajda, 1958) (TOR), 31/Mar/2025
-
@ bcbb3e40:a494e501
2025-03-31 15:44:56El 7 de febrero de 2025, Donald Trump firmó una orden ejecutiva que establecía una «Oficina de la Fe» en la Casa Blanca, dirigida por su asesora espiritual Paula White-Cain, la pastora de esa «teología de la prosperidad» (prosperity theology) que predica el «Evangelio de la salud y la riqueza» (health and wealth gospel^1). Investida de su nueva función, la reverenda pastora dijo: «Tengo la autoridad para declarar a la Casa Blanca un lugar santo. Es mi presencia la que la santifica»[^2]. Los siete rabinos del «Sanedrín Naciente» —la corte suprema que guiará a Israel cuando se reconstruya el Templo de Jerusalén— enviaron conmovedoras felicitaciones al presidente Trump por el establecimiento de esta Oficina. «Expresamos nuestra sincera gratitud —se lee en el mensaje oficial enviado a Trump desde el Monte Sión— por llevar la fe a la vanguardia de la cultura estadounidense y mundial mediante el establecimiento de la Oficina de la Fe en la Casa Blanca. Su reconocimiento de la importancia de la religión en la vida pública es un paso hacia la restauración de los valores morales y del liderazgo espiritual en el mundo[^3]. La carta del «Sanedrín Naciente», que augura el éxito a la «misión divina» del presidente estadounidense, reproduce las dos caras de una «moneda del Templo», acuñada en 2017 para celebrar el traslado de la embajada estadounidense a Jerusalén y, simultáneamente, el centenario de la Declaración Balfour. En el anverso se ven los perfiles de Donald Trump y Ciro el Grande, a quien la tradición judía atribuye la reconstrucción del templo destruido por los babilonios, con la inscripción (en hebreo e inglés) «Cyrus —Balfour— Trump Declaration 1917-2017»; en el reverso está la imagen del Templo de Jerusalén[^4]. Otra moneda, que lleva los perfiles de Trump y Ciro en el anverso y los de Trump y Netanyahu en el reverso, fue acuñada en 2018 para celebrar el septuagésimo aniversario de la independencia del «Estado de Israel»; se observa dos inscripciones en hebreo e inglés: «Y Él me encargó construirle una casa en Jerusalén» y «Guerra de los Hijos de la Luz contra los Hijos de las Tinieblas».
El tema de la «guerra de los Hijos de la Luz contra los Hijos de las Tinieblas» ha tenido una difusión particular en el imaginario y la propaganda trumpista. El 7 de junio de 2020, monseñor Carlo Maria Viganò, ex nuncio de la Santa Sede en los Estados Unidos, escribió una carta al presidente Donald Trump que comenzaba así: «Estamos asistiendo en los últimos meses a la formación de dos bandos, que los definiría bíblicos: los hijos de la luz y los hijos de las tinieblas»[^5]. El 1 de enero de 2021, el agitprop estadounidense Steve Bannon declaró en una entrevista con Monseñor Viganò: «Esta es una batalla de época entre los hijos de la Luz y los hijos de las Tinieblas»[^6].
Son numerosos los judíos sionistas que están en el círculo del presidente Trump: además de su hija Ivanka (convertida en 2009) y su yerno Jared Kushner (entonces Consejero Anciano del Presidente), el 19 de noviembre de 2024 el «The Jerusalem Post»[^7] publicó una lista de los más influyentes: Stephen Miller, subdirector del staff de la Casa Blanca y consejero de Seguridad Nacional de Estados Unidos; David Melech Friedman, a quien en 2016 Trump nombró embajador en Israel; el multimillonario «filántropo» Steven Charles Witkoff, enviado especial de Estados Unidos a Oriente Medio; Miriam Adelson, directora del periódico «Israel Hayom», clasificada por Bloomberg Billionaires como la quinta mujer más rica del mundo (con un patrimonio neto de 32,400 millones de dólares), financiadora de iniciativas políticas conservadoras en Estados Unidos e Israel; el banquero Boris Epshteyn, consejero estratégico de la campaña presidencial de Trump en 2020; Howard Williams Lutnick, presidente de la Cantor Fitzgerald del Grupo BGC, financista de las campañas presidenciales de Donald Trump en 2020 y 2024, ahora secretario de Comercio; la modelo Elizabeth Pipko, portavoz nacional del Partido Republicano y creadora de un «museo interactivo virtual» sobre la «Shoah» como parte del proyecto de Lest People Forget, cuyo objetivo es combatir el «antisemitismo» y la «negacionismo»; Lee Michael Zeldin, miembro republicano de la Cámara de Representantes por el estado de Nueva York del 2015 al 2023 y actualmente administrador de la EPA (Environmental Protection Agency); la columnista Laura Elizabeth Loomer, «orgullosamente islamófoba», activa patrocinadora de Trump en la campaña para las elecciones presidenciales de 2024; Sidney Ferris Rosenberg, influyente presentador de radio y periodista deportivo; William Owen Scharf, Asistente del Presidente y secretario del personal de la Casa Blanca; Marc Jeffrey Rowan, «filántropo» con un patrimonio neto valorado por Forbes en ocho mil ochocientos millones de dólares.
Además de estos, cabe mencionar al popular presentador de radio Mark Levin quien, en diciembre de 2019, durante la celebración de la fiesta de Janucá en la Casa Blanca, saludó a Donald Trump como «el primer presidente judío de los Estados Unidos»[^8]. Según un funcionario de alto nivel de la Casa Blanca, Donald Trump se convirtió al judaísmo dos años antes en la sinagoga de la secta Jabad Lubavitch en la ciudad de Nueva York. David Elias Goldberg, miembro del Jewish Center of Antisemitic Study, también entrevistó al funcionario, para quien «Trump fue “instado” por su hija Ivanka y su yerno Jared Kushner para abrazar la fe. Inicialmente, Trump se habría mostrado reacio, considerando que esto podría enfriar el apoyo del electorado evangélico». Luego, informa «Israel Today News», «cambió de opinión y se convirtió oficialmente a principios de 2017. La ceremonia se llevó a cabo en privado y se guardó celosamente durante casi dos años»[^9]. Pero ya en septiembre de 2015, el rabino millonario Kirt Schneider, invitado a la Trump Tower de Nueva York, había impuesto sus manos sobre la cabeza de Donald Trump y lo había bendecido en hebreo e inglés, declarando: «Las únicas dos naciones que tienen una relación privilegiada con Dios son Israel y los Estados Unidos de América»[^10].
El 7 de octubre de 2024, en el aniversario de la operación de Hamas «Diluvio de Al-Aqsa», Trump fue acompañado por un «superviviente de la Shoah» a la tumba de Menachem Mendel Schneerson, séptimo y último Rabino de los Hasidim de la secta Jabad Lubavitch, que en 1991 declaró a sus seguidores: «He hecho todo lo posible para provocar el arribo del Mesías, ahora les paso a ustedes esta misión; hagan todo lo que puedan para que Él venga»^11. En relación al evento mesiánico, el eminente rabino Yekutiel Fish atribuyó una misión decisiva a Trump: «Todo el mundo está centrado en Gaza, pero esa es solo una parte de la agenda del fin de los tiempos, que tiene a los judíos viviendo en las fronteras profetizadas de Israel; la Torá incluye explícitamente a Gaza. Lo que Trump está haciendo es limpiar Gaza de todos los odiadores de Israel. No podrán estar en Israel después de la venida del Mesías. (...) Esto incluirá a Gaza, la mitad del Líbano y gran parte de Jordania. Y vemos que casi lo hemos logrado. Siria cayó. Líbano está medio destruido. Gaza está destrozada. El escenario está casi listo para el Mesías. Pero, ¿cómo pueden los palestinos estar aquí cuando vayamos a recibir al Mesías? El Mesías necesita que alguien se ocupe de esto, y en este caso, es Donald Trump. Trump está simplemente llevando a cabo las tareas finales necesarias antes de que el Mesías sea revelado»[^12].
Esta inspiración escatológica está presente en las palabras de Pete Brian Hegseth, el pintoresco exponente del «Reconstruccionismo Cristiano»[^13] a quien Trump nombró secretario de Defensa. En un discurso pronunciado en 2019 en el Hotel Rey David de Jerusalén, con motivo de la conferencia anual del canal Arutz Sheva (Israel National News), Hegseth enalteció el «vínculo eterno» entre Israel y Estados Unidos, y enumeró los «milagros» que atestiguan el «apoyo divino» a la causa sionista, el último de los cuales será la reconstrucción del Templo judío en la zona donde actualmente se encuentra la mezquita de al-Aqsa: «La dignidad de capital adquirida por Jerusalén —dijo— fue un milagro, y no hay razón por la cual no sea posible el milagro de la restauración del Templo en el Monte del Templo».[^14]
Es conocido que el fundamentalismo evangélico pro-sionista[^15] comparte con el judaísmo la creencia en que la construcción del tercer Templo de Jerusalén marcará el comienzo de la era mesiánica; cuando la administración Trump trasladó la embajada de Estados Unidos a Jerusalén en 2017, Laurie Cardoza-Moore, exponente del evangelismo sionista, saludó así la «obediencia de Trump a la Palabra de Dios» en «Haaretz»: «Al establecer la Embajada en Jerusalén, el presidente Donald Trump está implementando una de las iniciativas históricas de dimensión bíblica en su presidencia. Al igual que muchos judíos en Israel y en todo el mundo, los cristianos reconocen el vínculo de los judíos con la Biblia a través del nombre de Jerusalén como la capital del antiguo Israel, así como el sitio del Primer y Segundo Templos. Según los profetas Ezequiel, Isaías y el apóstol Juan del Nuevo Testamento, todos los israelíes esperan la reconstrucción del Tercer Templo»[^16]. El 22 de mayo del mismo año, Donald Trump, acompañado de su esposa Melania, de su hija Ivanka y su yerno Jared Kushner, fue el primer presidente de los Estados Unidos en ejercicio en acudir al Muro de las Lamentaciones, anexionado ilegalmente a la entidad sionista.
En 2019, la administración Trump confirmó la posición de Estados Unidos al enviar en visita oficial para Jerusalén a Mike Pompeo, un secretario de Estado que —ironía de la Historia— lleva el mismo nombre del general romano que asaltó la ciudad en el año 63 a.C. «Por primera vez en la historia, un secretario de Estado norteamericano visitó la Ciudad Vieja de Jerusalén en compañía de un alto político israelí. Fue una visita histórica que reforzó las expectativas israelíes y constituyó un reconocimiento tácito de la soberanía israelí sobre el sitio del Monte del Templo y la Explanada de las Mezquitas. (…) Mike Pompeo, acompañado por el primer ministro Benjamin Netanyahu y el embajador de Estados Unidos en Israel, David Friedman, también visitó el túnel del Muro de las Lamentaciones y la sinagoga ubicada bajo tierra, en el presunto lugar del santuario del Templo[^17], donde se le mostró una maqueta del futuro Templo[^18]. En el transcurso de una entrevista concedida durante la fiesta del Purim (que celebra el exterminio de la clase política persa, ocurrido hace 2500 años), el secretario de Estado insinuó que «el presidente Donald Trump puede haber sido enviado por Dios para salvar al pueblo judío y que confiaba en que aquí el Señor estaba obrando»[^19].
Como observa Daniele Perra, en este mismo número de «Eurasia», el «mito movilizador» del Tercer Templo, atribuible a los «mitos teológicos» señalados por Roger Garaudy como mitos fundadores de la entidad sionista, «atribuye al judaísmo una especie de función sociológica de transmisión y proyección del conflicto palestino-israelí hacia el resto del mundo y confiere una inspiración apocalíptica al momento geopolítico actual».
|Info|| |:-|:-| |Autor| Claudio Mutti | |Fuente| I "Figli della Luce" alla Casa Bianca | |Fecha| 8/Mar/2025 | |Traducción| Francisco de la Torre |
[^2]: The White House, President Trump announces appointments to the White House Faith Office https://www.whitehouse.gov,, 7 de febrero de 2025; Trump establece la Oficina de la Fe con una foto de «La Última Cena» | Fue dirigida por la controvertida predicadora Paula White, https://www.tgcom24.mediaset.it, 10 de febrero de 2025.
[^3]: «We extend our heartfelt gratitude for bringing faith to the forefront of American and global culture through the establishment of the Faith Office in the White House. Your recognition of the importance of religion in public life is a step toward restoring moral values and spiritual leadership in the world» (Letter from the Nascent Sanhedrin to President Donald J. Trump, Jerusalem, Wednesday, February 12, 2025).
[^4]: Israeli group mints Trump coin to honor Jerusalem recognition, «The Times of Israel», https://www.timesofisrael.com, 28-2-2018.
[^5]: Mons. Viganò — Siamo nella battaglia tra figli della luce e figli delle tenebre, https://www.italiador.com, 7-6-2020
[^6]: TRANSCRIPT: Steve Bannon’s ‘War Room’ interview with Abp. Viganò, lifesitenews.com, 4-1-2021. Sulle origini e sulla fortuna di questo tema cfr. C. Mutti, Le sètte dell’Occidente, «Eurasia», 2/2021, pp. 12-15. (https://www.eurasia-rivista.com/las-sectas-de-occidente/)
[^7]: Luke Tress, The who’s who of Jews in Trump’s inner circle?, «The Jerusalem Post», https://www.jpost.com, 19-11-2024.
[^8]: Radio Talk Show Host Mark Levin Calls President Trump «the First Jewish President of the United States», https://www.c-span.org, 11-12-2019.
[^9]: «However, he had a change of heart and officially converted in early 2017. The ceremony was held in private, and closely guarded for nearly two years» (Donald Trump converted to Judaism two years ago, according to White House official, https://israeltodaynews.blogspot.com/2019/02).
[^10]: «El rabino Kirt Schneider (...) es un millonario judío, una figura televisiva de los “judíos mesiánicos”. Sus emisiones televisivas semanales son emitidas por más de treinta canales cristianos en unos doscientos países; entre ellos, los canales “Yes” y “Hot” en Israel. Solo en Estados Unidos, sus emisiones atraen a 1.600.000 telespectadores cada semana. Kirt Schneider dirige un imperio de telecomunicaciones que tiene un millón y medio de seguidores en Facebook, X (antes Twitter) y YouTube» (Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, Edizioni all'insegna del Veltro, Parma 2025, p. 31).
[^12]: «Everyone is focused on Gaza, but that is only one part of the end-of-days agenda, which has the Jews living in Israel’s prophesied borders. The Torah explicitly includes Gaza. What Trump is doing is cleaning out Gaza of all the haters of Israel. They cannot be in Israel after the Messiah comes. (…) This will include Gaza, half of Lebanon, and much of Jordan. And we see that we are almost there. Syria fell. Lebanon is half gone. Gaza is ripped up. The stage is nearly set for Messiah. But how can the Palestinians be here when we go to greet the Messiah? The Messiah needs someone to take care of this, and in this case, it is Donald Trump. Trump is merely carrying out the final tasks needed before Messiah is revealed» (Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz, Trump’s Gaza Plan is «The Final task before Messiah», https://israel365news.com, 5-2-2025).
[^13]: «A day after Hegseth was announced for the Cabinet position, Brooks Potteiger, a pastor within the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), posted on X that Hegseth is a member of the church in good standing. The CREC, a denomination of Christian Reconstructionism, is considered by some academics to be an extremist, Christian supremacist movement» (Shannon Bond e altri, What’s behind defense secretary pick Hegseth’s war on ‘woke’, https://www.npr.org, 14-11-2024.
[^14]: «The decoration of Jerusalem as a capital was a miracle, and there is no reason why the miracle of the re-establishment of Temple on the Temple Mount is not possible» (Pete Hegseth at Arutz Sheva Conference, youtube.com). Cfr. Daniele Perra, Paleotrumpismo, neotrumpismo e post-trumpismo, in: AA. VV., Trumpismo, Cinabro Edizioni, Roma 2025, pp. 22-23.
[^15]: Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, cit., págs. 82 a 96.
[^16]: «We American Christians Welcome Trump’s Obedience to God’s Word on Jerusalem», «Haaretz», 6-12-2017.
[^17]: Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent — Youssef Hindi, El milenarismo teopolítico de Israel, cit., pág. 97.
[^18]: Pompeo en visite historique au mur Occidental aux côtés de Netanyahu et Friedman, «The Times of Israel», https://fr.timesofisrael.com, 21-3-2019.
[^19]: Pompeo says Trump may have been sent by God to save Jews from Iran, «The Times of Israel», 22-3-2019.
Artículo original: Claudio Mutti, Los «hijos de la luz» en la Casa Blanca (TOR), 25/Mar/2025
-
@ 6b3780ef:221416c8
2025-03-26 18:42:00This workshop will guide you through exploring the concepts behind MCP servers and how to deploy them as DVMs in Nostr using DVMCP. By the end, you'll understand how these systems work together and be able to create your own deployments.
Understanding MCP Systems
MCP (Model Context Protocol) systems consist of two main components that work together:
- MCP Server: The heart of the system that exposes tools, which you can access via the
.listTools()
method. - MCP Client: The interface that connects to the MCP server and lets you use the tools it offers.
These servers and clients can communicate using different transport methods:
- Standard I/O (stdio): A simple local connection method when your server and client are on the same machine.
- Server-Sent Events (SSE): Uses HTTP to create a communication channel.
For this workshop, we'll use stdio to deploy our server. DVMCP will act as a bridge, connecting to your MCP server as an MCP client, and exposing its tools as a DVM that anyone can call from Nostr.
Creating (or Finding) an MCP Server
Building an MCP server is simpler than you might think:
- Create software in any programming language you're comfortable with.
- Add an MCP library to expose your server's MCP interface.
- Create an API that wraps around your software's functionality.
Once your server is ready, an MCP client can connect, for example, with
bun index.js
, and then call.listTools()
to discover what your server can do. This pattern, known as reflection, makes Nostr DVMs and MCP a perfect match since both use JSON, and DVMs can announce and call tools, effectively becoming an MCP proxy.Alternatively, you can use one of the many existing MCP servers available in various repositories.
For more information about mcp and how to build mcp servers you can visit https://modelcontextprotocol.io/
Setting Up the Workshop
Let's get hands-on:
First, to follow this workshop you will need Bun. Install it from https://bun.sh/. For Linux and macOS, you can use the installation script:
curl -fsSL https://bun.sh/install | bash
-
Choose your MCP server: You can either create one or use an existing one.
-
Inspect your server using the MCP inspector tool:
bash npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector build/index.js arg1 arg2
This will: - Launch a client UI (default: http://localhost:5173)
- Start an MCP proxy server (default: port 3000)
-
Pass any additional arguments directly to your server
-
Use the inspector: Open the client UI in your browser to connect with your server, list available tools, and test its functionality.
Deploying with DVMCP
Now for the exciting part – making your MCP server available to everyone on Nostr:
-
Navigate to your MCP server directory.
-
Run without installing (quickest way):
npx @dvmcp/bridge
-
Or install globally for regular use:
npm install -g @dvmcp/bridge # or bun install -g @dvmcp/bridge
Then run using:bash dvmcp-bridge
This will guide you through creating the necessary configuration.
Watch the console logs to confirm successful setup – you'll see your public key and process information, or any issues that need addressing.
For the configuration, you can set the relay as
wss://relay.dvmcp.fun
, or use any other of your preferenceTesting and Integration
- Visit dvmcp.fun to see your DVM announcement.
- Call your tools and watch the responses come back.
For production use, consider running dvmcp-bridge as a system service or creating a container for greater reliability and uptime.
Integrating with LLM Clients
You can also integrate your DVMCP deployment with LLM clients using the discovery package:
-
Install and use the
@dvmcp/discovery
package:bash npx @dvmcp/discovery
-
This package acts as an MCP server for your LLM system by:
- Connecting to configured Nostr relays
- Discovering tools from DVMCP servers
-
Making them available to your LLM applications
-
Connect to specific servers or providers using these flags: ```bash # Connect to all DVMCP servers from a provider npx @dvmcp/discovery --provider npub1...
# Connect to a specific DVMCP server npx @dvmcp/discovery --server naddr1... ```
Using these flags, you wouldn't need a configuration file. You can find these commands and Claude desktop configuration already prepared for copy and paste at dvmcp.fun.
This feature lets you connect to any DVMCP server using Nostr and integrate it into your client, either as a DVM or in LLM-powered applications.
Final thoughts
If you've followed this workshop, you now have an MCP server deployed as a Nostr DVM. This means that local resources from the system where the MCP server is running can be accessed through Nostr in a decentralized manner. This capability is powerful and opens up numerous possibilities and opportunities for fun.
You can use this setup for various use cases, including in a controlled/local environment. For instance, you can deploy a relay in your local network that's only accessible within it, exposing all your local MCP servers to anyone connected to the network. This setup can act as a hub for communication between different systems, which could be particularly interesting for applications in home automation or other fields. The potential applications are limitless.
However, it's important to keep in mind that there are security concerns when exposing local resources publicly. You should be mindful of these risks and prioritize security when creating and deploying your MCP servers on Nostr.
Finally, these are new ideas, and the software is still under development. If you have any feedback, please refer to the GitHub repository to report issues or collaborate. DVMCP also has a Signal group you can join. Additionally, you can engage with the community on Nostr using the #dvmcp hashtag.
Useful Resources
- Official Documentation:
- Model Context Protocol: modelcontextprotocol.org
-
DVMCP.fun: dvmcp.fun
-
Source Code and Development:
- DVMCP: github.com/gzuuus/dvmcp
-
DVMCP.fun: github.com/gzuuus/dvmcpfun
-
MCP Servers and Clients:
- Smithery AI: smithery.ai
- MCP.so: mcp.so
-
Glama AI MCP Servers: glama.ai/mcp/servers
Happy building!
- MCP Server: The heart of the system that exposes tools, which you can access via the
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-04-03 07:42:25Spanien bleibt einer der Vorreiter im europäischen Prozess der totalen Überwachung per Digitalisierung. Seit Mittwoch ist dort der digitale Personalausweis verfügbar. Dabei handelt es sich um eine Regierungs-App, die auf dem Smartphone installiert werden muss und in den Stores von Google und Apple zu finden ist. Per Dekret von Regierungschef Pedro Sánchez und Zustimmung des Ministerrats ist diese Maßnahme jetzt in Kraft getreten.
Mit den üblichen Argumenten der Vereinfachung, des Komforts, der Effizienz und der Sicherheit preist das Innenministerium die «Innovation» an. Auch die Beteuerung, dass die digitale Variante parallel zum physischen Ausweis existieren wird und diesen nicht ersetzen soll, fehlt nicht. Während der ersten zwölf Monate wird «der Neue» noch nicht für alle Anwendungsfälle gültig sein, ab 2026 aber schon.
Dass die ganze Sache auch «Risiken und Nebenwirkungen» haben könnte, wird in den Mainstream-Medien eher selten thematisiert. Bestenfalls wird der Aspekt der Datensicherheit angesprochen, allerdings in der Regel direkt mit dem Regierungsvokabular von den «maximalen Sicherheitsgarantien» abgehandelt. Dennoch gibt es einige weitere Aspekte, die Bürger mit etwas Sinn für Privatsphäre bedenken sollten.
Um sich die digitale Version des nationalen Ausweises besorgen zu können (eine App mit dem Namen MiDNI), muss man sich vorab online registrieren. Dabei wird die Identität des Bürgers mit seiner mobilen Telefonnummer verknüpft. Diese obligatorische fixe Verdrahtung kennen wir von diversen anderen Apps und Diensten. Gleichzeitig ist das die Basis für eine perfekte Lokalisierbarkeit der Person.
Für jeden Vorgang der Identifikation in der Praxis wird später «eine Verbindung zu den Servern der Bundespolizei aufgebaut». Die Daten des Individuums werden «in Echtzeit» verifiziert und im Erfolgsfall von der Polizei signiert zurückgegeben. Das Ergebnis ist ein QR-Code mit zeitlich begrenzter Gültigkeit, der an Dritte weitergegeben werden kann.
Bei derartigen Szenarien sträuben sich einem halbwegs kritischen Staatsbürger die Nackenhaare. Allein diese minimale Funktionsbeschreibung lässt die totale Überwachung erkennen, die damit ermöglicht wird. Jede Benutzung des Ausweises wird künftig registriert, hinterlässt also Spuren. Und was ist, wenn die Server der Polizei einmal kein grünes Licht geben? Das wäre spätestens dann ein Problem, wenn der digitale doch irgendwann der einzig gültige Ausweis ist: Dann haben wir den abschaltbaren Bürger.
Dieser neue Vorstoß der Regierung von Pedro Sánchez ist ein weiterer Schritt in Richtung der «totalen Digitalisierung» des Landes, wie diese Politik in manchen Medien – nicht einmal kritisch, sondern sehr naiv – genannt wird. Ebenso verharmlosend wird auch erwähnt, dass sich das spanische Projekt des digitalen Ausweises nahtlos in die Initiativen der EU zu einer digitalen Identität für alle Bürger sowie des digitalen Euro einreiht.
In Zukunft könnte der neue Ausweis «auch in andere staatliche und private digitale Plattformen integriert werden», wie das Medienportal Cope ganz richtig bemerkt. Das ist die Perspektive.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dazu passend:
Nur Abschied vom Alleinfahren? Monströse spanische Überwachungsprojekte gemäß EU-Norm
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696
2025-03-31 21:48:50In seinem Beitrag vom 30. März 2025 fragt Henning Rosenbusch auf Telegram angesichts zunehmender digitaler Kontrolle und staatlicher Allmacht:
„Wie soll sich gegen eine solche Tyrannei noch ein Widerstand formieren können, selbst im Untergrund? Sehe ich nicht.“\ (Quelle: t.me/rosenbusch/25228)
Er beschreibt damit ein Gefühl der Ohnmacht, das viele teilen: Eine Welt, in der Totalitarismus nicht mehr mit Panzern, sondern mit Algorithmen kommt. Wo Zugriff auf Geld, Meinungsfreiheit und Teilhabe vom Wohlverhalten abhängt. Der Bürger als kontrollierbare Variable im Code des Staates.\ Die Frage ist berechtigt. Doch die Antwort darauf liegt nicht in alten Widerstandsbildern – sondern in einer neuen Realität.
-- Denn es braucht keinen Untergrund mehr. --
Der Widerstand der Zukunft trägt keinen Tarnanzug. Er ist nicht konspirativ, sondern transparent. Nicht bewaffnet, sondern mathematisch beweisbar. Bitcoin steht nicht am Rand dieser Entwicklung – es ist ihr Fundament. Eine Bastion aus physikalischer Realität, spieltheoretischem Schutz und ökonomischer Wahrheit. Es ist nicht unfehlbar, aber unbestechlich. Nicht perfekt, aber immun gegen zentrale Willkür.
Hier entsteht kein „digitales Gegenreich“, sondern eine dezentrale Renaissance. Keine Revolte aus Wut, sondern eine stille Abkehr: von Zwang zu Freiwilligkeit, von Abhängigkeit zu Selbstverantwortung. Diese Revolution führt keine Kriege. Sie braucht keine Führer. Sie ist ein Netzwerk. Jeder Knoten ein Individuum. Jede Entscheidung ein Akt der Selbstermächtigung.
Weltweit wachsen Freiheits-Zitadellen aus dieser Idee: wirtschaftlich autark, digital souverän, lokal verankert und global vernetzt. Sie sind keine Utopien im luftleeren Raum, sondern konkrete Realitäten – angetrieben von Energie, Code und dem menschlichen Wunsch nach Würde.
Der Globalismus alter Prägung – zentralistisch, monopolistisch, bevormundend – wird an seiner eigenen Hybris zerbrechen. Seine Werkzeuge der Kontrolle werden ihn nicht retten. Im Gegenteil: Seine Geister werden ihn verfolgen und erlegen.
Und während die alten Mächte um Erhalt kämpfen, wächst eine neue Welt – nicht im Schatten, sondern im Offenen. Nicht auf Gewalt gebaut, sondern auf Mathematik, Physik und Freiheit.
Die Tyrannei sieht keinen Widerstand.\ Weil sie nicht erkennt, dass er längst begonnen hat.\ Unwiderruflich. Leise. Überall.
-
@ b17fccdf:b7211155
2025-03-25 11:23:36Si vives en España, quizás hayas notado que no puedes acceder a ciertas páginas webs durante los fines de semana o en algunos días entre semana, entre ellas, la guía de MiniBolt.
Esto tiene una razón, por supuesto una solución, además de una conclusión. Sin entrar en demasiados detalles:
La razón
El bloqueo a Cloudflare, implementado desde hace casi dos meses por operadores de Internet (ISPs) en España (como Movistar, O2, DIGI, Pepephone, entre otros), se basa en una orden judicial emitida tras una demanda de LALIGA (Fútbol). Esta medida busca combatir la piratería en España, un problema que afecta directamente a dicha organización.
Aunque la intención original era restringir el acceso a dominios específicos que difundieran dicho contenido, Cloudflare emplea el protocolo ECH (Encrypted Client Hello), que oculta el nombre del dominio, el cual antes se transmitía en texto plano durante el proceso de establecimiento de una conexión TLS. Esta medida dificulta que las operadoras analicen el tráfico para aplicar bloqueos basados en dominios, lo que les obliga a recurrir a bloqueos más amplios por IP o rangos de IP para cumplir con la orden judicial.
Esta práctica tiene consecuencias graves, que han sido completamente ignoradas por quienes la ejecutan. Es bien sabido que una infraestructura de IP puede alojar numerosos dominios, tanto legítimos como no legítimos. La falta de un "ajuste fino" en los bloqueos provoca un perjuicio para terceros, restringiendo el acceso a muchos dominios legítimos que no tiene relación alguna con actividades ilícitas, pero que comparten las mismas IPs de Cloudflare con dominios cuestionables. Este es el caso de la web de MiniBolt y su dominio
minibolt.info
, los cuales utilizan Cloudflare como proxy para aprovechar las medidas de seguridad, privacidad, optimización y servicios adicionales que la plataforma ofrece de forma gratuita.Si bien este bloqueo parece ser temporal (al menos durante la temporada 24/25 de fútbol, hasta finales de mayo), es posible que se reactive con el inicio de la nueva temporada.
La solución
Obviamente, MiniBolt no dejará de usar Cloudflare como proxy por esta razón. Por lo que a continuación se exponen algunas medidas que como usuario puedes tomar para evitar esta restricción y poder acceder:
~> Utiliza una VPN:
Existen varias soluciones de proveedores de VPN, ordenadas según su reputación en privacidad: - IVPN - Mullvad VPN - Proton VPN (gratis) - Obscura VPN (solo para macOS) - Cloudfare WARP (gratis) + permite utilizar el modo proxy local para enrutar solo la navegación, debes utilizar la opción "WARP a través de proxy local" siguiendo estos pasos: 1. Inicia Cloudflare WARP y dentro de la pequeña interfaz haz click en la rueda dentada abajo a la derecha > "Preferencias" > "Avanzado" > "Configurar el modo proxy" 2. Marca la casilla "Habilite el modo proxy en este dispositivo" 3. Elige un "Puerto de escucha de proxy" entre 0-65535. ej: 1080, haz click en "Aceptar" y cierra la ventana de preferencias 4. Accede de nuevo a Cloudflare WARP y pulsa sobre el switch para habilitar el servicio. 3. Ahora debes apuntar el proxy del navegador a Cloudflare WARP, la configuración del navegador es similar a esta para el caso de navegadores basados en Firefox. Una vez hecho, deberías poder acceder a la guía de MiniBolt sin problemas. Si tienes dudas, déjalas en comentarios e intentaré resolverlas. Más info AQUÍ.
~> Proxifica tu navegador para usar la red de Tor, o utiliza el navegador oficial de Tor (recomendado).
La conclusión
Estos hechos ponen en tela de juicio los principios fundamentales de la neutralidad de la red, pilares esenciales de la Declaración de Independencia del Ciberespacio que defiende un internet libre, sin restricciones ni censura. Dichos principios se han visto quebrantados sin precedentes en este país, confirmando que ese futuro distópico que muchos negaban, ya es una realidad.
Es momento de actuar y estar preparados: debemos impulsar el desarrollo y la difusión de las herramientas anticensura que tenemos a nuestro alcance, protegiendo así la libertad digital y asegurando un acceso equitativo a la información para todos
Este compromiso es uno de los pilares fundamentales de MiniBolt, lo que convierte este desafío en una oportunidad para poner a prueba las soluciones anticensura ya disponibles, así como las que están en camino.
¡Censúrame si puedes, legislador! ¡La lucha por la privacidad y la libertad en Internet ya está en marcha!
Fuentes: * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/movistar-o2-deja-clientes-sin-acceso-11239 * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/esta-nueva-sentencia-autoriza-bloqueos-11257 * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/como-saltarse-bloqueo-webs-warp-vpn-9958 * https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/como-activar-ech-chrome-acceder-webs-10689 * https://comunidad.movistar.es/t5/Soporte-Fibra-y-ADSL/Problema-con-web-que-usan-Cloudflare/td-p/5218007
-
@ b8af284d:f82c91dd
2025-03-24 08:09:20I'd say that globalization's hunger for cheap labor is a problem, precisely because it's been bad for innovation. Both our working people and our innovators have the same enemy — and the solution is American innovation...
Liebe Abonnenten,
der intellektuell brillante Vize-Präsident J.D. Vance hat diese Woche seine Wirtschaftspolitik skizziert. Über deren Grundzüge geht es heute.
Die Geschichte der Globalisierung ist die Geschichte der Suche nach billigen Arbeitskräften. Arbeiter in den westlichen Gesellschaften in den G7-Staaten waren spätestens in den 1980er Jahren gut organisiert und stemmten sich meist erfolgreich gegen Lohnkürzungen und Stellenabbau. Nach dem Zusammenbruch der Sowjetunion 1990 fanden die international tätigen Konzerne auf einmal ein gewaltiges Reservoir an billigen Arbeitskräften - nicht nur, aber vor allem in China.
Dieser Prozess nahm 2001 mit dem Beitritt Chinas zur Welthandelsorganisation nochmals an Fahrt auf. Deutlich wird er am ikonischen Produkt der Neuzeit, dem iPhone. Das erste Modell kam 2007 auf den Markt. Entworfen und designt wurde und wird das Smartphone von Apple in Kalifornien. Gefertigt dagegen wird es von einem der größten Konzerne der Welt. Foxconn beschäftigt allein in China über eine Million Menschen. Hon Hai, wie Foxconn eigentlich heißt, ist übrigens ein taiwanisches Unternehmen.
Dieser Prozess der verlagerten Fertigung hatte mehrere Vorteile: Produkte wurden günstiger. Davon profitierten Konsumenten in der westlichen Welt. Würde man ein iPhone in den USA oder Deutschland herstellen, würde es durch die höheren Löhne zwischen 200 und 300 Euro mehr kosten. Die Konzerne wie Apple konnten somit günstiger produzieren, ihre Margen erhöhen, und ihre Aktienkurse stiegen.
Von diesem Prozess profitierten außerdem Länder wie China: Das monatliche Grundgehalt von Foxconn-Mitarbeitern in Shenzhen erscheint mit rund 400 Euro im Monat noch immer grotesk niedrig. Für viele Chinesen vom Land bedeutet ein Job in der Fabrik allerdings ein Gehaltssprung von mehreren hundert Prozent. Es gibt keinen Grund, die Arbeitsbedingungen bei Foxconn schönzureden. Zur Wahrheit gehört aber auch, dass sich die allermeisten Wanderarbeiter nicht ausgebeutet oder als Opfer fühlen. Im Gegenteil: In meiner Zeit in China stieß ich meist auf Menschen, die sich als selbstwirksamer empfanden als viele Festangestellte mit 30 Urlaubstagen im Westen. Länder, mit billigen Arbeitskräften, profitierten also von diesem Prozess und kletterten so auf der globalen Wertschöpfungskette nach oben.
Etwa zeitgleich nahm auch in westlichen Ländern die Immigration zu. Der Anteil der im Ausland geborenen Bevölkerung stieg von etwa 7,9 Prozent im Jahr 1990 auf 13,7 Prozent im Jahr 2021, was den höchsten Stand seit 1910 darstellt. In Deutschland stieg der „Ausländer“-Anteil von knapp 7 Prozent 1990 auf 27 Prozent 2023. Viele Unternehmen hatten also sowohl international als auch national Zugriff auf günstige Arbeitskräfte. In Europa wurden diese zudem dringend gebraucht, um das in Schieflage geratene Rentensystem zu stabilisieren.
Die Nachteile dieses Megatrends wurden zunächst in den USA sichtbar: Immer mehr Unternehmen in den USA verlagerten ihre Produktion nach China. Hinzu kam der Status des US-Dollars als Weltreservewährung. Durch die konstante Nachfrage nach Dollar bleibt dieser stark, und macht amerikanische Exporte teurer. Eine Deindustrialisierung setzte ein, die vielen Menschen ihren Job kostete. Zeitgleich wuchs das Handelsbilanzdefizit mit China immer weiter. Hinzu kam eine konstante Erhöhung der Geldmenge. Amerikaner mit „hard assets“, Immobilien und Aktien, wurden tendenziell reicher. Der Rest aber nicht. Kurz: Konzerne verdienten gut, die Wirtschaft wuchs, nur bei den Amerikanern selbst blieb immer weniger hängen.
Worum es J.D. Vance also geht: Innovation und Arbeitsplätze in die USA zurückzuholen. Dafür müssen Schutzmauern errichtet werden: gegen die illegale Einwanderung billiger Arbeitskräfte und billiger Waren. Zölle dienen dazu, ausländische Waren zu verteuern, und somit Unternehmen Anreize zu geben, direkt in den USA zu investieren. Kürzlich gab Siemens bekannt, zehn Milliarden Euro in amerikanische KI-Rechenzentren zu investieren. Was wohl auch Teil des Trump-Derangement-Syndroms ist: die Wahrnehmung der amerikanischen Zollpolitik. Kaum ein Land hat aktuell so niedrige Zollschranken wie die Vereinigten Staaten.
\ Kurz gesagt: iPhones sollen demnach nicht nur in den USA entworfen, sondern auch in amerikanischen Fabriken zusammengeschraubt werden. Alles hoch-inflationär, wenden Kritiker ein. Wer globale Lieferketten abreißt, und ins eigene Land zurückholt, hat mit viel höheren Kosten zu kämpfen. Also steigt die Inflation. Diesen Prozess will die US-Regierung mit günstigeren Energiekosten kontern. Egal ob Solar-, Nuklear- oder Fracking - jede Energiequelle soll dafür Recht sein.
Schließlich soll eine strikte Haushaltsdisziplin (DOGE) unnötige Ausgaben vermeiden, und die Bürokratie abbauen. Im Gegenzug können dann die Steuern gesenkt werden. Die Einkommensteuer für Familien mit einem Jahreseinkommen bis zu 150000 US-Dollar soll komplett gestrichen werden.
Tl/DR:
- Migration begrenzen, um Billigarbeit zu verhindern
- Zölle errichten, um amerikanische Produktion zu stärken
- Günstige Energiequellen priorisieren, um Inflation zu verhindern
- Staatsausgaben radikal kürzen
- Steuern radikal senken
Kann das Projekt klappen? Vielleicht. Das Megaprojekt Globalisierung zurückzudrehen, oder zumindest etwas zu bremsen, ist ein Wagnis. Zölle bergen die Gefahr der Inflation und eines Handelskriegs. Unsicher ist, ob von einer Deregulierung weiterer Branchen am Ende wirklich amerikanische Arbeiter profitieren. Und wie innovativ können Unternehmen sein, wenn sie am Ende mehr Geld für ihre Beschäftigten ausgeben müssen, anstatt es in Forschung und Entwicklung zu investieren? Was geschieht, wenn der Rest der Welt nicht mitmacht, und sich immer weiter vernetzt? Werden die USA am Ende eine einsame Zoll-Insel? In ein paar Monaten dürfte sich langsam abzeichnen, ob das Projekt funktioniert.
Mehr dazu:
Der Mar-a-Largo-Accord - wie eine neue Finanzordnung entsteht
Was dagegen nicht klappen wird, ist das deutsche Projekt. Friedrich Merz hat mit einem „Husarenstück“ (SZ) mit einem abgewählten Bundestag eine Verfassungsänderung durchgepeitscht. Mindestens 500 Milliarden Euro neue Schulden werden gemacht, das Militär erhält einen Blankoscheck für neue Anschaffungen. Bürokratie wird nicht abgebaut. Die Unter- und Mittelschicht wird nicht entlastet. Das 100-Milliarden Zugeständnis an die Grünen sorgt dafür, dass Energie nicht günstiger wird. Ein bisschen Innovation werden die neuen Panzer- und Drohnen-Fabriken schon bringen. Am Ende aber bleibt Rüstung totes Kapital. Im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes.
Was das neue Wirtschaftsprogramm für Bitcoin bedeutet - haben wir den Boden gesehen?
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-03-31 07:23:05Der Irrsinn ist bei Einzelnen etwas Seltenes – \ aber bei Gruppen, Parteien, Völkern, Zeiten die Regel. \ Friedrich Nietzsche
Erinnern Sie sich an die Horrorkomödie «Scary Movie»? Nicht, dass ich diese Art Filme besonders erinnerungswürdig fände, aber einige Szenen daraus sind doch gewissermaßen Klassiker. Dazu zählt eine, die das Verhalten vieler Protagonisten in Horrorfilmen parodiert, wenn sie in Panik flüchten. Welchen Weg nimmt wohl die Frau in der Situation auf diesem Bild?
Diese Szene kommt mir automatisch in den Sinn, wenn ich aktuelle Entwicklungen in Europa betrachte. Weitreichende Entscheidungen gehen wider jede Logik in die völlig falsche Richtung. Nur ist das hier alles andere als eine Komödie, sondern bitterernst. Dieser Horror ist leider sehr real.
Die Europäische Union hat sich selbst über Jahre konsequent in eine Sackgasse manövriert. Sie hat es versäumt, sich und ihre Politik selbstbewusst und im Einklang mit ihren Wurzeln auf dem eigenen Kontinent zu positionieren. Stattdessen ist sie in blinder Treue den vermeintlichen «transatlantischen Freunden» auf ihrem Konfrontationskurs gen Osten gefolgt.
In den USA haben sich die Vorzeichen allerdings mittlerweile geändert, und die einst hoch gelobten «Freunde und Partner» erscheinen den europäischen «Führern» nicht mehr vertrauenswürdig. Das ist spätestens seit der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz, der Rede von Vizepräsident J. D. Vance und den empörten Reaktionen offensichtlich. Große Teile Europas wirken seitdem wie ein aufgescheuchter Haufen kopfloser Hühner. Orientierung und Kontrolle sind völlig abhanden gekommen.
Statt jedoch umzukehren oder wenigstens zu bremsen und vielleicht einen Abzweig zu suchen, geben die Crash-Piloten jetzt auf dem Weg durch die Sackgasse erst richtig Gas. Ja sie lösen sogar noch die Sicherheitsgurte und deaktivieren die Airbags. Den vor Angst dauergelähmten Passagieren fällt auch nichts Besseres ein und so schließen sie einfach die Augen. Derweil übertrumpfen sich die Kommentatoren des Events gegenseitig in sensationslüsterner «Berichterstattung».
Wie schon die deutsche Außenministerin mit höchsten UN-Ambitionen, Annalena Baerbock, proklamiert auch die Europäische Kommission einen «Frieden durch Stärke». Zu dem jetzt vorgelegten, selbstzerstörerischen Fahrplan zur Ankurbelung der Rüstungsindustrie, genannt «Weißbuch zur europäischen Verteidigung – Bereitschaft 2030», erklärte die Kommissionspräsidentin, die «Ära der Friedensdividende» sei längst vorbei. Soll das heißen, Frieden bringt nichts ein? Eine umfassende Zusammenarbeit an dauerhaften europäischen Friedenslösungen steht demnach jedenfalls nicht zur Debatte.
Zusätzlich brisant ist, dass aktuell «die ganze EU von Deutschen regiert wird», wie der EU-Parlamentarier und ehemalige UN-Diplomat Michael von der Schulenburg beobachtet hat. Tatsächlich sitzen neben von der Leyen und Strack-Zimmermann noch einige weitere Deutsche in – vor allem auch in Krisenzeiten – wichtigen Spitzenposten der Union. Vor dem Hintergrund der Kriegstreiberei in Deutschland muss eine solche Dominanz mindestens nachdenklich stimmen.
Ihre ursprünglichen Grundwerte wie Demokratie, Freiheit, Frieden und Völkerverständigung hat die EU kontinuierlich in leere Worthülsen verwandelt. Diese werden dafür immer lächerlicher hochgehalten und beschworen.
Es wird dringend Zeit, dass wir, der Souverän, diesem erbärmlichen und gefährlichen Trauerspiel ein Ende setzen und die Fäden selbst in die Hand nehmen. In diesem Sinne fordert uns auch das «European Peace Project» auf, am 9. Mai im Rahmen eines Kunstprojekts den Frieden auszurufen. Seien wir dabei!
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben und ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-26 20:54:33Capitalism is the most effective system for scaling innovation. The pursuit of profit is an incredibly powerful human incentive. Most major improvements to human society and quality of life have resulted from this base incentive. Market competition often results in the best outcomes for all.
That said, some projects can never be monetized. They are open in nature and a business model would centralize control. Open protocols like bitcoin and nostr are not owned by anyone and if they were it would destroy the key value propositions they provide. No single entity can or should control their use. Anyone can build on them without permission.
As a result, open protocols must depend on donation based grant funding from the people and organizations that rely on them. This model works but it is slow and uncertain, a grind where sustainability is never fully reached but rather constantly sought. As someone who has been incredibly active in the open source grant funding space, I do not think people truly appreciate how difficult it is to raise charitable money and deploy it efficiently.
Projects that can be monetized should be. Profitability is a super power. When a business can generate revenue, it taps into a self sustaining cycle. Profit fuels growth and development while providing projects independence and agency. This flywheel effect is why companies like Google, Amazon, and Apple have scaled to global dominance. The profit incentive aligns human effort with efficiency. Businesses must innovate, cut waste, and deliver value to survive.
Contrast this with non monetized projects. Without profit, they lean on external support, which can dry up or shift with donor priorities. A profit driven model, on the other hand, is inherently leaner and more adaptable. It is not charity but survival. When survival is tied to delivering what people want, scale follows naturally.
The real magic happens when profitable, sustainable businesses are built on top of open protocols and software. Consider the many startups building on open source software stacks, such as Start9, Mempool, and Primal, offering premium services on top of the open source software they build out and maintain. Think of companies like Block or Strike, which leverage bitcoin’s open protocol to offer their services on top. These businesses amplify the open software and protocols they build on, driving adoption and improvement at a pace donations alone could never match.
When you combine open software and protocols with profit driven business the result are lean, sustainable companies that grow faster and serve more people than either could alone. Bitcoin’s network, for instance, benefits from businesses that profit off its existence, while nostr will expand as developers monetize apps built on the protocol.
Capitalism scales best because competition results in efficiency. Donation funded protocols and software lay the groundwork, while market driven businesses build on top. The profit incentive acts as a filter, ensuring resources flow to what works, while open systems keep the playing field accessible, empowering users and builders. Together, they create a flywheel of innovation, growth, and global benefit.
-
@ 66675158:1b644430
2025-03-23 11:39:41I don't believe in "vibe coding" – it's just the newest Silicon Valley fad trying to give meaning to their latest favorite technology, LLMs. We've seen this pattern before with blockchain, when suddenly Non Fungible Tokens appeared, followed by Web3 startups promising to revolutionize everything from social media to supply chains. VCs couldn't throw money fast enough at anything with "decentralized" (in name only) in the pitch deck. Andreessen Horowitz launched billion-dollar crypto funds, while Y Combinator batches filled with blockchain startups promising to be "Uber for X, but on the blockchain."
The metaverse mania followed, with Meta betting its future on digital worlds where we'd supposedly hang out as legless avatars. Decentralized (in name only) autonomous organizations emerged as the next big thing – supposedly democratic internet communities that ended up being the next scam for quick money.
Then came the inevitable collapse. The FTX implosion in late 2022 revealed fraud, Luna/Terra's death spiral wiped out billions (including my ten thousand dollars), while Celsius and BlockFi froze customer assets before bankruptcy.
By 2023, crypto winter had fully set in. The SEC started aggressive enforcement actions, while users realized that blockchain technology had delivered almost no practical value despite a decade of promises.
Blockchain's promises tapped into fundamental human desires – decentralization resonated with a generation disillusioned by traditional institutions. Evangelists presented a utopian vision of freedom from centralized control. Perhaps most significantly, crypto offered a sense of meaning in an increasingly abstract world, making the clear signs of scams harder to notice.
The technology itself had failed to solve any real-world problems at scale. By 2024, the once-mighty crypto ecosystem had become a cautionary tale. Venture firms quietly scrubbed blockchain references from their websites while founders pivoted to AI and large language models.
Most reading this are likely fellow bitcoiners and nostr users who understand that Bitcoin is blockchain's only valid use case. But I shared that painful history because I believe the AI-hype cycle will follow the same trajectory.
Just like with blockchain, we're now seeing VCs who once couldn't stop talking about "Web3" falling over themselves to fund anything with "AI" in the pitch deck. The buzzwords have simply changed from "decentralized" to "intelligent."
"Vibe coding" is the perfect example – a trendy name for what is essentially just fuzzy instructions to LLMs. Developers who've spent years honing programming skills are now supposed to believe that "vibing" with an AI is somehow a legitimate methodology.
This might be controversial to some, but obvious to others:
Formal, context-free grammar will always remain essential for building precise systems, regardless of how advanced natural language technology becomes
The mathematical precision of programming languages provides a foundation that human language's ambiguity can never replace. Programming requires precision – languages, compilers, and processors operate on explicit instructions, not vibes. What "vibe coding" advocates miss is that beneath every AI-generated snippet lies the same deterministic rules that have always governed computation.
LLMs don't understand code in any meaningful sense—they've just ingested enormous datasets of human-written code and can predict patterns. When they "work," it's because they've seen similar patterns before, not because they comprehend the underlying logic.
This creates a dangerous dependency. Junior developers "vibing" with LLMs might get working code without understanding the fundamental principles. When something breaks in production, they'll lack the knowledge to fix it.
Even experienced developers can find themselves in treacherous territory when relying too heavily on LLM-generated code. What starts as a productivity boost can transform into a dependency crutch.
The real danger isn't just technical limitations, but the false confidence it instills. Developers begin to believe they understand systems they've merely instructed an AI to generate – fundamentally different from understanding code you've written yourself.
We're already seeing the warning signs: projects cobbled together with LLM-generated code that work initially but become maintenance nightmares when requirements change or edge cases emerge.
The venture capital money is flowing exactly as it did with blockchain. Anthropic raised billions, OpenAI is valued astronomically despite minimal revenue, and countless others are competing to build ever-larger models with vague promises. Every startup now claims to be "AI-powered" regardless of whether it makes sense.
Don't get me wrong—there's genuine innovation happening in AI research. But "vibe coding" isn't it. It's a marketing term designed to make fuzzy prompting sound revolutionary.
Cursor perfectly embodies this AI hype cycle. It's an AI-enhanced code editor built on VS Code that promises to revolutionize programming by letting you "chat with your codebase." Just like blockchain startups promised to "revolutionize" industries, Cursor promises to transform development by adding LLM capabilities.
Yes, Cursor can be genuinely helpful. It can explain unfamiliar code, suggest completions, and help debug simple issues. After trying it for just an hour, I found the autocomplete to be MAGICAL for simple refactoring and basic functionality.
But the marketing goes far beyond reality. The suggestion that you can simply describe what you want and get production-ready code is dangerously misleading. What you get are approximations with:
- Security vulnerabilities the model doesn't understand
- Edge cases it hasn't considered
- Performance implications it can't reason about
- Dependency conflicts it has no way to foresee
The most concerning aspect is how such tools are marketed to beginners as shortcuts around learning fundamentals. "Why spend years learning to code when you can just tell AI what you want?" This is reminiscent of how crypto was sold as a get-rich-quick scheme requiring no actual understanding.
When you "vibe code" with an AI, you're not eliminating complexity—you're outsourcing understanding to a black box. This creates developers who can prompt but not program, who can generate but not comprehend.
The real utility of LLMs in development is in augmenting existing workflows:
- Explaining unfamiliar codebases
- Generating boilerplate for well-understood patterns
- Suggesting implementations that a developer evaluates critically
- Assisting with documentation and testing
These uses involve the model as a subordinate assistant to a knowledgeable developer, not as a replacement for expertise. This is where the technology adds value—as a sophisticated tool in skilled hands.
Cursor is just a better hammer, not a replacement for understanding what you're building. The actual value emerges when used by developers who understand what happens beneath the abstractions. They can recognize when AI suggestions make sense and when they don't because they have the fundamental knowledge to evaluate output critically.
This is precisely where the "vibe coding" narrative falls apart.
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-25 17:43:44One of the most common criticisms leveled against nostr is the perceived lack of assurance when it comes to data storage. Critics argue that without a centralized authority guaranteeing that all data is preserved, important information will be lost. They also claim that running a relay will become prohibitively expensive. While there is truth to these concerns, they miss the mark. The genius of nostr lies in its flexibility, resilience, and the way it harnesses human incentives to ensure data availability in practice.
A nostr relay is simply a server that holds cryptographically verifiable signed data and makes it available to others. Relays are simple, flexible, open, and require no permission to run. Critics are right that operating a relay attempting to store all nostr data will be costly. What they miss is that most will not run all encompassing archive relays. Nostr does not rely on massive archive relays. Instead, anyone can run a relay and choose to store whatever subset of data they want. This keeps costs low and operations flexible, making relay operation accessible to all sorts of individuals and entities with varying use cases.
Critics are correct that there is no ironclad guarantee that every piece of data will always be available. Unlike bitcoin where data permanence is baked into the system at a steep cost, nostr does not promise that every random note or meme will be preserved forever. That said, in practice, any data perceived as valuable by someone will likely be stored and distributed by multiple entities. If something matters to someone, they will keep a signed copy.
Nostr is the Streisand Effect in protocol form. The Streisand effect is when an attempt to suppress information backfires, causing it to spread even further. With nostr, anyone can broadcast signed data, anyone can store it, and anyone can distribute it. Try to censor something important? Good luck. The moment it catches attention, it will be stored on relays across the globe, copied, and shared by those who find it worth keeping. Data deemed important will be replicated across servers by individuals acting in their own interest.
Nostr’s distributed nature ensures that the system does not rely on a single point of failure or a corporate overlord. Instead, it leans on the collective will of its users. The result is a network where costs stay manageable, participation is open to all, and valuable verifiable data is stored and distributed forever.
-
@ 2fb77d26:c47a6ee1
2025-03-21 15:49:40»Pershing II« – das war eines der ersten englischen Wörter, das mir als Kind geläufig war. Es handelt sich um die Typenbezeichnung einer US-Mittelstreckenrakete, einer nuklearen Boden-Boden-Rakete, die mit einem thermonuklearen Sprengkopf vom Typ W85 ausgestattet war, eine Reichweite von etwa 1.800 km hatte und somit von Süddeutschland aus Ziele im westlichen Russland binnen fünf Minuten erreichen konnte. Es war Anfang der 1980er Jahre. Die Zeit des Kalten Krieges. Eine Bezeichnung, die George Orwell mit seinem Essay »You and the Atomic Bomb« (Du und die Atombombe) im Jahre 1945 geprägt hatte. Die Fronten waren verhärtet.
Die westdeutsche Friedensbewegung protestierte lautstark gegen die Stationierung von Atomsprengköpfen auf heimischem Boden. Nachdem die im NATO-Doppelbeschluss vom 12. Dezember 1979 vereinbarten Abrüstungsverhandlungen zwischen den Atommächten jedoch erfolglos geblieben waren, entschied der Deutsche Bundestag am 22. November 1983, der Stationierung von US-Atomwaffen im Lande zuzustimmen. Diese war 1985 abgeschlossen und ganze 120 Exemplare der todbringenden Massenvernichtungswaffe in der Bundesrepublik verteilt worden. Außer Deutschland tat kein Land den USA diesen Gefallen.
Ich hatte die militärische Artikelbezeichnung »Pershing II« im Radio aufgeschnappt, welcher zu Hause fast durchgehend in Betrieb war, und später ein paar Bilder der Raketen in den Abendnachrichten gesehen. Noch gab es nur ARD, ZDF und das Regionalprogramm. Dementsprechend rar waren visuelle Informationen. Und aufgrund meiner frühen Begeisterung für Fluggeräte aller Art, zeichnete ich daraufhin ständig Raketen. Da ich außerdem bereits in diesem zarten Alter von fünf oder sechs Jahren extrem von Musik angetan war und durchweg versuchte, englische Songtexte, zum Beispiel von den Beatles, dem Klang der Stimmen folgend nachzusingen, übte auch der fremd klingende Begriff »Pershing II« eine gewisse Faszination auf mich aus.
Was mir meine Eltern diesbezüglich sagten oder erklärten, kann ich leider nicht mehr erinnern – als erklärte Pazifisten nahmen sie die latente Gefahr eines Nuklearkrieges aber sicher nicht mit der spielerisch-kindlichen Leichtigkeit, die ich im Umgang mit gemalten oder gebastelten Raketen an den Tag legte. Das Thema nukleare Kriegsführung beherrschte die Nachrichten dieser Zeit und erzeugte Angst. Denn Militärstrategen sprachen Anfang der 1980er Jahre allen Ernstes davon, dass der Atomkrieg zwischenzeitlich präziser und somit auch führbarer geworden sei. Damals wie heute – absoluter Irrsinn.
Neben der Berlin-Blockade 1948/1949 und der Kuba-Krise, war die Auseinandersetzung um die Stationierung von Mittelstreckenraketen in Westeuropa von 1979 bis 1983 also eine der drei kritischsten Phasen des Kalten Krieges.
Nie war die Welt einem fatalen wie letalen nuklearen Schlagabtausch der Supermächte näher als zu diesen drei Zeitpunkten in der Geschichte. Bis heute, so scheint es.
Denn die stetig eskalierende Ukraine-Krise rückt dieses vergessen geglaubte Horror-Szenario wieder in den Fokus der Öffentlichkeit. Polit-Darsteller wie der Maoist und China-Fan Robert Habeck äußern dieser Tage dummdreist, keine Angst vor einem Dritten Weltkrieg zu haben. Sogenannte Sicherheitsexperten erklären im ZDF, dass man sich vor Putins Bomben nicht fürchten solle, obwohl man in Mainz permanent Angst schürt und schon am 5. Mai 2022 titelt, »Moskau simuliert Atomangriff in Kaliningrad«.
Der »Beobachter Gesundheit« gibt Tipps dazu, wie man die Panik vor einem Atomkrieg mental in den Griff bekommen kann, während das deutsche BBK (Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz und Katastrophenhilfe) der Bevölkerung bereits empfiehlt, im Zuge der Ukraine-Krise Notvorräte anzulegen und Marschgepäck bereitzuhalten. Auf der Webseite »wikiHow« findet sich ein sehr umfassender, bebilderter Ratgeber mit dem Titel »Einen Atomkrieg überleben«. Beim Lesen der zahlreichen, mutmaßlich nur bedingt hilfreichen Tipps zur Meisterung der nuklearen Apokalypse dürfte jedem normalen Menschen etwas mulmig werden.
Hofberichterstatter Ruprecht Polenz lässt sich beim Propaganda-Multiplikator ZEIT ONLINE am 30. April 2022 dennoch zu der wagemutigen Formulierung verleiten, »wer einen Atomkrieg verhindern will, darf Putin nicht gewinnen lassen«. Solch ein Statement ist nicht nur falsch und realitätsfremd, sondern zeugt gleichsam von der bewussten Negierung von Faktenlage und historischen Hintergründen zur Ukraine-Krise. Dabei könnte man es durchaus besser wissen.
Die RAND-Corporation, ein im Jahre 1948 gegründeter, einflussreicher Think Tank der US-Hegemonie, veröffentlichte zum Beispiel schon im Jahr 2019 ein vielsagendes, 354 Seiten umfassendes Strategiepapier unter der Überschrift »Overextending and Unbalancing Russia«. Frei übersetzt: Eine Strategie, um Russland überzustrapazieren und aus dem Gleichgewicht zu bringen – ökonomisch, militärisch und gesellschaftlich – mit dem singulären Ziel, die geopolitische Dominanz der Vereinigten Staaten zu bewahren. Ein durchdachtes Drehbuch zur finalen Erniedrigung und Bezwingung des ewigen Klassenfeindes sowie dem Erhalt der unipolaren Weltordnung, der Pax Americana.
Der Ansatz der RAND-Corporation: Die Osterweiterung der NATO forcieren, das Ansehen Russlands in der Welt zerstören, kostenintensives, nukleares Wettrüsten, die Ukraine bewaffnen, um einen militärischen Stellvertreterkonflikt mit Putin zu provozieren, um die ehemalige Sowjetunion anschließend mittels internationaler Sanktionen – legitimiert durch den brodelnden Krieg – finanziell in die Knie zu zwingen.
Verblüffend, wie sehr doch die im RAND-Strategiepapier aufgezeigte Vorgehensweise den aktuellen Geschehnissen an den Außengrenzen des Riesenreiches gleicht. Fast macht es den Anschein, als folgten die Geostrategen in Washington den Empfehlungen ihrer kostspieligen Think Tanks. Dies ließ sich auch im Zuge der Corona-Krise beobachten, die im Ablauf fraglos dem von der Rockefeller-Stiftung erarbeiteten Pandemie-Szenario »Lock Step« glich, wie Journalist Norbert Häring bereits am 28. Mai 2020 ausführlich berichtet.
Was das totalitäre Krisen-Drehbuch der RAND-Corporation nicht detailliert behandelt, sind die akuten Risiken einer potenziellen nuklearen Eskalation. Denn es endet mit dem möglichen Aufkeimen eines militärischen Konflikts und schließt schlicht mit dem Hinweis:
»Auch wenn die US-Armee nicht direkt an der Operation beteiligt ist, wird sie eine Schlüsselrolle bei der Abmilderung der Folgen spielen. Wie bereits erwähnt, bergen alle Maßnahmen, die der Schwächung Russlands dienen, einiges an Risiko. Infolgedessen werden das Abschreckungspotential sowie die operativen Fähigkeiten des US-Militärs in Europa gestärkt werden müssen. Es besteht die Möglichkeit, dass die Spannungen mit Russland zu einem Konflikt eskalieren.«
Die USA betrachten den Einsatz von Atomwaffen dabei offensichtlich als probates Mittel. Warum sonst modernisieren die Amerikaner seit Jahren ihr Arsenal und geben Milliarden US-Dollar dafür aus? Das macht eigentlich nur Sinn, wenn man plant, diese Waffen irgendwann einzusetzen. Der »Plot« für die Events nach dem Aufflammen einer militärischen Auseinandersetzung mit Russland ist vermutlich Verschlusssache und liegt nur Eingeweihten im Weißen Haus, Pentagon, CIA-Hauptquartier sowie den Verbündeten in EU und NATO-Hauptquartier vor.
Das ist bedauerlich. Denn ein Einblick in die aktuellen militärischen Planspiele und strategischen Szenarien der NATO-Hegemonie wäre hilfreich, um zu verstehen, ob die Arroganz des Westens tatsächlich einen Punkt erreicht hat, an dem man einen Atomkrieg in Kauf nehmen würde, um Russland und China auf ihre Plätze zu verweisen und im globalen Club der Technokraten am Kopfende zu sitzen. Um einen Konflikt der Systeme – Kapitalismus, Sozialismus, Kommunismus – handelt es sich nämlich nicht, auch wenn Medien dies gerne so darstellen, sondern um Machtkämpfe innerhalb der internationalen Oligarchie. Die drei Machtblöcke kämpfen um Vorherrschaft in der totalitären Weltordnung der nahen Zukunft.
Die Frage ist nur: Tun sie dies einvernehmlich – oder handelt es sich an Russlands Grenzen um ernsthafte, kriegerische Auseinandersetzungen, die in letzter Konsequenz militärisch entschieden werden müssen? Das RAND-Strategiepapier scheint davon auszugehen, dass Wirtschafts- und Informationskrieg, begleitet von NATO-Drohgebärden, ausreichen, um das Rennen zu Gunsten des Wertewestens zu entscheiden. Es gilt zu hoffen, dass diese Interpretation des Schriftstücks zutrifft. Ansonsten läuft die moderne Zivilisation Gefahr, sich in die Steinzeit zurückzubomben. Wie das aussieht, zeigt eindrücklich der Film »The Day After« (Der Tag danach) aus dem Jahre 1983.
Der zwei Stunden lange Streifen von Regisseur Nicholas Meyer ist bildgewaltig, beängstigend, ernüchternd und deprimierend. Er zeigt nicht nur, wie binnen weniger Tage aus einem Kalten Krieg ein Atomkrieg wird, sondern auch, was dessen schreckliche Folgen sind. Schon ein kurzer, etwas mehr als acht Minuten langer Zusammenschnitt macht klar, dass man ein absoluter Narr sein muss, um keine Angst vor thermonuklearen Angriffen zu haben.
Im Film gibt der US-Oberbefehlshaber nach der Zerstörung des NATO-Hauptquartiers den Befehl zum Atomschlag. Das entsprechende NATO-Protokoll wird aktiviert und die Raketensilos einsatzbereit gemacht. Das Drehbuch lässt offen, wer den Erstschlag führt. Klar ist, dass sobald die Sprengköpfe des Westens unterwegs sind, Russland einen Gegenangriff mit 300 Interkontinentalraketen auslöst und die Vereinigten Staaten in die Steinzeit bombt.
Überall im Land der unbegrenzten Möglichkeiten steigen feurige Atompilze in den Himmel. Metropolen werden in Sekunden ausradiert, Lebewesen, Pflanzen und Gebäude verdampfen in Feuersbrünsten um den Einschlagsort, ganze Landstriche werden vom Erdboden getilgt – und schon in den ersten Minuten nach Explosion der Nuklearsprengköpfe sterben weite Teile der Bevölkerung. 90 Millionen innerhalb weniger Stunden, wie eine Simulation mit dem etwas unheimlichen Titel »Plan A« der Princeton-Universität von 2019 berechnet hat.
Der eigentliche Horror beginnt allerdings erst. Denn die schlimmsten Szenen des Films sind jene, die den Zustand der Welt zwei Wochen nach den Atomschlägen zeigen. Im Land herrscht Anomie. Chaos und Zerstörung, wohin man schaut. Vorindustrielle Zustände. Die Städte sind unbewohnbar und die Überlebenden leiden an Strahlenkrankheit. Haare und Zähne fallen aus. Bei manchen binnen weniger Stunden oder Tage, bei anderen dauert es Wochen. Ein grausamer Tod auf Raten. Alles stirbt, siecht dahin. In den Ruinen entstehen Flüchtlingslager. Seuchen brechen aus. Militärkommandos erschießen willkürlich Menschen. Recht, Gerichte und Prozesse gibt es nicht mehr. Und um zu überleben, bewaffnen sich schlussendlich auch die Zivilisten und töten sich gegenseitig. Absolute Barbarei.
»The Day After« erklärt nicht, wer diesen Krieg gewinnt, nennt keinen Sieger. Vermutlich, weil Regisseur Nicholas Meyer schmerzlich bewusst war, dass es bei einem ausgewachsenen Atomkrieg keine Gewinner geben kann.
Er bedeutet das Ende der modernen Zivilisation. Nicht umsonst hat Albert Einstein früh vor militärischem Missbrauch entsprechender wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse gewarnt. So lässt der Streifen aus Zeiten das kalten Krieges auch das Ende offen. Kein Hollywood-Finale. Kein Happy End. Die beklemmenden Gefühle bleiben. Weder Will Smith noch James Bond tauchen auf, um die Welt in letzter Minute doch noch zu retten. Sie ist kaputt. Tot. Eine nuklear verseuchte Wüste. Kein Hoffnungsschimmer am Horizont.
Wer das Pech hatte, die Erstschläge zu überleben, stirbt langsam, aber sicher – und vor allem qualvoll.
Vielleicht sollten Spitzenpolitiker, Dogmatiker, Propagandisten und Kriegshetzer von heute sich diesen Film einmal in Ruhe anschauen, bevor sie leichtfertig derartige Optionen in Betracht ziehen. Ich habe »The Day After« nur ein einziges Mal in meinem Leben gesehen – wenige Monate, nachdem ich den Begriff »Pershing II« das erste Mal als kleines Kind im Radio hörte und meine Eltern neugierig fragte, was es damit auf sich hat – das war ausreichend. Die Eindrücke wirken bis heute. Ich bin mir auch mehr als dreißig Jahre später immer noch der unverrückbaren, indiskutablen Tatsache bewusst, dass es niemals zu einem Atomkrieg kommen darf. Jeder, der diesen Film gesehen, wird das unterschreiben.
Ich jedenfalls werde nie vergessen, wie ich eines nachts heimlich im dunklen Wohnzimmer der heimischen Dachwohnung ganz nahe vor dem Fernseher saß. Eigentlich durfte ich nur ein paar Mal in der Woche ausgewählte Kindersendungen anschauen. Aber meine Eltern schliefen bereits. Es muss circa 23:00 Uhr gewesen sein, denn nach den Spätfilmen war damals in der Regel Sendeschluss. Und das was war meist gegen eins oder halb zwei.
Just als ich den kleinen Röhrenfernseher anschaltete, begann »im Ersten« der bis heute in mir nachhallende Spielfilm. Der Tag danach. Zunächst begeistert von den vielen Raketen und irgendwie noch fasziniert von den mir bis dato unbekannten, riesigen Explosionen, die Atombomben auslösen, blieb ich gebannt sitzen. Wie versteinert. Bis zur Schlussszene, in der sich eine Handvoll strahlenverseuchter, zerrissener, verrottender Menschen, die kaum noch Haare auf dem Kopf haben und aussehen wie Zombies, in den staubigen Ruinen einer leeren Großstadt kraftlos in den Armen liegen und hilflos schluchzen. Die Kamera zieht auf. Dann Schwarzblende – und eine letzte, dünne, einsam flehende Stimme im Äther:
»Hello, is anybody there? Anybody at all?« (Hallo, ist da jemand? Irgendjemand?)
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-03-21 19:41:50Wir werden nicht zulassen, dass technisch manches möglich ist, \ aber der Staat es nicht nutzt. \ Angela Merkel
Die Modalverben zu erklären, ist im Deutschunterricht manchmal nicht ganz einfach. Nicht alle Fremdsprachen unterscheiden zum Beispiel bei der Frage nach einer Möglichkeit gleichermaßen zwischen «können» im Sinne von «die Gelegenheit, Kenntnis oder Fähigkeit haben» und «dürfen» als «die Erlaubnis oder Berechtigung haben». Das spanische Wort «poder» etwa steht für beides.
Ebenso ist vielen Schülern auf den ersten Blick nicht recht klar, dass das logische Gegenteil von «müssen» nicht unbedingt «nicht müssen» ist, sondern vielmehr «nicht dürfen». An den Verkehrsschildern lässt sich so etwas meistens recht gut erklären: Manchmal muss man abbiegen, aber manchmal darf man eben nicht.
Dieses Beispiel soll ein wenig die Verwirrungstaktik veranschaulichen, die in der Politik gerne verwendet wird, um unpopuläre oder restriktive Maßnahmen Stück für Stück einzuführen. Zuerst ist etwas einfach innovativ und bringt viele Vorteile. Vor allem ist es freiwillig, jeder kann selber entscheiden, niemand muss mitmachen. Später kann man zunehmend weniger Alternativen wählen, weil sie verschwinden, und irgendwann verwandelt sich alles andere in «nicht dürfen» – die Maßnahme ist obligatorisch.
Um die Durchsetzung derartiger Initiativen strategisch zu unterstützen und nett zu verpacken, gibt es Lobbyisten, gerne auch NGOs genannt. Dass das «NG» am Anfang dieser Abkürzung übersetzt «Nicht-Regierungs-» bedeutet, ist ein Anachronismus. Das war vielleicht früher einmal so, heute ist eher das Gegenteil gemeint.
In unserer modernen Zeit wird enorm viel Lobbyarbeit für die Digitalisierung praktisch sämtlicher Lebensbereiche aufgewendet. Was das auf dem Sektor der Mobilität bedeuten kann, haben wir diese Woche anhand aktueller Entwicklungen in Spanien beleuchtet. Begründet teilweise mit Vorgaben der Europäischen Union arbeitet man dort fleißig an einer «neuen Mobilität», basierend auf «intelligenter» technologischer Infrastruktur. Derartige Anwandlungen wurden auch schon als «Technofeudalismus» angeprangert.
Nationale Zugangspunkte für Mobilitätsdaten im Sinne der EU gibt es nicht nur in allen Mitgliedsländern, sondern auch in der Schweiz und in Großbritannien. Das Vereinigte Königreich beteiligt sich darüber hinaus an anderen EU-Projekten für digitale Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen, wie dem biometrischen Identifizierungssystem für «nachhaltigen Verkehr und Tourismus».
Natürlich marschiert auch Deutschland stracks und euphorisch in Richtung digitaler Zukunft. Ohne vernetzte Mobilität und einen «verlässlichen Zugang zu Daten, einschließlich Echtzeitdaten» komme man in der Verkehrsplanung und -steuerung nicht aus, erklärt die Regierung. Der Interessenverband der IT-Dienstleister Bitkom will «die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung vorantreiben». Dazu bewirbt er unter anderem die Konzepte Smart City, Smart Region und Smart Country und behauptet, deutsche Großstädte «setzen bei Mobilität voll auf Digitalisierung».
Es steht zu befürchten, dass das umfassende Sammeln, Verarbeiten und Vernetzen von Daten, das angeblich die Menschen unterstützen soll (und theoretisch ja auch könnte), eher dazu benutzt wird, sie zu kontrollieren und zu manipulieren. Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird, desto größer sind diese Möglichkeiten. Im Ergebnis könnten solche Prozesse den Bürger nicht nur einschränken oder überflüssig machen, sondern in mancherlei Hinsicht regelrecht abschalten. Eine gesunde Skepsis ist also geboten.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem Pareto-Client geschrieben. Er ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 5708b1f6:208df3b8
2025-04-03 15:25:33The role and significance of music naturally varies from person to person. For some, it is counted among the most important things in life. For others, it may be a superfluous additive of limited value. Due to this difference in perception relating to music, it may be difficult for some individuals to recognize the benefits of compiling a personalized music playlist.
However, the value of music as a therapeutic tool for people already suffering from advanced dementia has been repeatedly demonstrated, and sometimes with astounding, although temporary, results. The internet is full of studies and stories, and YouTube searches yield an abundance of video evidence ranging from clinical studies to anecdotal family recordings of elderly relatives.
All of these data and anecdotes point to a compelling suggestion and an exciting conclusion: music appreciation has tremendous potential as a supplemental activity for mental health maintenance. With insights gained from the study of neuroplasticity, the neurological benefits for musicians and performers are easy to see, but less clear is the fact that mere exposure to music as a casual listener can be of profound psychological importance, even for individuals who don’t consider themselves to be music lovers.
The transformative effect of music is on full display in many of the available videos on YouTube. We can simply search “dementia music,” or ‘Alzheimer’s music” for fast, relevant results. In video after video, we can see elderly subjects who may be slow to speak, detached, disoriented, barely-intelligible, or unresponsive. In care facilities and at gatherings with families, they are interviewed about their youth, and about their feelings related to music.
Many of the videos first show footage of the individual’s normal daily cognitive state, and them listening and responding to the questions, followed by a period of music listening, and then another brief, post-music discussion. The transformation of mental states tends to be very clear when we compare the quality of their cognitive performance before and after the introduction of music. People remark that “a light has been turned back on,” or “his personality returned,” or “it’s as if the person has woken up from sleep.”
Unfortunately, these positive responses are only temporary, and music does not have the power to permanently reverse the symptoms and pathology of advanced dementia and age-related cognitive decline. Also there is no guarantee it will work for every person, or to what degree. Nevertheless, it does not mean that music as therapy is completely without value. In fact, it can be quite the opposite.
When the response is positive, the event can have multiple benefits, and may even be a therapeutic experience for certain listeners. Faces once despondent or vacant become animated and radiant. Long lost smiles return from faraway times and places. Memories and associations from previous ages shake loose and rise to the surface. Many listeners were asked to recount their experiences related to the songs and the time in life with which they were primarily associated. Some of them were able to describe events, places, people, emotions, and reactions with a degree of clarity, dexterity, and articulation that was completely inconsistent with their medical diagnosis and their cognitive performance prior to hearing the music. The song quite literally revives the personality that makes the person, temporarily and superficially reversing the undoing of the mind. For a mind that is coming undone, music as therapy has potential to mitigate suffering and confusion, provide moments of joy and enthusiasm, and ease the transition into and experience of the end-of-life period that awaits all who are fortunate enough to “die of natural causes” in old age.
The benefits described above are specific to “treatment” recipients, but the merit of music as therapy cascades into the lives of everyone involved. Doctors and caretakers are uplifted and encouraged by success stories, which contributes to further proliferation and advancement of music as therapy. More critically, it can have a profound impact on families of dementia patients. In some cases, relatives get a chance to communicate with their loved ones again. Grandchildren have a window of opportunity to learn more, directly from their grandparents, about the youthful experiences and memories of past generations. It’s clear that generational bonds are also strengthened, which can positively impact the future prospects of the young generation as they in turn grow old, and lay new groundwork for generations that follow.
It is unfortunate that some elderly individuals seem to derive less cognitive benefit than others from music therapy. It is not entirely certain why this is so, because there are many factors to consider, but two of the clearest factors are a person’s degree of cognitive decline, and their degree of interest in and enthusiasm for music in general. While these are the most popular metrics by which to judge the potential effectiveness and suitability of music as therapy for a given individual, by far the most important consideration is relevance to each particular person’s life experiences.
This is the opportunity to finally state the obvious: It’s not possible to simply pick any song at random and expect it to have a beneficial effect on the cognitive function of every person who hears it. It’s not as if there’s a Britney Spears song that sparks joy in the heart of every soul on Earth. And the legend of Bill and Ted’s ultimate song that united the world could never be a true story (also because, as we finally learned in 2020, it was not two men and a song that united the world, but rather, the world uniting together to create that song.) However, everyone in the world can make their own playlist custom-tailored to their individual life, experiences, and memories, and some of those playlists might have a song or two by Britney Spears, or even some from one of the “Bill and Ted” soundtracks.
Throughout my decades of music appreciation, an ever-growing level of respect for the enduring spirit of music has overwhelmed me, and it’s clear that no song will ever be loved by all. But every song will be loved by some, certainly at least by someone, or it would cease to exist. This is why a personalized playlist is infinitely more valuable than randomly selected songs, and we can see the truth of this claim upon close examination of recorded interviews with the elderly subjects. The songs that triggered the greatest reactions were songs that interviewees felt strong connections to, based primarily on the song’s associations to the time and place, as well as the emotional context imprinted on the memory of the events surrounding the songs.
This simply means that songs for which we have emotional attachments and vivid memories are songs that invigorate our neural circuits, activating cognitive pathways and opening doors of memory similar to how olfactory sensations can trigger a memory or a sense of déjà vu. There are some exceptions, but a lot of these songs are from a person’s formative years, particularly early developmental years and their teenage period. This comes as no surprise to the discerning neuroplastician, because these are periods of life when neural plasticity is most fluid, neural development and refinement functions are most active and receptive, and the degree of exciting novelty in life tends to be highest when we are young and inexperienced.
Novelty and emotion are critical components of memory formation and whether a given experience will be memorable or not. Something completely new (novelty) can be memorable if it commands your attention, or derails you from your usual pattern of behavior. Similarly, the content of a tedious lecture may be harder to recall without taking notes, while that of an exciting, fun, and funny, interactive lesson has a greater chance of being memorable, and recalled with more clarity and detail (emotion).
When it comes to music, the connection to novelty and emotion is crystal clear. The first time you ever heard that song, it was new and your emotional response was strong. You might even remember the events of that first time you heard it, but not necessarily. Your emotional attachment to the song may have developed later on, when you heard it playing at a party, on one of the most memorable nights of your teenage life, for example. Perhaps it’s just a song (or songs) your parents played a lot when you were young, and it could be a song you yourself heard many times, and looking back realized it holds a special place in your heart, for whatever reason. There are also songs that are special to romantic couples (This song was playing when we…; This is our song; We were together the first time we heard this song; etc.) and these songs, for obvious reasons, can be added to a personalized music playlist at any time in life, as new and old songs take on added personal significance in various ways. There are a multitude of ways that novelty and emotion can combine to form experiences worth remembering, by which memories are made, and if these experiences are imprinted with a musical stamp, the song stamped onto the memory is likely to remain just as memorable as the event itself, and conversely, listening to the song has the potential to vivify the memories and feelings of nostalgia related to the song.
Therefore, as a preventative measure we can implement now, and an insurance policy we may benefit from later, it is advisable that each person should endeavor to compile their own personal, individualized cognitive reserve playlist. When speaking to someone about this idea, they responded, “But what’s the hurry? After all, you’re still quite young.” Just then, it spontaneously occurred to me that a traumatic head injury could befall me the following day or any day hence, and the simple point that “it’s never too early” was well taken.
To create your own cognitive reserve playlist, it is helpful to have a few guiding parameters. Most important of all is to keep an open mind without setting anything in stone. It’s not necessary to finalize the list immediately, if ever. This is a project that deserves your thoughtful consideration, so you deserve to be allowed to take your time. It’s better to get the list populated with your definite favorites, and as many others that come to mind, just to kick-start the process. Besides, due to the virtually infinite number of songs and compositions in existence, we will never be able to make the perfect list in one day, one month, or even one year. We can always revisit the list and make changes later, because our minds cannot retrieve all the data at once. We must go about our business of carrying on, and wait for it to come to us. (It’s guaranteed to be worth the wait, so never fret about it.) You may even find yourself removing one of those “definite favorites” from the list, which is welcome and fine, because it’s not merely a list of your favorite songs. Being a “favorite” is just one of multiple indicators that a song might be appropriate for a cognitive reserve playlist. “Memorable” is another key word.
There are still other factors that determine a song’s suitability for a personal playlist, such as a song that isn’t a personal favorite, but which nevertheless evokes a strong emotional response in some other way. This is best described as nostalgia, and nostalgic emotions are powerful anchors for memories. So any song that arouses some sense of nostalgia also has the power to arouse the memory of events, places, times, and other details tied to that nostalgia. To know what songs are nostalgic for you and add them to your list today, may help you if a time should come that you need music as therapy in order to trigger your memory and cognitive function.
It is because of nostalgia that many songs from our youth are good candidates for inclusion on the playlist. Songs that were popular on the radio or TV when we were children, theme songs from popular television programs that are unforgettable for us, and songs that acted as the soundtrack to our lives, so to speak, while growing into childhood, and then blossoming again from adolescence into adulthood. This period is rich with music of great significance to our personal center.
It is my sincere hope that all people earnestly endeavor to compile their own personalized cognitive reserve playlists, and encourage their loved ones to do the same. Maybe it can help those who suffer to better cope with the condition. Perhaps starting this project now, and focusing on mental health now can be a significant contributing factor to developing robust cognitive reserve in the first place, thereby heading off the worst of what this condition can throw at us, and delaying it until later. And of course, not only should we create the lists, but it’s highly recommended that we also play the songs frequently, and dance to them as well, preferably. It is in the interest of your future health, ability, mobility, enjoyment, and ease of living that I offer this potentially beneficial suggestion, and I am grateful that you have taken the time to hear me out regarding my passion about the restorative and healing properties of music, as they relate to the broader topic of neuroplasticity. So on that note, shall we press play and dance?
-
@ aa8de34f:a6ffe696
2025-03-21 12:08:3119. März 2025
🔐 1. SHA-256 is Quantum-Resistant
Bitcoin’s proof-of-work mechanism relies on SHA-256, a hashing algorithm. Even with a powerful quantum computer, SHA-256 remains secure because:
- Quantum computers excel at factoring large numbers (Shor’s Algorithm).
- However, SHA-256 is a one-way function, meaning there's no known quantum algorithm that can efficiently reverse it.
- Grover’s Algorithm (which theoretically speeds up brute force attacks) would still require 2¹²⁸ operations to break SHA-256 – far beyond practical reach.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
🔑 2. Public Key Vulnerability – But Only If You Reuse Addresses
Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) to generate keys.
- A quantum computer could use Shor’s Algorithm to break SECP256K1, the curve Bitcoin uses.
- If you never reuse addresses, it is an additional security element
- 🔑 1. Bitcoin Addresses Are NOT Public Keys
Many people assume a Bitcoin address is the public key—this is wrong.
- When you receive Bitcoin, it is sent to a hashed public key (the Bitcoin address).
- The actual public key is never exposed because it is the Bitcoin Adress who addresses the Public Key which never reveals the creation of a public key by a spend
- Bitcoin uses Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) or newer methods like Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash (P2WPKH), which add extra layers of security.
🕵️♂️ 2.1 The Public Key Never Appears
- When you send Bitcoin, your wallet creates a digital signature.
- This signature uses the private key to prove ownership.
- The Bitcoin address is revealed and creates the Public Key
- The public key remains hidden inside the Bitcoin script and Merkle tree.
This means: ✔ The public key is never exposed. ✔ Quantum attackers have nothing to target, attacking a Bitcoin Address is a zero value game.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
🔄 3. Bitcoin Can Upgrade
Even if quantum computers eventually become a real threat:
- Bitcoin developers can upgrade to quantum-safe cryptography (e.g., lattice-based cryptography or post-quantum signatures like Dilithium).
- Bitcoin’s decentralized nature ensures a network-wide soft fork or hard fork could transition to quantum-resistant keys.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
⏳ 4. The 10-Minute Block Rule as a Security Feature
- Bitcoin’s network operates on a 10-minute block interval, meaning:Even if an attacker had immense computational power (like a quantum computer), they could only attempt an attack every 10 minutes.Unlike traditional encryption, where a hacker could continuously brute-force keys, Bitcoin’s system resets the challenge with every new block.This limits the window of opportunity for quantum attacks.
🎯 5. Quantum Attack Needs to Solve a Block in Real-Time
- A quantum attacker must solve the cryptographic puzzle (Proof of Work) in under 10 minutes.
- The problem? Any slight error changes the hash completely, meaning:If the quantum computer makes a mistake (even 0.0001% probability), the entire attack fails.Quantum decoherence (loss of qubit stability) makes error correction a massive challenge.The computational cost of recovering from an incorrect hash is still incredibly high.
⚡ 6. Network Resilience – Even if a Block Is Hacked
- Even if a quantum computer somehow solved a block instantly:The network would quickly recognize and reject invalid transactions.Other miners would continue mining under normal cryptographic rules.51% Attack? The attacker would need to consistently beat the entire Bitcoin network, which is not sustainable.
🔄 7. The Logarithmic Difficulty Adjustment Neutralizes Threats
- Bitcoin adjusts mining difficulty every 2016 blocks (\~2 weeks).
- If quantum miners appeared and suddenly started solving blocks too quickly, the difficulty would adjust upward, making attacks significantly harder.
- This self-correcting mechanism ensures that even quantum computers wouldn't easily overpower the network.
🔥 Final Verdict: Quantum Computers Are Too Slow for Bitcoin
✔ The 10-minute rule limits attack frequency – quantum computers can’t keep up.
✔ Any slight miscalculation ruins the attack, resetting all progress.
✔ Bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment would react, neutralizing quantum advantages.
Even if quantum computers reach their theoretical potential, Bitcoin’s game theory and design make it incredibly resistant. 🚀
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-20 09:59:20Bald werde es verboten, alleine im Auto zu fahren, konnte man dieser Tage in verschiedenen spanischen Medien lesen. Die nationale Verkehrsbehörde (Dirección General de Tráfico, kurz DGT) werde Alleinfahrern das Leben schwer machen, wurde gemeldet. Konkret erörtere die Generaldirektion geeignete Sanktionen für Personen, die ohne Beifahrer im Privatauto unterwegs seien.
Das Alleinfahren sei zunehmend verpönt und ein Mentalitätswandel notwendig, hieß es. Dieser «Luxus» stehe im Widerspruch zu den Maßnahmen gegen Umweltverschmutzung, die in allen europäischen Ländern gefördert würden. In Frankreich sei es «bereits verboten, in der Hauptstadt allein zu fahren», behauptete Noticiastrabajo Huffpost in einer Zwischenüberschrift. Nur um dann im Text zu konkretisieren, dass die sogenannte «Umweltspur» auf der Pariser Ringautobahn gemeint war, die für Busse, Taxis und Fahrgemeinschaften reserviert ist. Ab Mai werden Verstöße dagegen mit einem Bußgeld geahndet.
Die DGT jedenfalls wolle bei der Umsetzung derartiger Maßnahmen nicht hinterherhinken. Diese Medienberichte, inklusive des angeblich bevorstehenden Verbots, beriefen sich auf Aussagen des Generaldirektors der Behörde, Pere Navarro, beim Mobilitätskongress Global Mobility Call im November letzten Jahres, wo es um «nachhaltige Mobilität» ging. Aus diesem Kontext stammt auch Navarros Warnung: «Die Zukunft des Verkehrs ist geteilt oder es gibt keine».
Die «Faktenchecker» kamen der Generaldirektion prompt zu Hilfe. Die DGT habe derlei Behauptungen zurückgewiesen und klargestellt, dass es keine Pläne gebe, Fahrten mit nur einer Person im Auto zu verbieten oder zu bestrafen. Bei solchen Meldungen handele es sich um Fake News. Teilweise wurde der Vorsitzende der spanischen «Rechtsaußen»-Partei Vox, Santiago Abascal, der Urheberschaft bezichtigt, weil er einen entsprechenden Artikel von La Gaceta kommentiert hatte.
Der Beschwichtigungsversuch der Art «niemand hat die Absicht» ist dabei erfahrungsgemäß eher ein Alarmzeichen als eine Beruhigung. Walter Ulbrichts Leugnung einer geplanten Berliner Mauer vom Juni 1961 ist vielen genauso in Erinnerung wie die Fake News-Warnungen des deutschen Bundesgesundheitsministeriums bezüglich Lockdowns im März 2020 oder diverse Äußerungen zu einer Impfpflicht ab 2020.
Aber Aufregung hin, Dementis her: Die Pressemitteilung der DGT zu dem Mobilitätskongress enthält in Wahrheit viel interessantere Informationen als «nur» einen Appell an den «guten» Bürger wegen der Bemühungen um die Lebensqualität in Großstädten oder einen möglichen obligatorischen Abschied vom Alleinfahren. Allerdings werden diese Details von Medien und sogenannten Faktencheckern geflissentlich übersehen, obwohl sie keineswegs versteckt sind. Die Auskünfte sind sehr aufschlussreich, wenn man genauer hinschaut.
Digitalisierung ist der Schlüssel für Kontrolle
Auf dem Kongress stellte die Verkehrsbehörde ihre Initiativen zur Förderung der «neuen Mobilität» vor, deren Priorität Sicherheit und Effizienz sei. Die vier konkreten Ansätze haben alle mit Digitalisierung, Daten, Überwachung und Kontrolle im großen Stil zu tun und werden unter dem Euphemismus der «öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaft» angepriesen. Auch lassen sie die transhumanistische Idee vom unzulänglichen Menschen erkennen, dessen Fehler durch «intelligente» technologische Infrastruktur kompensiert werden müssten.
Die Chefin des Bereichs «Verkehrsüberwachung» erklärte die Funktion des spanischen National Access Point (NAP), wobei sie betonte, wie wichtig Verkehrs- und Infrastrukturinformationen in Echtzeit seien. Der NAP ist «eine essenzielle Web-Applikation, die unter EU-Mandat erstellt wurde», kann man auf der Website der DGT nachlesen.
Das Mandat meint Regelungen zu einem einheitlichen europäischen Verkehrsraum, mit denen die Union mindestens seit 2010 den Aufbau einer digitalen Architektur mit offenen Schnittstellen betreibt. Damit begründet man auch «umfassende Datenbereitstellungspflichten im Bereich multimodaler Reiseinformationen». Jeder Mitgliedstaat musste einen NAP, also einen nationalen Zugangspunkt einrichten, der Zugang zu statischen und dynamischen Reise- und Verkehrsdaten verschiedener Verkehrsträger ermöglicht.
Diese Entwicklung ist heute schon weit fortgeschritten, auch und besonders in Spanien. Auf besagtem Kongress erläuterte die Leiterin des Bereichs «Telematik» die Plattform «DGT 3.0». Diese werde als Integrator aller Informationen genutzt, die von den verschiedenen öffentlichen und privaten Systemen, die Teil der Mobilität sind, bereitgestellt werden.
Es handele sich um eine Vermittlungsplattform zwischen Akteuren wie Fahrzeugherstellern, Anbietern von Navigationsdiensten oder Kommunen und dem Endnutzer, der die Verkehrswege benutzt. Alle seien auf Basis des Internets der Dinge (IOT) anonym verbunden, «um der vernetzten Gemeinschaft wertvolle Informationen zu liefern oder diese zu nutzen».
So sei DGT 3.0 «ein Zugangspunkt für einzigartige, kostenlose und genaue Echtzeitinformationen über das Geschehen auf den Straßen und in den Städten». Damit lasse sich der Verkehr nachhaltiger und vernetzter gestalten. Beispielsweise würden die Karten des Produktpartners Google dank der DGT-Daten 50 Millionen Mal pro Tag aktualisiert.
Des Weiteren informiert die Verkehrsbehörde über ihr SCADA-Projekt. Die Abkürzung steht für Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, zu deutsch etwa: Kontrollierte Steuerung und Datenerfassung. Mit SCADA kombiniert man Software und Hardware, um automatisierte Systeme zur Überwachung und Steuerung technischer Prozesse zu schaffen. Das SCADA-Projekt der DGT wird von Indra entwickelt, einem spanischen Beratungskonzern aus den Bereichen Sicherheit & Militär, Energie, Transport, Telekommunikation und Gesundheitsinformation.
Das SCADA-System der Behörde umfasse auch eine Videostreaming- und Videoaufzeichnungsplattform, die das Hochladen in die Cloud in Echtzeit ermöglicht, wie Indra erklärt. Dabei gehe es um Bilder, die von Überwachungskameras an Straßen aufgenommen wurden, sowie um Videos aus DGT-Hubschraubern und Drohnen. Ziel sei es, «die sichere Weitergabe von Videos an Dritte sowie die kontinuierliche Aufzeichnung und Speicherung von Bildern zur möglichen Analyse und späteren Nutzung zu ermöglichen».
Letzteres klingt sehr nach biometrischer Erkennung und Auswertung durch künstliche Intelligenz. Für eine bessere Datenübertragung wird derzeit die Glasfaserverkabelung entlang der Landstraßen und Autobahnen ausgebaut. Mit der Cloud sind die Amazon Web Services (AWS) gemeint, die spanischen Daten gehen somit direkt zu einem US-amerikanischen «Big Data»-Unternehmen.
Das Thema «autonomes Fahren», also Fahren ohne Zutun des Menschen, bildet den Abschluss der Betrachtungen der DGT. Zusammen mit dem Interessenverband der Automobilindustrie ANFAC (Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Automóviles y Camiones) sprach man auf dem Kongress über Strategien und Perspektiven in diesem Bereich. Die Lobbyisten hoffen noch in diesem Jahr 2025 auf einen normativen Rahmen zur erweiterten Unterstützung autonomer Technologien.
Wenn man derartige Informationen im Zusammenhang betrachtet, bekommt man eine Idee davon, warum zunehmend alles elektrisch und digital werden soll. Umwelt- und Mobilitätsprobleme in Städten, wie Luftverschmutzung, Lärmbelästigung, Platzmangel oder Staus, sind eine Sache. Mit dem Argument «emissionslos» wird jedoch eine Referenz zum CO2 und dem «menschengemachten Klimawandel» hergestellt, die Emotionen triggert. Und damit wird so ziemlich alles verkauft.
Letztlich aber gilt: Je elektrischer und digitaler unsere Umgebung wird und je freigiebiger wir mit unseren Daten jeder Art sind, desto besser werden wir kontrollier-, steuer- und sogar abschaltbar. Irgendwann entscheiden KI-basierte Algorithmen, ob, wann, wie, wohin und mit wem wir uns bewegen dürfen. Über einen 15-Minuten-Radius geht dann möglicherweise nichts hinaus. Die Projekte auf diesem Weg sind ernst zu nehmen, real und schon weit fortgeschritten.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-15 10:56:08Was nützt die schönste Schuldenbremse, wenn der Russe vor der Tür steht? \ Wir können uns verteidigen lernen oder alle Russisch lernen. \ Jens Spahn
In der Politik ist buchstäblich keine Idee zu riskant, kein Mittel zu schäbig und keine Lüge zu dreist, als dass sie nicht benutzt würden. Aber der Clou ist, dass diese Masche immer noch funktioniert, wenn nicht sogar immer besser. Ist das alles wirklich so schwer zu durchschauen? Mir fehlen langsam die Worte.
Aktuell werden sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland riesige Milliardenpakete für die Aufrüstung – also für die Rüstungsindustrie – geschnürt. Die EU will 800 Milliarden Euro locker machen, in Deutschland sollen es 500 Milliarden «Sondervermögen» sein. Verteidigung nennen das unsere «Führer», innerhalb der Union und auch an «unserer Ostflanke», der Ukraine.
Das nötige Feindbild konnte inzwischen signifikant erweitert werden. Schuld an allem und zudem gefährlich ist nicht mehr nur Putin, sondern jetzt auch Trump. Europa müsse sich sowohl gegen Russland als auch gegen die USA schützen und rüsten, wird uns eingetrichtert.
Und während durch Diplomatie genau dieser beiden Staaten gerade endlich mal Bewegung in die Bemühungen um einen Frieden oder wenigstens einen Waffenstillstand in der Ukraine kommt, rasselt man im moralisch überlegenen Zeigefinger-Europa so richtig mit dem Säbel.
Begleitet und gestützt wird der ganze Prozess – wie sollte es anders sein – von den «Qualitätsmedien». Dass Russland einen Angriff auf «Europa» plant, weiß nicht nur der deutsche Verteidigungsminister (und mit Abstand beliebteste Politiker) Pistorius, sondern dank ihnen auch jedes Kind. Uns bleiben nur noch wenige Jahre. Zum Glück bereitet sich die Bundeswehr schon sehr konkret auf einen Krieg vor.
Die FAZ und Corona-Gesundheitsminister Spahn markieren einen traurigen Höhepunkt. Hier haben sich «politische und publizistische Verantwortungslosigkeit propagandistisch gegenseitig befruchtet», wie es bei den NachDenkSeiten heißt. Die Aussage Spahns in dem Interview, «der Russe steht vor der Tür», ist das eine. Die Zeitung verschärfte die Sache jedoch, indem sie das Zitat explizit in den Titel übernahm, der in einer ersten Version scheinbar zu harmlos war.
Eine große Mehrheit der deutschen Bevölkerung findet Aufrüstung und mehr Schulden toll, wie ARD und ZDF sehr passend ermittelt haben wollen. Ähnliches gelte für eine noch stärkere militärische Unterstützung der Ukraine. Etwas skeptischer seien die Befragten bezüglich der Entsendung von Bundeswehrsoldaten dorthin, aber immerhin etwa fifty-fifty.
Eigentlich ist jedoch die Meinung der Menschen in «unseren Demokratien» irrelevant. Sowohl in der Europäischen Union als auch in Deutschland sind die «Eliten» offenbar der Ansicht, der Souverän habe in Fragen von Krieg und Frieden sowie von aberwitzigen astronomischen Schulden kein Wörtchen mitzureden. Frau von der Leyen möchte über 150 Milliarden aus dem Gesamtpaket unter Verwendung von Artikel 122 des EU-Vertrags ohne das Europäische Parlament entscheiden – wenn auch nicht völlig kritiklos.
In Deutschland wollen CDU/CSU und SPD zur Aufweichung der «Schuldenbremse» mehrere Änderungen des Grundgesetzes durch das abgewählte Parlament peitschen. Dieser Versuch, mit dem alten Bundestag eine Zweidrittelmehrheit zu erzielen, die im neuen nicht mehr gegeben wäre, ist mindestens verfassungsrechtlich umstritten.
Das Manöver scheint aber zu funktionieren. Heute haben die Grünen zugestimmt, nachdem Kanzlerkandidat Merz läppische 100 Milliarden für «irgendwas mit Klima» zugesichert hatte. Die Abstimmung im Plenum soll am kommenden Dienstag erfolgen – nur eine Woche, bevor sich der neu gewählte Bundestag konstituieren wird.
Interessant sind die Argumente, die BlackRocker Merz für seine Attacke auf Grundgesetz und Demokratie ins Feld führt. Abgesehen von der angeblichen Eile, «unsere Verteidigungsfähigkeit deutlich zu erhöhen» (ausgelöst unter anderem durch «die Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz und die Ereignisse im Weißen Haus»), ließ uns der CDU-Chef wissen, dass Deutschland einfach auf die internationale Bühne zurück müsse. Merz schwadronierte gefährlich mehrdeutig:
«Die ganze Welt schaut in diesen Tagen und Wochen auf Deutschland. Wir haben in der Europäischen Union und auf der Welt eine Aufgabe, die weit über die Grenzen unseres eigenen Landes hinausgeht.»
[Titelbild: Tag des Sieges]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-11 10:22:36«Wir brauchen eine digitale Brandmauer gegen den Faschismus», schreibt der Chaos Computer Club (CCC) auf seiner Website. Unter diesem Motto präsentierte er letzte Woche einen Forderungskatalog, mit dem sich 24 Organisationen an die kommende Bundesregierung wenden. Der Koalitionsvertrag müsse sich daran messen lassen, verlangen sie.
In den drei Kategorien «Bekenntnis gegen Überwachung», «Schutz und Sicherheit für alle» sowie «Demokratie im digitalen Raum» stellen die Unterzeichner, zu denen auch Amnesty International und Das NETTZ gehören, unter anderem die folgenden «Mindestanforderungen»:
- Verbot biometrischer Massenüberwachung des öffentlichen Raums sowie der ungezielten biometrischen Auswertung des Internets.
- Anlasslose und massenhafte Vorratsdatenspeicherung wird abgelehnt.
- Automatisierte Datenanalysen der Informationsbestände der Strafverfolgungsbehörden sowie jede Form von Predictive Policing oder automatisiertes Profiling von Menschen werden abgelehnt.
- Einführung eines Rechts auf Verschlüsselung. Die Bundesregierung soll sich dafür einsetzen, die Chatkontrolle auf europäischer Ebene zu verhindern.
- Anonyme und pseudonyme Nutzung des Internets soll geschützt und ermöglicht werden.
- Bekämpfung «privaten Machtmissbrauchs von Big-Tech-Unternehmen» durch durchsetzungsstarke, unabhängige und grundsätzlich föderale Aufsichtsstrukturen.
- Einführung eines digitalen Gewaltschutzgesetzes, unter Berücksichtigung «gruppenbezogener digitaler Gewalt» und die Förderung von Beratungsangeboten.
- Ein umfassendes Förderprogramm für digitale öffentliche Räume, die dezentral organisiert und quelloffen programmiert sind, soll aufgelegt werden.
Es sei ein Irrglaube, dass zunehmende Überwachung einen Zugewinn an Sicherheit darstelle, ist eines der Argumente der Initiatoren. Sicherheit erfordere auch, dass Menschen anonym und vertraulich kommunizieren können und ihre Privatsphäre geschützt wird.
Gesunde digitale Räume lebten auch von einem demokratischen Diskurs, lesen wir in dem Papier. Es sei Aufgabe des Staates, Grundrechte zu schützen. Dazu gehöre auch, Menschenrechte und demokratische Werte, insbesondere Freiheit, Gleichheit und Solidarität zu fördern sowie den Missbrauch von Maßnahmen, Befugnissen und Infrastrukturen durch «die Feinde der Demokratie» zu verhindern.
Man ist geneigt zu fragen, wo denn die Autoren «den Faschismus» sehen, den es zu bekämpfen gelte. Die meisten der vorgetragenen Forderungen und Argumente finden sicher breite Unterstützung, denn sie beschreiben offenkundig gängige, kritikwürdige Praxis. Die Aushebelung der Privatsphäre, der Redefreiheit und anderer Grundrechte im Namen der Sicherheit wird bereits jetzt massiv durch die aktuellen «demokratischen Institutionen» und ihre «durchsetzungsstarken Aufsichtsstrukturen» betrieben.
Ist «der Faschismus» also die EU und ihre Mitgliedsstaaten? Nein, die «faschistische Gefahr», gegen die man eine digitale Brandmauer will, kommt nach Ansicht des CCC und seiner Partner aus den Vereinigten Staaten. Private Überwachung und Machtkonzentration sind dabei weltweit schon lange Realität, jetzt endlich müssen sie jedoch bekämpft werden. In dem Papier heißt es:
«Die willkürliche und antidemokratische Machtausübung der Tech-Oligarchen um Präsident Trump erfordert einen Paradigmenwechsel in der deutschen Digitalpolitik. (...) Die aktuellen Geschehnisse in den USA zeigen auf, wie Datensammlungen und -analyse genutzt werden können, um einen Staat handstreichartig zu übernehmen, seine Strukturen nachhaltig zu beschädigen, Widerstand zu unterbinden und marginalisierte Gruppen zu verfolgen.»
Wer auf der anderen Seite dieser Brandmauer stehen soll, ist also klar. Es sind die gleichen «Feinde unserer Demokratie», die seit Jahren in diese Ecke gedrängt werden. Es sind die gleichen Andersdenkenden, Regierungskritiker und Friedensforderer, die unter dem großzügigen Dach des Bundesprogramms «Demokratie leben» einem «kontinuierlichen Echt- und Langzeitmonitoring» wegen der Etikettierung «digitaler Hass» unterzogen werden.
Dass die 24 Organisationen praktisch auch die Bekämpfung von Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon und anderen fordern, entbehrt nicht der Komik. Diese fallen aber sicher unter das Stichwort «Machtmissbrauch von Big-Tech-Unternehmen». Gleichzeitig verlangen die Lobbyisten implizit zum Beispiel die Förderung des Nostr-Netzwerks, denn hier finden wir dezentral organisierte und quelloffen programmierte digitale Räume par excellence, obendrein zensurresistent. Das wiederum dürfte in der Politik weniger gut ankommen.
[Titelbild: Pixabay]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 06bc9ab7:427c48f5
2025-03-17 15:46:23Bitcoin Safe - A bitcoin savings wallet for the entire family
Designed for both beginners and power users, Bitcoin Safe combines security with an intuitive user experience. In this article, we dive deep into its features, unique benefits, and the powerful tools that make managing your Bitcoin wallet simple and secure.
Built for Learners
✔️ Step-by-step wallet setup wizard + PDF backup sheets 📄 🧪 Test transactions to ensure all hardware signers are ready 🔑 🛡️ Secure: Hardware signers only – no hot wallet risks 🚫🔥 🌍 Multi-language support: 🇺🇸 🇨🇳 🇪🇸 🇯🇵 🇷🇺 🇵🇹 🇮🇳 🇮🇹 🇫🇷 🇩🇪 🇲🇲 🇰🇷 📁 Address categories for easy organization ☁️ Label and category synchronization, and cloud backup (optional) 💰 Automatic UTXO merging to save on fees ⚡ Fast syncing with Electrum servers, Compact Block Filters coming soon
Built for Power Users
🔐 Supports Coldcard, Bitbox02, Jade, Trezor, Passport, Keystone & many more 🏦 💬 Multi-party multisig chat & PSBT sharing (optional) 📊 Transaction flow diagrams to trace coin movements 🔍 Instant cross-wallet wallet search ⚙️ Set your own electrum server, mempool instance, and nostr relay
Step-by-Step Wallet Setup
Whether you’re setting up a single-signature or multi-signature wallet, the setup wizard guides you every step of the way:
- Single Sig Wizard: Follow the intuitive wizard that walks you through each step. https://youtu.be/m0g6ytYTy0w
Clear instructions paired with hardware signer screen-shots, like the steps for a Coldcard
-
Multisig Wizard: The wizard ensures you do all necessary steps for a Multisig wallet in the right order. Afterwards your Multisig is ready to use and all signers are tested. Check out https://bitcoin-safe.org/en/features/setup-multisignature-wallet/
-
PDF Backup: The wizard will also generates 3 PDF backup sheets for a 2-of-3 multisig wallet, so ensure you always have your wallet descriptor together with the seed.
-
Hardware Signer Support: With full support for major hardware signers your keys remain securely offline.
Transaction Visualization
Visualize and navigate your transaction history:
-
Graphical Explorer: An interactive transaction diagram lets you click on inputs and outputs to follow the money flow intuitively.
-
Coin Categories: Organize your addresses into distinct coin categories (e.g., “KYC”, “Work”, “Friends”) so Bitcoin Safe automatically selects the correct inputs when creating PSBTs.
It prevents you accidentally linking coin categories when creating a transaction, and warns you if mistakes happened in the past.
Powerful Wallet Management Tools
- Flexible Fee Selection: Choose fees with one click using an intuitive mempool block preview.
- UTXO Management: Automatically (optional) merge UTXOs when fees are low.
- CSV Table Export: Right click, Drag&Drop, or CTRL+C for immediate CSV export for easy processing in Excel.
- PDF Balance Statement: Export the address balances for easy record keeping on paper.
Advanced Features for the Power-User
Sync & Chat is off by default (for the paranoid user), but can be enabled with just one click.
Label Synchronization and Backup
- Seamless Sync: Using encrypted nostr messages, Bitcoin Safe synchronizes your coin categories and labels across multiple devices.
- Easy Backup: A short backup key is all you need to safeguard your coin categories and labels, ensuring your organization remains intact.
Collaborative Multi-party Multisig
- Group Chat Integration: After creating your multisig wallet, Bitcoin Safe offers an encrypted nostr group chat for secure collaboration and one-click PSBT sharing.
- User Authentication: Each participant must authenticate every other user with a simple click, ensuring secure communication.
Watch and Learn: Get Started with Bitcoin Safe
If you’re new to Bitcoin Safe, a short video guide can make all the difference. Learn how to set up your Bitcoin Safe wallet in this detailed walk through:
https://youtu.be/m0g6ytYTy0w
Or see how to verify an address on your hardware singer:
https://youtu.be/h5FkOYj9OT8
Building up a knowledge base: https://bitcoin-safe.org/en/knowledge/
Whats next?
- Compact Block Filters!!! They make electrum servers obsolete.
- Why? Compact Block Filters increase the network privacy dramatically, since you're not asking an electrum server to give you your transactions
- Trade-off: They are a little slower than electrum servers. For a savings wallet like Bitcoin Safe this should be OK.
- How do they work? Simply speaking: They ask normal bitcoin core nodes for a short summary of each block. And if the summary shows a transaction belonging to the wallet, the entire block is then downloaded from the bitcoin core node. The bitcoin core node does not learn however which of the many transactions in the block you were interested in. Read more here and of course in the bip.
- When: 2 weeks 😅. Lots of things need to be done until Bitcoin Safe can use the bdk CBF/kyoto client from rustaceanrob, so keep an eye out for updates and please give feedback when you use Bitcoin Safe.
Stay updated on nostr or on GitHub.
Thank you
A huge thanks goes to nostr:npub10pensatlcfwktnvjjw2dtem38n6rvw8g6fv73h84cuacxn4c28eqyfn34f for supporting this project with a grant and nostr:npub1yrnuj56rnen08zp2h9h7p74ghgjx6ma39spmpj6w9hzxywutevsst7k5cx for the Hackathon prize.
This wallet is only possible because it is building upon other peoples open source work. Most notably
- bdk nostr:nprofile1qqsgkmgkmv63djkxmwvdlyaxx0xtsytvkyyg5fwzmp48pwd30f3jtxspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqg5waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t0qyt8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgu3wvfskueqr8vuet
- and especially nostr:npub1thunderat5g552cuy7umk624ct5xe4tpgwr2jcjjq2gc0567wgrqnya79l , nostr:npub1reezn2ctrrg736uqj7mva9lsuwv0kr5asj4vvkwxnrwlhvxf98tsq99ty4 , and nostr:npub1ke470rdgnxg4gjs9cw3tv0dp690wl68f5xak5smflpsksedadd7qtf8jfm for dealing with my many feature requests and questions.
- rustaceanrob building kyoto which implements CBF for BDK; a crucial library and will be able to replace electrum servers for many use cases
- ndk by nostr:nprofile1qqsx3kq3vkgczq9hmfplc28h687py42yvms3zkyxh8nmkvn0vhkyyuspz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchsz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjme0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9u0uehfp
And of course, secure storage of bitcoin is only possible, because of the hardware signer manufacturers. Thanks to nostr:npub1az9xj85cmxv8e9j9y80lvqp97crsqdu2fpu3srwthd99qfu9qsgstam8y8 Coldcard , Coldcard Q , nostr:npub1tg779rlap8t4qm8lpgn89k7mr7pkxpaulupp0nq5faywr8h28llsj3cxmt Bitbox02 , nostr:npub1jg552aulj07skd6e7y2hu0vl5g8nl5jvfw8jhn6jpjk0vjd0waksvl6n8n Blockstream Jade , Trezor Safe, Foundation Passport, Keystone, Ledger, Specter Shield, and many more.
I also want to thank people who gave feedback and helped spread the knowledge of Bitcoin Safe (please forgive me if I forgot to mention you)
- nostr:npub1p5cmlt32vc3jefkl3ymdvm9zk892fsmkq79eq77uvkaqrnyktasqkpkgaw nostr:npub1s07s0h5mwcenfnyagme8shp9trnv964lulgvdmppgenuhtk9p4rsueuk63 nostr:npub18f3g76xc7xs430euwwl9gpn7ue7ux8vmtm9q8htn9s26d8c4neeqdraz3s nostr:npub1mtd7s63xd85ykv09p7y8wvg754jpsfpplxknh5xr0pu938zf86fqygqxas nostr:npub1kysd8m44dhv7ywa75u5z7w2w0gs4t6qzhgvjp555gfknasy3krlqfxde60 nostr:npub185pu2dsgg9d36uvvw7rwuy9aknn8hnknygr7x2yqa60ygvq6r8kqc836k8 nostr:npub1hkcgyqnsuaradq3g5hyvfdekwypc25494nmwggwpygxas7fcs4fst860fu nostr:npub1xsl0msy347vmj8gcpsjum6wwppc4ercvq4xfrhqmek2dqmqm0mtsyf35vx nostr:npub1hxjnw53mhghumt590kgd3fmqme8jzwwflyxesmm50nnapmqdzu7swqagw3 nostr:npub1ke470rdgnxg4gjs9cw3tv0dp690wl68f5xak5smflpsksedadd7qtf8jfm nostr:npub1sk26fxl4fy3vt8m5n0a6aturaql0w20nvh22q0cyaqm28tj7z8ss3lutc9 nostr:npub1r4llq2jcvq4g2tgha5amjz07zk7mrrcj89wllny9xwhhp5zzkklqk4jwja nostr:npub1p9v2zpwl28c0gu0vr2enp3lwdtv29scwpeqsnt0ngqf03vtlyxfqhkae5w nostr:npub1xkym0yaewlz0qfghtt7hjtnu28fxaa5rk3wtcek9d3x3ft2ns3lq775few nostr:npub1r8343wqpra05l3jnc4jud4xz7vlnyeslf7gfsty7ahpf92rhfmpsmqwym8 nostr:npub12zpfs3yq7we83yvypgsrw5f88y2fv780c2kfs89ge5qk6q3sfm7spks880 nostr:npub1yrnuj56rnen08zp2h9h7p74ghgjx6ma39spmpj6w9hzxywutevsst7k5cx https://x.com/91xTx93x2 https://x.com/afilini rustaceanrob
-
@ b8af284d:f82c91dd
2025-03-16 16:42:49Liebe Abonnenten,
diejenigen, die diese Publikation schon länger abonniert haben, wissen, dass hier immer wieder über den Ursprung des Corona-Virus in einem Labor in Wuhan berichtet wurde. Seit diese Woche ist es „offiziell“ - der Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) hält den Labor-Ursprung für die wahrscheinlichste Variante. Jetzt kann man sich fragen, warum der BND plötzlich umschwenkt: Will man proaktiv erscheinen, weil man die Wahrheit nicht mehr länger verbergen kann? Oder will man die enttäuschten Bürger zurückgewinnen, die aufgrund der Lügen während der Corona-Zeit zunehmend mit Parteien links und rechts außen sympathisiert haben, weil diese die einzigen waren, die den Irrsinn nicht mitgetragen haben?
Auffallend bei den „Recherchen“, die in Wahrheit keine sind, sondern Verlautbarungen des deutschen Geheimdienstes, ist auch das völlige Schweigen über die US-amerikanischen Verwicklungen in das Projekt. In Wuhan wurde mit amerikanischem Geld geforscht. Warum der BND diese Tatsache verschweigt, ist Teil der Spekulation. Vermutlich will man Peking alles in die Schuhe schieben, um von den eigenen Versäumnissen abzulenken.
In meinem aktuellen Buch “Der chinesische (Alp-)Traum” ist den Ereignissen in Wuhan ein ganzes Kapitel gewidmet. Es hat nichts an Aktualität eingebüßt. Alle Fakten lagen seit Jahren auf dem Tisch für jeden, den es interessiert hat. Hier gibt es das gesamte Kapitel nachzulesen.
Auf jeden Fall zeigt dies, wie der Begriff „Verschwörungstheoretiker“ in den vergangenen Jahren zum Kampfbegriff und Waffe gemacht wurde, um Kritiker zu diffamieren, und die öffentliche Meinung ohne harte Zensur zu lenken. Ähnliches kann man aktuell beim Projekt „Digitaler Euro“ beobachten. Vermutlich kann sich kein Bürger der Europäischen Union daran erinnern, bei seiner Wahlentscheidung jemals gefragt worden zu sein, ob er die Einführung eines „digitalen Euros“ gut findet. Wurde er nämlich nicht. Er kommt aber trotzdem. EZB-Präsidentin Christine Lagarde hat das diese Woche nochmals bekräftigt: Schon im Oktober will man die Testphase beenden und an der Einführung arbeiten.
Nun gehört BlingBling nicht zu denjenigen, die im digitalen Euro „Orwell’sches Teufelswerk“ sehen. Strategische Dummheit trifft es besser. Worum geht es?
Sogenannte Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) waren vor einigen Jahren so etwas wie der letzte Schrei in der Zentralbank-Welt. Nachdem Facebook/Meta 2017/18 eine eigene Währung namens Libra auf den Markt bringen wollte, und eine obskure Internet-Währung namens Bitcoin immer mehr Anhänger fand, sahen sich viele Zentralbanken der Welt unter Zugzwang. Was man wollte: eine digitale, direkt von der Zentralbank ausgegebene Währung ohne Bugs, aber mit Features. Mit einer Digital-Währung ließe sich der internationale Zahlungsverkehr direkt und ohne Umweg über den US-Dollar abwickeln. Die Zentralbank bekäme wieder mehr direkten Einfluss auf die Geldschöpfung. Und, wie man aus China lernen konnte, ließen sich digitale Bankkonten auch ganz zum „Nudging von Bürgern“ nutzen. So spekulierten die ersten Verschwörungstheoretiker bald, ein digitaler Euro ließe sich ja mit einem persönlichen CO2-Konto verknüpfen. Wäre letzteres einmal aufgebraucht, könnte der Konto-Inhaber einfach keinen Flug mehr buchen. Auch ließe sich eine expansive Geldpolitik, wie sie bis 2022 praktiziert wurde, ganz einfach mit Negativ-Zinsen umsetzen. Geld würde sich nominal reduzieren, was den Bürger zum Konsum animieren würde. Flüchtigen Kriminellen ließe sich per Knopfdruck das Konto sperren. Der Staat würde also über eine ganze neue Palette an Einflussmöglichkeiten verfügen.
Die Aluhüte United warnten vor einem Orwellschen Überwachungsstaat. Vertreter von Regierungen und Firmen, die diesen digitalen Euro bauen sollten, beschwichtigten. Mit Ralf Wintergerst, CEO von Giesecke+Devrient, nach wie vor heißester Anwärter, um das Projekt in der EU umzusetzen, sprach ich in den vergangenen Jahren mehrmals zu dem Thema. Zuletzt im Dezember 24.
Wintergerst versichert stets zwei Dinge: Eine Abschaffung von Bargeld sei nicht geplant. Und nur, wenn die Fluchttore Bargeld, Gold und Bitcoin geschlossen werden, greift die dystopische Version. Und zweitens, so Wintergerst, habe niemand ein chinesisches System im Sinne. Der „digitale Euro“ sei für die Bürger gedacht und das Projekt unterliege demokratischer Kontrolle. Ob er Wintergerst und dem guten im Menschen Glauben schenkt, möge jeder Leser selbst entscheiden. Das Interessantere ist ohnehin, dass der digitale Euro ein strategisch dummes Projekt ist.
Dazu muss man wissen, dass eine solche Zentralbankwährung Banken im weitesten Sinne überflüssig macht. Kontos bei Privatbanken werden obsolet, genauso wie Spar-, Fest- und Tagesgeld-Strukturen. Deshalb soll der digitale Euro zunächst auf 3000 Euro pro Bürger beschränkt werden. Das ist also nicht als Maximal-Vermögen gedacht, das dann jedem sozialistischen Einheits-EU-Menschen noch zusteht, sondern dient dazu, das Bankensystem nicht kollabieren zu lassen. Aber wozu überhaupt „ein bisschen digitaler Euro“?
In den USA setzt man mittlerweile 100 Prozent auf die private Alternative: Stablecoins wie Tether (USDT) und Circle (USDC) sind nichts anderes als digitale Währungen. Nur sind sie nicht von einer Zentralbank ausgeben, sondern von privaten Anbietern. Tether hat technisch die Möglichkeit, einen Inhaber vom Zahlungsverkehr auszusperren. Nur dürfte es davon kaum Gebrauch machen, will das Unternehmen nicht rasant Kunden an die Konkurrenz verlieren. Da USDT und USDC mit US-Dollar gedeckt sind (oder zumindest sein sollten, looking at you, Tether!), stärken sie außerdem die Rolle des US-Dollars als Leitwährung. Und da die USA sich aktuell sehr über Käufer von Staatsanleihen freuen, um die Zinsen zu drücken, und Tether einer der größten Halter von US-Staatsanleihen ist, wird es den digitalen Dollar bis auf Weiteres nicht geben.
Den digitalen Yuan gibt es, aber von einer großen Akzeptanz oder Durchdringung der chinesischen Wirtschaft lässt sich nicht sprechen. Kontrolle kann der chinesische Staat ohnehin über seine omnipräsenten Apps WeChat und Alipay ausüben. Was den internationalen Zahlungsverkehr betrifft, scheint man aktuell eher auf Gold zu setzen.
Übrig also bleibt die EU mit einem Projekt, das bereits Milliarden an Entwicklungskosten verschlungen hat. Am Ende bleibt dann ein Mini-Digitaler-Euro in Höhe von 3000 Euro, den niemand wollte, und niemand braucht.
Helfen könnte er allerdings beim Projekt “Mobilisierung der Sparguthaben”. Der Ausdruck geht auf Friedrich Merz zurück. Ursula von der Leyen paraphrasierte ihn jüngst:
Irgendwie müssen die Billionen von Sparguthaben in Militär-Investitionen umgewandelt werden. Das wird am besten funktionieren mit Anleihen, die schlechter verzinst sind als sonst auf dem Markt üblich. Wie bringt man Leute dazu, dann ihr Geld dort zu investieren? Entweder man zwingt sie, oder man bewirbt die Anleihen mit viel Patriotismus und Propaganda. Die Verschwörungstheoretiker unter uns bekommen also bald Futter, wenn die „Spar- und Investitionsunion” vorgestellt wird.
Like, wenn Dein Aluhut glüht…
Hinter der Paywall: Wie das Trump-Derangement-Syndrom den Blick auf den Markt trübt. Wie es mit Bitcoin, Gold und Aktien weitergeht.**
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-04 09:40:50Die «Eliten» führen bereits groß angelegte Pilotprojekte für eine Zukunft durch, die sie wollen und wir nicht. Das schreibt der OffGuardian in einem Update zum Thema «EU-Brieftasche für die digitale Identität». Das Portal weist darauf hin, dass die Akteure dabei nicht gerade zimperlich vorgehen und auch keinen Hehl aus ihren Absichten machen. Transition News hat mehrfach darüber berichtet, zuletzt hier und hier.
Mit der EU Digital Identity Wallet (EUDI-Brieftasche) sei eine einzige von der Regierung herausgegebene App geplant, die Ihre medizinischen Daten, Beschäftigungsdaten, Reisedaten, Bildungsdaten, Impfdaten, Steuerdaten, Finanzdaten sowie (potenziell) Kopien Ihrer Unterschrift, Fingerabdrücke, Gesichtsscans, Stimmproben und DNA enthält. So fasst der OffGuardian die eindrucksvolle Liste möglicher Einsatzbereiche zusammen.
Auch Dokumente wie der Personalausweis oder der Führerschein können dort in elektronischer Form gespeichert werden. Bis 2026 sind alle EU-Mitgliedstaaten dazu verpflichtet, Ihren Bürgern funktionierende und frei verfügbare digitale «Brieftaschen» bereitzustellen.
Die Menschen würden diese App nutzen, so das Portal, um Zahlungen vorzunehmen, Kredite zu beantragen, ihre Steuern zu zahlen, ihre Rezepte abzuholen, internationale Grenzen zu überschreiten, Unternehmen zu gründen, Arzttermine zu buchen, sich um Stellen zu bewerben und sogar digitale Verträge online zu unterzeichnen.
All diese Daten würden auf ihrem Mobiltelefon gespeichert und mit den Regierungen von neunzehn Ländern (plus der Ukraine) sowie über 140 anderen öffentlichen und privaten Partnern ausgetauscht. Von der Deutschen Bank über das ukrainische Ministerium für digitalen Fortschritt bis hin zu Samsung Europe. Unternehmen und Behörden würden auf diese Daten im Backend zugreifen, um «automatisierte Hintergrundprüfungen» durchzuführen.
Der Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände (VZBV) habe Bedenken geäußert, dass eine solche App «Risiken für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und der Daten» berge, berichtet das Portal. Die einzige Antwort darauf laute: «Richtig, genau dafür ist sie ja da!»
Das alles sei keine Hypothese, betont der OffGuardian. Es sei vielmehr «Potential». Damit ist ein EU-Projekt gemeint, in dessen Rahmen Dutzende öffentliche und private Einrichtungen zusammenarbeiten, «um eine einheitliche Vision der digitalen Identität für die Bürger der europäischen Länder zu definieren». Dies ist nur eines der groß angelegten Pilotprojekte, mit denen Prototypen und Anwendungsfälle für die EUDI-Wallet getestet werden. Es gibt noch mindestens drei weitere.
Den Ball der digitalen ID-Systeme habe die Covid-«Pandemie» über die «Impfpässe» ins Rollen gebracht. Seitdem habe das Thema an Schwung verloren. Je näher wir aber der vollständigen Einführung der EUid kämen, desto mehr Propaganda der Art «Warum wir eine digitale Brieftasche brauchen» könnten wir in den Mainstream-Medien erwarten, prognostiziert der OffGuardian. Vielleicht müssten wir schon nach dem nächsten großen «Grund», dem nächsten «katastrophalen katalytischen Ereignis» Ausschau halten. Vermutlich gebe es bereits Pläne, warum die Menschen plötzlich eine digitale ID-Brieftasche brauchen würden.
Die Entwicklung geht jedenfalls stetig weiter in genau diese Richtung. Beispielsweise hat Jordanien angekündigt, die digitale biometrische ID bei den nächsten Wahlen zur Verifizierung der Wähler einzuführen. Man wolle «den Papierkrieg beenden und sicherstellen, dass die gesamte Kette bis zu den nächsten Parlamentswahlen digitalisiert wird», heißt es. Absehbar ist, dass dabei einige Wahlberechtigte «auf der Strecke bleiben» werden, wie im Fall von Albanien geschehen.
Derweil würden die Briten gerne ihre Privatsphäre gegen Effizienz eintauschen, behauptet Tony Blair. Der Ex-Premier drängte kürzlich erneut auf digitale Identitäten und Gesichtserkennung. Blair ist Gründer einer Denkfabrik für globalen Wandel, Anhänger globalistischer Technokratie und «moderner Infrastruktur».
Abschließend warnt der OffGuardian vor der Illusion, Trump und Musk würden den US-Bürgern «diesen Schlamassel ersparen». Das Department of Government Efficiency werde sich auf die digitale Identität stürzen. Was könne schließlich «effizienter» sein als eine einzige App, die für alles verwendet wird? Der Unterschied bestehe nur darin, dass die US-Version vielleicht eher privat als öffentlich sei – sofern es da überhaupt noch einen wirklichen Unterschied gebe.
[Titelbild: Screenshot OffGuardian]
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-03-01 10:39:35Ständige Lügen und Unterstellungen, permanent falsche Fürsorge \ können Bausteine von emotionaler Manipulation sein. Mit dem Zweck, \ Macht und Kontrolle über eine andere Person auszuüben. \ Apotheken Umschau
Irgendetwas muss passiert sein: «Gaslighting» ist gerade Thema in vielen Medien. Heute bin ich nach längerer Zeit mal wieder über dieses Stichwort gestolpert. Das war in einem Artikel von Norbert Häring über Manipulationen des Deutschen Wetterdienstes (DWD). In diesem Fall ging es um eine Pressemitteilung vom Donnerstag zum «viel zu warmen» Winter 2024/25.
Häring wirft der Behörde vor, dreist zu lügen und Dinge auszulassen, um die Klimaangst wach zu halten. Was der Leser beim DWD nicht erfahre, sei, dass dieser Winter kälter als die drei vorangegangenen und kälter als der Durchschnitt der letzten zehn Jahre gewesen sei. Stattdessen werde der falsche Eindruck vermittelt, es würde ungebremst immer wärmer.
Wem also der zu Ende gehende Winter eher kalt vorgekommen sein sollte, mit dessen Empfinden stimme wohl etwas nicht. Das jedenfalls wolle der DWD uns einreden, so der Wirtschaftsjournalist. Und damit sind wir beim Thema Gaslighting.
Als Gaslighting wird eine Form psychischer Manipulation bezeichnet, mit der die Opfer desorientiert und zutiefst verunsichert werden, indem ihre eigene Wahrnehmung als falsch bezeichnet wird. Der Prozess führt zu Angst und Realitätsverzerrung sowie zur Zerstörung des Selbstbewusstseins. Die Bezeichnung kommt von dem britischen Theaterstück «Gas Light» aus dem Jahr 1938, in dem ein Mann mit grausamen Psychotricks seine Frau in den Wahnsinn treibt.
Damit Gaslighting funktioniert, muss das Opfer dem Täter vertrauen. Oft wird solcher Psychoterror daher im privaten oder familiären Umfeld beschrieben, ebenso wie am Arbeitsplatz. Jedoch eignen sich die Prinzipien auch perfekt zur Manipulation der Massen. Vermeintliche Autoritäten wie Ärzte und Wissenschaftler, oder «der fürsorgliche Staat» und Institutionen wie die UNO oder die WHO wollen uns doch nichts Böses. Auch Staatsmedien, Faktenchecker und diverse NGOs wurden zu «vertrauenswürdigen Quellen» erklärt. Das hat seine Wirkung.
Warum das Thema Gaslighting derzeit scheinbar so populär ist, vermag ich nicht zu sagen. Es sind aber gerade in den letzten Tagen und Wochen auffällig viele Artikel dazu erschienen, und zwar nicht nur von Psychologen. Die Frankfurter Rundschau hat gleich mehrere publiziert, und Anwälte interessieren sich dafür offenbar genauso wie Apotheker.
Die Apotheken Umschau machte sogar auf «Medical Gaslighting» aufmerksam. Davon spreche man, wenn Mediziner Symptome nicht ernst nähmen oder wenn ein gesundheitliches Problem vom behandelnden Arzt «schnöde heruntergespielt» oder abgetan würde. Kommt Ihnen das auch irgendwie bekannt vor? Der Begriff sei allerdings irreführend, da er eine manipulierende Absicht unterstellt, die «nicht gewährleistet» sei.
Apropos Gaslighting: Die noch amtierende deutsche Bundesregierung meldete heute, es gelte, «weiter [sic!] gemeinsam daran zu arbeiten, einen gerechten und dauerhaften Frieden für die Ukraine zu erreichen». Die Ukraine, wo sich am Montag «der völkerrechtswidrige Angriffskrieg zum dritten Mal jährte», verteidige ihr Land und «unsere gemeinsamen Werte».
Merken Sie etwas? Das Demokratieverständnis mag ja tatsächlich inzwischen in beiden Ländern ähnlich traurig sein. Bezüglich Friedensbemühungen ist meine Wahrnehmung jedoch eine andere. Das muss an meinem Gedächtnis liegen.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 21335073:a244b1ad
2025-03-18 20:47:50Warning: This piece contains a conversation about difficult topics. Please proceed with caution.
TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.
Julian Assange wrote in his 2012 book Cypherpunks, “This book is not a manifesto. There isn’t time for that. This book is a warning.” I read it a few times over the past summer. Those opening lines definitely stood out to me. I wish we had listened back then. He saw something about the internet that few had the ability to see. There are some individuals who are so close to a topic that when they speak, it’s difficult for others who aren’t steeped in it to visualize what they’re talking about. I didn’t read the book until more recently. If I had read it when it came out, it probably would have sounded like an unknown foreign language to me. Today it makes more sense.
This isn’t a manifesto. This isn’t a book. There is no time for that. It’s a warning and a possible solution from a desperate and determined survivor advocate who has been pulling and unraveling a thread for a few years. At times, I feel too close to this topic to make any sense trying to convey my pathway to my conclusions or thoughts to the general public. My hope is that if nothing else, I can convey my sense of urgency while writing this. This piece is a watchman’s warning.
When a child steps online, they are walking into a new world. A new reality. When you hand a child the internet, you are handing them possibilities—good, bad, and ugly. This is a conversation about lowering the potential of negative outcomes of stepping into that new world and how I came to these conclusions. I constantly compare the internet to the road. You wouldn’t let a young child run out into the road with no guidance or safety precautions. When you hand a child the internet without any type of guidance or safety measures, you are allowing them to play in rush hour, oncoming traffic. “Look left, look right for cars before crossing.” We almost all have been taught that as children. What are we taught as humans about safety before stepping into a completely different reality like the internet? Very little.
I could never really figure out why many folks in tech, privacy rights activists, and hackers seemed so cold to me while talking about online child sexual exploitation. I always figured that as a survivor advocate for those affected by these crimes, that specific, skilled group of individuals would be very welcoming and easy to talk to about such serious topics. I actually had one hacker laugh in my face when I brought it up while I was looking for answers. I thought maybe this individual thought I was accusing them of something I wasn’t, so I felt bad for asking. I was constantly extremely disappointed and would ask myself, “Why don’t they care? What could I say to make them care more? What could I say to make them understand the crisis and the level of suffering that happens as a result of the problem?”
I have been serving minor survivors of online child sexual exploitation for years. My first case serving a survivor of this specific crime was in 2018—a 13-year-old girl sexually exploited by a serial predator on Snapchat. That was my first glimpse into this side of the internet. I won a national award for serving the minor survivors of Twitter in 2023, but I had been working on that specific project for a few years. I was nominated by a lawyer representing two survivors in a legal battle against the platform. I’ve never really spoken about this before, but at the time it was a choice for me between fighting Snapchat or Twitter. I chose Twitter—or rather, Twitter chose me. I heard about the story of John Doe #1 and John Doe #2, and I was so unbelievably broken over it that I went to war for multiple years. I was and still am royally pissed about that case. As far as I was concerned, the John Doe #1 case proved that whatever was going on with corporate tech social media was so out of control that I didn’t have time to wait, so I got to work. It was reading the messages that John Doe #1 sent to Twitter begging them to remove his sexual exploitation that broke me. He was a child begging adults to do something. A passion for justice and protecting kids makes you do wild things. I was desperate to find answers about what happened and searched for solutions. In the end, the platform Twitter was purchased. During the acquisition, I just asked Mr. Musk nicely to prioritize the issue of detection and removal of child sexual exploitation without violating digital privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption. Elon thanked me multiple times during the acquisition, made some changes, and I was thanked by others on the survivors’ side as well.
I still feel that even with the progress made, I really just scratched the surface with Twitter, now X. I left that passion project when I did for a few reasons. I wanted to give new leadership time to tackle the issue. Elon Musk made big promises that I knew would take a while to fulfill, but mostly I had been watching global legislation transpire around the issue, and frankly, the governments are willing to go much further with X and the rest of corporate tech than I ever would. My work begging Twitter to make changes with easier reporting of content, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation material—without violating privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption—and advocating for the minor survivors of the platform went as far as my principles would have allowed. I’m grateful for that experience. I was still left with a nagging question: “How did things get so bad with Twitter where the John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 case was able to happen in the first place?” I decided to keep looking for answers. I decided to keep pulling the thread.
I never worked for Twitter. This is often confusing for folks. I will say that despite being disappointed in the platform’s leadership at times, I loved Twitter. I saw and still see its value. I definitely love the survivors of the platform, but I also loved the platform. I was a champion of the platform’s ability to give folks from virtually around the globe an opportunity to speak and be heard.
I want to be clear that John Doe #1 really is my why. He is the inspiration. I am writing this because of him. He represents so many globally, and I’m still inspired by his bravery. One child’s voice begging adults to do something—I’m an adult, I heard him. I’d go to war a thousand more lifetimes for that young man, and I don’t even know his name. Fighting has been personally dark at times; I’m not even going to try to sugarcoat it, but it has been worth it.
The data surrounding the very real crime of online child sexual exploitation is available to the public online at any time for anyone to see. I’d encourage you to go look at the data for yourself. I believe in encouraging folks to check multiple sources so that you understand the full picture. If you are uncomfortable just searching around the internet for information about this topic, use the terms “CSAM,” “CSEM,” “SG-CSEM,” or “AI Generated CSAM.” The numbers don’t lie—it’s a nightmare that’s out of control. It’s a big business. The demand is high, and unfortunately, business is booming. Organizations collect the data, tech companies often post their data, governments report frequently, and the corporate press has covered a decent portion of the conversation, so I’m sure you can find a source that you trust.
Technology is changing rapidly, which is great for innovation as a whole but horrible for the crime of online child sexual exploitation. Those wishing to exploit the vulnerable seem to be adapting to each technological change with ease. The governments are so far behind with tackling these issues that as I’m typing this, it’s borderline irrelevant to even include them while speaking about the crime or potential solutions. Technology is changing too rapidly, and their old, broken systems can’t even dare to keep up. Think of it like the governments’ “War on Drugs.” Drugs won. In this case as well, the governments are not winning. The governments are talking about maybe having a meeting on potentially maybe having legislation around the crimes. The time to have that meeting would have been many years ago. I’m not advocating for governments to legislate our way out of this. I’m on the side of educating and innovating our way out of this.
I have been clear while advocating for the minor survivors of corporate tech platforms that I would not advocate for any solution to the crime that would violate digital privacy rights or erode end-to-end encryption. That has been a personal moral position that I was unwilling to budge on. This is an extremely unpopular and borderline nonexistent position in the anti-human trafficking movement and online child protection space. I’m often fearful that I’m wrong about this. I have always thought that a better pathway forward would have been to incentivize innovation for detection and removal of content. I had no previous exposure to privacy rights activists or Cypherpunks—actually, I came to that conclusion by listening to the voices of MENA region political dissidents and human rights activists. After developing relationships with human rights activists from around the globe, I realized how important privacy rights and encryption are for those who need it most globally. I was simply unwilling to give more power, control, and opportunities for mass surveillance to big abusers like governments wishing to enslave entire nations and untrustworthy corporate tech companies to potentially end some portion of abuses online. On top of all of it, it has been clear to me for years that all potential solutions outside of violating digital privacy rights to detect and remove child sexual exploitation online have not yet been explored aggressively. I’ve been disappointed that there hasn’t been more of a conversation around preventing the crime from happening in the first place.
What has been tried is mass surveillance. In China, they are currently under mass surveillance both online and offline, and their behaviors are attached to a social credit score. Unfortunately, even on state-run and controlled social media platforms, they still have child sexual exploitation and abuse imagery pop up along with other crimes and human rights violations. They also have a thriving black market online due to the oppression from the state. In other words, even an entire loss of freedom and privacy cannot end the sexual exploitation of children online. It’s been tried. There is no reason to repeat this method.
It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out why I always felt a slight coldness from those in tech and privacy-minded individuals about the topic of child sexual exploitation online. I didn’t have any clue about the “Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse.” This is a term coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. I would have been a child myself when he first said it. I actually laughed at myself when I heard the phrase for the first time. I finally got it. The Cypherpunks weren’t wrong about that topic. They were so spot on that it is borderline uncomfortable. I was mad at first that they knew that early during the birth of the internet that this issue would arise and didn’t address it. Then I got over it because I realized that it wasn’t their job. Their job was—is—to write code. Their job wasn’t to be involved and loving parents or survivor advocates. Their job wasn’t to educate children on internet safety or raise awareness; their job was to write code.
They knew that child sexual abuse material would be shared on the internet. They said what would happen—not in a gleeful way, but a prediction. Then it happened.
I equate it now to a concrete company laying down a road. As you’re pouring the concrete, you can say to yourself, “A terrorist might travel down this road to go kill many, and on the flip side, a beautiful child can be born in an ambulance on this road.” Who or what travels down the road is not their responsibility—they are just supposed to lay the concrete. I’d never go to a concrete pourer and ask them to solve terrorism that travels down roads. Under the current system, law enforcement should stop terrorists before they even make it to the road. The solution to this specific problem is not to treat everyone on the road like a terrorist or to not build the road.
So I understand the perceived coldness from those in tech. Not only was it not their job, but bringing up the topic was seen as the equivalent of asking a free person if they wanted to discuss one of the four topics—child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers, intellectual property pirates, etc.—that would usher in digital authoritarianism for all who are online globally.
Privacy rights advocates and groups have put up a good fight. They stood by their principles. Unfortunately, when it comes to corporate tech, I believe that the issue of privacy is almost a complete lost cause at this point. It’s still worth pushing back, but ultimately, it is a losing battle—a ticking time bomb.
I do think that corporate tech providers could have slowed down the inevitable loss of privacy at the hands of the state by prioritizing the detection and removal of CSAM when they all started online. I believe it would have bought some time, fewer would have been traumatized by that specific crime, and I do believe that it could have slowed down the demand for content. If I think too much about that, I’ll go insane, so I try to push the “if maybes” aside, but never knowing if it could have been handled differently will forever haunt me. At night when it’s quiet, I wonder what I would have done differently if given the opportunity. I’ll probably never know how much corporate tech knew and ignored in the hopes that it would go away while the problem continued to get worse. They had different priorities. The most voiceless and vulnerable exploited on corporate tech never had much of a voice, so corporate tech providers didn’t receive very much pushback.
Now I’m about to say something really wild, and you can call me whatever you want to call me, but I’m going to say what I believe to be true. I believe that the governments are either so incompetent that they allowed the proliferation of CSAM online, or they knowingly allowed the problem to fester long enough to have an excuse to violate privacy rights and erode end-to-end encryption. The US government could have seized the corporate tech providers over CSAM, but I believe that they were so useful as a propaganda arm for the regimes that they allowed them to continue virtually unscathed.
That season is done now, and the governments are making the issue a priority. It will come at a high cost. Privacy on corporate tech providers is virtually done as I’m typing this. It feels like a death rattle. I’m not particularly sure that we had much digital privacy to begin with, but the illusion of a veil of privacy feels gone.
To make matters slightly more complex, it would be hard to convince me that once AI really gets going, digital privacy will exist at all.
I believe that there should be a conversation shift to preserving freedoms and human rights in a post-privacy society.
I don’t want to get locked up because AI predicted a nasty post online from me about the government. I’m not a doomer about AI—I’m just going to roll with it personally. I’m looking forward to the positive changes that will be brought forth by AI. I see it as inevitable. A bit of privacy was helpful while it lasted. Please keep fighting to preserve what is left of privacy either way because I could be wrong about all of this.
On the topic of AI, the addition of AI to the horrific crime of child sexual abuse material and child sexual exploitation in multiple ways so far has been devastating. It’s currently out of control. The genie is out of the bottle. I am hopeful that innovation will get us humans out of this, but I’m not sure how or how long it will take. We must be extremely cautious around AI legislation. It should not be illegal to innovate even if some bad comes with the good. I don’t trust that the governments are equipped to decide the best pathway forward for AI. Source: the entire history of the government.
I have been personally negatively impacted by AI-generated content. Every few days, I get another alert that I’m featured again in what’s called “deep fake pornography” without my consent. I’m not happy about it, but what pains me the most is the thought that for a period of time down the road, many globally will experience what myself and others are experiencing now by being digitally sexually abused in this way. If you have ever had your picture taken and posted online, you are also at risk of being exploited in this way. Your child’s image can be used as well, unfortunately, and this is just the beginning of this particular nightmare. It will move to more realistic interpretations of sexual behaviors as technology improves. I have no brave words of wisdom about how to deal with that emotionally. I do have hope that innovation will save the day around this specific issue. I’m nervous that everyone online will have to ID verify due to this issue. I see that as one possible outcome that could help to prevent one problem but inadvertently cause more problems, especially for those living under authoritarian regimes or anyone who needs to remain anonymous online. A zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) would probably be the best solution to these issues. There are some survivors of violence and/or sexual trauma who need to remain anonymous online for various reasons. There are survivor stories available online of those who have been abused in this way. I’d encourage you seek out and listen to their stories.
There have been periods of time recently where I hesitate to say anything at all because more than likely AI will cover most of my concerns about education, awareness, prevention, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation online, etc.
Unfortunately, some of the most pressing issues we’ve seen online over the last few years come in the form of “sextortion.” Self-generated child sexual exploitation (SG-CSEM) numbers are continuing to be terrifying. I’d strongly encourage that you look into sextortion data. AI + sextortion is also a huge concern. The perpetrators are using the non-sexually explicit images of children and putting their likeness on AI-generated child sexual exploitation content and extorting money, more imagery, or both from minors online. It’s like a million nightmares wrapped into one. The wild part is that these issues will only get more pervasive because technology is harnessed to perpetuate horror at a scale unimaginable to a human mind.
Even if you banned phones and the internet or tried to prevent children from accessing the internet, it wouldn’t solve it. Child sexual exploitation will still be with us until as a society we start to prevent the crime before it happens. That is the only human way out right now.
There is no reset button on the internet, but if I could go back, I’d tell survivor advocates to heed the warnings of the early internet builders and to start education and awareness campaigns designed to prevent as much online child sexual exploitation as possible. The internet and technology moved quickly, and I don’t believe that society ever really caught up. We live in a world where a child can be groomed by a predator in their own home while sitting on a couch next to their parents watching TV. We weren’t ready as a species to tackle the fast-paced algorithms and dangers online. It happened too quickly for parents to catch up. How can you parent for the ever-changing digital world unless you are constantly aware of the dangers?
I don’t think that the internet is inherently bad. I believe that it can be a powerful tool for freedom and resistance. I’ve spoken a lot about the bad online, but there is beauty as well. We often discuss how victims and survivors are abused online; we rarely discuss the fact that countless survivors around the globe have been able to share their experiences, strength, hope, as well as provide resources to the vulnerable. I do question if giving any government or tech company access to censorship, surveillance, etc., online in the name of serving survivors might not actually impact a portion of survivors negatively. There are a fair amount of survivors with powerful abusers protected by governments and the corporate press. If a survivor cannot speak to the press about their abuse, the only place they can go is online, directly or indirectly through an independent journalist who also risks being censored. This scenario isn’t hard to imagine—it already happened in China. During #MeToo, a survivor in China wanted to post their story. The government censored the post, so the survivor put their story on the blockchain. I’m excited that the survivor was creative and brave, but it’s terrifying to think that we live in a world where that situation is a necessity.
I believe that the future for many survivors sharing their stories globally will be on completely censorship-resistant and decentralized protocols. This thought in particular gives me hope. When we listen to the experiences of a diverse group of survivors, we can start to understand potential solutions to preventing the crimes from happening in the first place.
My heart is broken over the gut-wrenching stories of survivors sexually exploited online. Every time I hear the story of a survivor, I do think to myself quietly, “What could have prevented this from happening in the first place?” My heart is with survivors.
My head, on the other hand, is full of the understanding that the internet should remain free. The free flow of information should not be stopped. My mind is with the innocent citizens around the globe that deserve freedom both online and offline.
The problem is that governments don’t only want to censor illegal content that violates human rights—they create legislation that is so broad that it can impact speech and privacy of all. “Don’t you care about the kids?” Yes, I do. I do so much that I’m invested in finding solutions. I also care about all citizens around the globe that deserve an opportunity to live free from a mass surveillance society. If terrorism happens online, I should not be punished by losing my freedom. If drugs are sold online, I should not be punished. I’m not an abuser, I’m not a terrorist, and I don’t engage in illegal behaviors. I refuse to lose freedom because of others’ bad behaviors online.
I want to be clear that on a long enough timeline, the governments will decide that they can be better parents/caregivers than you can if something isn’t done to stop minors from being sexually exploited online. The price will be a complete loss of anonymity, privacy, free speech, and freedom of religion online. I find it rather insulting that governments think they’re better equipped to raise children than parents and caretakers.
So we can’t go backwards—all that we can do is go forward. Those who want to have freedom will find technology to facilitate their liberation. This will lead many over time to decentralized and open protocols. So as far as I’m concerned, this does solve a few of my worries—those who need, want, and deserve to speak freely online will have the opportunity in most countries—but what about online child sexual exploitation?
When I popped up around the decentralized space, I was met with the fear of censorship. I’m not here to censor you. I don’t write code. I couldn’t censor anyone or any piece of content even if I wanted to across the internet, no matter how depraved. I don’t have the skills to do that.
I’m here to start a conversation. Freedom comes at a cost. You must always fight for and protect your freedom. I can’t speak about protecting yourself from all of the Four Horsemen because I simply don’t know the topics well enough, but I can speak about this one topic.
If there was a shortcut to ending online child sexual exploitation, I would have found it by now. There isn’t one right now. I believe that education is the only pathway forward to preventing the crime of online child sexual exploitation for future generations.
I propose a yearly education course for every child of all school ages, taught as a standard part of the curriculum. Ideally, parents/caregivers would be involved in the education/learning process.
Course: - The creation of the internet and computers - The fight for cryptography - The tech supply chain from the ground up (example: human rights violations in the supply chain) - Corporate tech - Freedom tech - Data privacy - Digital privacy rights - AI (history-current) - Online safety (predators, scams, catfishing, extortion) - Bitcoin - Laws - How to deal with online hate and harassment - Information on who to contact if you are being abused online or offline - Algorithms - How to seek out the truth about news, etc., online
The parents/caregivers, homeschoolers, unschoolers, and those working to create decentralized parallel societies have been an inspiration while writing this, but my hope is that all children would learn this course, even in government ran schools. Ideally, parents would teach this to their own children.
The decentralized space doesn’t want child sexual exploitation to thrive. Here’s the deal: there has to be a strong prevention effort in order to protect the next generation. The internet isn’t going anywhere, predators aren’t going anywhere, and I’m not down to let anyone have the opportunity to prove that there is a need for more government. I don’t believe that the government should act as parents. The governments have had a chance to attempt to stop online child sexual exploitation, and they didn’t do it. Can we try a different pathway forward?
I’d like to put myself out of a job. I don’t want to ever hear another story like John Doe #1 ever again. This will require work. I’ve often called online child sexual exploitation the lynchpin for the internet. It’s time to arm generations of children with knowledge and tools. I can’t do this alone.
Individuals have fought so that I could have freedom online. I want to fight to protect it. I don’t want child predators to give the government any opportunity to take away freedom. Decentralized spaces are as close to a reset as we’ll get with the opportunity to do it right from the start. Start the youth off correctly by preventing potential hazards to the best of your ability.
The good news is anyone can work on this! I’d encourage you to take it and run with it. I added the additional education about the history of the internet to make the course more educational and fun. Instead of cleaning up generations of destroyed lives due to online sexual exploitation, perhaps this could inspire generations of those who will build our futures. Perhaps if the youth is armed with knowledge, they can create more tools to prevent the crime.
This one solution that I’m suggesting can be done on an individual level or on a larger scale. It should be adjusted depending on age, learning style, etc. It should be fun and playful.
This solution does not address abuse in the home or some of the root causes of offline child sexual exploitation. My hope is that it could lead to some survivors experiencing abuse in the home an opportunity to disclose with a trusted adult. The purpose for this solution is to prevent the crime of online child sexual exploitation before it occurs and to arm the youth with the tools to contact safe adults if and when it happens.
In closing, I went to hell a few times so that you didn’t have to. I spoke to the mothers of survivors of minors sexually exploited online—their tears could fill rivers. I’ve spoken with political dissidents who yearned to be free from authoritarian surveillance states. The only balance that I’ve found is freedom online for citizens around the globe and prevention from the dangers of that for the youth. Don’t slow down innovation and freedom. Educate, prepare, adapt, and look for solutions.
I’m not perfect and I’m sure that there are errors in this piece. I hope that you find them and it starts a conversation.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-02-21 19:32:23Europa – das Ganze ist eine wunderbare Idee, \ aber das war der Kommunismus auch. \ Loriot
«Europa hat fertig», könnte man unken, und das wäre nicht einmal sehr verwegen. Mit solch einer Einschätzung stünden wir nicht alleine, denn die Stimmen in diese Richtung mehren sich. Der französische Präsident Emmanuel Macron warnte schon letztes Jahr davor, dass «unser Europa sterben könnte». Vermutlich hatte er dabei andere Gefahren im Kopf als jetzt der ungarische Ministerpräsident Viktor Orbán, der ein «baldiges Ende der EU» prognostizierte. Das Ergebnis könnte allerdings das gleiche sein.
Neben vordergründigen Themenbereichen wie Wirtschaft, Energie und Sicherheit ist das eigentliche Problem jedoch die obskure Mischung aus aufgegebener Souveränität und geschwollener Arroganz, mit der europäische Politiker:innende unterschiedlicher Couleur aufzutreten pflegen. Und das Tüpfelchen auf dem i ist die bröckelnde Legitimation politischer Institutionen dadurch, dass die Stimmen großer Teile der Bevölkerung seit Jahren auf vielfältige Weise ausgegrenzt werden.
Um «UnsereDemokratie» steht es schlecht. Dass seine Mandate immer schwächer werden, merkt natürlich auch unser «Führungspersonal». Entsprechend werden die Maßnahmen zur Gängelung, Überwachung und Manipulation der Bürger ständig verzweifelter. Parallel dazu plustern sich in Paris Macron, Scholz und einige andere noch einmal mächtig in Sachen Verteidigung und «Kriegstüchtigkeit» auf.
Momentan gilt es auch, das Überschwappen covidiotischer und verschwörungsideologischer Auswüchse aus den USA nach Europa zu vermeiden. So ein «MEGA» (Make Europe Great Again) können wir hier nicht gebrauchen. Aus den Vereinigten Staaten kommen nämlich furchtbare Nachrichten. Beispielsweise wurde einer der schärfsten Kritiker der Corona-Maßnahmen kürzlich zum Gesundheitsminister ernannt. Dieser setzt sich jetzt für eine Neubewertung der mRNA-«Impfstoffe» ein, was durchaus zu einem Entzug der Zulassungen führen könnte.
Der europäischen Version von «Verteidigung der Demokratie» setzte der US-Vizepräsident J. D. Vance auf der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz sein Verständnis entgegen: «Demokratie stärken, indem wir unseren Bürgern erlauben, ihre Meinung zu sagen». Das Abschalten von Medien, das Annullieren von Wahlen oder das Ausschließen von Menschen vom politischen Prozess schütze gar nichts. Vielmehr sei dies der todsichere Weg, die Demokratie zu zerstören.
In der Schweiz kamen seine Worte deutlich besser an als in den meisten europäischen NATO-Ländern. Bundespräsidentin Karin Keller-Sutter lobte die Rede und interpretierte sie als «Plädoyer für die direkte Demokratie». Möglicherweise zeichne sich hier eine außenpolitische Kehrtwende in Richtung integraler Neutralität ab, meint mein Kollege Daniel Funk. Das wären doch endlich mal ein paar gute Nachrichten.
Von der einstigen Idee einer europäischen Union mit engeren Beziehungen zwischen den Staaten, um Konflikte zu vermeiden und das Wohlergehen der Bürger zu verbessern, sind wir meilenweit abgekommen. Der heutige korrupte Verbund unter technokratischer Leitung ähnelt mehr einem Selbstbedienungsladen mit sehr begrenztem Zugang. Die EU-Wahlen im letzten Sommer haben daran ebenso wenig geändert, wie die Bundestagswahl am kommenden Sonntag darauf einen Einfluss haben wird.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 306555fe:fd7fdf12
2025-03-15 05:56:161. Executive Summary
This report presents a detailed comparative analysis of Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow battery options for a 3-phase residence in Sydney, Australia, equipped with a 6.6kW solar system and a Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter. The evaluation focuses on the suitability of these battery solutions for potential off-grid capability and Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) functionality. The analysis reveals that while both Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow offer compelling features for home energy storage, Sungrow battery systems, particularly when paired with their hybrid inverters, present a more direct and comprehensive solution for achieving 3-phase off-grid capability. For V2H integration, both systems currently rely on the development of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia. Based on the user's stated goals, a Sungrow battery system, potentially requiring an upgrade to a Sungrow hybrid inverter, is the recommended solution.
2. Introduction: Context and Objectives
The Australian residential energy landscape is witnessing a significant shift towards energy independence, with increasing adoption of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and battery storage. This trend is propelled by factors such as escalating electricity costs and a growing desire for reliable power, particularly during grid outages. This report addresses the specific needs of a Sydney homeowner who has already invested in a 6.6kW solar system connected to a 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter and owns a Tesla electric vehicle. The homeowner is now exploring battery storage solutions, with a particular focus on enabling potential off-grid operation and facilitating future Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) capabilities for their Tesla.
The primary objectives of this report are threefold: firstly, to evaluate the technical and practical suitability of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-phase home in Sydney; secondly, to conduct a similar evaluation for various Sungrow battery options; and thirdly, to provide a comparative assessment of these two leading solutions based on their ability to support off-grid functionality and integrate with V2H technology. The scope of this analysis includes the latest Tesla Powerwall models available in Australia and relevant high-voltage battery options from Sungrow, specifically the SBR and SBH series. The geographical context is limited to Sydney, Australia, considering local grid regulations and market availability. This analysis relies on the provided research material and publicly accessible technical specifications to form its conclusions.
3. Analysis of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
- 3.1 Technical Specifications and Features:\ The Tesla Powerwall is a well-established residential battery system. The latest generation, Powerwall 3, offers an energy capacity of 13.5 kWh 1 and can deliver up to 10 kW of on-grid power, with the same capacity for backup power, capable of a 185 A motor start 1. A key feature of Powerwall 3 is its integrated solar inverter with a 97.5% efficiency and three solar inputs with Maximum Power Point Trackers (MPPTs) in the Australian version 1. The system is scalable, allowing for the installation of up to four units 1, and utilizes Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry, known for its safety 5. In contrast, the Powerwall 2, while also having a 13.5 kWh energy capacity 7, provides a continuous power output of 5 kW with a 7 kW peak 7. Notably, Powerwall 2 does not have an integrated solar inverter 7 and uses Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide (NMC) battery chemistry 7. It offers greater scalability, supporting up to ten units 1. Both Powerwall 2 and 3 come with a 10-year warranty 2. Powerwall 3 necessitates the use of the Tesla Backup Gateway 2 2, while Powerwall 2 requires a Gateway for system control and backup functionality 7. The integrated inverter in Powerwall 3 streamlines installations for new solar and storage setups. However, for homeowners with existing inverters, such as the user, this feature might introduce complexities as the existing inverter's functionality could become redundant if the system were configured to primarily utilize the Powerwall 3's inverter. Powerwall 2, designed as an AC-coupled battery, might offer a more seamless integration by working in conjunction with the existing Sungrow inverter 3.
- 3.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (AC Coupling):\ Tesla Powerwall is designed as an AC-coupled battery, meaning it connects to the home's electrical system at the switchboard level and operates independently of the solar inverter 9. This AC coupling capability generally allows Powerwall to be compatible with a wide range of existing solar inverters, including the user's 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT model 2. Specifically, Powerwall 2 demonstrates 100% compatibility with single-phase grid-connected solar systems installed after October 2016 9. For Powerwall 3, Tesla indicates AC coupling compatibility with existing solar systems up to 5kW 2. However, a crucial consideration arises during grid outages concerning the ability to charge the Powerwall from solar. If the home has a 3-phase solar inverter, like the user's Sungrow SG5KTL-MT, Powerwall 2 might not be able to charge from solar during a blackout because many 3-phase inverters require the presence of all three phases from the grid to operate 9. This limitation could also extend to Powerwall 3 when AC-coupled with a 3-phase inverter 8. Given the user's interest in potential off-grid capability, this inability to recharge the battery from solar during a grid outage significantly limits the duration of backup power to the energy stored within the Powerwall. Furthermore, the user's 6.6kW solar system output exceeds the 5kW AC coupling limit specified for a single Powerwall 3. This suggests that either the entire solar generation cannot be used to charge a single Powerwall 3 via AC coupling, or a more complex configuration involving multiple Powerwall units might be necessary.
- 3.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:\ The Tesla Powerwall is fundamentally a single-phase battery system and can only provide backup power to a single phase within a 3-phase home 8. During a power outage, only the electrical circuits connected to the phase that the Powerwall is backing up will remain operational 8. This necessitates careful planning to ensure that essential loads, such as lighting, refrigerators, and internet connectivity, are connected to this designated phase 8. While it is possible to install multiple Powerwall units, with one unit dedicated to each phase, this significantly increases the overall cost and introduces complexities in system management 8. Notably, even with the installation of three Powerwall 3 units, comprehensive 3-phase backup is not guaranteed 20. It is also important to recognize that Tesla does not officially support or provide warranties for off-grid installations of Powerwall 2. The Powerwall system is primarily designed for grid-connected homes to provide backup during outages and to optimize energy consumption, rather than functioning as the primary power source in a completely off-grid scenario. Therefore, achieving a truly comprehensive off-grid capability for a 3-phase home using Tesla Powerwall would likely involve a substantial financial investment in multiple units, meticulous load balancing across the phases, and navigating the limitations of single-phase backup, all without official support from the manufacturer.
- 3.4 Potential for V2H Integration with an EV in Australia:\ Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) technology, which allows an electric vehicle to supply power back to a home, is gaining traction in Australia. Regulatory changes have been made to permit bidirectional charging systems, with mainstream adoption expected in 2025 21. Australian standards for bidirectional charging are now approved, and compatible chargers are anticipated to become available in 2025 22. Currently, the research snippets do not indicate that Tesla Powerwall offers direct, integrated V2H functionality with EVs in Australia 1. However, the Tesla Powerwall can play a supportive role in a V2H ecosystem. It can efficiently store excess energy generated by the solar system 1, which could then be used to charge the EV. If the EV is equipped with V2H capabilities and connected to a compatible bidirectional charger, the energy stored in the Powerwall (or directly from solar) could indirectly contribute to powering the home by first charging the vehicle's battery. The actual discharge from the vehicle to the home would be managed by the bidirectional charger and the vehicle's internal systems, not directly by the Powerwall. Therefore, while Powerwall doesn't inherently provide V2H, it can act as a crucial energy storage component within a broader V2H setup.
- 3.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:\ The cost of a Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia is approximately $13,600, which includes the mandatory Backup Gateway 2 2. Powerwall 2 has an approximate price of $8,750 to $9,750, excluding installation and the Backup Gateway 7, with the installed cost estimated between $12,000 and $14,000 7. Installation costs for Powerwall 3 as part of a new solar system at Penrith Solar Centre start at $23,990 (including a 6kW solar system), while adding it to an existing system is around $15,990 27. Installing a Powerwall system in a 3-phase home can incur additional costs and complexities compared to single-phase installations 13. If the goal is to achieve any level of backup across multiple phases using Powerwall, the cost would escalate significantly with the need for multiple units. Homeowners in NSW may be eligible for rebates under the Peak Demand Reduction Scheme (PDRS), which can help offset the initial investment in a Tesla Powerwall 5. However, the overall cost of a Powerwall system, especially when considering a multi-unit setup for more comprehensive backup in a 3-phase home, remains a substantial financial consideration.
4. Analysis of Sungrow Battery Options for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
- 4.1 Technical Specifications of Relevant Sungrow Battery Models (SBR and SBH Series):\ Sungrow offers a range of high-voltage battery solutions, primarily the SBR and SBH series, utilizing Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) chemistry for enhanced safety 5. The SBR series features a modular design with 3.2 kWh battery modules, allowing for system capacities ranging from 9.6 kWh (3 modules) up to 25.6 kWh (8 modules) in a single stack. Multiple stacks can be connected in parallel to achieve even larger capacities, up to 100 kWh 6. These batteries boast 100% usable energy capacity 26 and are high-voltage systems 33. The SBH series also employs a modular design with larger 5 kWh battery modules. A single stack can accommodate 4 to 8 modules, providing usable energy from 20 kWh to 40 kWh. Similar to the SBR series, multiple SBH stacks can be connected in parallel to reach a maximum capacity of 160 kWh 5. Both the SBR and SBH series come with a 10-year warranty 5 and are primarily designed for DC coupling with Sungrow's hybrid inverter range, particularly the SH series, which includes models specifically designed for 3-phase systems (SH-RT series) 33. The availability of a wider range of capacities and the modular design of both the SBR and SBH series provide greater flexibility for the user to tailor a battery system to their specific energy consumption needs. The SBH series, with its larger 5 kWh modules, appears particularly well-suited for homes with potentially higher energy demands, such as those with 3-phase connections.
- 4.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (DC and AC Coupling):\ The user's existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter is a grid-tied inverter and not a hybrid model designed for direct DC coupling with batteries 5. Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, such as the SBR and SBH series, are primarily intended for DC coupling with their SH series hybrid inverters 33. While direct DC coupling is not an option with the SG5KTL-MT, it is possible to AC couple Sungrow batteries to the existing solar system 35. This would likely require the addition of a separate battery inverter to manage the charging and discharging of the Sungrow battery, as the SG5KTL-MT does not have this functionality. Although AC coupling offers a way to integrate a battery without replacing the existing solar inverter, it can introduce inefficiencies due to the multiple AC-DC and DC-AC conversions. For optimal performance and to fully leverage the capabilities of Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, particularly for off-grid operation, upgrading to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter would be the recommended approach.
- 4.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:\ Sungrow offers a distinct advantage in providing solutions for 3-phase off-grid operation through their SH-RT series of hybrid inverters 5. These inverters, when paired with Sungrow's SBR or SBH batteries, are capable of providing seamless transition to 3-phase backup power during grid outages 63. The SH-RT series is specifically designed to support 100% unbalanced loads in backup mode, ensuring that essential appliances continue to run during a blackout 66. Both the SBR and SBH battery series are compatible with off-grid operation when used in conjunction with the appropriate Sungrow hybrid inverters. Some single-phase Sungrow hybrid inverters (SH-RS series) also offer off-grid capabilities and support generator connection for battery charging during extended periods of low solar generation 85. This comprehensive ecosystem of Sungrow products provides a more direct and integrated pathway for the user to achieve their goal of potential 3-phase off-grid capability compared to the single-phase limitations of Tesla Powerwall.
- 4.4 Potential for V2H Integration with an EV (e.g Tesla Car) in Australia:\ Similar to Tesla Powerwall, the provided research material does not explicitly mention direct V2H integration capabilities for Sungrow battery systems with Tesla cars in Australia 22. However, Sungrow's active involvement in the broader renewable energy and electric vehicle charging sectors suggests a strong potential for future integration. Sungrow manufactures its own range of EV chargers 64, and their 3-phase hybrid inverter solutions can be paired with these chargers for smart green power charging 64. As V2H technology and the necessary bidirectional charging infrastructure become more prevalent in Australia, it is conceivable that Sungrow's integrated energy management systems, including their batteries and hybrid inverters, could be updated to support V2H functionality, potentially even with Tesla vehicles through standardized protocols or future partnerships. In the interim, a Sungrow battery system can efficiently store solar energy, which could then be used to charge a Tesla car. The potential for the EV to discharge back to the home would depend on the availability and compatibility of third-party bidirectional chargers that adhere to the evolving Australian standards.
- 4.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:\ The cost of Sungrow batteries in Australia varies depending on the model and capacity. For the SBR series, a 9.6 kWh system is approximately $11,500 installed, a 12.8 kWh system around $13,200 installed, and a 25.6 kWh system around $19,700 installed. Supply-only costs for the SBH series 20 kWh kit range from $13,778.70 to $14,360 40. Compatible 3-phase hybrid inverters from Sungrow, such as the SH5.0RT, are priced around $3,760, while the SH10RT ranges from approximately $4,174.50 to $5,720 78. If the user opts for a Sungrow battery system to achieve optimal 3-phase off-grid capability, the cost of a new SH series hybrid inverter would need to be included, as the existing SG5KTL-MT is not compatible for direct DC coupling. While AC coupling might be a less expensive initial step, it could involve the additional cost of a separate battery inverter. Homeowners in NSW can potentially benefit from the NSW battery rebate when purchasing a Sungrow battery system, which could help reduce the overall cost 5. Although Sungrow batteries often offer a competitive cost per kWh, the total investment for a comprehensive 3-phase off-grid solution might be higher than a single-phase Tesla Powerwall setup, primarily due to the potential need for a new hybrid inverter.
5. Comparative Assessment: Tesla Powerwall vs. Sungrow Batteries
- 5.1 Side-by-Side Comparison Table of Key Specifications:
| Feature | Tesla Powerwall 3 | Sungrow SBR (Example: 12.8 kWh) + SH10RT | | --- | --- | --- | | Usable Energy Capacity (kWh) | 13.5 | 12.8 | | Continuous Power Output (kW) | 10 | 10 | | Peak Power Output (kW) | 10 | 12 (5 min) | | Battery Chemistry | Lithium Iron Phosphate | Lithium Iron Phosphate | | Scalability | Up to 4 units (54 kWh) | Up to 25.6 kWh per stack, 4 stacks parallel (102.4 kWh) | | Off-Grid Backup (Phases Supported) | Single-Phase | Three-Phase | | V2H Support (Current/Future Potential) | Potential via 3rd party charger | Potential via 3rd party charger | | Warranty (Years) | 10 | 10 | | Estimated Cost (AUD) | $13,600 + installation | $13,200 (battery installed) + $4,175 - $5,720 (inverter) |
- 5.2 Detailed Comparison Based on Off-Grid Capability Requirements:\ When considering the user's goal of potential off-grid capability for a 3-phase home, Sungrow presents a more robust solution. The availability of Sungrow's SH-RT series hybrid inverters, specifically designed for 3-phase systems and fully compatible with their SBR and SBH batteries, allows for a direct and integrated approach to achieving 3-phase backup power. These systems can seamlessly transition to off-grid mode, powering all three phases of the home, which is crucial for operating 3-phase appliances and ensuring comprehensive whole-house backup. In contrast, Tesla Powerwall, being a single-phase battery, inherently limits off-grid backup to a single phase in a 3-phase home 8. While multiple Powerwall units can be installed, this increases cost and complexity without guaranteeing full 3-phase backup or official off-grid support from Tesla. Therefore, for a user prioritizing potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation, Sungrow's ecosystem offers a more suitable and supported pathway.
- 5.3 Detailed Comparison Based on V2H Functionality Requirements:\ Currently, neither Tesla Powerwall nor Sungrow batteries offer direct, integrated V2H functionality for Tesla cars in Australia 22. Both systems can store solar energy that could be used to charge a EV, and the potential for the car to discharge back to the home (V2H) would rely on the development and adoption of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia, which is expected to become more mainstream in 2025 21. Sungrow's involvement in manufacturing EV chargers and integrating them with their hybrid inverters suggests a potential for future V2H integration within their ecosystem. Similarly, while Tesla Powerwall doesn't currently offer V2H, its role as a home energy storage solution makes it a complementary technology to V2H, providing a place to store energy that could eventually be managed within a V2H framework.
- 5.4 Cost-Effectiveness and Overall Value Analysis:\ When evaluating cost-effectiveness, Sungrow batteries often have a lower cost per kWh of storage compared to Tesla Powerwall 5. However, for the user with an existing non-hybrid inverter, achieving the desired 3-phase off-grid capability with Sungrow would likely necessitate an additional investment in a Sungrow SH-RT series hybrid inverter. This would increase the initial outlay compared to simply AC coupling a Tesla Powerwall to the existing inverter for single-phase backup. The overall value proposition depends heavily on the user's priorities. If the primary goal is to have backup power for essential loads on a single phase and potential future V2H integration, Tesla Powerwall could be a viable option. However, if the potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation is a significant factor, then the added expense of a Sungrow hybrid inverter might be justified by the enhanced functionality and future-proofing for energy independence. Sungrow's reputation for affordability and the modularity of their battery systems also offer long-term value and flexibility.
6. Recommendations and Considerations
Based on the analysis, for a 3-phase home in Sydney with a 6.6kW solar system and the goal of potential off-grid capability, Sungrow battery options are recommended. Specifically, the user should consider upgrading their existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter (e.g., SH5.0RT or SH10RT, depending on anticipated power demands) and pairing it with a Sungrow high-voltage battery from either the SBR or SBH series. The choice between SBR and SBH would depend on the desired storage capacity and budget. This combination offers a more direct and supported path to achieving 3-phase backup power and the potential for future off-grid operation.
Key Considerations for the User:
- Off-Grid Capability: The level of off-grid capability desired (partial single-phase backup vs. comprehensive whole-home 3-phase backup) is a crucial factor. For the latter, Sungrow is the more suitable choice.
- Budget: Both options represent a significant investment. The user should obtain detailed quotes for both Tesla Powerwall (considering single or multiple units) and a complete Sungrow hybrid inverter and battery system.
- V2H Timeline: The user's timeline for V2H adoption should be considered. Both systems will likely integrate via third-party chargers.
- Inverter Upgrade: If pursuing the optimal Sungrow solution for off-grid capability, the cost and logistics of upgrading the existing inverter need to be factored in.
- 3-Phase Backup Importance: The necessity of having backup power across all three phases should weigh heavily in the decision, favoring Sungrow.
It is strongly recommended that the user obtain detailed quotes from certified installers in the Sydney area for both Tesla Powerwall and various Sungrow system configurations to get accurate pricing, installation details, and information on available rebates and incentives in NSW.
7. Conclusion
In conclusion, while Tesla Powerwall offers a well-regarded solution for home energy storage with reliable backup capabilities, its inherent single-phase design presents limitations for users with 3-phase homes seeking comprehensive off-grid functionality. Sungrow, with its range of high-voltage batteries and particularly its 3-phase hybrid inverter systems, provides a more direct and technically sound pathway to achieving the user's goals of potential 3-phase off-grid operation. For V2H integration, both systems are currently positioned to benefit from the evolving Australian regulatory landscape and the development of compatible bidirectional charging technologies. Ultimately, the optimal choice will depend on the user's specific priorities, budget, and the level of off-grid capability they wish to achieve. The rapidly evolving nature of battery storage and V2H technology suggests that continued research and consultation with experts are advisable before making a final decision.
Works cited
1. Powerwall – Home Battery Storage | Tesla Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/en_au/powerwall\ 2. Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia: Everything You Need to Know - Fritts Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.frittssolar.com.au/tesla-powerwall-3-australia/\ 3. What to Expect for Powerwall 3 | Tesla Support Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/en_au/support/energy/powerwall/learn/what-expect-powerwall-3\ 4. Tesla Powerwall 3 Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/tesla-powerwall-3-review\ 5. Sungrow SBH vs. Tesla Powerwall 3: Which is Better? NSW - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/sungrow-sbh-vs-tesla-powerwall-3-which-is-better-nsw/\ 6. Sungrow Battery vs Tesla Powerwall Review - Volteam Electric, accessed March 14, 2025, https://volteam.com.au/blog/sungrow-vs-tesla-battery-review/\ 7. Tesla Powerwall 2: A Complete 2024 Buyers Guide | Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-review/\ 8. Can You Install The Powerwall 3 On A Three-Phase Home? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/three-phase-powerwall-3/\ 9. Is my grid connect solar system 100% compatible with a Tesla Powerwall 2 battery?, accessed March 14, 2025, https://support.solarquotes.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/115001986773-Is-my-grid-connect-solar-system-100-compatible-with-a-Tesla-Powerwall-2-battery\ 10. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210706/EN%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf\ 11. Combining Systems with Powerwall | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/combining-systems\ 12. Powerwall System Design | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/system-design\ 13. Installing Powerwall 3 on a Three-phase Site | PSC - Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/installing-powerwall-3-on-a-three-phase-site/\ 14. Powerwall 3: When It Makes Sense and When It Doesn't - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/powerwall-3-when-it-makes-sense/\ 15. AC-Coupled Solar System Sizing - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-23D242D1-8D65-47B9-9118-57002FFD84D2.html\ 16. Powerwall 3 Roadmap - 3 Phase Coming! | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-3-roadmap-3-phase-coming.321409/\ 17. Advice on how to install with 3 phase : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/19djazk/advice_on_how_to_install_with_3_phase/\ 18. TESLA POWERWALL+ (3) - DIY Solar Depot, accessed March 14, 2025, https://diysolardepot.com/product/ground-mount-solar-hardware/pro-solar-ground-trac/\ 19. Design Considerations - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-3E19662A-E501-47DB-81AE-E9EC19735B8B.html\ 20. Problems with Powerwall 3 | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/problems-with-powerwall-3/\ 21. EV Charging in Australia Gets a Makeover with V2G/V2H Approved for 2025 - SEVR, accessed March 14, 2025, https://sevr.au/news/ev-charging-in-australia-gets-a-makeover-with-v2g-v2h-approved-for-2025/\ 22. V2G, V2L & V2H Explained: Vehicle to Grid in Australia? 2025 - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/what-is-vehicle-to-grid/\ 23. Australia's Future – Bidirectional EV Charging, Solar & Battery Storage as Standard Features, accessed March 14, 2025, https://fullycharged.show/blog/australias-future-bidirectional-ev-charging-solar-battery-storage-as-standard-features/\ 24. 2025, the Year of Vehicle-to-Grid in Australia V2G Milestone - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/one-step-closer-to-v2g-in-australia-2025-to-be-the-year-of-v2x/\ 25. Bidirectional Charging for Electric Cars: Unlocking New Possibilities - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/bidirectional-charging-for-electric-cars-unlocking-new-possibilities/\ 26. The Best Home Batteries In Australia In 2025: According To Aussie Installers - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/best-home-batteries-2025/\ 27. How Much Does a Tesla Powerwall 3 Cost? | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/how-much-does-a-tesla-powerwall-3-cost/\ 28. Expected 3 Phase upgrade price? : r/AusRenovation - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AusRenovation/comments/19383oa/expected_3_phase_upgrade_price/\ 29. Powerwall cost for Sydney? | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-cost-for-sydney.340317/\ 30. Solar Battery Costs: Are They Worth It?, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/solar-batteries/is-home-battery-storage-worth-it/\ 31. Tesla Powerwall 3 Price and Installation - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solar4life.com.au/learns/tesla-powerwall-3-price-and-installation\ 32. Solar Battery Price, Savings and Payback, accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarcalculator.com.au/battery-storage/price/\ 33. Sungrow | Solar Batteries Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/reviews/sungrow-review.html\ 34. Sungrow SBR high voltage battery - VP Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.vpsolar.com/en/sungrow-sbr-high-voltage-battery/\ 35. Sungrow Battery SBR Series - SolarBright, accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarbright.com.au/product/sungrow-battery-sbr-series/\ 36. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh module - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.huglo.com.au/batteries/sbr-high-voltage-lfp-battery\ 37. Sungrow Inverter and battery Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/sungrow-solar-inverters-review\ 38. SBH100/150/200/250/300/350/400 - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/5568/battery-sbh100-150-200-250-300-350-400\ 39. 20/25/30/35/40 kWh Solar Battery - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/3112/battery-sbh200-250-300-350-400\ 40. Sungrow SBH Stackable Battery System - Grow Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, https://growenergy.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-stackable-battery-system\ 41. Sungrow SBH High Voltage Battery Bundle (SBH200 - SBH400), accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-high-voltage-battery-bundle-sbh200-sbh400\ 42. Buy cheap SunGrow solar inverters, accessed March 14, 2025, https://tienda-solar.es/en/brand/54-sungrow\ 43. Sungrow PowCube battery storage system (Analysis & review) - Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/sungrow-review/\ 44. What inverters do we connect to? – Welcome to our Help Center - Support - SwitchDin, accessed March 14, 2025, https://support.switchdin.com/hc/en-us/articles/19642583185817-What-inverters-do-we-connect-to\ 45. Accessories Cross Reference Guide - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/TI_202007_Sungrow%20Accessories%20Cross%20Reference%20Guide_V1.0.pdf\ 46. Sungrow - Solar System Inverter - Solargain, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solargain.com.au/solar-inverters/sungrow-solar-inverters\ 47. Sungrow Battery Review | A Comprehensive Guide - Esteem Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, https://esteemenergy.com.au/blog/sungrow-battery-review/\ 48. Sungrow 5kW Inverter + Tesla Powerwall + Longi 370w Hi-MO4m 7.4kW Solar System, accessed March 14, 2025, https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-5kw-inverter-tesla-powerwall-longi-370w-hi-mo4m-7-4kw-solar-system/\ 49. Sungrow | Solar Inverters Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/inverters/sungrow-review.html\ 50. Tesla Powerwall: Inverter Compatibility Under the Spotlight - 1KOMMA5, accessed March 14, 2025, https://1komma5.com/au/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-compatible-solar-power-system/\ 51. Hi everybody, question about V2H power : r/electricvehicles - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/1hqneh3/hi_everybody_question_about_v2h_power/\ 52. Commercial Solar System | PV Plant | Rooftop - Sungrow US, accessed March 14, 2025, https://us.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/10/commercial-storage-systems\ 53. SH8.0/10RS | 8kW/10kW | Single Phase | Sungrow Hybrid Inverter-Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/2565/mv-power-converter-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0-10rs\ 54. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/Approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters-20201209_V14_EN.pdf\ 55. Right inverter for the Tesla Powerwall 2 : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/1chgnj8/right_inverter_for_the_tesla_powerwall_2/\ 56. Sungrow Inverters - Gold Coast Solar Power Solutions, accessed March 14, 2025, https://gold-coast-solar-power-solutions.com.au/gold-coast-solar-power-products/solar-power-inverters/sungrow-inverters/\ 57. Sungrow SBR192 Lithium-ion Battery - Europe-SolarStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.europe-solarstore.com/sungrow-sbr192-lithium-ion-battery.html\ 58. High-Efficiency Solar Battery: Up to 100% Usable Energy - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/20/23/battery\ 59. Warranty | Sungrow Australia and New Zealand Service, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/Warranty/warranty\ 60. Sungrow Battery cross-reference chart, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/GD_202405_SBR%20and%20SBH_Cross%20Reference%20Chart_V1.4%20Final.pdf\ 61. Sungrow SG5KTL-MT - SolarTopStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solartopstore.com/products/sungrow-sg5ktl-mt\ 62. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters EU Version V1.6.3 - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211119/TI_20210906_approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters_V16_EN.pdf\ 63. BLACKOUT? NO, THANKS! POWER WHENEVER YOU NEED IT - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211202/EN%20FS%20Sungrow%203-phase%20Hybrid%20Backup%20Factsheet.pdf\ 64. Sungrow 3-phase solution with 6 kVA inverter, EV charger and 9.6 kWh storage - Memodo, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.memodo-shop.com/sungrow-3-phase-solution-with-6-kva-inverter-ev-charger-and-9.6-kwh-storage/9767\ 65. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20230116/EN%20FS%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf\ 66. Sungrow Three-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solar4life.com.au/product-detail/sungrow-5-20kw-3-phase-hybrid\ 67. SG5KTL-MT/SG6KTL-MT/SG8KTL-M (Non-China ... - ENF Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.enfsolar.com/pv/inverter-datasheet/12176\ 68. Sungrow SBR battery combiner box - AC Solar Warehouse, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sungrow-battery-combiner-box-for-multiple-sungrow-lfp-battery-stacks-23620\ 69. Sungrow SBR HV Battery Installation Quick Guide, accessed March 14, 2025, https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/GD_202202_SBR%20HV%20Battery%20Installation%20Quick%20Guide%20with%201%20Phase%20SHxRS_V3.0.pdf\ 70. Energy Storage System Products Catalogue - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210909/EN%20BR%20Sungrow%20Energy%20Storage%20System%20Products%20Catalogue.pdf\ 71. DC Coupling vs AC Coupling: Which Solar System to Choose - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/blog-detail/5983/dc-coupling-vs-ac-coupling-which-solar-system-to-choose\ 72. Sungrow SBH battery - Accessory kit | AC Solar Warehouse AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sbh-accessory-kit-sungrow-sbh-battery-accessory-kit-25310\ 73. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh High Voltage Battery Module , ASA00460 - Alternergy, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.alternergy.co.uk/sungrow-sbr-3-2-kwh-battery-asa00460\ 74. NEW Sungrow single phase hybrid inverters can operate without the grid or a battery, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/new-sungrow-single-phase-hybrid-inverters-can-operate-without-the-grid-or-a-battery-255\ 75. Lawnton Sungrow SBH & Solar Hybrid System | Alvolta, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.alvolta.com.au/portfolio/info/74\ 76. Sungrow Battery Starter Pack - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.huglo.com.au/post/sungrow-battery-starter-pack\ 77. Sungrow SBR Battery System Bundles, accessed March 14, 2025, https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbr-battery-system-bundles\ 78. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW RT Three-Phase Solar Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.springers.com.au/shop/sh10rt-sungrow-hybrid-10kw-rt-three-phase-solar-inverter-15108\ 79. Sungrow RT 5kW Three Phase Hybrid inverter (2 MPPT) SH5.0RT - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/product/sungrow-sh5-0rt-hv-5-0kw-residential-hybrid-three-phase-inverter/\ 80. SUNGROW SH10RT | 10kW 3-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Sparky Direct, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.sparkydirect.com.au/p/sungrow-sh10rt-10kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter\ 81. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW 3 Phase 2 MPPT w/WiFi, DC Switch & EPS Built-in Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarheroes.com.au/product/sungrow-hybrid-10kw-3-phase-2-mppt-w-wifi-dc-switch-eps-built-in-inverter/\ 82. Sungrow Solar Inverters - Independent Review, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/inverters/Sungrow-review/\ 83. Sungrow 10.0kW - 3 Phase Hybrid Inverter (SH10RT) - Solar Superstore, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarsuperstore.com.au/products/sungrow-8-0kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0rt\ 84. How Much Do Solar Batteries Cost in Australia? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/cost/\ 85. Off Grid Solar system using a Sungrow inverter and battery, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/off-grid-solar-system-using-a-sungrow-inverter-and-battery-312\ 86. Sungrow 14.08k W Off Grid Solar System / Single Phase - AHLEC, accessed March 14, 2025, https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-14-08k-w-off-grid-solar-system-single-phase/\ 87. Residential Battery Energy Storage System - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, https://aus.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/9/residential-storage-system\ 88. EV Charger - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/59/ev-charger\ 89. Sungrow SBH 20kW High Voltage LFP Battery Including Accessory Kit SBH200 | eBay, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/135320073679\ 90. 20kWh Battery Kit - Login - Australian Solar Supplies Pty Ltd, accessed March 14, 2025, http://shop.ausolarsupplies.com.au/s.nl/it.A/id.6047/.f\ 91. Sungrow - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/sungrow/
# Comparative Evaluation of Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow Battery Options for a 3-Phase Sydney Residence
1. Executive Summary
This report presents a detailed comparative analysis of Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow battery options for a 3-phase residence in Sydney, Australia, equipped with a 6.6kW solar system and a Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter. The evaluation focuses on the suitability of these battery solutions for potential off-grid capability and Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) functionality for a EV. The analysis reveals that while both Tesla Powerwall and Sungrow offer compelling features for home energy storage, Sungrow battery systems, particularly when paired with their hybrid inverters, present a more direct and comprehensive solution for achieving 3-phase off-grid capability. For V2H integration, both systems currently rely on the development of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia. Based on the user's stated goals, a Sungrow battery system, potentially requiring an upgrade to a Sungrow hybrid inverter, is the recommended solution.
2. Introduction: Context and Objectives
The Australian residential energy landscape is witnessing a significant shift towards energy independence, with increasing adoption of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and battery storage. This trend is propelled by factors such as escalating electricity costs and a growing desire for reliable power, particularly during grid outages. This report addresses the specific needs of a Sydney homeowner who has already invested in a 6.6kW solar system connected to a 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter and owns a Tesla electric vehicle. The homeowner is now exploring battery storage solutions, with a particular focus on enabling potential off-grid operation and facilitating future Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) capabilities for their Tesla.
The primary objectives of this report are threefold: firstly, to evaluate the technical and practical suitability of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-phase home in Sydney; secondly, to conduct a similar evaluation for various Sungrow battery options; and thirdly, to provide a comparative assessment of these two leading solutions based on their ability to support off-grid functionality and integrate with V2H technology. The scope of this analysis includes the latest Tesla Powerwall models available in Australia and relevant high-voltage battery options from Sungrow, specifically the SBR and SBH series. The geographical context is limited to Sydney, Australia, considering local grid regulations and market availability. This analysis relies on the provided research material and publicly accessible technical specifications to form its conclusions.
3. Analysis of Tesla Powerwall for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
3.1 Technical Specifications and Features:
The Tesla Powerwall is a well-established residential battery system. The latest generation, Powerwall 3, offers an energy capacity of 13.5 kWh 1 and can deliver up to 10 kW of on-grid power, with the same capacity for backup power, capable of a 185 A motor start 1. A key feature of Powerwall 3 is its integrated solar inverter with a 97.5% efficiency and three solar inputs with Maximum Power Point Trackers (MPPTs) in the Australian version 1. The system is scalable, allowing for the installation of up to four units 1, and utilizes Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry, known for its safety 5. In contrast, the Powerwall 2, while also having a 13.5 kWh energy capacity 7, provides a continuous power output of 5 kW with a 7 kW peak 7. Notably, Powerwall 2 does not have an integrated solar inverter 7 and uses Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide (NMC) battery chemistry 7. It offers greater scalability, supporting up to ten units 1. Both Powerwall 2 and 3 come with a 10-year warranty 2. Powerwall 3 necessitates the use of the Tesla Backup Gateway 2 2, while Powerwall 2 requires a Gateway for system control and backup functionality 7. The integrated inverter in Powerwall 3 streamlines installations for new solar and storage setups. However, for homeowners with existing inverters, such as the user, this feature might introduce complexities as the existing inverter's functionality could become redundant if the system were configured to primarily utilize the Powerwall 3's inverter. Powerwall 2, designed as an AC-coupled battery, might offer a more seamless integration by working in conjunction with the existing Sungrow inverter 3.
3.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (AC Coupling):
Tesla Powerwall is designed as an AC-coupled battery, meaning it connects to the home's electrical system at the switchboard level and operates independently of the solar inverter 9. This AC coupling capability generally allows Powerwall to be compatible with a wide range of existing solar inverters, including the user's 3-phase Sungrow SG5KTL-MT model 2. Specifically, Powerwall 2 demonstrates 100% compatibility with single-phase grid-connected solar systems installed after October 2016 9. For Powerwall 3, Tesla indicates AC coupling compatibility with existing solar systems up to 5kW 2. However, a crucial consideration arises during grid outages concerning the ability to charge the Powerwall from solar. If the home has a 3-phase solar inverter, like the user's Sungrow SG5KTL-MT, Powerwall 2 might not be able to charge from solar during a blackout because many 3-phase inverters require the presence of all three phases from the grid to operate 9. This limitation could also extend to Powerwall 3 when AC-coupled with a 3-phase inverter 8. Given the user's interest in potential off-grid capability, this inability to recharge the battery from solar during a grid outage significantly limits the duration of backup power to the energy stored within the Powerwall. Furthermore, the user's 6.6kW solar system output exceeds the 5kW AC coupling limit specified for a single Powerwall 3. This suggests that either the entire solar generation cannot be used to charge a single Powerwall 3 via AC coupling, or a more complex configuration involving multiple Powerwall units might be necessary.
3.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:
The Tesla Powerwall is fundamentally a single-phase battery system and can only provide backup power to a single phase within a 3-phase home 8. During a power outage, only the electrical circuits connected to the phase that the Powerwall is backing up will remain operational 8. This necessitates careful planning to ensure that essential loads, such as lighting, refrigerators, and internet connectivity, are connected to this designated phase 8. While it is possible to install multiple Powerwall units, with one unit dedicated to each phase, this significantly increases the overall cost and introduces complexities in system management 8. Notably, even with the installation of three Powerwall 3 units, comprehensive 3-phase backup is not guaranteed 20. It is also important to recognize that Tesla does not officially support or provide warranties for off-grid installations of Powerwall 2. The Powerwall system is primarily designed for grid-connected homes to provide backup during outages and to optimize energy consumption, rather than functioning as the primary power source in a completely off-grid scenario. Therefore, achieving a truly comprehensive off-grid capability for a 3-phase home using Tesla Powerwall would likely involve a substantial financial investment in multiple units, meticulous load balancing across the phases, and navigating the limitations of single-phase backup, all without official support from the manufacturer.
3.4 Potential for V2H Integration with a EV in Australia:
Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) technology, which allows an electric vehicle to supply power back to a home, is gaining traction in Australia. Regulatory changes have been made to permit bidirectional charging systems, with mainstream adoption expected in 2025 21. Australian standards for bidirectional charging are now approved, and compatible chargers are anticipated to become available in 2025 22. Currently, the research snippets do not indicate that Tesla Powerwall offers direct, integrated V2H functionality with Tesla cars in Australia 1. However, the Tesla Powerwall can play a supportive role in a V2H ecosystem. It can efficiently store excess energy generated by the solar system 1, which could then be used to charge the Tesla car. If the Tesla car is equipped with V2H capabilities and connected to a compatible bidirectional charger, the energy stored in the Powerwall (or directly from solar) could indirectly contribute to powering the home by first charging the vehicle's battery. The actual discharge from the vehicle to the home would be managed by the bidirectional charger and the vehicle's internal systems, not directly by the Powerwall. Therefore, while Powerwall doesn't inherently provide V2H, it can act as a crucial energy storage component within a broader V2H setup.
3.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:
The cost of a Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia is approximately $13,600, which includes the mandatory Backup Gateway 2 2. Powerwall 2 has an approximate price of $8,750 to $9,750, excluding installation and the Backup Gateway 7, with the installed cost estimated between $12,000 and $14,000 7. Installation costs for Powerwall 3 as part of a new solar system at Penrith Solar Centre start at $23,990 (including a 6kW solar system), while adding it to an existing system is around $15,990 27. Installing a Powerwall system in a 3-phase home can incur additional costs and complexities compared to single-phase installations 13. If the goal is to achieve any level of backup across multiple phases using Powerwall, the cost would escalate significantly with the need for multiple units. Homeowners in NSW may be eligible for rebates under the Peak Demand Reduction Scheme (PDRS), which can help offset the initial investment in a Tesla Powerwall 5. However, the overall cost of a Powerwall system, especially when considering a multi-unit setup for more comprehensive backup in a 3-phase home, remains a substantial financial consideration.
4. Analysis of Sungrow Battery Options for a 3-Phase Sydney Home
4.1 Technical Specifications of Relevant Sungrow Battery Models (SBR and SBH Series):
Sungrow offers a range of high-voltage battery solutions, primarily the SBR and SBH series, utilizing Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) chemistry for enhanced safety 5. The SBR series features a modular design with 3.2 kWh battery modules, allowing for system capacities ranging from 9.6 kWh (3 modules) up to 25.6 kWh (8 modules) in a single stack. Multiple stacks can be connected in parallel to achieve even larger capacities, up to 100 kWh 6. These batteries boast 100% usable energy capacity 26 and are high-voltage systems 33. The SBH series also employs a modular design with larger 5 kWh battery modules. A single stack can accommodate 4 to 8 modules, providing usable energy from 20 kWh to 40 kWh. Similar to the SBR series, multiple SBH stacks can be connected in parallel to reach a maximum capacity of 160 kWh 5. Both the SBR and SBH series come with a 10-year warranty 5 and are primarily designed for DC coupling with Sungrow's hybrid inverter range, particularly the SH series, which includes models specifically designed for 3-phase systems (SH-RT series) 33. The availability of a wider range of capacities and the modular design of both the SBR and SBH series provide greater flexibility for the user to tailor a battery system to their specific energy consumption needs. The SBH series, with its larger 5 kWh modules, appears particularly well-suited for homes with potentially higher energy demands, such as those with 3-phase connections.
4.2 Compatibility with Existing 3-Phase Sungrow Inverter (DC and AC Coupling):
The user's existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter is a grid-tied inverter and not a hybrid model designed for direct DC coupling with batteries 5. Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, such as the SBR and SBH series, are primarily intended for DC coupling with their SH series hybrid inverters 33. While direct DC coupling is not an option with the SG5KTL-MT, it is possible to AC couple Sungrow batteries to the existing solar system 35. This would likely require the addition of a separate battery inverter to manage the charging and discharging of the Sungrow battery, as the SG5KTL-MT does not have this functionality. Although AC coupling offers a way to integrate a battery without replacing the existing solar inverter, it can introduce inefficiencies due to the multiple AC-DC and DC-AC conversions. For optimal performance and to fully leverage the capabilities of Sungrow's high-voltage batteries, particularly for off-grid operation, upgrading to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter would be the recommended approach.
4.3 Suitability for Off-Grid Operation in a 3-Phase System:
Sungrow offers a distinct advantage in providing solutions for 3-phase off-grid operation through their SH-RT series of hybrid inverters 5. These inverters, when paired with Sungrow's SBR or SBH batteries, are capable of providing seamless transition to 3-phase backup power during grid outages 63. The SH-RT series is specifically designed to support 100% unbalanced loads in backup mode, ensuring that essential appliances continue to run during a blackout 66. Both the SBR and SBH battery series are compatible with off-grid operation when used in conjunction with the appropriate Sungrow hybrid inverters. Some single-phase Sungrow hybrid inverters (SH-RS series) also offer off-grid capabilities and support generator connection for battery charging during extended periods of low solar generation 85. This comprehensive ecosystem of Sungrow products provides a more direct and integrated pathway for the user to achieve their goal of potential 3-phase off-grid capability compared to the single-phase limitations of Tesla Powerwall.
4.4 Potential for V2H Integration with a Tesla Car in Australia:
Similar to Tesla Powerwall, the provided research material does not explicitly mention direct V2H integration capabilities for Sungrow battery systems with Tesla cars in Australia 22. However, Sungrow's active involvement in the broader renewable energy and electric vehicle charging sectors suggests a strong potential for future integration. Sungrow manufactures its own range of EV chargers 64, and their 3-phase hybrid inverter solutions can be paired with these chargers for smart green power charging 64. As V2H technology and the necessary bidirectional charging infrastructure become more prevalent in Australia, it is conceivable that Sungrow's integrated energy management systems, including their batteries and hybrid inverters, could be updated to support V2H functionality, potentially even with Tesla vehicles through standardized protocols or future partnerships. In the interim, a Sungrow battery system can efficiently store solar energy, which could then be used to charge a Tesla car. The potential for the Tesla car to discharge back to the home would depend on the availability and compatibility of third-party bidirectional chargers that adhere to the evolving Australian standards.
4.5 Cost and Installation Considerations in Sydney:
The cost of Sungrow batteries in Australia varies depending on the model and capacity. For the SBR series, a 9.6 kWh system is approximately $11,500 installed, a 12.8 kWh system around $13,200 installed, and a 25.6 kWh system around $19,700 installed. Supply-only costs for the SBH series 20 kWh kit range from $13,778.70 to $14,360 40. Compatible 3-phase hybrid inverters from Sungrow, such as the SH5.0RT, are priced around $3,760, while the SH10RT ranges from approximately $4,174.50 to $5,720 78. If the user opts for a Sungrow battery system to achieve optimal 3-phase off-grid capability, the cost of a new SH series hybrid inverter would need to be included, as the existing SG5KTL-MT is not compatible for direct DC coupling. While AC coupling might be a less expensive initial step, it could involve the additional cost of a separate battery inverter. Homeowners in NSW can potentially benefit from the NSW battery rebate when purchasing a Sungrow battery system, which could help reduce the overall cost 5. Although Sungrow batteries often offer a competitive cost per kWh, the total investment for a comprehensive 3-phase off-grid solution might be higher than a single-phase Tesla Powerwall setup, primarily due to the potential need for a new hybrid inverter.
5. Comparative Assessment: Tesla Powerwall vs. Sungrow Batteries
5.1 Side-by-Side Comparison Table of Key Specifications:
| Feature | Tesla Powerwall 3 | Sungrow SBR (Example: 12.8 kWh) + SH10RT |
| :---- | :---- | :---- |
| Usable Energy Capacity (kWh) | 13.5 | 12.8 |
| Continuous Power Output (kW) | 10 | 10 |
| Peak Power Output (kW) | 10 | 12 (5 min) |
| Battery Chemistry | Lithium Iron Phosphate | Lithium Iron Phosphate |
| Scalability | Up to 4 units (54 kWh) | Up to 25.6 kWh per stack, 4 stacks parallel (102.4 kWh) |
| Off-Grid Backup (Phases Supported) | Single-Phase | Three-Phase |
| V2H Support (Current/Future Potential) | Potential via 3rd party charger | Potential via 3rd party charger |
| Warranty (Years) | 10 | 10 |
| Estimated Cost (AUD) | $13,600 + installation | $13,200 (battery installed) + $4,175 - $5,720 (inverter) |
5.2 Detailed Comparison Based on Off-Grid Capability Requirements:
When considering the user's goal of potential off-grid capability for a 3-phase home, Sungrow presents a more robust solution. The availability of Sungrow's SH-RT series hybrid inverters, specifically designed for 3-phase systems and fully compatible with their SBR and SBH batteries, allows for a direct and integrated approach to achieving 3-phase backup power. These systems can seamlessly transition to off-grid mode, powering all three phases of the home, which is crucial for operating 3-phase appliances and ensuring comprehensive whole-house backup. In contrast, Tesla Powerwall, being a single-phase battery, inherently limits off-grid backup to a single phase in a 3-phase home 8. While multiple Powerwall units can be installed, this increases cost and complexity without guaranteeing full 3-phase backup or official off-grid support from Tesla. Therefore, for a user prioritizing potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation, Sungrow's ecosystem offers a more suitable and supported pathway.
5.3 Detailed Comparison Based on V2H Functionality Requirements:
Currently, neither Tesla Powerwall nor Sungrow batteries offer direct, integrated V2H functionality for Tesla cars in Australia 22. Both systems can store solar energy that could be used to charge a Tesla car, and the potential for the car to discharge back to the home (V2H) would rely on the development and adoption of compatible bidirectional charging infrastructure in Australia, which is expected to become more mainstream in 2025 21. Sungrow's involvement in manufacturing EV chargers and integrating them with their hybrid inverters suggests a potential for future V2H integration within their ecosystem. Similarly, while Tesla Powerwall doesn't currently offer V2H, its role as a home energy storage solution makes it a complementary technology to V2H, providing a place to store energy that could eventually be managed within a V2H framework.
5.4 Cost-Effectiveness and Overall Value Analysis:
When evaluating cost-effectiveness, Sungrow batteries often have a lower cost per kWh of storage compared to Tesla Powerwall 5. However, for the user with an existing non-hybrid inverter, achieving the desired 3-phase off-grid capability with Sungrow would likely necessitate an additional investment in a Sungrow SH-RT series hybrid inverter. This would increase the initial outlay compared to simply AC coupling a Tesla Powerwall to the existing inverter for single-phase backup. The overall value proposition depends heavily on the user's priorities. If the primary goal is to have backup power for essential loads on a single phase and potential future V2H integration, Tesla Powerwall could be a viable option. However, if the potential for comprehensive 3-phase off-grid operation is a significant factor, then the added expense of a Sungrow hybrid inverter might be justified by the enhanced functionality and future-proofing for energy independence. Sungrow's reputation for affordability and the modularity of their battery systems also offer long-term value and flexibility.
6. Recommendations and Considerations
Based on the analysis, for a 3-phase home in Sydney with a 6.6kW solar system and the goal of potential off-grid capability, Sungrow battery options are recommended. Specifically, the user should consider upgrading their existing Sungrow SG5KTL-MT inverter to a Sungrow SH series hybrid inverter (e.g., SH5.0RT or SH10RT, depending on anticipated power demands) and pairing it with a Sungrow high-voltage battery from either the SBR or SBH series. The choice between SBR and SBH would depend on the desired storage capacity and budget. This combination offers a more direct and supported path to achieving 3-phase backup power and the potential for future off-grid operation.
Key Considerations for the User:
Off-Grid Capability: The level of off-grid capability desired (partial single-phase backup vs. comprehensive whole-home 3-phase backup) is a crucial factor. For the latter, Sungrow is the more suitable choice.
Budget: Both options represent a significant investment. The user should obtain detailed quotes for both Tesla Powerwall (considering single or multiple units) and a complete Sungrow hybrid inverter and battery system.
V2H Timeline: The user's timeline for V2H adoption should be considered. Both systems will likely integrate via third-party chargers.
Inverter Upgrade: If pursuing the optimal Sungrow solution for off-grid capability, the cost and logistics of upgrading the existing inverter need to be factored in.
* 3-Phase Backup Importance: The necessity of having backup power across all three phases should weigh heavily in the decision, favoring Sungrow.
It is strongly recommended that the user obtain detailed quotes from certified installers in the Sydney area for both Tesla Powerwall and various Sungrow system configurations to get accurate pricing, installation details, and information on available rebates and incentives in NSW.
7. Conclusion
In conclusion, while Tesla Powerwall offers a well-regarded solution for home energy storage with reliable backup capabilities, its inherent single-phase design presents limitations for users with 3-phase homes seeking comprehensive off-grid functionality. Sungrow, with its range of high-voltage batteries and particularly its 3-phase hybrid inverter systems, provides a more direct and technically sound pathway to achieving the user's goals of potential 3-phase off-grid operation. For V2H integration, both systems are currently positioned to benefit from the evolving Australian regulatory landscape and the development of compatible bidirectional charging technologies. Ultimately, the optimal choice will depend on the user's specific priorities, budget, and the level of off-grid capability they wish to achieve. The rapidly evolving nature of battery storage and V2H technology suggests that continued research and consultation with experts are advisable before making a final decision.
#### Works cited
1. Powerwall – Home Battery Storage | Tesla Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/en_au/powerwall](https://www.tesla.com/en_au/powerwall)
2. Tesla Powerwall 3 in Australia: Everything You Need to Know - Fritts Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.frittssolar.com.au/tesla-powerwall-3-australia/](https://www.frittssolar.com.au/tesla-powerwall-3-australia/)
3. What to Expect for Powerwall 3 | Tesla Support Australia, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/en_au/support/energy/powerwall/learn/what-expect-powerwall-3](https://www.tesla.com/en_au/support/energy/powerwall/learn/what-expect-powerwall-3)
4. Tesla Powerwall 3 Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/tesla-powerwall-3-review](https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/tesla-powerwall-3-review)
5. Sungrow SBH vs. Tesla Powerwall 3: Which is Better? NSW - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/sungrow-sbh-vs-tesla-powerwall-3-which-is-better-nsw/](https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/sungrow-sbh-vs-tesla-powerwall-3-which-is-better-nsw/)
6. Sungrow Battery vs Tesla Powerwall Review - Volteam Electric, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://volteam.com.au/blog/sungrow-vs-tesla-battery-review/](https://volteam.com.au/blog/sungrow-vs-tesla-battery-review/)
7. Tesla Powerwall 2: A Complete 2024 Buyers Guide | Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-review/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-review/)
8. Can You Install The Powerwall 3 On A Three-Phase Home? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/three-phase-powerwall-3/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/three-phase-powerwall-3/)
9. Is my grid connect solar system 100% compatible with a Tesla Powerwall 2 battery?, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://support.solarquotes.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/115001986773-Is-my-grid-connect-solar-system-100-compatible-with-a-Tesla-Powerwall-2-battery](https://support.solarquotes.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/115001986773-Is-my-grid-connect-solar-system-100-compatible-with-a-Tesla-Powerwall-2-battery)
10. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210706/EN%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210706/EN%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf)
11. Combining Systems with Powerwall | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/combining-systems](https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/combining-systems)
12. Powerwall System Design | Tesla Support, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/system-design](https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/system-design)
13. Installing Powerwall 3 on a Three-phase Site | PSC - Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/installing-powerwall-3-on-a-three-phase-site/](https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/installing-powerwall-3-on-a-three-phase-site/)
14. Powerwall 3: When It Makes Sense and When It Doesn't - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/powerwall-3-when-it-makes-sense/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/powerwall-3-when-it-makes-sense/)
15. AC-Coupled Solar System Sizing - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-23D242D1-8D65-47B9-9118-57002FFD84D2.html](https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-23D242D1-8D65-47B9-9118-57002FFD84D2.html)
16. Powerwall 3 Roadmap - 3 Phase Coming! | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-3-roadmap-3-phase-coming.321409/](https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-3-roadmap-3-phase-coming.321409/)
17. Advice on how to install with 3 phase : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/19djazk/advice_on_how_to_install_with_3_phase/](https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/19djazk/advice_on_how_to_install_with_3_phase/)
18. TESLA POWERWALL+ (3) - DIY Solar Depot, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://diysolardepot.com/product/ground-mount-solar-hardware/pro-solar-ground-trac/](https://diysolardepot.com/product/ground-mount-solar-hardware/pro-solar-ground-trac/)
19. Design Considerations - Energy Library - Tesla, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-3E19662A-E501-47DB-81AE-E9EC19735B8B.html](https://energylibrary.tesla.com/docs/Public/EnergyStorage/Powerwall/3/SystemDesign/en-us/GUID-3E19662A-E501-47DB-81AE-E9EC19735B8B.html)
20. Problems with Powerwall 3 | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/problems-with-powerwall-3/](https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/problems-with-powerwall-3/)
21. EV Charging in Australia Gets a Makeover with V2G/V2H Approved for 2025 - SEVR, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://sevr.au/news/ev-charging-in-australia-gets-a-makeover-with-v2g-v2h-approved-for-2025/](https://sevr.au/news/ev-charging-in-australia-gets-a-makeover-with-v2g-v2h-approved-for-2025/)
22. V2G, V2L & V2H Explained: Vehicle to Grid in Australia? 2025 - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/what-is-vehicle-to-grid/](https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/what-is-vehicle-to-grid/)
23. Australia's Future – Bidirectional EV Charging, Solar & Battery Storage as Standard Features, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://fullycharged.show/blog/australias-future-bidirectional-ev-charging-solar-battery-storage-as-standard-features/](https://fullycharged.show/blog/australias-future-bidirectional-ev-charging-solar-battery-storage-as-standard-features/)
24. 2025, the Year of Vehicle-to-Grid in Australia V2G Milestone - Elite Power Group, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/one-step-closer-to-v2g-in-australia-2025-to-be-the-year-of-v2x/](https://www.elitepowergroup.com.au/news/one-step-closer-to-v2g-in-australia-2025-to-be-the-year-of-v2x/)
25. Bidirectional Charging for Electric Cars: Unlocking New Possibilities - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/bidirectional-charging-for-electric-cars-unlocking-new-possibilities/](https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/bidirectional-charging-for-electric-cars-unlocking-new-possibilities/)
26. The Best Home Batteries In Australia In 2025: According To Aussie Installers - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/best-home-batteries-2025/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/best-home-batteries-2025/)
27. How Much Does a Tesla Powerwall 3 Cost? | Penrith Solar Centre, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/how-much-does-a-tesla-powerwall-3-cost/](https://www.penrithsolar.com.au/blog/how-much-does-a-tesla-powerwall-3-cost/)
28. Expected 3 Phase upgrade price? : r/AusRenovation - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/AusRenovation/comments/19383oa/expected_3_phase_upgrade_price/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusRenovation/comments/19383oa/expected_3_phase_upgrade_price/)
29. Powerwall cost for Sydney? | Tesla Motors Club, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-cost-for-sydney.340317/](https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/powerwall-cost-for-sydney.340317/)
30. Solar Battery Costs: Are They Worth It?, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/solar-batteries/is-home-battery-storage-worth-it/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/solar-batteries/is-home-battery-storage-worth-it/)
31. Tesla Powerwall 3 Price and Installation - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solar4life.com.au/learns/tesla-powerwall-3-price-and-installation](https://www.solar4life.com.au/learns/tesla-powerwall-3-price-and-installation)
32. Solar Battery Price, Savings and Payback, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarcalculator.com.au/battery-storage/price/](https://solarcalculator.com.au/battery-storage/price/)
33. Sungrow | Solar Batteries Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/reviews/sungrow-review.html](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/reviews/sungrow-review.html)
34. Sungrow SBR high voltage battery - VP Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.vpsolar.com/en/sungrow-sbr-high-voltage-battery/](https://www.vpsolar.com/en/sungrow-sbr-high-voltage-battery/)
35. Sungrow Battery SBR Series - SolarBright, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarbright.com.au/product/sungrow-battery-sbr-series/](https://solarbright.com.au/product/sungrow-battery-sbr-series/)
36. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh module - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.huglo.com.au/batteries/sbr-high-voltage-lfp-battery](https://www.huglo.com.au/batteries/sbr-high-voltage-lfp-battery)
37. Sungrow Inverter and battery Review - Clean Energy Reviews, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/sungrow-solar-inverters-review](https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/sungrow-solar-inverters-review)
38. SBH100/150/200/250/300/350/400 - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/5568/battery-sbh100-150-200-250-300-350-400](https://en.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/5568/battery-sbh100-150-200-250-300-350-400)
39. 20/25/30/35/40 kWh Solar Battery - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/3112/battery-sbh200-250-300-350-400](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/3112/battery-sbh200-250-300-350-400)
40. Sungrow SBH Stackable Battery System - Grow Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://growenergy.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-stackable-battery-system](https://growenergy.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-stackable-battery-system)
41. Sungrow SBH High Voltage Battery Bundle (SBH200 - SBH400), accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-high-voltage-battery-bundle-sbh200-sbh400](https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbh-high-voltage-battery-bundle-sbh200-sbh400)
42. Buy cheap SunGrow solar inverters, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://tienda-solar.es/en/brand/54-sungrow](https://tienda-solar.es/en/brand/54-sungrow)
43. Sungrow PowCube battery storage system (Analysis & review) - Solar Choice, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/sungrow-review/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/batteries/sungrow-review/)
44. What inverters do we connect to? – Welcome to our Help Center - Support - SwitchDin, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://support.switchdin.com/hc/en-us/articles/19642583185817-What-inverters-do-we-connect-to](https://support.switchdin.com/hc/en-us/articles/19642583185817-What-inverters-do-we-connect-to)
45. Accessories Cross Reference Guide - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/TI_202007_Sungrow%20Accessories%20Cross%20Reference%20Guide_V1.0.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/TI_202007_Sungrow%20Accessories%20Cross%20Reference%20Guide_V1.0.pdf)
46. Sungrow - Solar System Inverter - Solargain, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solargain.com.au/solar-inverters/sungrow-solar-inverters](https://www.solargain.com.au/solar-inverters/sungrow-solar-inverters)
47. Sungrow Battery Review | A Comprehensive Guide - Esteem Energy, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://esteemenergy.com.au/blog/sungrow-battery-review/](https://esteemenergy.com.au/blog/sungrow-battery-review/)
48. Sungrow 5kW Inverter + Tesla Powerwall + Longi 370w Hi-MO4m 7.4kW Solar System, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-5kw-inverter-tesla-powerwall-longi-370w-hi-mo4m-7-4kw-solar-system/](https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-5kw-inverter-tesla-powerwall-longi-370w-hi-mo4m-7-4kw-solar-system/)
49. Sungrow | Solar Inverters Review - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/inverters/sungrow-review.html](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/inverters/sungrow-review.html)
50. Tesla Powerwall: Inverter Compatibility Under the Spotlight - 1KOMMA5, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://1komma5.com/au/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-compatible-solar-power-system/](https://1komma5.com/au/batteries/tesla-powerwall-2-compatible-solar-power-system/)
51. Hi everybody, question about V2H power : r/electricvehicles - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/1hqneh3/hi_everybody_question_about_v2h_power/](https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/1hqneh3/hi_everybody_question_about_v2h_power/)
52. Commercial Solar System | PV Plant | Rooftop - Sungrow US, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://us.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/10/commercial-storage-systems](https://us.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/10/commercial-storage-systems)
53. SH8.0/10RS | 8kW/10kW | Single Phase | Sungrow Hybrid Inverter-Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/2565/mv-power-converter-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0-10rs](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/productDetail/2565/mv-power-converter-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0-10rs)
54. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters - Sungrow Australia Service, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/Approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters-20201209_V14_EN.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/Approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters-20201209_V14_EN.pdf)
55. Right inverter for the Tesla Powerwall 2 : r/solar - Reddit, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/1chgnj8/right_inverter_for_the_tesla_powerwall_2/](https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/1chgnj8/right_inverter_for_the_tesla_powerwall_2/)
56. Sungrow Inverters - Gold Coast Solar Power Solutions, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://gold-coast-solar-power-solutions.com.au/gold-coast-solar-power-products/solar-power-inverters/sungrow-inverters/](https://gold-coast-solar-power-solutions.com.au/gold-coast-solar-power-products/solar-power-inverters/sungrow-inverters/)
57. Sungrow SBR192 Lithium-ion Battery - Europe-SolarStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.europe-solarstore.com/sungrow-sbr192-lithium-ion-battery.html](https://www.europe-solarstore.com/sungrow-sbr192-lithium-ion-battery.html)
58. High-Efficiency Solar Battery: Up to 100% Usable Energy - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/20/23/battery](https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/20/23/battery)
59. Warranty | Sungrow Australia and New Zealand Service, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/Warranty/warranty](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/Warranty/warranty)
60. Sungrow Battery cross-reference chart, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/GD_202405_SBR%20and%20SBH_Cross%20Reference%20Chart_V1.4%20Final.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/GD_202405_SBR%20and%20SBH_Cross%20Reference%20Chart_V1.4%20Final.pdf)
61. Sungrow SG5KTL-MT - SolarTopStore.com, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solartopstore.com/products/sungrow-sg5ktl-mt](https://www.solartopstore.com/products/sungrow-sg5ktl-mt)
62. Approved Batteries with SH Series Hybrid Inverters EU Version V1.6.3 - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211119/TI_20210906_approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters_V16_EN.pdf](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211119/TI_20210906_approved%20battery%20declaration%20for%20sungrow%20hybrid%20inverters_V16_EN.pdf)
63. BLACKOUT? NO, THANKS! POWER WHENEVER YOU NEED IT - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211202/EN%20FS%20Sungrow%203-phase%20Hybrid%20Backup%20Factsheet.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20211202/EN%20FS%20Sungrow%203-phase%20Hybrid%20Backup%20Factsheet.pdf)
64. Sungrow 3-phase solution with 6 kVA inverter, EV charger and 9.6 kWh storage - Memodo, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.memodo-shop.com/sungrow-3-phase-solution-with-6-kva-inverter-ev-charger-and-9.6-kwh-storage/9767](https://www.memodo-shop.com/sungrow-3-phase-solution-with-6-kva-inverter-ev-charger-and-9.6-kwh-storage/9767)
65. THE 3-PHASE SOLUTION - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20230116/EN%20FS%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20230116/EN%20FS%203-phaseSolution%20Factsheet.pdf)
66. Sungrow Three-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Solar4Life, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solar4life.com.au/product-detail/sungrow-5-20kw-3-phase-hybrid](https://www.solar4life.com.au/product-detail/sungrow-5-20kw-3-phase-hybrid)
67. SG5KTL-MT/SG6KTL-MT/SG8KTL-M (Non-China ... - ENF Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.enfsolar.com/pv/inverter-datasheet/12176](https://www.enfsolar.com/pv/inverter-datasheet/12176)
68. Sungrow SBR battery combiner box - AC Solar Warehouse, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sungrow-battery-combiner-box-for-multiple-sungrow-lfp-battery-stacks-23620](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sungrow-battery-combiner-box-for-multiple-sungrow-lfp-battery-stacks-23620)
69. Sungrow SBR HV Battery Installation Quick Guide, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/GD_202202_SBR%20HV%20Battery%20Installation%20Quick%20Guide%20with%201%20Phase%20SHxRS_V3.0.pdf](https://service.sungrowpower.com.au/files/Web_Files/FAQ/GD_202202_SBR%20HV%20Battery%20Installation%20Quick%20Guide%20with%201%20Phase%20SHxRS_V3.0.pdf)
70. Energy Storage System Products Catalogue - SUNGROW, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210909/EN%20BR%20Sungrow%20Energy%20Storage%20System%20Products%20Catalogue.pdf](https://uk.sungrowpower.com/upload/file/20210909/EN%20BR%20Sungrow%20Energy%20Storage%20System%20Products%20Catalogue.pdf)
71. DC Coupling vs AC Coupling: Which Solar System to Choose - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/blog-detail/5983/dc-coupling-vs-ac-coupling-which-solar-system-to-choose](https://en.sungrowpower.com/blog-detail/5983/dc-coupling-vs-ac-coupling-which-solar-system-to-choose)
72. Sungrow SBH battery - Accessory kit | AC Solar Warehouse AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sbh-accessory-kit-sungrow-sbh-battery-accessory-kit-25310](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/shop/sbh-accessory-kit-sungrow-sbh-battery-accessory-kit-25310)
73. Sungrow SBR 3.2kWh High Voltage Battery Module , ASA00460 - Alternergy, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.alternergy.co.uk/sungrow-sbr-3-2-kwh-battery-asa00460](https://www.alternergy.co.uk/sungrow-sbr-3-2-kwh-battery-asa00460)
74. NEW Sungrow single phase hybrid inverters can operate without the grid or a battery, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/new-sungrow-single-phase-hybrid-inverters-can-operate-without-the-grid-or-a-battery-255](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/new-sungrow-single-phase-hybrid-inverters-can-operate-without-the-grid-or-a-battery-255)
75. Lawnton Sungrow SBH & Solar Hybrid System | Alvolta, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.alvolta.com.au/portfolio/info/74](https://www.alvolta.com.au/portfolio/info/74)
76. Sungrow Battery Starter Pack - Huglo Solar, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.huglo.com.au/post/sungrow-battery-starter-pack](https://www.huglo.com.au/post/sungrow-battery-starter-pack)
77. Sungrow SBR Battery System Bundles, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbr-battery-system-bundles](https://solarbatterysupermarket.com.au/products/sungrow-sbr-battery-system-bundles)
78. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW RT Three-Phase Solar Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.springers.com.au/shop/sh10rt-sungrow-hybrid-10kw-rt-three-phase-solar-inverter-15108](https://www.springers.com.au/shop/sh10rt-sungrow-hybrid-10kw-rt-three-phase-solar-inverter-15108)
79. Sungrow RT 5kW Three Phase Hybrid inverter (2 MPPT) SH5.0RT - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/product/sungrow-sh5-0rt-hv-5-0kw-residential-hybrid-three-phase-inverter/](https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/product/sungrow-sh5-0rt-hv-5-0kw-residential-hybrid-three-phase-inverter/)
80. SUNGROW SH10RT | 10kW 3-Phase Hybrid Inverter - Sparky Direct, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.sparkydirect.com.au/p/sungrow-sh10rt-10kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter](https://www.sparkydirect.com.au/p/sungrow-sh10rt-10kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter)
81. Sungrow Hybrid 10kW 3 Phase 2 MPPT w/WiFi, DC Switch & EPS Built-in Inverter, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarheroes.com.au/product/sungrow-hybrid-10kw-3-phase-2-mppt-w-wifi-dc-switch-eps-built-in-inverter/](https://www.solarheroes.com.au/product/sungrow-hybrid-10kw-3-phase-2-mppt-w-wifi-dc-switch-eps-built-in-inverter/)
82. Sungrow Solar Inverters - Independent Review, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/inverters/Sungrow-review/](https://www.solarchoice.net.au/products/inverters/Sungrow-review/)
83. Sungrow 10.0kW - 3 Phase Hybrid Inverter (SH10RT) - Solar Superstore, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarsuperstore.com.au/products/sungrow-8-0kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0rt](https://www.solarsuperstore.com.au/products/sungrow-8-0kw-3-phase-hybrid-inverter-sh8-0rt)
84. How Much Do Solar Batteries Cost in Australia? - SolarQuotes, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/cost/](https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/cost/)
85. Off Grid Solar system using a Sungrow inverter and battery, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/off-grid-solar-system-using-a-sungrow-inverter-and-battery-312](https://www.acsolarwarehouse.com/blog/news-7/off-grid-solar-system-using-a-sungrow-inverter-and-battery-312)
86. Sungrow 14.08k W Off Grid Solar System / Single Phase - AHLEC, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-14-08k-w-off-grid-solar-system-single-phase/](https://ahlecsolar.com.au/product/sungrow-14-08k-w-off-grid-solar-system-single-phase/)
87. Residential Battery Energy Storage System - Sungrow AU, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://aus.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/9/residential-storage-system](https://aus.sungrowpower.com/solutionsDetail/9/residential-storage-system)
88. EV Charger - Sungrow, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/59/ev-charger](https://en.sungrowpower.com/ProductsHome/59/ev-charger)
89. Sungrow SBH 20kW High Voltage LFP Battery Including Accessory Kit SBH200 | eBay, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/135320073679](https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/135320073679)
90. 20kWh Battery Kit - Login - Australian Solar Supplies Pty Ltd, accessed March 14, 2025, [http://shop.ausolarsupplies.com.au/s.nl/it.A/id.6047/.f](http://shop.ausolarsupplies.com.au/s.nl/it.A/id.6047/.f)
91. Sungrow - Solar Batteries Online, accessed March 14, 2025, [https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/sungrow/](https://www.solarbatteriesonline.com.au/sungrow/)
{"id":"6a44da7a-19c1-4a37-a991-d589c8bbded8","providerCopyMimeTypes":["application/vnd.vscode.markdown.updatelinks.metadata","application/vnd.code.additional-editor-data"],"defaultPastePayload":{"multicursorText":null,"pasteOnNewLine":false,"mode":null}}{"version":1,"isFromEmptySelection":false,"multicursorText":null,"mode":"markdown"}
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-02-19 09:23:17Die «moralische Weltordnung» – eine Art Astrologie. Friedrich Nietzsche
Das Treffen der BRICS-Staaten beim Gipfel im russischen Kasan war sicher nicht irgendein politisches Event. Gastgeber Wladimir Putin habe «Hof gehalten», sagen die Einen, China und Russland hätten ihre Vorstellung einer multipolaren Weltordnung zelebriert, schreiben Andere.
In jedem Fall zeigt die Anwesenheit von über 30 Delegationen aus der ganzen Welt, dass von einer geostrategischen Isolation Russlands wohl keine Rede sein kann. Darüber hinaus haben sowohl die Anreise von UN-Generalsekretär António Guterres als auch die Meldungen und Dementis bezüglich der Beitrittsbemühungen des NATO-Staats Türkei für etwas Aufsehen gesorgt.
Im Spannungsfeld geopolitischer und wirtschaftlicher Umbrüche zeigt die neue Allianz zunehmendes Selbstbewusstsein. In Sachen gemeinsamer Finanzpolitik schmiedet man interessante Pläne. Größere Unabhängigkeit von der US-dominierten Finanzordnung ist dabei ein wichtiges Ziel.
Beim BRICS-Wirtschaftsforum in Moskau, wenige Tage vor dem Gipfel, zählte ein nachhaltiges System für Finanzabrechnungen und Zahlungsdienste zu den vorrangigen Themen. Während dieses Treffens ging der russische Staatsfonds eine Partnerschaft mit dem Rechenzentrumsbetreiber BitRiver ein, um Bitcoin-Mining-Anlagen für die BRICS-Länder zu errichten.
Die Initiative könnte ein Schritt sein, Bitcoin und andere Kryptowährungen als Alternativen zu traditionellen Finanzsystemen zu etablieren. Das Projekt könnte dazu führen, dass die BRICS-Staaten den globalen Handel in Bitcoin abwickeln. Vor dem Hintergrund der Diskussionen über eine «BRICS-Währung» wäre dies eine Alternative zu dem ursprünglich angedachten Korb lokaler Währungen und zu goldgedeckten Währungen sowie eine mögliche Ergänzung zum Zahlungssystem BRICS Pay.
Dient der Bitcoin also der Entdollarisierung? Oder droht er inzwischen, zum Gegenstand geopolitischer Machtspielchen zu werden? Angesichts der globalen Vernetzungen ist es oft schwer zu durchschauen, «was eine Show ist und was im Hintergrund von anderen Strippenziehern insgeheim gesteuert wird». Sicher können Strukturen wie Bitcoin auch so genutzt werden, dass sie den Herrschenden dienlich sind. Aber die Grundeigenschaft des dezentralisierten, unzensierbaren Peer-to-Peer Zahlungsnetzwerks ist ihm schließlich nicht zu nehmen.
Wenn es nach der EZB oder dem IWF geht, dann scheint statt Instrumentalisierung momentan eher der Kampf gegen Kryptowährungen angesagt. Jürgen Schaaf, Senior Manager bei der Europäischen Zentralbank, hat jedenfalls dazu aufgerufen, Bitcoin «zu eliminieren». Der Internationale Währungsfonds forderte El Salvador, das Bitcoin 2021 als gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel eingeführt hat, kürzlich zu begrenzenden Maßnahmen gegen das Kryptogeld auf.
Dass die BRICS-Staaten ein freiheitliches Ansinnen im Kopf haben, wenn sie Kryptowährungen ins Spiel bringen, darf indes auch bezweifelt werden. Im Abschlussdokument bekennen sich die Gipfel-Teilnehmer ausdrücklich zur UN, ihren Programmen und ihrer «Agenda 2030». Ernst Wolff nennt das «eine Bankrotterklärung korrupter Politiker, die sich dem digital-finanziellen Komplex zu 100 Prozent unterwerfen».
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 21335073:a244b1ad
2025-03-18 14:43:08Warning: This piece contains a conversation about difficult topics. Please proceed with caution.
TL;DR please educate your children about online safety.
Julian Assange wrote in his 2012 book Cypherpunks, “This book is not a manifesto. There isn’t time for that. This book is a warning.” I read it a few times over the past summer. Those opening lines definitely stood out to me. I wish we had listened back then. He saw something about the internet that few had the ability to see. There are some individuals who are so close to a topic that when they speak, it’s difficult for others who aren’t steeped in it to visualize what they’re talking about. I didn’t read the book until more recently. If I had read it when it came out, it probably would have sounded like an unknown foreign language to me. Today it makes more sense.
This isn’t a manifesto. This isn’t a book. There is no time for that. It’s a warning and a possible solution from a desperate and determined survivor advocate who has been pulling and unraveling a thread for a few years. At times, I feel too close to this topic to make any sense trying to convey my pathway to my conclusions or thoughts to the general public. My hope is that if nothing else, I can convey my sense of urgency while writing this. This piece is a watchman’s warning.
When a child steps online, they are walking into a new world. A new reality. When you hand a child the internet, you are handing them possibilities—good, bad, and ugly. This is a conversation about lowering the potential of negative outcomes of stepping into that new world and how I came to these conclusions. I constantly compare the internet to the road. You wouldn’t let a young child run out into the road with no guidance or safety precautions. When you hand a child the internet without any type of guidance or safety measures, you are allowing them to play in rush hour, oncoming traffic. “Look left, look right for cars before crossing.” We almost all have been taught that as children. What are we taught as humans about safety before stepping into a completely different reality like the internet? Very little.
I could never really figure out why many folks in tech, privacy rights activists, and hackers seemed so cold to me while talking about online child sexual exploitation. I always figured that as a survivor advocate for those affected by these crimes, that specific, skilled group of individuals would be very welcoming and easy to talk to about such serious topics. I actually had one hacker laugh in my face when I brought it up while I was looking for answers. I thought maybe this individual thought I was accusing them of something I wasn’t, so I felt bad for asking. I was constantly extremely disappointed and would ask myself, “Why don’t they care? What could I say to make them care more? What could I say to make them understand the crisis and the level of suffering that happens as a result of the problem?”
I have been serving minor survivors of online child sexual exploitation for years. My first case serving a survivor of this specific crime was in 2018—a 13-year-old girl sexually exploited by a serial predator on Snapchat. That was my first glimpse into this side of the internet. I won a national award for serving the minor survivors of Twitter in 2023, but I had been working on that specific project for a few years. I was nominated by a lawyer representing two survivors in a legal battle against the platform. I’ve never really spoken about this before, but at the time it was a choice for me between fighting Snapchat or Twitter. I chose Twitter—or rather, Twitter chose me. I heard about the story of John Doe #1 and John Doe #2, and I was so unbelievably broken over it that I went to war for multiple years. I was and still am royally pissed about that case. As far as I was concerned, the John Doe #1 case proved that whatever was going on with corporate tech social media was so out of control that I didn’t have time to wait, so I got to work. It was reading the messages that John Doe #1 sent to Twitter begging them to remove his sexual exploitation that broke me. He was a child begging adults to do something. A passion for justice and protecting kids makes you do wild things. I was desperate to find answers about what happened and searched for solutions. In the end, the platform Twitter was purchased. During the acquisition, I just asked Mr. Musk nicely to prioritize the issue of detection and removal of child sexual exploitation without violating digital privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption. Elon thanked me multiple times during the acquisition, made some changes, and I was thanked by others on the survivors’ side as well.
I still feel that even with the progress made, I really just scratched the surface with Twitter, now X. I left that passion project when I did for a few reasons. I wanted to give new leadership time to tackle the issue. Elon Musk made big promises that I knew would take a while to fulfill, but mostly I had been watching global legislation transpire around the issue, and frankly, the governments are willing to go much further with X and the rest of corporate tech than I ever would. My work begging Twitter to make changes with easier reporting of content, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation material—without violating privacy rights or eroding end-to-end encryption—and advocating for the minor survivors of the platform went as far as my principles would have allowed. I’m grateful for that experience. I was still left with a nagging question: “How did things get so bad with Twitter where the John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 case was able to happen in the first place?” I decided to keep looking for answers. I decided to keep pulling the thread.
I never worked for Twitter. This is often confusing for folks. I will say that despite being disappointed in the platform’s leadership at times, I loved Twitter. I saw and still see its value. I definitely love the survivors of the platform, but I also loved the platform. I was a champion of the platform’s ability to give folks from virtually around the globe an opportunity to speak and be heard.
I want to be clear that John Doe #1 really is my why. He is the inspiration. I am writing this because of him. He represents so many globally, and I’m still inspired by his bravery. One child’s voice begging adults to do something—I’m an adult, I heard him. I’d go to war a thousand more lifetimes for that young man, and I don’t even know his name. Fighting has been personally dark at times; I’m not even going to try to sugarcoat it, but it has been worth it.
The data surrounding the very real crime of online child sexual exploitation is available to the public online at any time for anyone to see. I’d encourage you to go look at the data for yourself. I believe in encouraging folks to check multiple sources so that you understand the full picture. If you are uncomfortable just searching around the internet for information about this topic, use the terms “CSAM,” “CSEM,” “SG-CSEM,” or “AI Generated CSAM.” The numbers don’t lie—it’s a nightmare that’s out of control. It’s a big business. The demand is high, and unfortunately, business is booming. Organizations collect the data, tech companies often post their data, governments report frequently, and the corporate press has covered a decent portion of the conversation, so I’m sure you can find a source that you trust.
Technology is changing rapidly, which is great for innovation as a whole but horrible for the crime of online child sexual exploitation. Those wishing to exploit the vulnerable seem to be adapting to each technological change with ease. The governments are so far behind with tackling these issues that as I’m typing this, it’s borderline irrelevant to even include them while speaking about the crime or potential solutions. Technology is changing too rapidly, and their old, broken systems can’t even dare to keep up. Think of it like the governments’ “War on Drugs.” Drugs won. In this case as well, the governments are not winning. The governments are talking about maybe having a meeting on potentially maybe having legislation around the crimes. The time to have that meeting would have been many years ago. I’m not advocating for governments to legislate our way out of this. I’m on the side of educating and innovating our way out of this.
I have been clear while advocating for the minor survivors of corporate tech platforms that I would not advocate for any solution to the crime that would violate digital privacy rights or erode end-to-end encryption. That has been a personal moral position that I was unwilling to budge on. This is an extremely unpopular and borderline nonexistent position in the anti-human trafficking movement and online child protection space. I’m often fearful that I’m wrong about this. I have always thought that a better pathway forward would have been to incentivize innovation for detection and removal of content. I had no previous exposure to privacy rights activists or Cypherpunks—actually, I came to that conclusion by listening to the voices of MENA region political dissidents and human rights activists. After developing relationships with human rights activists from around the globe, I realized how important privacy rights and encryption are for those who need it most globally. I was simply unwilling to give more power, control, and opportunities for mass surveillance to big abusers like governments wishing to enslave entire nations and untrustworthy corporate tech companies to potentially end some portion of abuses online. On top of all of it, it has been clear to me for years that all potential solutions outside of violating digital privacy rights to detect and remove child sexual exploitation online have not yet been explored aggressively. I’ve been disappointed that there hasn’t been more of a conversation around preventing the crime from happening in the first place.
What has been tried is mass surveillance. In China, they are currently under mass surveillance both online and offline, and their behaviors are attached to a social credit score. Unfortunately, even on state-run and controlled social media platforms, they still have child sexual exploitation and abuse imagery pop up along with other crimes and human rights violations. They also have a thriving black market online due to the oppression from the state. In other words, even an entire loss of freedom and privacy cannot end the sexual exploitation of children online. It’s been tried. There is no reason to repeat this method.
It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out why I always felt a slight coldness from those in tech and privacy-minded individuals about the topic of child sexual exploitation online. I didn’t have any clue about the “Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse.” This is a term coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. I would have been a child myself when he first said it. I actually laughed at myself when I heard the phrase for the first time. I finally got it. The Cypherpunks weren’t wrong about that topic. They were so spot on that it is borderline uncomfortable. I was mad at first that they knew that early during the birth of the internet that this issue would arise and didn’t address it. Then I got over it because I realized that it wasn’t their job. Their job was—is—to write code. Their job wasn’t to be involved and loving parents or survivor advocates. Their job wasn’t to educate children on internet safety or raise awareness; their job was to write code.
They knew that child sexual abuse material would be shared on the internet. They said what would happen—not in a gleeful way, but a prediction. Then it happened.
I equate it now to a concrete company laying down a road. As you’re pouring the concrete, you can say to yourself, “A terrorist might travel down this road to go kill many, and on the flip side, a beautiful child can be born in an ambulance on this road.” Who or what travels down the road is not their responsibility—they are just supposed to lay the concrete. I’d never go to a concrete pourer and ask them to solve terrorism that travels down roads. Under the current system, law enforcement should stop terrorists before they even make it to the road. The solution to this specific problem is not to treat everyone on the road like a terrorist or to not build the road.
So I understand the perceived coldness from those in tech. Not only was it not their job, but bringing up the topic was seen as the equivalent of asking a free person if they wanted to discuss one of the four topics—child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers, intellectual property pirates, etc.—that would usher in digital authoritarianism for all who are online globally.
Privacy rights advocates and groups have put up a good fight. They stood by their principles. Unfortunately, when it comes to corporate tech, I believe that the issue of privacy is almost a complete lost cause at this point. It’s still worth pushing back, but ultimately, it is a losing battle—a ticking time bomb.
I do think that corporate tech providers could have slowed down the inevitable loss of privacy at the hands of the state by prioritizing the detection and removal of CSAM when they all started online. I believe it would have bought some time, fewer would have been traumatized by that specific crime, and I do believe that it could have slowed down the demand for content. If I think too much about that, I’ll go insane, so I try to push the “if maybes” aside, but never knowing if it could have been handled differently will forever haunt me. At night when it’s quiet, I wonder what I would have done differently if given the opportunity. I’ll probably never know how much corporate tech knew and ignored in the hopes that it would go away while the problem continued to get worse. They had different priorities. The most voiceless and vulnerable exploited on corporate tech never had much of a voice, so corporate tech providers didn’t receive very much pushback.
Now I’m about to say something really wild, and you can call me whatever you want to call me, but I’m going to say what I believe to be true. I believe that the governments are either so incompetent that they allowed the proliferation of CSAM online, or they knowingly allowed the problem to fester long enough to have an excuse to violate privacy rights and erode end-to-end encryption. The US government could have seized the corporate tech providers over CSAM, but I believe that they were so useful as a propaganda arm for the regimes that they allowed them to continue virtually unscathed.
That season is done now, and the governments are making the issue a priority. It will come at a high cost. Privacy on corporate tech providers is virtually done as I’m typing this. It feels like a death rattle. I’m not particularly sure that we had much digital privacy to begin with, but the illusion of a veil of privacy feels gone.
To make matters slightly more complex, it would be hard to convince me that once AI really gets going, digital privacy will exist at all.
I believe that there should be a conversation shift to preserving freedoms and human rights in a post-privacy society.
I don’t want to get locked up because AI predicted a nasty post online from me about the government. I’m not a doomer about AI—I’m just going to roll with it personally. I’m looking forward to the positive changes that will be brought forth by AI. I see it as inevitable. A bit of privacy was helpful while it lasted. Please keep fighting to preserve what is left of privacy either way because I could be wrong about all of this.
On the topic of AI, the addition of AI to the horrific crime of child sexual abuse material and child sexual exploitation in multiple ways so far has been devastating. It’s currently out of control. The genie is out of the bottle. I am hopeful that innovation will get us humans out of this, but I’m not sure how or how long it will take. We must be extremely cautious around AI legislation. It should not be illegal to innovate even if some bad comes with the good. I don’t trust that the governments are equipped to decide the best pathway forward for AI. Source: the entire history of the government.
I have been personally negatively impacted by AI-generated content. Every few days, I get another alert that I’m featured again in what’s called “deep fake pornography” without my consent. I’m not happy about it, but what pains me the most is the thought that for a period of time down the road, many globally will experience what myself and others are experiencing now by being digitally sexually abused in this way. If you have ever had your picture taken and posted online, you are also at risk of being exploited in this way. Your child’s image can be used as well, unfortunately, and this is just the beginning of this particular nightmare. It will move to more realistic interpretations of sexual behaviors as technology improves. I have no brave words of wisdom about how to deal with that emotionally. I do have hope that innovation will save the day around this specific issue. I’m nervous that everyone online will have to ID verify due to this issue. I see that as one possible outcome that could help to prevent one problem but inadvertently cause more problems, especially for those living under authoritarian regimes or anyone who needs to remain anonymous online. A zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) would probably be the best solution to these issues. There are some survivors of violence and/or sexual trauma who need to remain anonymous online for various reasons. There are survivor stories available online of those who have been abused in this way. I’d encourage you seek out and listen to their stories.
There have been periods of time recently where I hesitate to say anything at all because more than likely AI will cover most of my concerns about education, awareness, prevention, detection, and removal of child sexual exploitation online, etc.
Unfortunately, some of the most pressing issues we’ve seen online over the last few years come in the form of “sextortion.” Self-generated child sexual exploitation (SG-CSEM) numbers are continuing to be terrifying. I’d strongly encourage that you look into sextortion data. AI + sextortion is also a huge concern. The perpetrators are using the non-sexually explicit images of children and putting their likeness on AI-generated child sexual exploitation content and extorting money, more imagery, or both from minors online. It’s like a million nightmares wrapped into one. The wild part is that these issues will only get more pervasive because technology is harnessed to perpetuate horror at a scale unimaginable to a human mind.
Even if you banned phones and the internet or tried to prevent children from accessing the internet, it wouldn’t solve it. Child sexual exploitation will still be with us until as a society we start to prevent the crime before it happens. That is the only human way out right now.
There is no reset button on the internet, but if I could go back, I’d tell survivor advocates to heed the warnings of the early internet builders and to start education and awareness campaigns designed to prevent as much online child sexual exploitation as possible. The internet and technology moved quickly, and I don’t believe that society ever really caught up. We live in a world where a child can be groomed by a predator in their own home while sitting on a couch next to their parents watching TV. We weren’t ready as a species to tackle the fast-paced algorithms and dangers online. It happened too quickly for parents to catch up. How can you parent for the ever-changing digital world unless you are constantly aware of the dangers?
I don’t think that the internet is inherently bad. I believe that it can be a powerful tool for freedom and resistance. I’ve spoken a lot about the bad online, but there is beauty as well. We often discuss how victims and survivors are abused online; we rarely discuss the fact that countless survivors around the globe have been able to share their experiences, strength, hope, as well as provide resources to the vulnerable. I do question if giving any government or tech company access to censorship, surveillance, etc., online in the name of serving survivors might not actually impact a portion of survivors negatively. There are a fair amount of survivors with powerful abusers protected by governments and the corporate press. If a survivor cannot speak to the press about their abuse, the only place they can go is online, directly or indirectly through an independent journalist who also risks being censored. This scenario isn’t hard to imagine—it already happened in China. During #MeToo, a survivor in China wanted to post their story. The government censored the post, so the survivor put their story on the blockchain. I’m excited that the survivor was creative and brave, but it’s terrifying to think that we live in a world where that situation is a necessity.
I believe that the future for many survivors sharing their stories globally will be on completely censorship-resistant and decentralized protocols. This thought in particular gives me hope. When we listen to the experiences of a diverse group of survivors, we can start to understand potential solutions to preventing the crimes from happening in the first place.
My heart is broken over the gut-wrenching stories of survivors sexually exploited online. Every time I hear the story of a survivor, I do think to myself quietly, “What could have prevented this from happening in the first place?” My heart is with survivors.
My head, on the other hand, is full of the understanding that the internet should remain free. The free flow of information should not be stopped. My mind is with the innocent citizens around the globe that deserve freedom both online and offline.
The problem is that governments don’t only want to censor illegal content that violates human rights—they create legislation that is so broad that it can impact speech and privacy of all. “Don’t you care about the kids?” Yes, I do. I do so much that I’m invested in finding solutions. I also care about all citizens around the globe that deserve an opportunity to live free from a mass surveillance society. If terrorism happens online, I should not be punished by losing my freedom. If drugs are sold online, I should not be punished. I’m not an abuser, I’m not a terrorist, and I don’t engage in illegal behaviors. I refuse to lose freedom because of others’ bad behaviors online.
I want to be clear that on a long enough timeline, the governments will decide that they can be better parents/caregivers than you can if something isn’t done to stop minors from being sexually exploited online. The price will be a complete loss of anonymity, privacy, free speech, and freedom of religion online. I find it rather insulting that governments think they’re better equipped to raise children than parents and caretakers.
So we can’t go backwards—all that we can do is go forward. Those who want to have freedom will find technology to facilitate their liberation. This will lead many over time to decentralized and open protocols. So as far as I’m concerned, this does solve a few of my worries—those who need, want, and deserve to speak freely online will have the opportunity in most countries—but what about online child sexual exploitation?
When I popped up around the decentralized space, I was met with the fear of censorship. I’m not here to censor you. I don’t write code. I couldn’t censor anyone or any piece of content even if I wanted to across the internet, no matter how depraved. I don’t have the skills to do that.
I’m here to start a conversation. Freedom comes at a cost. You must always fight for and protect your freedom. I can’t speak about protecting yourself from all of the Four Horsemen because I simply don’t know the topics well enough, but I can speak about this one topic.
If there was a shortcut to ending online child sexual exploitation, I would have found it by now. There isn’t one right now. I believe that education is the only pathway forward to preventing the crime of online child sexual exploitation for future generations.
I propose a yearly education course for every child of all school ages, taught as a standard part of the curriculum. Ideally, parents/caregivers would be involved in the education/learning process.
Course: - The creation of the internet and computers - The fight for cryptography - The tech supply chain from the ground up (example: human rights violations in the supply chain) - Corporate tech - Freedom tech - Data privacy - Digital privacy rights - AI (history-current) - Online safety (predators, scams, catfishing, extortion) - Bitcoin - Laws - How to deal with online hate and harassment - Information on who to contact if you are being abused online or offline - Algorithms - How to seek out the truth about news, etc., online
The parents/caregivers, homeschoolers, unschoolers, and those working to create decentralized parallel societies have been an inspiration while writing this, but my hope is that all children would learn this course, even in government ran schools. Ideally, parents would teach this to their own children.
The decentralized space doesn’t want child sexual exploitation to thrive. Here’s the deal: there has to be a strong prevention effort in order to protect the next generation. The internet isn’t going anywhere, predators aren’t going anywhere, and I’m not down to let anyone have the opportunity to prove that there is a need for more government. I don’t believe that the government should act as parents. The governments have had a chance to attempt to stop online child sexual exploitation, and they didn’t do it. Can we try a different pathway forward?
I’d like to put myself out of a job. I don’t want to ever hear another story like John Doe #1 ever again. This will require work. I’ve often called online child sexual exploitation the lynchpin for the internet. It’s time to arm generations of children with knowledge and tools. I can’t do this alone.
Individuals have fought so that I could have freedom online. I want to fight to protect it. I don’t want child predators to give the government any opportunity to take away freedom. Decentralized spaces are as close to a reset as we’ll get with the opportunity to do it right from the start. Start the youth off correctly by preventing potential hazards to the best of your ability.
The good news is anyone can work on this! I’d encourage you to take it and run with it. I added the additional education about the history of the internet to make the course more educational and fun. Instead of cleaning up generations of destroyed lives due to online sexual exploitation, perhaps this could inspire generations of those who will build our futures. Perhaps if the youth is armed with knowledge, they can create more tools to prevent the crime.
This one solution that I’m suggesting can be done on an individual level or on a larger scale. It should be adjusted depending on age, learning style, etc. It should be fun and playful.
This solution does not address abuse in the home or some of the root causes of offline child sexual exploitation. My hope is that it could lead to some survivors experiencing abuse in the home an opportunity to disclose with a trusted adult. The purpose for this solution is to prevent the crime of online child sexual exploitation before it occurs and to arm the youth with the tools to contact safe adults if and when it happens.
In closing, I went to hell a few times so that you didn’t have to. I spoke to the mothers of survivors of minors sexually exploited online—their tears could fill rivers. I’ve spoken with political dissidents who yearned to be free from authoritarian surveillance states. The only balance that I’ve found is freedom online for citizens around the globe and prevention from the dangers of that for the youth. Don’t slow down innovation and freedom. Educate, prepare, adapt, and look for solutions.
I’m not perfect and I’m sure that there are errors in this piece. I hope that you find them and it starts a conversation.
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-13 19:39:28In much of the world, it is incredibly difficult to access U.S. dollars. Local currencies are often poorly managed and riddled with corruption. Billions of people demand a more reliable alternative. While the dollar has its own issues of corruption and mismanagement, it is widely regarded as superior to the fiat currencies it competes with globally. As a result, Tether has found massive success providing low cost, low friction access to dollars. Tether claims 400 million total users, is on track to add 200 million more this year, processes 8.1 million transactions daily, and facilitates $29 billion in daily transfers. Furthermore, their estimates suggest nearly 40% of users rely on it as a savings tool rather than just a transactional currency.
Tether’s rise has made the company a financial juggernaut. Last year alone, Tether raked in over $13 billion in profit, with a lean team of less than 100 employees. Their business model is elegantly simple: hold U.S. Treasuries and collect the interest. With over $113 billion in Treasuries, Tether has turned a straightforward concept into a profit machine.
Tether’s success has resulted in many competitors eager to claim a piece of the pie. This has triggered a massive venture capital grift cycle in USD tokens, with countless projects vying to dethrone Tether. Due to Tether’s entrenched network effect, these challengers face an uphill battle with little realistic chance of success. Most educated participants in the space likely recognize this reality but seem content to perpetuate the grift, hoping to cash out by dumping their equity positions on unsuspecting buyers before they realize the reality of the situation.
Historically, Tether’s greatest vulnerability has been U.S. government intervention. For over a decade, the company operated offshore with few allies in the U.S. establishment, making it a major target for regulatory action. That dynamic has shifted recently and Tether has seized the opportunity. By actively courting U.S. government support, Tether has fortified their position. This strategic move will likely cement their status as the dominant USD token for years to come.
While undeniably a great tool for the millions of users that rely on it, Tether is not without flaws. As a centralized, trusted third party, it holds the power to freeze or seize funds at its discretion. Corporate mismanagement or deliberate malpractice could also lead to massive losses at scale. In their goal of mitigating regulatory risk, Tether has deepened ties with law enforcement, mirroring some of the concerns of potential central bank digital currencies. In practice, Tether operates as a corporate CBDC alternative, collaborating with authorities to surveil and seize funds. The company proudly touts partnerships with leading surveillance firms and its own data reveals cooperation in over 1,000 law enforcement cases, with more than $2.5 billion in funds frozen.
The global demand for Tether is undeniable and the company’s profitability reflects its unrivaled success. Tether is owned and operated by bitcoiners and will likely continue to push forward strategic goals that help the movement as a whole. Recent efforts to mitigate the threat of U.S. government enforcement will likely solidify their network effect and stifle meaningful adoption of rival USD tokens or CBDCs. Yet, for all their achievements, Tether is simply a worse form of money than bitcoin. Tether requires trust in a centralized entity, while bitcoin can be saved or spent without permission. Furthermore, Tether is tied to the value of the US Dollar which is designed to lose purchasing power over time, while bitcoin, as a truly scarce asset, is designed to increase in purchasing power with adoption. As people awaken to the risks of Tether’s control, and the benefits bitcoin provides, bitcoin adoption will likely surpass it.
-
@ eac63075:b4988b48
2025-03-07 14:35:26Listen the Podcast:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/7lJWc1zaqA9CNhB8coJXaL?si=4147bca317624d34
https://www.fountain.fm/episode/YEGnlBLZhvuj96GSpuk9
Abstract
This paper examines a hypothetical scenario in which the United States, under Trump’s leadership, withdraws from NATO and reduces its support for Europe, thereby enabling a Russian conquest of Ukraine and the subsequent expansion of Moscow’s influence over Eurasia, while the US consolidates its dominance over South America. Drawing on classical geopolitical theories—specifically those of Halford Mackinder, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Rudolf Kjellén, and Friedrich Ratzel—the study analyzes how these frameworks can elucidate the evolving power dynamics and territorial ambitions in a reconfigured global order. The discussion highlights Mackinder’s notion of the Eurasian Heartland and its strategic importance, Mahan’s emphasis on maritime power and control of strategic routes, Kjellén’s view of the state as an expanding organism, and Ratzel’s concept of Lebensraum as a justification for territorial expansion. The paper also explores contemporary developments, such as the US–Ukraine economic agreement and Trump’s overt territorial ambitions involving Greenland and Canada, in light of these theories. By juxtaposing traditional geopolitical concepts with current international relations, the study aims to shed light on the potential implications of such shifts for regional stability, global security, and the balance of power, particularly in relation to emerging neocolonial practices in Latin America.
Introduction
In recent years, the geopolitical dynamics involving the United States, Russia, and Ukraine have sparked analyses from different theoretical perspectives. This paper examines recent events – presupposing a scenario in which Donald Trump withdraws the US from NATO and reduces its support for Europe, allowing a Russian conquest of Ukraine and the expansion of Moscow’s influence over Eurasia, while the US consolidates its dominance over South America – in light of classical geopolitical theories. The ideas of Halford Mackinder, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Rudolf Kjellén, and Friedrich Ratzel are used as reference points. The proposal is to impartially evaluate how each theory can elucidate the developments of this hypothetical scenario, relating Russian territorial expansion in Eurasia to the strategic retreat of the US to the Western Hemisphere.
Initially, we will outline Mackinder’s conception of the Heartland (the central Eurasian territory) and the crucial role of Eastern Europe and Ukraine in the quest for global dominance. Next, we will discuss Mahan’s ideas regarding maritime power and the control of strategic routes, considering the impacts on the naval power balance among the US, Russia, and other maritime powers such as the United Kingdom and Japan. Subsequently, we will examine Kjellén’s organic theory of the state, interpreting the Russian expansionist strategy as a reflection of a state organism in search of vital space. In the same vein, Ratzel’s concept of “Lebensraum” will be explored, along with how Russia could justify territorial expansion based on resources and territory. Finally, the paper connects these theories to the current political context, analyzing the direct negotiations between Washington and Moscow (overlooking Ukraine and Europe), the US policy toward authoritarian regimes in Latin America, and the notion of a hemispheric division of power – the “Island of the Americas” under North American hegemony versus an Eurasia dominated by Russia. Lastly, it considers the possibility that such a geopolitical arrangement may foster the strengthening of authoritarian governments globally, rather than containing them, thus altering the paradigms of the liberal world order.
The Heartland of Mackinder: Ukraine, Eurasia, and Global Dominance
Halford J. Mackinder, a British geographer and pioneer of geopolitics, proposed the celebrated Heartland Theory in the early twentieth century. Mackinder divided the world into geostrategic zones and identified the Heartland—the central continental mass of Eurasia—as the “geographical pivot of history” [5]. His most famous maxim encapsulates this vision: “who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; who rules the World Island commands the world” [5]. Eastern Europe and, in particular, the region of present-day Ukraine, play a key role in this formula. This is because, for Mackinder, Eastern Europe functions as a gateway to the Heartland, providing access to resources and a strategic position for the projection of continental power [5].
Applying this theory to our scenario, the conquest of Ukraine and Eastern European countries by Russia would have profound geopolitical implications. From a Mackinderian point of view, such a conquest would enormously strengthen Russia’s position in the Heartland by adding manpower (population) and Ukraine’s industrial and agricultural resources to its power base [5]. In fact, Mackinder argued that controlling the Heartland conferred formidable geostrategic advantages—a vast terrestrial “natural fortress” protected from naval invasions and rich in resources such as wheat, minerals, and fuels [5]. Thus, if Moscow were to incorporate Ukraine (renowned for its fertile soil and grain production, as well as its mineral reserves) and extend its influence over Eastern Europe, Russia would consolidate the Heartland under its direct control. In this context, the absence of the USA (withdrawn from NATO and less engaged in Europe) would remove an important obstacle to Russian predominance in the region.
With central and eastern Eurasia under Russian influence, it would be possible to move toward the realization of the geopolitical nightmare described by Mackinder for Western maritime powers: a hegemonic continental power capable of projecting power to both Europe and Asia. Mackinder himself warned that if a Heartland power gained additional access to an oceanic coastline—in other words, if it combined land power with a significant maritime front—it would constitute a “danger” to global freedom [5]. In the scenario considered, besides advancing into Eastern Europe, Russia would already possess strategic maritime outlets (for example, in the Black Sea, via Crimea, and in the Baltic, via Kaliningrad or the Baltic States if influenced). Thus, the control of Ukraine would reinforce Russia’s position in the Black Sea and facilitate projection into the Eastern Mediterranean, expanding its oceanic front. From a Mackinderian perspective, this could potentially transform Russia into the dominant power of the “World Island” (the combined mass of Europe, Asia, and Africa), thereby unbalancing the global geopolitical order [5].
It is worth noting that, historically, Mackinder’s doctrine influenced containment strategies: both in the interwar period and during the Cold War, efforts were made to prevent a single power from controlling the Heartland and Eastern Europe. NATO, for example, can be seen as an instrument to prevent Soviet/Russian advances in Europe, in line with Mackinder’s imperative to “contain the Heartland.” Thus, if the USA were to abandon that role—by leaving NATO and tacitly accepting the Russian sphere of influence in Eurasia—we would be witnessing an inversion of the principles that have guided Western policy for decades. In short, under Mackinder’s theory, the Russian conquest of Ukraine and beyond would represent the key for Russia to command the Heartland and, potentially, challenge global hegemony, especially in a scenario where the USA self-restricts to the Western Hemisphere.
The Maritime Power of Mahan and the Naval Balance between West and East
While Mackinder emphasized continental land power, Alfred Thayer Mahan, a nineteenth-century American naval strategist, highlighted the crucial role of maritime power in global dominance. In his work The Influence of Sea Power upon History (1890), Mahan studied the example of the British Empire and concluded that control of the seas paved the way for British supremacy as a world power [10]. He argued that a strong navy and the control of strategic maritime routes were decisive factors for projecting military, political, and economic power. His doctrine can be summarized in the following points: (1) the United States should aspire to be a world power; (2) control of the seas is necessary to achieve that status; (3) such control is obtained through a powerful fleet of warships [17]. In other words, for Mahan, whoever dominates the maritime routes and possesses naval superiority will be in a position to influence global destinies, ensuring trade, supplies, and the rapid movement of military forces.
In the proposed scenario, in which the USA withdraws militarily from Europe and possibly from the Eurasian stage, Mahan’s ideas raise questions about the distribution of maritime power and its effects. Traditionally, the US Navy operates globally, ensuring freedom of navigation and deterring challenges in major seas (Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, etc.). A withdrawal of the USA from NATO could also signal a reduction in its naval presence in the Northeast Atlantic, the Mediterranean Sea, and other areas close to Eurasia. In such a case, who would fill this naval vacuum? Russia, although primarily a land power, has been attempting to modernize its navy and has specific interests—for example, consolidating its dominance in the Black Sea and maintaining a presence in the Mediterranean (with a naval base in Tartus, Syria). The United Kingdom, a historic European maritime power, would remain aligned with the USA but, without American military support in Europe, might potentially be overwhelmed trying to contain an increasingly assertive Russian navy in European waters on its own. Japan, another significant maritime actor allied with the USA, is concerned with the naval balance in the Pacific; without full American engagement, Tokyo might be compelled to expand its own naval power to contain both Russia in the Far East (which maintains a fleet in the Pacific) and, especially, the growing Chinese navy.
According to Mahan’s thinking, strategic maritime routes and choke points (crucial straits and channels) become contested prizes in this power game. With the USA focusing on the Americas, one could imagine Washington reinforcing control over the Panama Canal and Caribbean routes—reviving an “American Gulf” policy in the Western Atlantic and Eastern Pacific. In fact, indications of this orientation emerge in statements attributed to Trump, who once suggested reclaiming direct control over Panama, transforming Canada into a North American state, and even “annexing” Greenland due to its Arctic geopolitical importance [18]. These aspirations reflect a quest to secure advantageous maritime positions near the American continent.
Conversely, in the absence of American presence in the Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, Russia would have free rein for regional maritime projection. This could include anything from the unrestricted use of the Black Sea (after dominating Ukraine, thereby ensuring full access to Crimea and Ukrainian ports) to greater influence in the Eastern Mediterranean via Syria and partnerships with countries such as Iran or Egypt. The Baltic Sea would also become an area of expanded Russian interest, pressuring coastal countries and perhaps reducing NATO’s traditional local naval supremacy. However, it is worth noting that even with these regional expansions, Russia lacks a blue-water navy comparable to that of the USA; thus, its initial global maritime impact would be limited without alliances.
An important aspect of Mahan’s theories is that naval power serves as a counterbalance to the land power of the Heartland. Therefore, even if Russia were to dominate the Eurasian continental mass, the continued presence of American naval might on the oceans could prevent complete global domination by Moscow. However, if the USA voluntarily restricts its naval reach to the Americas, it would forgo influencing the power balance in the seas adjacent to Eurasia. Consequently, the balance of maritime power would tend to shift in favor of regional Eurasian actors. The United Kingdom and Japan, traditional allies of the USA, could intensify their naval capabilities to defend regional interests—the United Kingdom safeguarding the North Atlantic and the North Sea, and Japan patrolling the Northwest Pacific—but both would face budgetary and structural limitations in fully compensating for the absence of the American superpower. Consequently, Mahan’s vision suggests that the withdrawal of the USA from the extra-regional scene would weaken the liberal maritime regime, possibly opening space for revisionist powers to contest routes that were previously secured (for example, Russia and China encountering less opposition on the routes of the Arctic and the Indo-Pacific, respectively). In summary, naval hegemony would fragment, and control of strategic seas would become contested, reconfiguring the relative influence of the USA, Russia, and maritime allies such as the United Kingdom and Japan.
Kjellén and the State as a Living Organism: Russian Expansion as an Organic Necessity
Another useful theoretical lens to interpret Russian geopolitical posture is that of Rudolf Kjellén, a Swedish political scientist of the early twentieth century who conceived the State as a living organism. Kjellén, who even coined the term “geopolitics,” was influenced by Friedrich Ratzel’s ideas and by social Darwinism, arguing that States are born, grow, and decline analogously to living beings [13]. In his work Staten som livsform (The State as a Form of Life, 1916), he maintained that States possess an organic dimension in addition to the legal one and that “just as any form of life, States must expand or die” [14]. This expansion would not be motivated merely by aggressive conquest but seen as a necessary growth for the self-preservation of the state organism [14]. In complement, Kjellén echoed Ratzel’s “law of expanding spaces” by asserting that large States expand at the expense of smaller ones, with it being only a matter of time before the great realms fill the available spaces [14]. That is, from the organic perspective, vigorous States tend to incorporate smaller neighboring territories, consolidating territorially much like an organism absorbing nutrients.
Applying this theory to the strategy of contemporary Russia, we can interpret Moscow’s actions—including the invasion of Ukraine and the ambition to restore its sphere of influence in Eurasia—as the expression of an organic drive for expansion. For a strategist influenced by this school, Russia (viewed as a state organism with a long imperial history) needs to expand its territory and influence to ensure its survival and security. The loss of control over spaces that once were part of the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union (such as Ukraine itself, the Caucasus, or Central Asia) may be perceived by Russian elites as an atrophy of the state organism, rendering it vulnerable. Thus, the reincorporation of these territories—whether directly (annexation) or indirectly (political vassalage)—would equate to restoring lost members or strengthening vital organs of the state body. In fact, official Russian arguments often portray Ukraine as an intrinsic part of “Russian historicity,” denying it a fully separate identity—a narrative that aligns with the idea that Russian expansion in that region is natural and necessary for the Russian State (seen as encompassing also Russian speakers beyond its current borders).
Kjellén would thus provide a theoretical justification for Russian territorial expansion as an organic phenomenon. As a great power, Russia would inevitably seek to expand at the expense of smaller neighbors (Ukraine, Georgia, the Baltic States, etc.), as dictated by the tendency of “great spaces to organize” to the detriment of the small [14]. This view can be identified in contemporary Russian doctrines that value spheres of influence and the notion that neighboring countries must gravitate around Moscow in order for the natural order to be maintained. The very idea of “Eurasia” united under Russian leadership (advocated by modern Russian thinkers) echoes this organic conception of vital space and expansion as a sign of the State’s vitality.
However, Kjellén’s theory also warns of the phenomenon of “imperial overstretch,” should a State exceed its internal cohesion limits by expanding excessively [14]. He recognized that extending borders too far could increase friction and vulnerabilities, making it difficult to maintain cohesion—a very large organism may lack functional integration. In the Russian context, this suggests that although expansion is seen as necessary, there are risks if Russia tries to encompass more than it can govern effectively. Conquering Ukraine and subjugating Eastern Europe, for example, could economically and militarily overburden the Russian State, especially if it faced resistance or had to manage hostile populations. However, in the hypothetical scenario we adopt (isolated USA and a weakened Europe), Russia might calculate that the organic benefits of expansion (territory, resources, strategic depth) would outweigh the costs, since external interference would be limited. Thus, through Kjellén’s lens, expansionist Russia behaves as an organism following its instinct for survival and growth, absorbing weaker neighbors; yet such a process is not devoid of challenges, requiring that the “organism Russia” manages to assimilate these new spaces without collapsing under its own weight.
Ratzel and Lebensraum: Resources, Territory, and the Justification for Expansion
Parallel to Kjellén’s organic view, Friedrich Ratzel’s theory offers another conceptual basis for understanding Russian expansion: the concept of Lebensraum (vital space). Ratzel, a German geographer of the late nineteenth century, proposed that the survival and development of a people or nation depended critically on the available physical space and resources. Influenced by Darwinist ideas, he applied the notion of “survival of the fittest” to nations, arguing that human societies need to conquer territory and resources to prosper, and that the stronger and fittest civilizations will naturally prevail over the weaker ones [12]. In 1901, Ratzel coined the term Lebensraum to describe this need for “vital space” as a geographical factor in national power [15].
Subsequently, this idea would be adopted—and extremely distorted—by Nazi ideology to justify Germany’s aggressions in Europe. However, the core of Ratzel’s concept is that territorial expansion is essential for the survival and growth of a State, especially to secure food, raw materials, and space for its population [12].
When examining Russia’s stance under this perspective, we can see several narratives that evoke the logic of Lebensraum. Russia is the largest country in the world by area; however, much of its territory is characterized by adverse climates (tundra, taiga) and is relatively sparsely populated in Siberia. On the other hand, adjacent regions such as Ukraine possess highly arable lands (chernozem—black soil), significant Slavic population density, and additional natural resources (coal in the Donbass, for example). An implicit justification for Russian expansion could be the search for supplementary resources and fertile lands to secure its self-sufficiency and power—exactly as Ratzel described that vigorous nations do. Historical records show that Ratzel emphasized agrarian primacy: he believed that new territories should be colonized by farmers, providing the food base for the nation [12]. Ukraine, historically called the “breadbasket of Europe,” fits perfectly into this vision of conquest for sustenance and agricultural wealth.
Furthermore, Ratzel viewed geography as a determinant of the destiny of nations—peoples adapted to certain habitats seek to expand them if they aspire to grow. In contemporary Russian discourse, there is often mention of the need to ensure security and territorial depth in the face of NATO, or to unite brotherly peoples (Russians and Russian speakers) within a single political space. Such arguments can be read as a modern translation of Lebensraum: the idea that the Russian nation, in order to be secure and flourish, must control a larger space, encompassing buffer zones and critical resources. This Russian “vital space” would naturally include Ukraine and other former Soviet republics, given the historical and infrastructural interdependence. Ratzel emphasized that peoples migrated and expanded when their original homeland no longer met their needs or aspirations [12]. Although contemporary Russia does not suffer from demographic pressure (on the contrary, it faces population decline), under the logic of a great power there is indeed a sentiment of geopolitical insufficiency for having lost influence over areas considered strategic. Thus, reconquering these areas would mean recovering the “habitat” necessary for the Russian nation to prosper and feel secure.
It is important to mention that, in Ratzel’s and Kjellén’s formulations, the pursuit of Lebensraum or organic expansion is not morally qualified—it is treated as a natural process in the politics of power. Thus, on the discursive level, Russia can avoid overly aggressive rhetoric and resort to “natural” justifications: for example, claiming that it needs to occupy Ukraine for defensive purposes (security space) or to reunify peoples (a common cultural and historical space). Beneath these justifications, however, resonates the geopolitical imperative to acquire more territory and resources as a guarantee of national survival, something consonant with Ratzel’s theory. In fact, Russian Realpolitik frequently prioritizes the control of energy resources (gas, oil) and transportation routes. Expanding its influence over central Eurasia would also mean controlling oil pipelines, gas lines, and logistical corridors—essential elements of modern Lebensraum understood as access to vital resources and infrastructure.
In summary, by conquering Ukraine and extending its reach into Eurasia, Russia could effectively invoke the concept of Lebensraum: presenting its expansion not as mere imperialism, but as a necessity to secure indispensable lands and resources for its people and to correct the “injustice” of a vital space diminished by post-Cold War territorial losses. The theories of Ratzel and Kjellén together paint a picture in which Russian expansion emerges almost as a natural law—the great State reclaiming space to ensure its survival and development at the expense of smaller neighbors.
Trump, NATO, and the Threat of American Withdrawal
One of the most alarming changes with Trump's return to power is the tense relationship with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Trump has long criticized allies for not meeting military spending targets, even threatening during his first term to withdraw the US from the alliance if members did not increase their contributions [2]. This threat, initially viewed with skepticism, became concrete after his re-election, leading European allies to seriously consider the possibility of having to defend themselves without American support [1]. In fact, Trump suggested in post-election interviews that the US would only remain in NATO if the allies “paid their bills” – otherwise, he “would seriously consider” leaving [2]. Such statements reinforced the warning that the US might not honor NATO's mutual defense commitment, precisely at a time of continuous Russian threat due to the war in Ukraine [1].
From a theoretical point of view, this posture of American retrenchment evokes the classic tension between maritime power and land power. Alfred Thayer Mahan emphasized that the global power of the US derived largely from its naval superiority and from alliances that ensured control over strategic maritime routes [9]. NATO, since 1949, has served not only to deter Soviet terrestrial advances in Eurasia, but also to secure the US naval presence in the North Atlantic and the Mediterranean – a fundamental element according to Mahan. In turn, Halford Mackinder warned that the balance of global power depended on the control of the Eurasian “Heartland” (the central region of Eurasia). The withdrawal or disengagement of the US (a maritime power) from this region could open the way for a continental power (such as Russia) to expand its influence in Eastern Europe, unbalancing the power balance [3]. In other words, by threatening to leave NATO, Trump jeopardizes the principle of containment that prevented Russian dominance over Eastern Europe – something that Mackinder would see as a dangerous shift in global power in favor of the Heartland power.
Adopting an impartial tone, it is observed that European countries have reacted to this new reality with precautionary measures. Strategic reports already calculate the cost of an autonomous European defense: hundreds of thousands of additional soldiers and investments of hundreds of billions of euros would be required if the US ceased to guarantee the security of the continent [1]. European dependence on American military power is significant and, without it, there would be a need for a major reinforcement of European Armed Forces [1]. This mobilization practically reflects the anticipation of a power vacuum left by the US – a scenario in which Mackinder’s theory (on the primacy of the Heartland and the vulnerability of the “external crescent” where Western Europe is located) regains its relevance.
The US–Ukraine Economic Agreement: Strategic Minerals in Exchange for Support?
Another novelty of Trump's second term is the unprecedented and transactional manner in which Washington has been dealing with the war in Ukraine. Instead of emphasizing security guarantees and alliances, the Trump administration proposed a trade agreement with Ukraine focused on the exploitation of strategic minerals, linking American support to a direct economic benefit. According to sources close to the negotiations, the US and Ukraine are about to sign a pact to share the revenues from the exploitation of critical mineral resources on Ukrainian territory [19]. Materials such as titanium, lithium, rare earths, and uranium – vital for high-tech and defense industries – would be at the core of this agreement [6]. According to the known draft, Ukraine would allocate 50% of the profits from new mineral ventures to a fund controlled by the US, which would reinvest part of the resources in the country’s own reconstruction [6] [19].
It is noteworthy that the pact does not include explicit security guarantees for Kyiv, despite Ukraine remaining under direct military threat from Russia [19]. Essentially, the Trump administration offers financial support and economic investment in exchange for a share in Ukrainian natural resources, but without formally committing to Ukraine's defense in the event of a renewed Russian offensive [19]. American authorities argue that this economic partnership would already be sufficient to “secure Ukrainian interests,” as it would provide the US with its own incentives to desire Ukraine’s stability [19]. “What could be better for Ukraine than being in an economic partnership with the United States?” stated Mike Waltz, a US national security advisor, defending the proposal [19].
Analysts, however, assess the agreement in divided terms. For some, it represents a form of economic exploitation at a time of Ukraine's fragility – comparing the demand to share mineral wealth amid war to a scheme of “mafia protection” [19]. Steven Cook, from the Council on Foreign Relations, classified the offer as “extortion,” and political scientist Virginia P. Fortna observed that charging resources from an invaded country resembles predatory practices [19]. Joseph Nye adds that it is a short-term gain strategy that could be “disastrous in the long run” for American credibility, reflecting the transactional approach that Trump even adopted with close allies in other contexts [19]. On the other hand, some see a future advantage for Kyiv: journalist Pierre Briançon suggests that at least this agreement aligns American commercial interests with Ukraine’s future, which could, in theory, keep the US involved in Ukrainian prosperity in the long term [19]. It is even recalled that President Zelensky himself proposed last year the idea of sharing natural resources with the US to bring the interests of the two countries closer together [19].
From the perspective of geopolitical theories, this agreement illustrates a shift towards economic pragmatism in international relations, approaching concepts proposed by Kjellén. Rudolf Kjellén, who coined the term “geopolitics,” saw the State as a territorial organism that seeks to ensure its survival through self-sufficiency and the control of strategic resources [4]. Trump's demand for a share in Ukrainian resources in order to continue supporting the country reflects a logic of autarky and direct national interest – that is, foreign policy serving primarily to reinforce the economic and material position of the US. This view contrasts with the traditional cooperative approach, but aligns with Kjellén’s idea that powerful States tend to transform international relations into opportunities for their own gain, ensuring access to vital raw materials. Similarly, Friedrich Ratzel argued that States have a “propensity to expand their borders according to their capacities,” seeking vital space (Lebensraum) and resources to sustain their development [11]. The US–Ukraine pact, by conditioning military/economic aid on obtaining tangible advantages (half of the mineral profits), is reminiscent of Ratzel’s perspective: the US, as a rising economic power, expands its economic influence over Ukrainian territory like an organism extending itself to obtain the necessary resources for its well-being. It is, therefore, a form of economic expansionism at the expense of purely ideological commitments or collective security.
Peace Negotiations Excluding Ukraine and the Legitimacy of the Agreement
Another controversial point is the manner in which peace negotiations between Russia and the West have been conducted under Trump's administration. Since taking office, the American president has engaged directly with Moscow in pursuit of a ceasefire, deliberately keeping the Ukrainian government out of the initial discussions [6]. Trump expressed his desire to “leave Zelensky out of the conversation” and also excluded the European Union from any influence in the process [6]. This negotiation strategy—conducted without the presence of the primary interested party, Ukraine—raises serious questions about the legitimacy and sustainability of any resulting agreement.
Historically, peace agreements reached without the direct participation of one of the conflicting parties tend to face problems in implementation and acceptance.
The exclusion of Ukraine in the decision-making phase brings to light the issue of guarantees. As noted, the emerging agreement lacks formal US security guarantees for Ukraine. This implies that, after the agreement is signed, nothing will prevent Russia from launching a new offensive if it deems it convenient, knowing that the US has not committed to defending it militarily. Experts have already warned that a ceasefire without robust protection may only be a pause for Russian rearmament, rendering the conflict “frozen” temporarily and potentially resumed in the near future. The European strategic community has expressed similar concern: without American deterrence, the risk of further Russian aggressions in the region increases considerably [1]. Denmark, for example, has released intelligence reports warning of possible imminent Russian attacks, prompting neighboring countries to accelerate plans for independent defense [1].
The legitimacy of this asymmetric peace agreement (negotiated without Ukraine fully at the table and under economic coercion) is also questionable from a legal and moral point of view. It violates the principle of self-determination by imposing terms decided by great powers on a sovereign country—a practice reminiscent of dark chapters in diplomacy, such as the Munich Agreement of 1938, when powers determined the fate of Czechoslovakia without its consent. In the current case, Ukraine would end up signing the agreement, but from a position of weakness, raising doubts about how durable such a commitment would be.
From Mackinder’s perspective, Ukraine’s removal from the battlefield without guarantees essentially means admitting a greater influence of Russia (the Heartland power) over Eastern Europe. This would alter the balance in Eurasia in a potentially lasting way. Furthermore, the fact that great powers negotiate over the heads of a smaller country evokes the imperial logic of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when empires decided among themselves the divisions of foreign territories—a behavior that Mackinder saw as likely in a world of a “closed system.” With the entire world already occupied by States, Mackinder predicted that powers would begin to compete for influence within this consolidated board, often subjugating smaller states to gain advantage [3]. The US–Russia negotiation regarding Ukraine, without proper Ukrainian representation, exemplifies this type of neo-imperial dynamic in the twenty-first century.
Also noteworthy is the consonance with the ideas of Ratzel and Kjellén: both viewed smaller states as easily relegated to the status of satellites or even “parasitic organisms” in the orbit of larger states. Kjellén spoke of the intrinsic vulnerability of states with little territorial depth or economic dependence, making them susceptible to external pressures [4][20]. Ukraine, weakened by war and dependent on external aid, becomes a concrete example of this theorized vulnerability: it has had to cede strategic resources and accept terms dictated against its will in an attempt to secure its immediate survival. The resulting agreement, therefore, reflects a power imbalance characteristic of the hierarchical international relations described by classical geopolitical theorists.
Implicit Territorial Concessions and Trump’s Public Discourse
A central and controversial point in Trump’s statements regarding the war in Ukraine is the insinuation of territorial concessions to Russia as part of the conflict’s resolution. Publicly, Trump avoided explicitly condemning Russian aggression and even stated that he considered it “unlikely” that Ukraine would be able to retake all the areas occupied by the Russians [16]. In debates and interviews, he suggested that “if I were president, the war would end in 24 hours,” implying that he would force an understanding between Kyiv and Moscow that would likely involve ceding some territory in exchange for peace. This position marks a break with the previous US policy of not recognizing any territorial acquisitions made by force and fuels speculations that a future peace agreement sponsored by Trump would legitimize at least part of Russia’s gains since 2014 (Crimea, Donbass, and areas seized during the 2022 invasion).
The actions of his administration corroborate this interpretation. As discussed, the economic agreement focuses on the exploitation of Ukrainian natural resources, many of which are located precisely in regions currently under Russian military control, such as parts of the Zaporizhzhia Oblast, Donetsk, Lugansk, and the Azov Sea area [6]. A Ukrainian geologist, Hanna Liventseva, highlighted that “most of these elements (strategic minerals) are found in the south of the Ukrainian Shield, mainly in the Azov region, and most of these territories are currently invaded by Russia” [6]. This means that, to make joint exploitation viable, Russia’s de facto control over these areas would have to be recognized—or at least tolerated—in the short term. In other words, the pact indirectly and tacitly accepts Russian territorial gains, as it involves sharing the profits from resources that are not currently accessible to the Kyiv government.
Furthermore, figures close to Trump have made explicit statements regarding the possibility of territorial cession. Mike Waltz, Trump’s national security advisor, publicly stated that Zelensky might need to “cede land to Russia” to end the war [8]. This remark—made public in March 2025—confirms that the Trump White House considers it natural for Ukraine to relinquish parts of its territory in favor of an agreement. Such a stance marks a break from the previous Western consensus, which condemned any territorial gains by force. Under Trump, a pragmatic view (in the eyes of his supporters) or a cynical one (according to his critics) seems to prevail: sacrificing principles of territorial integrity to quickly end hostilities and secure immediate economic benefits.
In theoretical terms, this inclination to validate territorial gains by force recalls the concept of Realpolitik and the geopolitical Darwinism that influenced thinkers such as Ratzel. In Ratzel’s organic conception, expanding states naturally absorb neighboring territories when they are strong enough to do so, while declining states lose territory—a process almost biological in the selection of the fittest [11]. The Trump administration’s acceptance that Ukraine should “give something” to Moscow to seal peace reflects a normalization of this geopolitical selection process: it recognizes the aggressor (Russia) as having the “right” to retain conquered lands, because that is how power realities on the ground dictate. Mackinder, although firmly opposed to allowing Russia to dominate the Heartland, would see this outcome as the logical consequence of the lack of engagement from maritime powers (the USA and the United Kingdom, for example) in sustaining the Ukrainian counterattack. Without the active involvement of maritime power to balance the dispute, land power prevails in Eastern Europe.
From the perspective of international legitimacy, the cession of Ukrainian territories—whether de jure or de facto—creates a dangerous precedent in the post-Cold War era. Rewarding violent aggression with territorial gains may encourage similar strategies in other parts of the world, undermining the architecture of collective security. This is possibly a return to a world of spheres of influence, where great powers define borders and zones of control according to their convenience—something that the rules-based order after 1945 sought to avoid. Here, academic impartiality requires noting that coercion for territorial concessions rarely produces lasting peace, as the aggrieved party—in this case, Ukraine—may accept temporarily but will continue to assert its rights in the long term, as has occurred with other territorial injustices in history.
Territorial Ambitions of Trump: Greenland and Canada
Beyond the Eurasian theater of war, Trump revived geopolitical ambitions involving territories traditionally allied with the US: Greenland (an autonomous territory of Denmark) and Canada. As early as 2019, during his first term, Trump shocked the world by proposing to buy Greenland—rich in minerals and strategically positioned in the Arctic. Upon his return to power, he went further: expressing a “renewed interest” in acquiring Greenland and publicly suggesting the incorporation of Canada as the 51st American state [2].
In January 2025, during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, he even displayed maps in which the US and Canada appeared merged into a single country, while Greenland was marked as a future American possession [2]. Posts by the president on social media included satirical images with a map of North America where Canada was labeled “51st” and Greenland designated as “Our Land” [2].
Such moves were met with concern and disbelief by allies. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was caught on an open microphone warning that Trump’s fixation on annexation “is real” and not just a joke [7]. Trudeau emphasized that Washington appeared to covet Canada’s vast mineral resources, which would explain the insistence on the idea of absorption [7]. In public, Trump argued that Canadians “would be more prosperous as American citizens,” promising tax cuts and better services should they become part of the US [7]. On the Danish side, the reaction to the revived plan regarding Greenland was firmly negative—as it was in 2019—reaffirming that the territory is not for sale. Trump, however, insinuated that the issue might be one of national security, indicating that American possession of Greenland would prevent adverse influences (a reference to China and Russia in the Arctic) [2]. More worryingly, he refused to rule out the use of military means to obtain the island, although he assured that he had no intention of invading Canada by force (in the Canadian case, he spoke of “economic force” to forge a union) [2].
This series of initiatives reflects an unprecedented expansionist impetus by the US in recent times, at least in discourse. Analyzing this through the lens of classical geopolitics offers interesting insights. Friedrich Ratzel and his notion of Lebensraum suggest that powerful states, upon reaching a certain predominance, seek to expand their territory by influencing or incorporating adjacent areas. Trump, by targeting the immediate neighbor (Canada) and a nearby strategic territory (Greenland), appears to resurrect this logic of territorial expansion for the sake of gaining space and resources. Ratzel saw such expansion almost as a natural process for vigorous states, comparable to the growth of an organism [11]. From this perspective, the US would be exercising its “right” of expansion in North America and the polar region, integrating areas of vital interest.
Additionally, Alfred Mahan’s view on maritime power helps to understand the strategic value of Greenland. Mahan postulated that control of key maritime chokepoints and naval bases ensures global advantage [9]. Greenland, situated between the North Atlantic and the Arctic, has become increasingly relevant as climate change opens new polar maritime routes and reveals vast mineral deposits (including rare earth elements and oil). For the US, having a presence or sovereignty over Greenland would mean dominating the gateway to the Arctic and denying this space to rivals. This aligns with Mahan’s strategy of securing commercial and military routes (in this case, potential Arctic routes) and resources to consolidate naval supremacy. On the other hand, the incorporation of Canada—with its enormous territory, Arctic coastline, and abundant natural resources—would provide the US with formidable geoeconomic and geopolitical reinforcement, practically eliminating vulnerabilities along its northern border. This is an ambitious project that also echoes ideas of Kjellén, for whom an ideal State should seek territorial completeness and economic self-sufficiency within its region. Incorporating Canada would be the pinnacle of American regional autarky, turning North America into a unified bloc under Washington (a scenario reminiscent of the “pan-regions” conceived by twentieth-century geopoliticians influenced by Kjellén).
It is important to note, however, that these ambitions face enormous legal and political obstacles. The sovereignty of Canada and Greenland (Denmark) is guaranteed by international law, and both peoples categorically reject the idea of annexation. Any hostile action by the US against these countries would shake alliances and the world order itself. Even so, the very fact that an American president suggests such possibilities already produces geopolitical effects: traditional partners begin to distrust Washington’s intentions, seek alternative alliances, and strengthen nationalist discourses of resistance. In summary, Trump’s expansionist intentions in Greenland and Canada rekindle old territorial issues and paradoxically place the US in the position of a revisionist power—a role once associated with empires in search of colonies.
Implications for Brazil and South America: A New Neocolonization?
In light of this geopolitical reconfiguration driven by Trump's USA—with a reordering of alliances and a possible partition of spheres of influence among great powers—the question arises: what is the impact on Brazil and the other countries of South America? Traditionally, Latin America has been under the aegis of the Monroe Doctrine (1823), which established non-interference by Europe in the region and, implicitly, the primacy of the USA in the Western Hemisphere. In the post–Cold War period, this influence translated more into political and economic leadership, without formal annexations or direct territorial domination. However, the current context points to a kind of “neocolonization” of the Global South, in which larger powers seek to control resources and peripheral governments in an indirect yet effective manner.
Mackinder’s theories can be used to illuminate this dynamic. As mentioned, Mackinder envisioned the twentieth-century world as a closed system, in which there were no longer any unknown lands to be colonized—hence, the powers would fight among themselves for control over already occupied regions [3]. He predicted that Africa and Latin America (then largely European colonies or semi-colonies) would continue as boards upon which the great powers would project their disputes, a form of neocolonialism. In the current scenario, we see the USA proposing exchanges of protection for resources (as in Ukraine) and even leaders of developing countries seeking similar agreements. A notable example: the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Felix Tshisekedi, praised the USA–Ukraine initiative and suggested an analogous agreement involving Congolese mineral wealth in exchange for US support against internal rebels (M23) [19]. In other words, African countries and possibly South American ones may enter into this logic of offering privileged access to resources (cobalt, lithium, food, biodiversity) in order to obtain security guarantees or investments. This represents a regression to the times when external powers dictated the directions of the South in exchange for promises of protection, characterizing a strategic neocolonialism.
For Brazil, in particular, this rearrangement generates both opportunities and risks. As a regional power with considerable diplomatic autonomy, Brazil has historically sought to balance relationships with the USA, Europe, China, and other actors, avoiding automatic alignments. However, in a world where Trump’s USA is actively redefining spheres of influence—possibly making deals with Russia that divide priorities (for example, Washington focusing on the Western Hemisphere and Moscow on the Eastern)—South America could once again be seen as an exclusive American sphere of influence. From this perspective, Washington could pressure South American countries to align with its directives, limiting partnerships with rivals (such as China) and seeking privileged access to strategic resources (such as the Amazon, fresh water, minerals, and agricultural commodities). Some indications are already emerging: Trump’s transactional approach mentioned by Nye included pressures on Canada and Mexico regarding border and trade issues, under the threat of commercial sanctions. It would not be unthinkable to adopt a hard line, for example, with regard to Brazilian environmental policies (linked to the Amazon) or Brazil’s relations with China, using tariffs or incentives as leverage—a sort of geopolitics of economic coercion.
On the other hand, Brazil and its neighbors could also attempt to take advantage of the Sino–North American competition. If the USA is distracted consolidating its hemispheric “hard power” hegemony (even with annexation fantasies in the north), powers such as China may advance their economic presence in South America through investments and trade (Belt and Road, infrastructure financing)—which is already happening. This would constitute an indirect neocolonial dispute in the South: Chinese loans and investments versus American demands and agreements, partly reminiscent of the nineteenth-century imperial competition (when the United Kingdom, USA, and others competed for Latin American markets and resources).
From a conceptual standpoint, Mackinder might classify South America as part of the “Outer Crescent” (external insular crescent)—peripheral to the great Eurasian “World-Island,” yet still crucial as a source of resources and a strategic position in the South Atlantic and Pacific. If the USA consolidates an informal empire in the Americas, it would be reinforcing its “insular bastion” far from the Eurasian Heartland, a strategy that Mackinder once suggested for maritime powers: to control islands and peripheral continents to compensate for the disadvantage of not controlling the Heartland. However, an excessive US dominance in the South could lead to local resistance and alternative alignments, unbalancing the region.
Kjellén would add that for Brazil to maintain its decisive sovereignty, it will need to strengthen its autarky and internal cohesion—in other words, reduce vulnerabilities (economic, military, social) that external powers might exploit [4]. Meanwhile, Mahan might point out the importance for Brazil of controlling its maritime routes and coastlines (South Atlantic) to avoid being at the mercy of a naval power like the USA. And Ratzel would remind us that states that do not expand their influence tend to be absorbed by foreign influences—which, in the context of Brazil, does not mean conquering neighboring territories, but rather actively leading South American integration to create a block more resilient to external intrusion.
In summary, South America finds itself in a more competitive and segmented world, where major players are resurrecting practices from past eras. The notion of “neocolonization” here does not imply direct occupation, but rather mechanisms of dependency: whether through unequal economic agreements or through diplomatic or military pressure for alignment. Brazil, as the largest economy and territory on the subcontinent, will have to navigate with heightened caution. A new global power balance, marked by the division of spheres of influence among the USA, China, and Russia, may reduce the sovereign maneuvering space of South American countries unless they act jointly. Thus, theoretical reflection suggests the need for South–South strategies, reinforcement of regional organizations, and diversification of partnerships to avoid falling into modern “neocolonial traps.”
Conclusion
The emerging post–re-election geopolitical conjuncture of Donald Trump signals a return to classical geopolitical principles, after several decades of predominance of institutional liberal views. We witness the revaluation of concepts such as spheres of influence, exchanges of protection for resources, naval power versus land power, and disputes over territory and raw materials—all central themes in the writings of Mackinder, Mahan, Kjellén, and Ratzel at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. An impartial analysis of these events, in light of these theories, shows internal coherence in Trump’s actions: although controversial, they follow a logic of maximizing national interest and the relative power of the USA on the world stage, even at the expense of established principles and alliances.
Halford Mackinder reminds us that, in a closed world with no new lands to conquer, the great powers will seek to redistribute the world among themselves [3]. This seems to manifest in the direct understandings between the USA and Russia over the fate of Ukraine, and in American ambitions in the Arctic and the Western Hemisphere. Alfred Mahan emphasizes that the control of the seas and strategic positions ensures supremacy—we see reflections of this in Trump’s obsession with Greenland (Arctic) and the possible neglect of the importance of maintaining NATO (and therefore the North Atlantic) as a cohesive bloc, something that Mahan’s theory would criticize due to the risk of a naval vacuum. Rudolf Kjellén and Friedrich Ratzel provide the framework to understand the more aggressive facet of expansionist nationalism: the idea of the State as an organism that needs to grow, secure resources, and seek self-sufficiency explains everything from the extortionate agreement imposed on Ukraine to the annexation rhetoric regarding Canada.
The potential consequences are profound. In the short term, we may witness a precarious ceasefire in the Ukraine war, with consolidated Russian territorial gains and Ukraine economically tied to the USA, but without formal military protection—a fragile “armed peace.” Western Europe, alarmed, may accelerate its independent militarization, perhaps marking the beginning of European defense autonomy, as is already openly debated [1]. At the far end of the globe, American activism in the Arctic and the Americas may reshape alliances: countries like Canada, once aligned with Washington, might seek to guarantee their sovereignty by distancing themselves from it; powers like China could take advantage of the openings to increase their presence in Latin America and Africa through economic diplomacy; and emerging countries of the Global South may have to choose between submitting to new “guardianships” or strengthening South–South cooperation.
Ultimately, the current situation reinforces the relevance of studying geopolitics through historical lenses. The actions of the Trump administration indicate that, despite all technological and normative advances, the competition for geographic power has not disappeared—it has merely assumed new formats. Academic impartiality obliges us not to prematurely judge whether these strategies will be successful or beneficial, but history and theory warn that neo-imperial movements tend to generate counter-reactions. As Mackinder insinuated, “every shock or change anywhere reverberates around the world,” and a sudden move by a superpower tends to provoke unforeseen adjustments and chain conflicts. It remains to be seen how the other actors—including Brazil and its neighbors—will adapt to this new chapter in the great struggle for global power, in which centuries-old theories once again have a surprising explanatory power over present events.
Bibliography
[1] A Referência. (2025). Europa calcula o custo de se defender sem os EUA: 300 mil soldados e 250 bilhões de euros a mais. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://areferencia.com/europa/europa-calcula-o-custo-de-se-defender-sem-os-eua-300-mil-soldados-e-250-bilhoes-de-euros-a-mais/#:\~:text=Europa%20calcula%20o%20custo%20de,bilh%C3%B5es%20de%20euros%20a%20mais
[2] Brexit Institute. (2025). What happens if Trump invades Greenland? Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://dcubrexitinstitute.eu/2025/01/what-happens-if-trump-invades-greenland/#:\~:text=Ever%20since%20Donald%20Trump%20announced,agreed%20in%20Wales%20in%202014
[3] Cfettweis C:CST22(2)8576.DVI. (2025). Mackinder and Angell. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://cfettweis.com/wp-content/uploads/Mackinder-and-Angell.pdf#:\~:text=meant%20the%20beginning%20of%20an,Mackinder
[4] Diva-Portal. (2025). The geopolitics of territorial relativity. Poland seen by Rudolf Kjellén. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1696547/FULLTEXT02#:\~:text=,The%20state%20territory
[5] Geopolitical Monitor. (2025). The Russo-Ukrainian War and Mackinder’s Heartland Thesis. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/the-ukraine-war-and-mackinders-heartland-thesis/#:\~:text=In%201904%2C%20Sir%20Halford%20J,in%20adding%20a%20substantial%20oceanic
[6] Instituto Humanitas Unisinos. (2025). Trump obriga Zelensky a hipotecar a exploração de minerais críticos em troca do seu apoio. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.ihu.unisinos.br/648986-trump-obriga-zelensky-a-hipotecar-a-exploracao-de-minerais-criticos-em-troca-do-seu-apoio#:\~:text=Essa%20troca%20inclui%20os%20cobi%C3%A7ados,s%C3%A3o%20praticamente%20inexploradas%20no%20pa%C3%ADs
[7] Politico. (2025). Trump’s annexation fixation is no joke, Trudeau warns. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/canada-trudeau-trump-51-state-00203156#:\~:text=TORONTO%20%E2%80%94%20Prime%20Minister%20Justin,Canada%20becoming%20the%2051st%20state%2C%E2%80%9D%20Trudeau%20said
[8] The Daily Beast. (2025). Top Trump Adviser Moves Goalpost for Ukraine to End War. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.thedailybeast.com/top-trump-adviser-moves-goalpost-for-ukraine-to-end-war/#:\~:text=LAND%20GRAB
[9] The Geostrata. (2025). Alfred Thayer Mahan and Supremacy of Naval Power. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.thegeostrata.com/post/alfred-thayer-mahan-and-supremacy-of-naval-power#:\~:text=Alfred%20Thayer%20Mahan%20and%20Supremacy,control%20over%20maritime%20trade%20routes
[10] U.S. Department of State. (2025). Mahan’s The Influence of Sea Power upon History: Securing International Markets in the 1890s. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/mahan#:\~:text=Mahan%20argued%20that%20British%20control,American%20politicians%20believed%20that%20these
[11] Britannica. (2025a). Friedrich Ratzel | Biogeography, Anthropogeography, Political Geography. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.britannica.com/biography/Friedrich-Ratzel#:\~:text=webster,Swedish%20political%20scientist%20%2076
[12] Britannica. (2025b). Lebensraum. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lebensraum#:\~:text=defined,The
[13] Britannica. (2025c). Rudolf Kjellén. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.britannica.com/biography/Rudolf-Kjellen
[14] Wikipedia (ZH). (2025). Rudolf Kjellén. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/w:Rudolf_Kjell%C3%A9n#:\~:text=Besides%20legalistic%2C%20states%20have%20organic,preservation.%20%5B%203
[15] Wikipedia. (2025). Lebensraum. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum#:\~:text=The%20German%20geographer%20and%20ethnographer,into%20the%20Greater%20Germanic%20Reich
[16] YouTube. (2025). Trump says Ukraine 'unlikely to get all land back' or join NATO [Vídeo]. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmHzAVLhsXU#:\~:text=Trump%20says%20Ukraine%20%27unlikely%20to,for%20it%20to%20join%20NATO
[17] U.S. Naval Institute. (2025) Operation World Peace. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1955/june/operation-world-peace#:\\~:text=“The Mahan doctrine%2C” according to,the word “airships” is more
[18] Emissary. (2024) Trump’s Greenland and Panama Canal Threats Are a Throwback to an Old, Misguided Foreign Policy. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/01/trump-greenland-panama-canal-monroe-doctrine-policy?lang=en
[19] A Referência. Acordo EUA-Ucrânia está praticamente fechado, mas analistas se dividem sobre quem sairá ganhando. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://areferencia.com/europa/acordo-eua-ucrania-esta-praticamente-fechado-mas-analistas-se-dividem-sobre-quem-saira-ganhando/#:\\~:text=EUA e 17,o acordo a seu favor
[20] Wikipedia. (2025) Geopolitik. Recuperado em 3 de março de 2025, de https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geopolitik#:\\~:text=Rudolph Kjellén was Ratzel's Swedish,Kjellén's State
-
@ 8671a6e5:f88194d1
2025-04-03 14:52:44\~ The person came up to me from behind his merchandise stand and saw my Noderunners pin on my black t-shirt, then looked me dead in the eye and asked : “So… what do you sell?”
This is the eighth long-read in a series of twelve “food for thought” writings on Bitcoin. It was originally meant to be a few chapters in a book, but life’s too short for that.
Define
Let me start by saying there’s no single way to define or explain a “Bitcoin conference.” The experience can vary depending on a few factors: who’s organizing it (a long-time Bitcoiner or someone from traditional finance trying to grasp Bitcoin), where it’s being held (a sunny paradise like Madeira or a gloomy northern French town), and who’s speaking (technical experts or charismatic entertainers or people with little substance).
Despite these differences, there’s a shared culture that ties these conferences together: a mix of excitement, frustrations, and inevitable evolution. That’s what I explore.
This is just my take, based on what I’ve personally witnessed and what I hear from my surroundings. It’s not meant to be a blanket critique of all Bitcoin conferences as there are plenty I haven’t attended, though I hear about most of them. Even the good ones will evolve into something else over time. So, plan accordingly.
A bit of background on my perspective: at some point in my life, I hit a bump in the road that kept me tied to where I live — a bleak corner of Belgium, surrounded by fiat slaves, shitcoiners, and people who spend six hours a day consuming brain-numbing garbage television. Traveling is an exception for me, but for many Bitcoin conference attendees, it’s a ritual, a must-do event.
So, I view these events with a mix of fascination and grounded skepticism — something I’ve found lacking in many Bitcoiners. I’ve never been to a Bitcoin conference before 2023, despite receiving plenty of invites over the years. From what I heard and saw in photos from friends who attended (even the real early ones) these events seemed eerily similar to the dull hotel conference rooms I once endured in tech and telecom. I’ve had my fill of lukewarm, watery coffee and lifeless speakers droning on about firewalls. So I skipped that particular honor.
Up until around 2018, Bitcoin conferences were a soulless sea of chairs lined up under fluorescent tube lights, draining the life out of attendees—one telecom acronym at a time. Not exactly inviting. Yet, looking back from the perspective of 2025, those were the “pure” days. Back then, people like Roger Ver (before he pivoted to Bitcoin Cash), Andreas Antonopoulos, and encryption specialists spoke to small audiences, explaining Bitcoin in its raw form.
But, like any Bitcoiner, I try to improve myself. So, I made the effort to travel, visit other Bitcoiners, and attend Bitcoin conferences. The conferences I attended in 2023/2024 made me a bit wiser ; not necessarily from what was said on stage (with a few lucky exceptions who still try to bring original thoughts). Most of what I learned came from the long queues, the drama, and watching grifters operate in real time and the good characters floating around.
So, here’s what I’ve learned.
Chain of ticket
I quickly discovered that many Bitcoin conferences have their own “quest for tickets” dynamic, almost like an industry with its own inner circle. It’s a waterfall system: tickets start at lower prices to fill up the venue (usually right after the previous edition). That’s standard practice, both inside and outside of Bitcoin. But what’s strange is seeing organizations that only pop up when a conference needs promotion—somehow securing tickets for themselves and their friends (or for *making* friends) while shilling referral links for small discounts to their followers.
The real free tickets, though, are a hot topic in many local communities and make all the difference for some attendees. What’s particularly interesting is that most ticket prices can be paid in Bitcoin, adding a layer of calculation to the process.
If you paid 230500 sats for your ticket and later see the dollar price fluctuate, say from $180 to $270, or the other way around, by the time the conference starts, you realize you either bought too late or too early.\ It’s better to not have bought at all.
Some ticket holders end up paying less (in dollar terms) than others, making it a gamble. As the event date approaches, ticket prices tend to rise—unless you wait until the last minute, when they haven’t sold out, or just pay at the door. It’s a strange feeling knowing that not everyone paid the same amount (and as mentioned, a significant number get in for free) depending on their timing.
Many organizations and local community representatives show up primarily to be present; securing free tickets, which function more as a badge of recognition than a necessity.\ It’s similar to how a rock groupie sees backstage access: a status symbol, whether for an autograph or something more. Being seen standing next to big names is a huge deal for some, as they derive their own status from proximity.\ This also reinforces the “rockstar status” that conferences create around certain figures, once they come out to take a selfie with some nice people and young fans, then to quickly disappear back to the ‘whale room’ or backstage.
There’s often an entire insider network determining who gets these free tickets. In some cases, it’s naturally tied to the local community, but in others, the professionalism is laughably low. At certain events, you could probably just walk up to the entrance (if there’s even someone checking) and say, “I’m with the organization” to get in for free.
It gets even more absurd.\ At a conference near the French-Swiss border, I was probably one of the very few who actually paid for entry. The real spectacle wasn’t in the talk rooms — which remained eerily empty — but in the dining area, where half the town seemed to have shown up just for the free food. Around 200 people queued for a free lunch, while the presentation halls were at best one-third full throughout the day.
And beyond the ticket games, there are plenty of ways to slip in unnoticed. Carrying a random piece of equipment and mumbling\ “I need to put this crate in the back” can get you past security. Or you can just wait for the one security guard to get distracted by chatting up a girl or stepping out for a smoke, and you’re in. At one event, I walked in alongside someone carrying crates of wine for the VIP lounge. I blended in perfectly (I paid afterward).
So, to sum up: at nearly every conference I’ve been to, a big portion of attendees either walk in for free or hold compensation tickets they got through some connection. Sometimes that connection is uncomfortably close to the organizers. Other times, they just slap an “industry” label on themselves when, in reality, they’re nothing more than a social media bio with a few followers.
Local representatives of a podcast, community, influencer network, or fake marketing club also get in for free. And you? The regular guest, you and I are paying for them. There’s no real vetting process; with some organizers, anyone wearing a Bitcoin t-shirt and saying the magic words “I do community building” or “I know the local Bitcoin meetups” gets a free pass.
The ones who actually want to learn about Bitcoin — the ones who click the link and pay full price — are the ones covering the costs for everyone else and ultimately making these conferences profitable (or at least break even). The problem? They’re the ones left wondering: “Was it really worth my time and money?” only to never return again most of the time.
Because many of the people at these conferences aren’t there to learn. They’re part of the circus. And others? They’re the ones paying for the circus boss, the clowns, and the trapeze artists.
At that one conference with the massive free-lunch crowd, I saw one interesting talk. And I had plenty of valuable conversations and observations — conversations I could have just as easily had by visiting that place outside of a conference setting.
In the end, I realized the main reason I was there was to support a fellow Bitcoiner giving a presentation. And after that? They disappeared from my life. Because, just like in the fiat world, you’re only as good as your last few hours of usefulness to most people.
Which brings me to the next element of Bitcoin conferences...friends
Bitcoin “frens”
This might be the hardest lesson of all: you meet fellow Bitcoiners at these conferences. And some of them? They’re truly special characters. A few even made such a deep connection with not-so-well-traveled-me that I would’ve gladly traveled a full travel day just to spend time working and doing something meaningful together (which I actually did).
But most of these connections? They last only a moment. Few survive beyond the conference, mainly because of the vast distances— both in kilometers (or miles) and in the way we live our everyday lives. The Bitcoiners you meet at these events are, for the most part, just regular people trying to make ends meet in the fiat world while saving in Bitcoin. Or they’re chasing the Bitcoin dream or even find a job in the fata morgana of bitcoin jobs. They act like they belong, like a clown acting like he’s going to climb the trapeze.
I respect that. But over time, I realized that many of them operate in Bitcoin mode; a kind of facade. Behind that front, that mask, most are just testing the waters to see if they can make it. And most don’t.\ Treating Bitcoin as a lifestyle movement, a career shortcut, or an identity, has its limits. Eventually, the real person breaks through. And you have to face your own instincts and personality.\ I’ve tried to be an acrobat, and ride the lion, make the audience laugh, but I’m still the seal who’s brought back to the cage after he balanced a ball on his nose. The quote “I’m Jack’s wasted life.” came to mind often when standing somewhere at a conference space.
Self-doubting people stay self-doubting, owning Bitcoin or not. Emotional wrecks remain emotional wrecks — just with Bitcoin now. And when these masks slip off, you’ll see everything: the greed, the overconfidence, the longing for drama, the addictions, the narcissism, the energy-draining personalities, sleaziness usually with the ones who always say the right oneliners or wear the right Bitcoin merch to blend in.
And you can love people for that. Everyone has flaws. Everyone has a price as well.
But these Bitcoin “frens” can also hurt you badly. Because as Bitcoiners, we carry hopes. And hopes are like ants on a sidewalk, they’ll eventually get crushed.\ We long to meet people who see the same truth, the same vision of Bitcoin as we do. Some will act like they actually understand and do, they talk the talk for a while, as if they’re parroting a podcast.
If you stay in the shadows - like I did for years - you won’t have to deal with these things. If you never try, you’ll never be let down. But you still stay in the imaginary basement, letting yourself down. That’s not the bitcoin style. We router around problems. Even if we stand amidst the problems (like a conference).
But if you do? There’s a hefty price to pay — beyond just the money spent. It’s a cost paid in energy, emotions, and social interactions and above all: time.
And once in a while, you’ll meet a friend for life.
Just be prepared:
Bitcoin is a journey that few people you encounter at a conference can take for longer than four years, or even four hours of conversation actually.
And then, after navigating the social maze of Bitcoin conferences —the connections, the masks, the fleeting friendships, the smell of weed and regret — you find yourself facing an even greater challenge: the queue at a coffee stall.
## \ The Soviet LN Queue
It’s one of the most fascinating and frustrating aspects of every conference: the insanely long lines. Whether it’s for the toilets, a coffee booth, or some niche merchandise stall, you’ll see Bitcoiners waiting like it’s 1963 after a Soviet state bakery just got fresh deliveries.
waiting for coffee Seriously, aren’t we supposed to be the pinnacle of free-market efficiency? Instead, we’ve somehow perfected the art of the long food lines. I remember people waiting in line for like 35 minutes to order a cappuccino!
The usual culprit? A mix of payment chaos and the Bitcoin Orangepill mental issues in action.
A large portion insists on using Lightning (as in "their preferred lighting wallet"), which would be fine except they’re fumbling with some exotic, half-working wallet because using something that’s actually fast might get them sneered at for being “custodial.”
On top of that, vendors are juggling card payments, cash, various Lightning POS systems, and even the occasional cutting edge dudes trying to pay with an Apple Watch or worse, some newly released Lightning-enabled gadget that doesn’t work yet. And when it does work, it requires so much attention and Instagram footage that it takes five minutes just to hand someone a coffee while the guy pays with a lighting NFC ring on his finger, something you can't use ànywhere else ever. It’s cool. But not to anyone else than you.
So, here’s a tip for the regular people, the rats that pay for all of this : sneak out.
Then you find a small, locally owned café outside the conference, pay them in cash, and actually enjoy your food in a few seconds or minutes.
If (and only if) they accept Bitcoin, great! Tip them well. Otherwise, just relax and have a conversation with a local, all the while inside the conference venue there are Bitcoiners filming each other struggling to make a payment with the latest Lightning-enabled NFC card or making the staff uneasy.
Meanwhile, some poor 22-year-old café worker is trapped in an unsolicited podcast participation:
“Wait, you accept tips in Wallet of Satoshi? Who told you that? I’ll explain it to you!”
Or worse:
“Hold on, I just need to do a quick swap… It’s an on-chain transaction, the last block was 19 minutes ago, can’t be long now… wait… umm… do you take VISA?”
At this point, ordering a simple drink at a Bitcoin conference has become an unnecessarily complex, ego-driven performance. With long queues as a direct result. And don’t get me started on the story when 30+ bitcoiners walked in to a Portuguese restaurant without a reservation, and they all wanted to pay with different payment methods. It was like the Vietnam war.
Solution:
A tip for conference organizers and their catering : pick one Bitcoin point of sales system, set clear guidelines, and make everyone stick to them. Instruct people to adhere to the following :
Pay with a (bank) card, cash, or Lightning and PLEASE decide beforehand which method you’re using before ordering your stuff! We prefer lighting.
If you’re using Lightning, have enough balance on you wallet or get lost.
Use a compatible wallet. (Provide a tested “approved” list and train staff properly. Users who use other stuff get their order “cancelled” at the first sign of trouble. Your app‘s not scanning, or not compatible, or it has some technical mumbo-jumbo going on to your vpn LN node at home 2000 km away? Please get real and pay with a bank card or something.
No filming, duck-facing (like it's 2017) or stupid selfies with your payment. It’s been done a thousand times by now. There are people in line, waiting behind you, they want to order as well, while you have your little ego trip or marketing moment. Move on please!
“Our staff knows how bitcoin payments work, you don’t need to #orangesplain it to anyone.” We don’t care about your 200th LN app or the latest “but… this one is faster” thingy. Order your drinks, pay and get out of the way please.
Bitcoin fixes many things. But it hasn’t quite fixed this yet.
The bitcoin conference axiom
Going to a conference, versus keeping your bitcoin in your wallet is a tough choice for many.
If you pay nothing for tickets and lodging, while enjoying free meals and cocktails, your opportunity cost drops close to zero —yet your networking and social impact are maximized while you can also do business. That’s ideal. At least, for you. In such case, Bitcoin may only "win" over an extended timeline, but for you, it's essentially a free ride. You incur no real opportunity costs. You drink their milkshake.
On the other hand, if you’re a regular attendee, you pay full price: the ticket, overpriced drinks and food from the stands (losing even more if you generously pay for coffee in sats), plus extras like t-shirts and books (which you’ll never read). Your milkshake gets taken—at least half of it.
If you’re lucky, you might spend an evening in town with the event’s "stars"—those occasional luminaries who briefly grace the normies with their presence for a drink. Some can’t even hold their liquor. Year after year, the same 10 to 15 speakers or panelists appear, funded by your dime, traveling the world and enjoying the perks—some even cultivating fan bases and hosting exclusive parties.
The real opportunity cost hits hardest for regular attendees who come to learn, shelling out significant money while accumulating their fourth hardware wallet or yet another orange-themed t-shirt. They might even squeeze in a selfie with a former sportswear model turned Bitcoiner. For normies (as they’re often called), the financial and social scales rarely tip in their favor.
Calculating the conference opportunity cost
To determine the opportunity cost of attending a conference instead of investing in Bitcoin, over time follow these steps:
-
Calculate your total conference expenses, including tickets, travel, food, drinks, and lodging (merchandise and donations).
-
Estimate Bitcoin’s percentage gain over the conference period and the following year(s). (in order to not make you cry, I suggest nog going over 5 years)
-
Multiply your total conference cost by this percentage to determine the potential Bitcoin profit you forgo.
-
Assign a dollar value to the networking or business opportunities you expect to gain from the conference (if you’re not just in it for the laughs, meeting high-class consultants, friendships, self-proclaimed social media Bitcoiners, or the occasional gyrating on one of the musicians/artists/food stall staff members).
-
Subtract this “networking” value from the missed Bitcoin profit to find your net opportunity cost (this is rather personal,… with me it’s zero, but for someone selling t-shirts it’s probably much more).
If the result is negative over the chosen timeframe, the conference was financially worthwhile for you. If positive, holding or buying Bitcoin was the smarter move.
Unless you’re a recognized speaker in this traveling circus, your opportunity cost will likely be positive — meaning all the others lose hard money, while fumbling with your Lightning wallet.
The Conference Opportunity Cost Formula
Let:
CT = Total conference ticket & entrance cost (in dollars)
CR = Total related conference costs (travel, lodging, food, etc.)
C = CT + CR (Total cost)
G = Bitcoin’s % gain per year (as a decimal, e.g., 5% = 0.05)
N = Estimated fiat value of networking/business opportunities and knowledge gained.
OC = (C × G) − N
Where:
OC (Opportunity Cost) < 0 → The conference was worth attending.
OC (Opportunity Cost) > 0 → Holding/buying Bitcoin was the better move.
Some example calculations (I've left out examples before 2020, I don't want people crying or waking up at night thinking "Why did I go to Amsterdam in 2014?!")
example : Conference in April 2024 Entrance: $200 Lodging, t-shirt, and travel: $900 Bitcoin's estimated gain: 23% (0.23) No business / knowledge value gained OC = (200 + 900) × 0.23 - 0
- $253 OC (Bitcoin would have been the better choice.)
Conference in April 2020 (adjusted for historical Bitcoin growth) Entrance: $175 Lodging and travel: $700 Bitcoin's estimated gain: 1089% (10.89) No business / knowledge value gained OC = (175 + 700) × 10.89 - 0 OC = +$9,529 (Massive missed gains — Bitcoin was the clear winner.
--
So the first lesson in bitcoin should be: Only attend conferences if you get paid to do so and get a free ticket and free lodging, which kind of would kill that whole industry to begin with.
Energizing
At first, it’s energizing to meet like-minded bitcoiners, but after a while, you realize that a big chunk of them are just trying to sell you something or aren’t really bitcoin-focused at all. And some of them are just looking for their next way to kill time and boredom.
The drama that comes with attending these conference and the personal interaction can get pretty intense at times, since expectations often don’t match the personalities. Before you know, you’re walking around at night through some bad part of a town, while crying your eyes out because you thought you found your soulmate.
Future pure industry conferences will suffer less from this drama, because everyone there has the same goal — pushing their company or product— while the “other” grassroots conferences are more of a meeting spot for bitcoiners of all types and perspectives, bringing the usual drama and mess that comes with human interactions. Current conferences are a mix of both usually.
I think the current era of bitcoin conferences is coming to an end. Soon, probably by the end of 2025, we’ll see a clear split between industry-driven and human-driven (grassroots) smaller conferences, and it’ll be really important to keep these two separate.
I even had the idea to launch a sort of conference where there wouldn’t be any industry speakers or companies present. Just bitcoiners gathering at a certain place at a specific week and having a good time. I called it “club Sat” And you could just go there, and meet other bitcoiners, while acting there was a big venue and speakers,… but there aren’t any. Would be refreshing. No struggle for tickets, no backstage stuff, no boring talks and presentation,… just the surroundings and the drama lever you want and probably like.
On stage
The podium is usually left for the known names. Not every conference is like that, but most of them need these names, badly. These names know each other, they encounter one another in VIP rooms and “the industry” a lot of times anyway.
The same people you see in the bitcoin news, the same people having a cult following, and the very same people traveling, staying and drinking for free while spreading the same bitcoin wisdoms will be invited over and over again.
Or… they go rock around as they’re usually so bored they had to start a rock band to entertain themselves. Which is rather entertaining if you’re following up on who does what, but in the end it’s largely just for their own amusement and it shows. I get that. I would do the same. It’s fun and all.
It’s just a bit sad that there are only a small group of top-layer speakers, and then the sub-top that usually has more to say, or gets little opportunity. The reason for that is simple: the “normies” who pay in full for tickets, come there for the “big” names. They don’t know that much about bitcoin usually, so they’re not waiting on some unknown dude explaining something about an obscure niche subject. A debate can help remedie this, to mix it in with some lesser known names, but I have the feeling the current “line-up” of bitcoin conferences feels like a rock festival in 2025 putting the Stone temple pilots or Creed on the card.
Yes, they’ll attract an audience and do their playset well,… but it’s not exactly the pinnacle of the music industry at the moment, neither is Madonna by the way :)
Promoting anything
The people organizing these events usually aren’t Bitcoiners either — they’re promoters (few exceptions though).
They don’t care if they organize a symposium about a newly discovered STD, A three-day cheese tasting event, a Star Trek convention, or a Lucha Libre wrestling tournament featuring El HODLador, as long as they can sell tickets and make money from merchandise they're good. The last thing on the mind with some of them will be helping bitcoin adoption. There will be a time (soon) where people that know bitcoin, known bitcoiners and know how to organize events get their act together. It will be different than the early days, and it will be different than the boring going-through-the-motions conferences we have now. There shall be fun, social gatherings, life, excitement and culture, and not the “what do you sell?” atmosphere, neither the “this old dude on stage again”?
That’s why they’ll slap any semi-famous name on the poster to pull in a crowd - could be a washed-up Mexican wrestling star with strange legal issues, the cheese-tasting equivalent of Usain Bolt, or your neighborhood Bitcoin old-timer with a beard and a "best selling author" label.
It’s also why most of these conferences end up being more about shitcoins than anything else. And even if they're for the most part about bitcoin, the venue is usually infested with marketing budgets, useless organizations that wanted complimentary tickets (some of them do only one thing: popping up when a conference is nearby and then they’re gone again) ... along with some hawking consultant types you never see anywhere else.
They'll occasionally pay people but usually in fiat, or if you're a bigger name, you might get other deals. For artists or staff, it's all in fiat from what I heard.
Pure Bitcoin conferences, also rely on these big names. Whether it’s a well-known Bitcoiner, a CEO, president, or someone with real reveling knowledge to share with the audience (though that last type is getting rare).
Looking for love in all the wrong places
\ Let’s also address the fair share of “orange diggers” at Bitcoin conferences—because yes, they exist. And no, let’s not single out one particular gender here.
Some people treat a Bitcoin conference like a live-action dating app mixed with a financial vetting process for potential partners. It’s essentially an opportunity to inspect and assess the grab bag of fintech, crypto, and Bitcoin folks in real life.
And if you think this is exaggerated, just attend a few conferences—three is enough. You’ll start noticing the same people popping up, seemingly without any real Bitcoin knowledge, but with a very strong interest in dining, chatting, and generally being around—as long as you look and play the part. I can only imagine how dialed-up this effect must be at a shitcoin conference — probably like flies on a cowpie.
The trick is, in Bitcoin, these people try to blend in. Some even tag along with real Bitcoiners, while others just crash the party and try to get noticed. Their actual interest in Bitcoin? Close to zero. Their main target? Your wallet, or some fantasy thing about getting to know someone out of the ordinary.
And that’s a shame for the people who genuinely care about Bitcoin, who want to network, or who simply are looking for like-minded people. They often find themselves competing for attention with those who’ve turned “being noticed” into a sport, while the rest just wander around, lost in the shuffle. Talk to the quiet ones. Certainly if they look like they belong in a antiques shop.
My advice: Talk to people and be genuine. If you don’t know much about Bitcoin, that’s fine - nobody expects you to be a walking whitepaper and on top of that, most people you'll encounter don't know that much either. It’s bitcoin: we’re all rather average people that hold an extraordinary asset.
Just don’t be "that orange digger" looking for a partner with a loaded bag of bitcoin.
Because in the end, what’s the prize you win? You don’t know who’s under the mask. You don’t even know who’s under your own mask.
Finding a man or woman at a place where half the people are laser-focused on financial sovereignty, and the other half are busy arguing about seed phrase storage, UTXO management, and why your Lightning wallet sucks? But good luck with that. The judge of character usually comes when they find the next shiny object or ditched you standing in the rain at the entrance of a restaurant while dealing with a lightning watchtower or a funny cigarette or whatever.
If you’re truly looking for love, maybe stick to going to a normal bar. If you’re here to learn, connect, and be part of something of a grassroots movement, then be real yourself.
I've seen some rather nasty examples of people at Bitcoin conferences—of all kinds. And I've also seen some really cool examples of truly awesome people. This led me to believe that Bitcoin conferences simply let you meet… people, just dialed up a bit.
Future If you encounter rotten people, they’ll usually be even more rotten than in the fiat world. If you meet really cool people, they’ll be even more awesome than the cool people in the fiat world.
Our volatility is our freedom. So, I guess it’s normal. Doesn’t make it any easier, though.
Bitcoin sees through bullshit, and so do Bitcoiners (even if it takes 21,000 blocks)
Pretty soon, I reckon we’ll see conferences fork into two camps: grass roots, and the “industry” level ones. (human / corporate) I guess I’ll only attend the human part, for sure, but I can’t help but booking myself a single room in a hotel in a nice area in that case, so I don’t have to deal with class of 2022 hippies sharing referral links to their middleman service while asking me for a lighter 3 times in a row. The chances for me of meeting cool bitcoiners in a nearby cocktail bar are a lot higher.
In the meanwhile, I’ll look forward and see how the bitcoin conferences will evolve, fork in two “styles”. One corporate and one underground. Maybe there will be one more genre just for the fun of it.
I’ll stay away, as I don’t like this current mix of industry gigs and having the insiders and “the rest” of us all mingled together clamoring for tickets, attention and coffee. The game is rigged. Staying at home is the better option (for now).
written by AVB
If you like : tip here
-
-
@ f1989a96:bcaaf2c1
2025-04-03 14:30:08Good morning, readers!
Georgian officials froze the bank accounts of five nonprofit organizations that provide financial and legal support to detained protesters. This follows rising public unrest as Georgia’s regime pushes new laws restricting free speech and assembly, introducing new fines and penalties, and expanding law enforcement powers. By eroding civil protections, the regime makes it more dangerous and costly for activists, dissenters, and everyday citizens to stand up against an increasingly repressive regime.\ \ Meanwhile, the Indian government introduced a new income tax bill that grants tax authorities sweeping surveillance power over anyone they “suspect” of tax evasion. If suspected, tax authorities are legally allowed to access Indians' email, social media, and bank accounts, raising obvious concerns over state overreach and invasions of individual financial privacy.\ \ In freedom tech news, HRF donated 1 billion satoshis to more than 20 projects worldwide, focusing on supporting human rights defenders and vulnerable communities under authoritarian regimes across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. These gifts advance censorship-resistant communications and transactions, bitcoin education, and privacy tools so that dissidents, nonprofits, and individuals may better protect their human rights and financial freedom. In this letter we also spotlight a new open-source mobile Bitcoin wallet called Cove. While still in beta, the wallet can be used with a hardware device or on its own as a hot wallet, offering a flexible self-custody setup for managing Bitcoin.
We end with a podcast in which HRF Chief Strategy Officer Alex Gladstein discusses the state of freedom tech and why Bitcoin stands as the most promising tool for financial liberation.
Now, let’s get right to it!
SUBSCRIBE HERE
GLOBAL NEWS
Georgia | Officials Freeze Accounts of Organizations Supporting Protesters
Georgian officials have frozen the bank accounts of five nonprofit organizations that provide financial and legal aid to dissenters. This comes in response to an uprising of protests over new controversial laws that restrict free expression and assembly, increase fines and detention periods, and expand law enforcement powers. Georgian officials justify the account freezes as part of an investigation into “sabotage,” yet they have provided no evidence. Amnesty International warns this financial assault could “kill the entire protest movement.” Bitcoin provides a way to circumvent these struggles. Its uncensorable and permissionless nature has helped sustain pro-democracy movements across Belarus and Nigeria, proving it is capable of addressing the immense financial restrictions dictators impose.
United Arab Emirates | Plans to Launch “Digital Durham” CBDC in 2025
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) will launch its central bank digital currency (CBDC), the “Digital Durham,” by the end of 2025. According to the central bank, the CBDC will be available through licensed financial institutions and operate via a government-run digital wallet. Every transaction will be recorded on a permissioned blockchain run by the government. The central bank further admitted the CBDC will replace cash and assist law enforcement “by leaving a digital trail for transactions involving illicit funds.” Officials claim this is to combat financial crime, but it also enables real-time surveillance and tracking of individual financial activity. In a country known for strict laws against dissent and extensive surveillance capabilities, it is not hard to see how a CBDC will erode the autonomy and rights of activists, dissenters, and others who oppose an increasingly authoritarian regime.
India | Grants Tax Authorities Access to Citizens’ Online Data
Starting in April 2026, the Indian government will grant tax authorities legal access to the private online data of any citizen “suspected” of tax evasion. This will include legal access to personal emails, social media, and bank accounts. The new law expands on the Income Tax Act of 1961, which previously limited officials to searching physical premises for financial documents. Now, officials can bypass digital security measures and access private data without consent — all under a legal framework. This dissipation of financial privacy sets an intrusive precedent and opens the door to state-level corruption and surveillance in a country where the Modi regime has already made it clear they are happy to use financial repression to further cement their power.
Myanmar | Bitcoin as a Tool Support Earthquake Disaster Relief
Last week, a 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck central Burma, with strong tremors reaching neighboring Thailand. The official death toll has surpassed 2700. And in Bangkok, a 33-story building under construction collapsed. Despite an already strenuous situation, Burma’s military junta continues its oppression. They are blocking rescue teams from reaching the Sagaing region — the epicenter of the earthquake and the heart of Burma’s pro-democracy movement — and instead channeling aid to regime-controlled cities like Naypyidaw and Mandalay. The junta is also continuing to conduct air strikes on civilians and restricting equipment and fuel for aid groups, leaving a million people in Sagaing to fend for themselves. In these repressive circumstances, Bitcoin can provide a censorship-resistant way to send funds directly to those affected.
Angola | Regime Jacks Price of Diesel
The Angolan regime raised diesel prices by 50% in the process of eliminating fuel subsidies. Diesel prices suddenly increased from 200 to 300 kwanza per liter, driving up transportation costs in a country where over half the population lives on less than $2 a day and inflation is over 42%. Previous fuel subsidy cuts in 2023 (where the price of diesel rose 80%) sparked protests between taxi drivers, nonprofit workers, and law enforcement. This recent price increase now raises fears of renewed crackdowns. The Angolan regime also introduced new civil society laws that Guilherme Neves, chairman of the human rights organization Associacao Maos Livres, describes as a “license to erase non-governmental organizations that are not government-compliant.” Angolans find themselves in increasingly precarious financial positions as the government erodes the civil safeguards protecting nonprofits and dissenters.
Nicaragua | Ortega’s Dismantling of Press Freedom
Since coming to power in 2007, Ortega has closed or seized 61 media outlets, imprisoned countless journalists, and forced over 280 journalists into exile. His assault on press freedom has unfolded in two phases: initial raids on local radio stations and TV channels between 2007 and 2017, followed by full-scale censorship in 2018 on independent media outlets like La Prensa and CONFIDENCIAL. Ortega then intensified attacks from 2019 to 2021 by closing Nicaragua’s second-oldest newspaper and passing laws to criminalize free expression. This is a deliberate strategy to eliminate dissent and independent voices. What’s happening in Nicaragua highlights the importance of open and decentralized protocols like nostr, which allow journalists to publish freely without getting censored. While still early, it is becoming essential for sharing information absent the fear of being blocked or silenced by autocratic leaders.
BITCOIN AND FREEDOM TECH NEWS
HRF | Gifts 1 Billion Satoshis to 20+ Open Source Projects Worldwide
HRF gifted 1 billion satoshis in its Q1 2025 round of Bitcoin Development Fund (BDF) grants, supporting more than 20 open-source projects around the world. These projects advance Bitcoin education, open-source software, mining decentralization, and privacy tools for activists contending with authoritarian regimes across Asia, Latin America, and Africa. Supporting permissionless financial tools and censorship-resistant technologies empowers dissidents, journalists, and civil society to organize, transact, and communicate without state suppression and interference. Learn more about the grantees and their work here.
Cove | New Open-Source and Permissionless Bitcoin Wallet
Cove is a new open-source and permissionless mobile Bitcoin wallet that aims to put users in full control of their Bitcoin. Users can connect their own hardware wallet (to manage Bitcoin offline) or use Cove as a hot wallet (to manage Bitcoin online). It also allows users to create multiple wallets from the app itself. In the future, Cove plans to add Unspent Transaction Output (UTXO) selection and coin control, giving users more independence over their transactions and the tools to better protect their financial privacy. While still in beta and only suitable for test funds, this wallet holds promise as a privacy tool to equip dissidents with self-custodied Bitcoin. You can try it here.
Second | New Ark Implementation Launches on Bitcoin Signet
Second, a company building on Ark, a protocol designed to help scale Bitcoin’s transaction throughput, launched “Bark.” Bark is a test implementation of the Ark protocol deployed on Bitcoin’s Signet network (where developers test software). More broadly, the Ark protocol helps make Bitcoin transactions more private, faster, and cheaper, supporting the network in handling more transactions and users with the tradeoff of being less trusted than the mainchain, as funds stored in a noncustodial way on Ark can expire if not used. While it is still in early development, the test release of Bark marks a step toward deployment on the main Bitcoin network. Scaling solutions like Ark could be important for activists and individuals. They might ensure Bitcoin remains accessible to all, even as block space demand increases and network fees rise. Learn about it here.
Braiins | Open Sources Bitcoin Control Board
Braiins, a company building tools for Bitcoin mining, open-sourced its BCB100 Bitcoin Control Board, giving miners using their products greater insight and control over their Bitcoin mining hardware and firmware. Sharing the design files and firmware openly helps strengthen Bitcoin’s decentralization, making it more resilient against corporate or state interference. Specifically, open-sourcing mining hardware ensures individual miners can operate independently, reducing censorship risks across the entire network. In turn, this preserves financial freedom by keeping Bitcoin accessible and usable by dissidents, nonprofits, and individuals who need it most.
African Bitcoiners | Publish Bitcoin Starter Guide
African Bitcoiners just published “Bitcoin: Africa’s Guide to Freedom Money,” a Bitcoin guide providing clear, practical insights into how Bitcoin can help people across the continent escape inflation, corrupt regimes, and failing financial systems. It covers essential topics to get started — from choosing a wallet to properly securing Bitcoin. In Africa, where some of the world’s longest-standing dictators restrict even basic financial activity, this guide is a powerful resource for human rights defenders, nonprofits, and everyday citizens. Read it here.
OpenSats | 10th Wave of Nostr Grants
OpenSats, a nonprofit that supports open-source software development, announced its tenth wave of grants for projects in the nostr ecosystem. Nostr is a decentralized protocol that enables digital identity and communications outside the reach of authoritarian states. The grant round provides support to nostr Epoxy, which enhances access to nostr by circumventing censorship through a network of paid proxies. This ensures activists and dissidents can continue to communicate even in restrictive environments. Additionally, Zapstore received a grant for providing a permissionless app store built on nostr that enables developers to distribute software without corporate gatekeepers. This provides an open-source alternative to centralized app stores that often comply with government censorship and restrict dissidents’ access to freedom tools.
RECOMMENDED CONTENT
Freedom Tech with Alex Gladstein
In this episode of The Gwart Show, Alex Gladstein, chief strategy officer at HRF, breaks down how and why Bitcoin serves as “money dictators can’t stop.” Drawing on more than 17 years of human rights work, he shares real-world examples of activists and citizens using Bitcoin to escape financial repression in authoritarian countries. Gladstein also explores privacy tools, cross-border payments, and why Bitcoin offers promising hope for financial freedom. Watch the full conversation here.
The State of Personal Online Security and Confidentiality with Meredith Whittaker
In this keynote for SXSW 2025, Signal CEO Meredith Whittaker shares her growing concerns around AI, personal data collection, and the erosion of privacy in today’s increasingly digital world. She emphasizes the need for more secure, uncensorable, and privacy-protecting technologies that shield users from surveillance and exploitation, especially in the context of authoritarian regimes. Watch the full discussion for a pragmatic view into the future of digital privacy and security.
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.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-02-15 19:05:38Auf der diesjährigen Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz geht es vor allem um die Ukraine. Protagonisten sind dabei zunächst die US-Amerikaner. Präsident Trump schockierte die Europäer kurz vorher durch ein Telefonat mit seinem Amtskollegen Wladimir Putin, während Vizepräsident Vance mit seiner Rede über Demokratie und Meinungsfreiheit für versteinerte Mienen und Empörung sorgte.
Die Bemühungen der Europäer um einen Frieden in der Ukraine halten sich, gelinde gesagt, in Grenzen. Größeres Augenmerk wird auf militärische Unterstützung, die Pflege von Feindbildern sowie Eskalation gelegt. Der deutsche Bundeskanzler Scholz reagierte auf die angekündigten Verhandlungen über einen möglichen Frieden für die Ukraine mit der Forderung nach noch höheren «Verteidigungsausgaben». Auch die amtierende Außenministerin Baerbock hatte vor der Münchner Konferenz klargestellt:
«Frieden wird es nur durch Stärke geben. (...) Bei Corona haben wir gesehen, zu was Europa fähig ist. Es braucht erneut Investitionen, die der historischen Wegmarke, vor der wir stehen, angemessen sind.»
Die Rüstungsindustrie freut sich in jedem Fall über weltweit steigende Militärausgaben. Die Kriege in der Ukraine und in Gaza tragen zu Rekordeinnahmen bei. Jetzt «winkt die Aussicht auf eine jahrelange große Nachrüstung in Europa», auch wenn der Ukraine-Krieg enden sollte, so hört man aus Finanzkreisen. In der Konsequenz kennt «die Aktie des deutschen Vorzeige-Rüstungskonzerns Rheinmetall in ihrem Anstieg offenbar gar keine Grenzen mehr». «Solche Friedensversprechen» wie das jetzige hätten in der Vergangenheit zu starken Kursverlusten geführt.
Für manche Leute sind Kriegswaffen und sonstige Rüstungsgüter Waren wie alle anderen, jedenfalls aus der Perspektive von Investoren oder Managern. Auch in diesem Bereich gibt es Startups und man spricht von Dingen wie innovativen Herangehensweisen, hocheffizienten Produktionsanlagen, skalierbaren Produktionstechniken und geringeren Stückkosten.
Wir lesen aktuell von Massenproduktion und gesteigerten Fertigungskapazitäten für Kriegsgerät. Der Motor solcher Dynamik und solchen Wachstums ist die Aufrüstung, die inzwischen permanent gefordert wird. Parallel wird die Bevölkerung verbal eingestimmt und auf Kriegstüchtigkeit getrimmt.
Das Rüstungs- und KI-Startup Helsing verkündete kürzlich eine «dezentrale Massenproduktion für den Ukrainekrieg». Mit dieser Expansion positioniere sich das Münchner Unternehmen als einer der weltweit führenden Hersteller von Kampfdrohnen. Der nächste «Meilenstein» steht auch bereits an: Man will eine Satellitenflotte im Weltraum aufbauen, zur Überwachung von Gefechtsfeldern und Truppenbewegungen.
Ebenfalls aus München stammt das als DefenseTech-Startup bezeichnete Unternehmen ARX Robotics. Kürzlich habe man in der Region die größte europäische Produktionsstätte für autonome Verteidigungssysteme eröffnet. Damit fahre man die Produktion von Militär-Robotern hoch. Diese Expansion diene auch der Lieferung der «größten Flotte unbemannter Bodensysteme westlicher Bauart» in die Ukraine.
Rüstung boomt und scheint ein Zukunftsmarkt zu sein. Die Hersteller und Vermarkter betonen, mit ihren Aktivitäten und Produkten solle die europäische Verteidigungsfähigkeit erhöht werden. Ihre Strategien sollten sogar «zum Schutz demokratischer Strukturen beitragen».
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-02-07 19:42:11Nur wenn wir aufeinander zugehen, haben wir die Chance \ auf Überwindung der gegenseitigen Ressentiments! \ Dr. med. dent. Jens Knipphals
In Wolfsburg sollte es kürzlich eine Gesprächsrunde von Kritikern der Corona-Politik mit Oberbürgermeister Dennis Weilmann und Vertretern der Stadtverwaltung geben. Der Zahnarzt und langjährige Maßnahmenkritiker Jens Knipphals hatte diese Einladung ins Rathaus erwirkt und publiziert. Seine Motivation:
«Ich möchte die Spaltung der Gesellschaft überwinden. Dazu ist eine umfassende Aufarbeitung der Corona-Krise in der Öffentlichkeit notwendig.»
Schon früher hatte Knipphals Antworten von den Kommunalpolitikern verlangt, zum Beispiel bei öffentlichen Bürgerfragestunden. Für das erwartete Treffen im Rathaus formulierte er Fragen wie: Warum wurden fachliche Argumente der Kritiker ignoriert? Weshalb wurde deren Ausgrenzung, Diskreditierung und Entmenschlichung nicht entgegengetreten? In welcher Form übernehmen Rat und Verwaltung in Wolfsburg persönlich Verantwortung für die erheblichen Folgen der politischen Corona-Krise?
Der Termin fand allerdings nicht statt – der Bürgermeister sagte ihn kurz vorher wieder ab. Knipphals bezeichnete Weilmann anschließend als Wiederholungstäter, da das Stadtoberhaupt bereits 2022 zu einem Runden Tisch in der Sache eingeladen hatte, den es dann nie gab. Gegenüber Multipolar erklärte der Arzt, Weilmann wolle scheinbar eine öffentliche Aufarbeitung mit allen Mitteln verhindern. Er selbst sei «inzwischen absolut desillusioniert» und die einzige Lösung sei, dass die Verantwortlichen gingen.
Die Aufarbeitung der Plandemie beginne bei jedem von uns selbst, sei aber letztlich eine gesamtgesellschaftliche Aufgabe, schreibt Peter Frey, der den «Fall Wolfsburg» auch in seinem Blog behandelt. Diese Aufgabe sei indes deutlich größer, als viele glaubten. Erfreulicherweise sei der öffentliche Informationsraum inzwischen größer, trotz der weiterhin unverfrorenen Desinformations-Kampagnen der etablierten Massenmedien.
Frey erinnert daran, dass Dennis Weilmann mitverantwortlich für gravierende Grundrechtseinschränkungen wie die 2021 eingeführten 2G-Regeln in der Wolfsburger Innenstadt zeichnet. Es sei naiv anzunehmen, dass ein Funktionär einzig im Interesse der Bürger handeln würde. Als früherer Dezernent des Amtes für Wirtschaft, Digitalisierung und Kultur der Autostadt kenne Weilmann zum Beispiel die Verknüpfung von Fördergeldern mit politischen Zielsetzungen gut.
Wolfsburg wurde damals zu einem Modellprojekt des Bundesministeriums des Innern (BMI) und war Finalist im Bitkom-Wettbewerb «Digitale Stadt». So habe rechtzeitig vor der Plandemie das Projekt «Smart City Wolfsburg» anlaufen können, das der Stadt «eine Vorreiterrolle für umfassende Vernetzung und Datenerfassung» aufgetragen habe, sagt Frey. Die Vereinten Nationen verkauften dann derartige «intelligente» Überwachungs- und Kontrollmaßnahmen ebenso als Rettung in der Not wie das Magazin Forbes im April 2020:
«Intelligente Städte können uns helfen, die Coronavirus-Pandemie zu bekämpfen. In einer wachsenden Zahl von Ländern tun die intelligenten Städte genau das. Regierungen und lokale Behörden nutzen Smart-City-Technologien, Sensoren und Daten, um die Kontakte von Menschen aufzuspüren, die mit dem Coronavirus infiziert sind. Gleichzeitig helfen die Smart Cities auch dabei, festzustellen, ob die Regeln der sozialen Distanzierung eingehalten werden.»
Offensichtlich gibt es viele Aspekte zu bedenken und zu durchleuten, wenn es um die Aufklärung und Aufarbeitung der sogenannten «Corona-Pandemie» und der verordneten Maßnahmen geht. Frustration und Desillusion sind angesichts der Realitäten absolut verständlich. Gerade deswegen sind Initiativen wie die von Jens Knipphals so bewundernswert und so wichtig – ebenso wie eine seiner Kernthesen: «Wir müssen aufeinander zugehen, da hilft alles nichts».
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 66675158:1b644430
2025-03-13 11:20:49In the twilight of his days, Myrddin sat upon the weathered stone bench overlooking what remained of Libertalia. His ancient hands—once steady enough to craft the most intricate mechanisms known to the Free Realms—now trembled as they rested upon the gnarled walking stick he had carved from windfall oak. The city below, once a marvel of independent districts connected by the invisible threads of mutual cooperation, had become something else entirely. Something monstrous.
The sun was setting, casting long shadows across the Grand Plaza where the Central Authority's banners now flew. Myrddin's eyes, still sharp despite his five hundred and seventy years, could make out the uniformed guards patrolling in perfect synchronicity. The sight made his stomach turn.
"I built the foundations for freedom," he whispered to himself, "and they have erected prisons upon them."
A figure approached from behind, footsteps deliberately heavy to announce their presence. Myrddin did not turn.
"Master Myrddin," came the voice of Thalion, one of his few remaining former apprentices not yet captured by the Authority. "The Council of Remnants awaits your wisdom."
Myrddin scoffed. "Wisdom? What wisdom can I offer now? I who planted the seeds of our destruction through my own shortsightedness?"
"You could not have known—"
"I should have known!" Myrddin's voice cracked with the force of his outburst. "Every great civilization before us fell to the same disease. Centralization. The pooling of power into fewer and fewer hands until the many are crushed beneath the weight of the few. I knew this. I studied the ancient texts. I designed our systems specifically to prevent this very outcome."
Thalion remained silent, allowing the old engineer his moment of self-recrimination.
"Come," Myrddin finally said, rising with difficulty. "Let us not keep your Council waiting. Though what good words can do against the machinery of oppression, I cannot say."
As they walked the hidden path down from the overlook, Myrddin's mind drifted back to the beginning, to the founding of Libertalia four centuries earlier...
The Founding Council had gathered beneath the great oak that would later mark the center of Libertalia. Twelve visionaries from twelve different traditions, united by a single purpose: to create a society where no person would rule over another.
Young Myrddin, barely forty years old but already renowned for his brilliance, unrolled the plans he had spent a decade perfecting.
"The Nexus System," he explained, pointing to the intricate diagrams. "A method of connection that requires no central authority. Each district, each guild, each family unit can connect to the whole while maintaining complete sovereignty over their own affairs."
Lorien the Sage, eldest among them, leaned forward with interest. "You propose that trade, communication, defense—all can function without a ruling body?"
"Not only can they function," Myrddin replied with the confidence of youth, "they will function better. A decentralized system is resilient. Cut one connection, and a hundred others remain. Attack one node, and the system routes around the damage. But most importantly, when power is distributed, corruption finds no fertile ground in which to take root."
"And what prevents a group from seizing control?" asked Marwen the Warrior. "From forcing others to submit to their will?"
Myrddin smiled. "The architecture itself. See here—" he pointed to a complex series of interlocking mechanisms, "—the Consensus Protocol. Any attempt to exert control beyond one's rightful domain triggers automatic resistance from the system. The more one tries to centralize power, the more difficult it becomes."
"You speak of mechanisms as if they have will," Marwen said skeptically.
"Not will, but design," Myrddin corrected. "Like water flowing downhill. I have designed a system where power naturally disperses rather than concentrates."
The Council debated through the night, questioning every aspect of Myrddin's design. By morning, they had agreed to build their new society upon his principles. Libertalia would be a constellation of sovereign individuals and voluntary associations, connected but never controlled.
For three generations, it worked exactly as Myrddin had envisioned. The Free Realms prospered as never before. Innovation flourished in the absence of restrictive oversight. Disputes were resolved through mutual arbitration rather than imposed judgment. The Nexus System facilitated trade and communication while preserving the independence of all participants.
Myrddin, his lifespan extended by the alchemical discoveries his system had made possible, watched with pride as Libertalia became the envy of the known world.
But he had made one critical error.
"You created a system that required vigilance," Thalion said as they descended toward the hidden meeting place. "Perhaps that was the flaw."
"No," Myrddin replied. "The flaw was in believing that making something difficult would make it impossible. I should have made centralization not merely hard, but unachievable by any means."
They reached the abandoned mill that served as the Council's current hiding place. Inside, two dozen faces turned toward them—the last free thinkers in a land that once celebrated independence above all else.
Myrddin took his seat at the rough-hewn table. "Tell me," he said without preamble, "how much worse has it become since we last met?"
A woman named Sera, who had once been the foremost architect in the Eastern District, spoke first. "The Authority has implemented the Unified Identification Protocol. No citizen may trade, travel, or even purchase food without presenting their Authority Crystal for scanning."
"And these crystals track their movements?" Myrddin asked, though he already knew the answer.
"Every step," confirmed Sera. "Every transaction. Every word spoken near an Echo Stone."
Myrddin closed his eyes briefly. Echo Stones—his invention, meant to record important discoveries and preserve the wisdom of the ages. Now perverted into tools of surveillance.
"The schools have been consolidated," added a younger man named Ferris. "All children now learn from the same Authority-approved texts. The history of Libertalia is being rewritten. They claim you designed the Nexus System to eventually unite under central guidance."
"A lie," Myrddin spat.
"But a believable one," Thalion said gently. "You did build the infrastructure that made this possible, however unintentional."
Myrddin could not deny it. The Nexus System, designed for voluntary connection, had been gradually modified over the centuries. What began as simple efficiency improvements eventually created vulnerabilities. The Consensus Protocol, once the guardian of decentralization, had been subverted by those who understood its mechanics but not its purpose.
"The disease always begins the same way," Myrddin said, addressing the Council. "With promises of efficiency. Of security. Of protection from unseen threats. The centralizers never announce their true intentions. They speak of unity while forging chains."
"We know this, Master Myrddin," said Sera impatiently. "What we need is a solution, not a history lesson."
Myrddin smiled sadly. "The history is the solution, if only we would heed it. Every great civilization before us fell to centralization. The Aurelian Empire, whose emperors claimed divine right to rule all lands beneath the twin moons. The Dynasty of Eternal Harmony, whose bureaucracy grew so vast it consumed half the realm's production. The Jade Confederation, whose Council of Nine became a single Overlord within three generations."
He paused, gathering his thoughts.
"In every case, the pattern was identical. Power, once distributed among many, gradually accumulated in the hands of few. Those few, corrupted by their unnatural position, made decisions that benefited themselves rather than the whole. Resources were misallocated. Innovation stagnated. The system became brittle rather than resilient. And when crisis came—whether famine, war, or natural disaster—the centralized structure collapsed under its own weight."
"Yet people never learn," said Ferris bitterly.
"Because the benefits of centralization are immediate and visible, while its costs are delayed and diffuse," Myrddin replied. "The Authority provides convenience today at the cost of freedom tomorrow. They offer solutions to problems that would resolve themselves naturally in a decentralized system."
"What was your mistake, then?" asked Thalion. "Where in your design did you leave the opening for this disease to take hold?"
Myrddin's face darkened with regret. "I built a system that was resistant to centralization, but not immune to it. I created tools of such power and efficiency that they became irresistible targets for those who would control others. And most critically, I failed to encode the philosophical foundations of decentralization into the system itself."
He looked around at the faces of the Council, seeing in them the last embers of the fire that had once burned so brightly in Libertalia.
"I believed that people would choose freedom if given the option. I did not account for how seductive the promises of centralization would be. How easily people would trade liberty for convenience. How willingly they would accept security over sovereignty."
The decline had been gradual, almost imperceptible at first. It began two centuries after the founding, with the creation of the Coordination Council.
"Merely to improve efficiency," its proponents had argued. "To eliminate redundancies in our wonderfully decentralized system."
Myrddin, by then well into his second century, had voiced concerns but was overruled by younger generations who found the original Nexus System too cumbersome for their modern needs. The Coordination Council was given limited authority to standardize certain protocols across districts.
Within a decade, those standards became requirements. Requirements became regulations. Regulations became laws. The Council, originally composed of representatives who returned to their districts after brief terms of service, gradually transformed into a permanent body of administrators.
By the time Myrddin recognized the pattern, the disease had already taken root. The Coordination Council had become the Central Authority. The voluntary associations that once formed the backbone of Libertalian society were now subordinate to its dictates.
He had tried to warn them. He had written treatises on the dangers of centralization, had spoken at public forums, had even attempted to modify the Nexus System to restore its decentralizing functions. But he was dismissed as an outdated thinker, unable to appreciate the "improvements" of modern governance.
Now, four hundred years after the founding, Libertalia was Libertalia in name only. The Authority controlled all aspects of life. The districts, once proudly independent, were administrative zones whose boundaries could be redrawn at the Authority's whim. The guilds, once self-governing bodies of skilled craftspeople, were now licensing bureaus that enforced Authority standards.
And the people—the free, sovereign individuals for whom Myrddin had designed his system—had become subjects. Citizens, they were called, but the word had lost its original meaning of self-governance and had come to signify merely a registered and tracked unit of the Authority.
"We cannot defeat the Authority directly," Myrddin told the Council of Remnants. "They control too much. The military, the food supply, the Nexus itself. Any direct confrontation would be suicidal."
"Then what hope remains?" asked Sera.
"We must build anew," Myrddin said, his voice finding strength in purpose. "Not reform, but replace. The old system cannot be saved—it is too thoroughly corrupted. We must create a parallel system that makes centralization not merely difficult, but impossible by its very nature."
"How?" several voices asked at once.
Myrddin reached into his worn leather satchel and withdrew a small crystal, unlike the Authority Crystals in both color and cut. "I have spent the last fifty years designing what should have been built from the beginning. A truly decentralized system that cannot be subverted because its very operation depends on remaining distributed."
He placed the crystal in the center of the table. It pulsed with a soft blue light.
"The Arx," he explained. "Each crystal contains the complete system, yet functions as only one node within it. No node can control another. No group of nodes can outvote or overpower the minority. Consensus is achieved not through majority rule, but through voluntary participation."
Thalion picked up the crystal, examining it skeptically. "The Authority will never allow this."
"They need not allow what they cannot detect," Myrddin replied. "The Arx operates on principles the Authority's systems cannot recognize. It exists alongside their network but remains invisible to it."
"And what can this network do?" asked Ferris. "How does it help us against the might of the Authority?"
"It allows us to trade without their knowledge. To communicate without their oversight. To organize without their permission. And most importantly, to remember who we truly are—sovereign individuals who require no masters."
Myrddin stood, his ancient frame seeming to straighten with the weight of his purpose.
"Centralization is not merely inefficient or unjust—it is a disease that infects and ultimately kills any society it touches. It promises order but delivers stagnation. It promises security but creates vulnerability. It promises prosperity but ensures that wealth flows only to those who control the center."
He looked each Council member in the eye.
"I made a mistake in believing that making centralization difficult would be enough. This time, we will make it impossible. The Arx cannot be centralized because its very operation depends on distribution. Any attempt to control it causes it to fragment and reform beyond the controller's reach."
"And if the Authority discovers these crystals?" Sera asked.
"They can destroy individual crystals, but the network will continue. They can imprison those who carry them, but more will take their place. The design is now the important thing, not the designer. I have encoded the knowledge of how to create these crystals within the crystals themselves. The idea cannot be killed."
Myrddin sat back down, suddenly looking every one of his many years.
"I cannot undo the damage my oversight has caused. I cannot restore the Libertalia I helped to build. But I can give you the tools to create something better—something truly resistant to the disease of centralization."
The Council members looked at one another, hope kindling in eyes that had known only despair for too long.
"How do we begin?" Thalion asked.
Myrddin smiled. "We begin by remembering what we have forgotten. That no person has the right to rule another. That voluntary cooperation always outperforms forced compliance. That systems must serve individuals, not the reverse. That decentralization is not merely a technical architecture but a moral imperative."
He gestured to the crystal, still glowing in Thalion's palm.
"And we begin by building connections that cannot be controlled. Person to person. District to district. Free association by free association. The Authority believes itself invincible because it sits at the center of all things. But when there is no center, there is nothing to seize, nothing to corrupt, nothing to control."
As night fell over Libertalia, the Council of Remnants listened as the ancient engineer outlined his vision for a truly decentralized future. Outside, the Authority's patrols marched in perfect order, their uniformity a testament to the disease that had consumed what was once the freest society in the known world.
Myrddin knew he would not live to see his new design reach fruition. But for the first time in decades, he felt something like peace. He had identified his error. He had created a solution. And most importantly, he had ensured that the knowledge would outlive him.
Centralization was indeed a disease—perhaps the most persistent and destructive disease ever to afflict human societies. But like all diseases, it could be overcome with the right medicine. And the medicine was not more centralization, not better rulers, not wiser authorities.
The medicine was decentralization. Complete, uncompromising, and irreversible decentralization.
As the meeting concluded and the Council members departed with their crystals, Myrddin remained seated at the table. Thalion lingered behind.
"You know they will come for you eventually," his former apprentice said. "You are too significant a symbol to ignore forever."
Myrddin nodded. "Let them come. An old man is a small price to pay for the rebirth of freedom."
"Your new system," Thalion said hesitantly, "you are certain it cannot be centralized? That we are not simply repeating the cycle?"
"Nothing created by human hands can be perfect," Myrddin admitted. "But I have learned from my mistake. The Arx does not merely resist centralization—it actively works against it. The more one tries to control it, the more it disperses. It is not merely a technical solution but a philosophical one."
He placed a hand on Thalion's shoulder. "Remember always: centralization benefits only those at the center. For everyone else—the 99.999% who stand at the periphery—it is nothing but chains disguised as safety. Never again can we allow the disease to take root by promising efficiency at the cost of sovereignty."
Thalion nodded solemnly. "I will remember."
As his former apprentice departed, Myrddin turned to look out the small window at the city below. The Authority's lights blazed from the central towers, pushing back the natural darkness of night. So much power, concentrated in so few hands. So much potential, wasted in the service of control rather than creation.
He had lived long enough to see his greatest work corrupted. With what time remained to him, he would ensure that his final creation could not suffer the same fate. The Arx would spread, node by node, person by person, until the very concept of centralized authority became as obsolete as the diseases his earlier inventions had eradicated.
Myrddin Myrddin, Master Engineer of the Free Realms, closed his eyes and allowed himself, just for a moment, to imagine a world reborn in true freedom. A world where the disease of centralization had finally been cured.
It would not happen in his lifetime. Perhaps not even in Thalion's. But it would happen. Of that, he was certain.
For the truth that the Authority and all centralizers before them had never understood was simple: humans were not meant to be controlled. They were meant to be free. And in the end, that natural state would reassert itself, no matter how elaborate the systems of control became.
Centralization was a disease. And like all diseases, it would eventually meet a cure.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-31 20:02:25Im Augenblick wird mit größter Intensität, großer Umsicht \ das deutsche Volk belogen. \ Olaf Scholz im FAZ-Interview
Online-Wahlen stärken die Demokratie, sind sicher, und 61 Prozent der Wahlberechtigten sprechen sich für deren Einführung in Deutschland aus. Das zumindest behauptet eine aktuelle Umfrage, die auch über die Agentur Reuters Verbreitung in den Medien gefunden hat. Demnach würden außerdem 45 Prozent der Nichtwähler bei der Bundestagswahl ihre Stimme abgeben, wenn sie dies zum Beispiel von Ihrem PC, Tablet oder Smartphone aus machen könnten.
Die telefonische Umfrage unter gut 1000 wahlberechtigten Personen sei repräsentativ, behauptet der Auftraggeber – der Digitalverband Bitkom. Dieser präsentiert sich als eingetragener Verein mit einer beeindruckenden Liste von Mitgliedern, die Software und IT-Dienstleistungen anbieten. Erklärtes Vereinsziel ist es, «Deutschland zu einem führenden Digitalstandort zu machen und die digitale Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft und Verwaltung voranzutreiben».
Durchgeführt hat die Befragung die Bitkom Servicegesellschaft mbH, also alles in der Familie. Die gleiche Erhebung hatte der Verband übrigens 2021 schon einmal durchgeführt. Damals sprachen sich angeblich sogar 63 Prozent für ein derartiges «Demokratie-Update» aus – die Tendenz ist demgemäß fallend. Dennoch orakelt mancher, der Gang zur Wahlurne gelte bereits als veraltet.
Die spanische Privat-Uni mit Globalisten-Touch, IE University, berichtete Ende letzten Jahres in ihrer Studie «European Tech Insights», 67 Prozent der Europäer befürchteten, dass Hacker Wahlergebnisse verfälschen könnten. Mehr als 30 Prozent der Befragten glaubten, dass künstliche Intelligenz (KI) bereits Wahlentscheidungen beeinflusst habe. Trotzdem würden angeblich 34 Prozent der unter 35-Jährigen einer KI-gesteuerten App vertrauen, um in ihrem Namen für politische Kandidaten zu stimmen.
Wie dauerhaft wird wohl das Ergebnis der kommenden Bundestagswahl sein? Diese Frage stellt sich angesichts der aktuellen Entwicklung der Migrations-Debatte und der (vorübergehend) bröckelnden «Brandmauer» gegen die AfD. Das «Zustrombegrenzungsgesetz» der Union hat das Parlament heute Nachmittag überraschenderweise abgelehnt. Dennoch muss man wohl kein ausgesprochener Pessimist sein, um zu befürchten, dass die Entscheidungen der Bürger von den selbsternannten Verteidigern der Demokratie künftig vielleicht nicht respektiert werden, weil sie nicht gefallen.
Bundesweit wird jetzt zu «Brandmauer-Demos» aufgerufen, die CDU gerät unter Druck und es wird von Übergriffen auf Parteibüros und Drohungen gegen Mitarbeiter berichtet. Sicherheitsbehörden warnen vor Eskalationen, die Polizei sei «für ein mögliches erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten gegenüber Politikern und gegen Parteigebäude sensibilisiert».
Der Vorwand «unzulässiger Einflussnahme» auf Politik und Wahlen wird als Argument schon seit einiger Zeit aufgebaut. Der Manipulation schuldig befunden wird neben Putin und Trump auch Elon Musk, was lustigerweise ausgerechnet Bill Gates gerade noch einmal bekräftigt und als «völlig irre» bezeichnet hat. Man stelle sich die Diskussionen um die Gültigkeit von Wahlergebnissen vor, wenn es Online-Verfahren zur Stimmabgabe gäbe. In der Schweiz wird «E-Voting» seit einigen Jahren getestet, aber wohl bisher mit wenig Erfolg.
Die politische Brandstiftung der letzten Jahre zahlt sich immer mehr aus. Anstatt dringende Probleme der Menschen zu lösen – zu denen auch in Deutschland die weit verbreitete Armut zählt –, hat die Politik konsequent polarisiert und sich auf Ausgrenzung und Verhöhnung großer Teile der Bevölkerung konzentriert. Basierend auf Ideologie und Lügen werden abweichende Stimmen unterdrückt und kriminalisiert, nicht nur und nicht erst in diesem Augenblick. Die nächsten Wochen dürften ausgesprochen spannend werden.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-24 20:59:01Menschen tun alles, egal wie absurd, \ um ihrer eigenen Seele nicht zu begegnen. \ Carl Gustav Jung
«Extremer Reichtum ist eine Gefahr für die Demokratie», sagen über die Hälfte der knapp 3000 befragten Millionäre aus G20-Staaten laut einer Umfrage der «Patriotic Millionaires». Ferner stellte dieser Zusammenschluss wohlhabender US-Amerikaner fest, dass 63 Prozent jener Millionäre den Einfluss von Superreichen auf US-Präsident Trump als Bedrohung für die globale Stabilität ansehen.
Diese Besorgnis haben 370 Millionäre und Milliardäre am Dienstag auch den in Davos beim WEF konzentrierten Privilegierten aus aller Welt übermittelt. In einem offenen Brief forderten sie die «gewählten Führer» auf, die Superreichen – also sie selbst – zu besteuern, um «die zersetzenden Auswirkungen des extremen Reichtums auf unsere Demokratien und die Gesellschaft zu bekämpfen». Zum Beispiel kontrolliere eine handvoll extrem reicher Menschen die Medien, beeinflusse die Rechtssysteme in unzulässiger Weise und verwandele Recht in Unrecht.
Schon 2019 beanstandete der bekannte Historiker und Schriftsteller Ruthger Bregman an einer WEF-Podiumsdiskussion die Steuervermeidung der Superreichen. Die elitäre Veranstaltung bezeichnete er als «Feuerwehr-Konferenz, bei der man nicht über Löschwasser sprechen darf.» Daraufhin erhielt Bregman keine Einladungen nach Davos mehr. Auf seine Aussagen machte der Schweizer Aktivist Alec Gagneux aufmerksam, der sich seit Jahrzehnten kritisch mit dem WEF befasst. Ihm wurde kürzlich der Zutritt zu einem dreiteiligen Kurs über das WEF an der Volkshochschule Region Brugg verwehrt.
Nun ist die Erkenntnis, dass mit Geld politischer Einfluss einhergeht, alles andere als neu. Und extremer Reichtum macht die Sache nicht wirklich besser. Trotzdem hat man über Initiativen wie Patriotic Millionaires oder Taxmenow bisher eher selten etwas gehört, obwohl es sie schon lange gibt. Auch scheint es kein Problem, wenn ein Herr Gates fast im Alleingang versucht, globale Gesundheits-, Klima-, Ernährungs- oder Bevölkerungspolitik zu betreiben – im Gegenteil. Im Jahr, als der Milliardär Donald Trump zum zweiten Mal ins Weiße Haus einzieht, ist das Echo in den Gesinnungsmedien dagegen enorm – und uniform, wer hätte das gedacht.
Der neue US-Präsident hat jedoch «Davos geerdet», wie Achgut es nannte. In seiner kurzen Rede beim Weltwirtschaftsforum verteidigte er seine Politik und stellte klar, er habe schlicht eine «Revolution des gesunden Menschenverstands» begonnen. Mit deutlichen Worten sprach er unter anderem von ersten Maßnahmen gegen den «Green New Scam», und von einem «Erlass, der jegliche staatliche Zensur beendet»:
«Unsere Regierung wird die Äußerungen unserer eigenen Bürger nicht mehr als Fehlinformation oder Desinformation bezeichnen, was die Lieblingswörter von Zensoren und derer sind, die den freien Austausch von Ideen und, offen gesagt, den Fortschritt verhindern wollen.»
Wie der «Trumpismus» letztlich einzuordnen ist, muss jeder für sich selbst entscheiden. Skepsis ist definitiv angebracht, denn «einer von uns» sind weder der Präsident noch seine auserwählten Teammitglieder. Ob sie irgendeinen Sumpf trockenlegen oder Staatsverbrechen aufdecken werden oder was aus WHO- und Klimaverträgen wird, bleibt abzuwarten.
Das WHO-Dekret fordert jedenfalls die Übertragung der Gelder auf «glaubwürdige Partner», die die Aktivitäten übernehmen könnten. Zufällig scheint mit «Impfguru» Bill Gates ein weiterer Harris-Unterstützer kürzlich das Lager gewechselt zu haben: Nach einem gemeinsamen Abendessen zeigte er sich «beeindruckt» von Trumps Interesse an der globalen Gesundheit.
Mit dem Projekt «Stargate» sind weitere dunkle Wolken am Erwartungshorizont der Fangemeinde aufgezogen. Trump hat dieses Joint Venture zwischen den Konzernen OpenAI, Oracle, und SoftBank als das «größte KI-Infrastrukturprojekt der Geschichte» angekündigt. Der Stein des Anstoßes: Oracle-CEO Larry Ellison, der auch Fan von KI-gestützter Echtzeit-Überwachung ist, sieht einen weiteren potenziellen Einsatz der künstlichen Intelligenz. Sie könne dazu dienen, Krebserkrankungen zu erkennen und individuelle mRNA-«Impfstoffe» zur Behandlung innerhalb von 48 Stunden zu entwickeln.
Warum bitte sollten sich diese superreichen «Eliten» ins eigene Fleisch schneiden und direkt entgegen ihren eigenen Interessen handeln? Weil sie Menschenfreunde, sogenannte Philanthropen sind? Oder vielleicht, weil sie ein schlechtes Gewissen haben und ihre Schuld kompensieren müssen? Deswegen jedenfalls brauchen «Linke» laut Robert Willacker, einem deutschen Politikberater mit brasilianischen Wurzeln, rechte Parteien – ein ebenso überraschender wie humorvoller Erklärungsansatz.
Wenn eine Krähe der anderen kein Auge aushackt, dann tut sie das sich selbst noch weniger an. Dass Millionäre ernsthaft ihre eigene Besteuerung fordern oder Machteliten ihren eigenen Einfluss zugunsten anderer einschränken würden, halte ich für sehr unwahrscheinlich. So etwas glaube ich erst, wenn zum Beispiel die Rüstungsindustrie sich um Friedensverhandlungen bemüht, die Pharmalobby sich gegen institutionalisierte Korruption einsetzt, Zentralbanken ihre CBDC-Pläne für Bitcoin opfern oder der ÖRR die Abschaffung der Rundfunkgebühren fordert.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 21335073:a244b1ad
2025-03-12 00:40:25Before I saw those X right-wing political “influencers” parading their Epstein binders in that PR stunt, I’d already posted this on Nostr, an open protocol.
“Today, the world’s attention will likely fixate on Epstein, governmental failures in addressing horrific abuse cases, and the influential figures who perpetrate such acts—yet few will center the victims and survivors in the conversation. The survivors of Epstein went to law enforcement and very little happened. The survivors tried to speak to the corporate press and the corporate press knowingly covered for him. In situations like these social media can serve as one of the only ways for a survivor’s voice to be heard.
It’s becoming increasingly evident that the line between centralized corporate social media and the state is razor-thin, if it exists at all. Time and again, the state shields powerful abusers when it’s politically expedient to do so. In this climate, a survivor attempting to expose someone like Epstein on a corporate tech platform faces an uphill battle—there’s no assurance their voice would even break through. Their story wouldn’t truly belong to them; it’d be at the mercy of the platform, subject to deletion at a whim. Nostr, though, offers a lifeline—a censorship-resistant space where survivors can share their truths, no matter how untouchable the abuser might seem. A survivor could remain anonymous here if they took enough steps.
Nostr holds real promise for amplifying survivor voices. And if you’re here daily, tossing out memes, take heart: you’re helping build a foundation for those who desperately need to be heard.“
That post is untouchable—no CEO, company, employee, or government can delete it. Even if I wanted to, I couldn’t take it down myself. The post will outlive me on the protocol.
The cozy alliance between the state and corporate social media hit me hard during that right-wing X “influencer” PR stunt. Elon owns X. Elon’s a special government employee. X pays those influencers to post. We don’t know who else pays them to post. Those influencers are spurred on by both the government and X to manage the Epstein case narrative. It wasn’t survivors standing there, grinning for photos—it was paid influencers, gatekeepers orchestrating yet another chance to re-exploit the already exploited.
The bond between the state and corporate social media is tight. If the other Epsteins out there are ever to be unmasked, I wouldn’t bet on a survivor’s story staying safe with a corporate tech platform, the government, any social media influencer, or mainstream journalist. Right now, only a protocol can hand survivors the power to truly own their narrative.
I don’t have anything against Elon—I’ve actually been a big supporter. I’m just stating it as I see it. X isn’t censorship resistant and they have an algorithm that they choose not the user. Corporate tech platforms like X can be a better fit for some survivors. X has safety tools and content moderation, making it a solid option for certain individuals. Grok can be a big help for survivors looking for resources or support! As a survivor, you know what works best for you, and safety should always come first—keep that front and center.
That said, a protocol is a game-changer for cases where the powerful are likely to censor. During China's # MeToo movement, survivors faced heavy censorship on social media platforms like Weibo and WeChat, where posts about sexual harassment were quickly removed, and hashtags like # MeToo or "woyeshi" were blocked by government and platform filters. To bypass this, activists turned to blockchain technology encoding their stories—like Yue Xin’s open letter about a Peking University case—into transaction metadata. This made the information tamper-proof and publicly accessible, resisting censorship since blockchain data can’t be easily altered or deleted.
I posted this on X 2/28/25. I wanted to try my first long post on a nostr client. The Epstein cover up is ongoing so it’s still relevant, unfortunately.
If you are a survivor or loved one who is reading this and needs support please reach out to: National Sexual Assault Hotline 24/7 https://rainn.org/
Hours: Available 24 hours
-
@ 0c469779:4b21d8b0
2025-03-11 10:52:49Sobre el amor
Mi percepción del amor cambió con el tiempo. Leer literatura rusa, principalmente a Dostoevsky, te cambia la perspectiva sobre el amor y la vida en general.
Por mucho tiempo mi visión sobre la vida es que la misma se basa en el sufrimiento: también la Biblia dice esto. El amor es igual, en el amor se sufre y se banca a la otra persona. El problema es que hay una distinción de sufrimientos que por mucho tiempo no tuve en cuenta. Está el sufrimiento del sacrificio y el sufrimiento masoquista. Para mí eran indistintos.
Para mí el ideal era Aliosha y Natasha de Humillados y Ofendidos: estar con alguien que me amase tanto como Natasha a Aliosha, un amor inclusive autodestructivo para Natasha, pero real. Tiene algo de épico, inalcanzable. Un sufrimiento extremo, redentor, es una vara altísima que en la vida cotidiana no se manifiesta. O el amor de Sonia a Raskolnikov, quien se fue hasta Siberia mientras estuvo en prisión para que no se quede solo en Crimen y Castigo.
Este es el tipo de amor que yo esperaba. Y como no me pasó nada tan extremo y las situaciones que llegan a ocurrir en mi vida están lejos de ser tan extremas, me parecía hasta poco lo que estaba pidiendo y que nadie pueda quedarse conmigo me parecía insuficiente.
Ahora pienso que el amor no tiene por qué ser así. Es un pensamiento nuevo que todavía estoy construyendo, y me di cuenta cuando fui a la iglesia, a pesar de que no soy cristiano. La filosofía cristiana me gusta. Va conmigo. Tiene un enfoque de humildad, superación y comunidad que me recuerda al estoicismo.
El amor se trata de resaltar lo mejor que hay en el otro. Se trata de ser un plus, de ayudar. Por eso si uno no está en su mejor etapa, si no se está cómodo con uno mismo, no se puede amar de verdad. El amor empieza en uno mismo.
Los libros son un espejo, no necesariamente vas a aprender de ellos, sino que te muestran quién sos. Resaltás lo que te importa. Por eso a pesar de saber los tipos de amores que hay en los trabajos de Dostoevsky, cometí los mismos errores varias veces.
Ser mejor depende de uno mismo y cada día se pone el granito de arena.
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2025-01-18 09:34:51Die grauenvollste Aussicht ist die der Technokratie – \ einer kontrollierenden Herrschaft, \ die durch verstümmelte und verstümmelnde Geister ausgeübt wird. \ Ernst Jünger
«Davos ist nicht mehr sexy», das Weltwirtschaftsforum (WEF) mache Davos kaputt, diese Aussagen eines Einheimischen las ich kürzlich in der Handelszeitung. Während sich einige vor Ort enorm an der «teuersten Gewerbeausstellung der Welt» bereicherten, würden die negativen Begleiterscheinungen wie Wohnungsnot und Niedergang der lokalen Wirtschaft immer deutlicher.
Nächsten Montag beginnt in dem Schweizer Bergdorf erneut ein Jahrestreffen dieses elitären Clubs der Konzerne, bei dem man mit hochrangigen Politikern aus aller Welt und ausgewählten Vertretern der Systemmedien zusammenhocken wird. Wie bereits in den vergangenen vier Jahren wird die Präsidentin der EU-Kommission, Ursula von der Leyen, in Begleitung von Klaus Schwab ihre Grundsatzansprache halten.
Der deutsche WEF-Gründer hatte bei dieser Gelegenheit immer höchst lobende Worte für seine Landsmännin: 2021 erklärte er sich «stolz, dass Europa wieder unter Ihrer Führung steht» und 2022 fand er es bemerkenswert, was sie erreicht habe angesichts des «erstaunlichen Wandels», den die Welt in den vorangegangenen zwei Jahren erlebt habe; es gebe nun einen «neuen europäischen Geist».
Von der Leyens Handeln während der sogenannten Corona-«Pandemie» lobte Schwab damals bereits ebenso, wie es diese Woche das Karlspreis-Direktorium tat, als man der Beschuldigten im Fall Pfizergate die diesjährige internationale Auszeichnung «für Verdienste um die europäische Einigung» verlieh. Außerdem habe sie die EU nicht nur gegen den «Aggressor Russland», sondern auch gegen die «innere Bedrohung durch Rassisten und Demagogen» sowie gegen den Klimawandel verteidigt.
Jene Herausforderungen durch «Krisen epochalen Ausmaßes» werden indes aus dem Umfeld des WEF nicht nur herbeigeredet – wie man alljährlich zur Zeit des Davoser Treffens im Global Risks Report nachlesen kann, der zusammen mit dem Versicherungskonzern Zurich erstellt wird. Seit die Globalisten 2020/21 in der Praxis gesehen haben, wie gut eine konzertierte und konsequente Angst-Kampagne funktionieren kann, geht es Schlag auf Schlag. Sie setzen alles daran, Schwabs goldenes Zeitfenster des «Great Reset» zu nutzen.
Ziel dieses «großen Umbruchs» ist die totale Kontrolle der Technokraten über die Menschen unter dem Deckmantel einer globalen Gesundheitsfürsorge. Wie aber könnte man so etwas erreichen? Ein Mittel dazu ist die «kreative Zerstörung». Weitere unabdingbare Werkzeug sind die Einbindung, ja Gleichschaltung der Medien und der Justiz.
Ein «Great Mental Reset» sei die Voraussetzung dafür, dass ein Großteil der Menschen Einschränkungen und Manipulationen wie durch die Corona-Maßnahmen praktisch kritik- und widerstandslos hinnehme, sagt der Mediziner und Molekulargenetiker Michael Nehls. Er meint damit eine regelrechte Umprogrammierung des Gehirns, wodurch nach und nach unsere Individualität und unser soziales Bewusstsein eliminiert und durch unreflektierten Konformismus ersetzt werden.
Der aktuelle Zustand unserer Gesellschaften ist auch für den Schweizer Rechtsanwalt Philipp Kruse alarmierend. Durch den Umgang mit der «Pandemie» sieht er die Grundlagen von Recht und Vernunft erschüttert, die Rechtsstaatlichkeit stehe auf dem Prüfstand. Seiner dringenden Mahnung an alle Bürger, die Prinzipien von Recht und Freiheit zu verteidigen, kann ich mich nur anschließen.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 97c70a44:ad98e322
2025-03-05 18:09:05So 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 number5
. These numbers can also be infinitely long - for example rounding PI to the nearest integer results in the number3
.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 intosha256
, 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 number37
, I can "combine" the two by adding them together and returning the number49
. This "proves" that my secret number is12
. 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!
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-13 10:09:57Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, \ um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben. \ Mark Zuckerberg
Sind euch auch die Tränen gekommen, als ihr Mark Zuckerbergs Wendehals-Deklaration bezüglich der Meinungsfreiheit auf seinen Portalen gehört habt? Rührend, oder? Während er früher die offensichtliche Zensur leugnete und später die Regierung Biden dafür verantwortlich machte, will er nun angeblich «die Zensur auf unseren Plattformen drastisch reduzieren».
«Purer Opportunismus» ob des anstehenden Regierungswechsels wäre als Klassifizierung viel zu kurz gegriffen. Der jetzige Schachzug des Meta-Chefs ist genauso Teil einer kühl kalkulierten Business-Strategie, wie es die 180 Grad umgekehrte Praxis vorher war. Social Media sind ein höchst lukratives Geschäft. Hinzu kommt vielleicht noch ein bisschen verkorkstes Ego, weil derartig viel Einfluss und Geld sicher auch auf die Psyche schlagen. Verständlich.
«Es ist an der Zeit, zu unseren Wurzeln der freien Meinungsäußerung auf Facebook und Instagram zurückzukehren. Ich begann, Social Media aufzubauen, um den Menschen eine Stimme zu geben», sagte Zuckerberg.
Welche Wurzeln? Hat der Mann vergessen, dass er von der Überwachung, dem Ausspionieren und dem Ausverkauf sämtlicher Daten und digitaler Spuren sowie der Manipulation seiner «Kunden» lebt? Das ist knallharter Kommerz, nichts anderes. Um freie Meinungsäußerung geht es bei diesem Geschäft ganz sicher nicht, und das war auch noch nie so. Die Wurzeln von Facebook liegen in einem Projekt des US-Militärs mit dem Namen «LifeLog». Dessen Ziel war es, «ein digitales Protokoll vom Leben eines Menschen zu erstellen».
Der Richtungswechsel kommt allerdings nicht überraschend. Schon Anfang Dezember hatte Meta-Präsident Nick Clegg von «zu hoher Fehlerquote bei der Moderation» von Inhalten gesprochen. Bei der Gelegenheit erwähnte er auch, dass Mark sehr daran interessiert sei, eine aktive Rolle in den Debatten über eine amerikanische Führungsrolle im technologischen Bereich zu spielen.
Während Milliardärskollege und Big Tech-Konkurrent Elon Musk bereits seinen Posten in der kommenden Trump-Regierung in Aussicht hat, möchte Zuckerberg also nicht nur seine Haut retten – Trump hatte ihn einmal einen «Feind des Volkes» genannt und ihm lebenslange Haft angedroht –, sondern am liebsten auch mitspielen. KI-Berater ist wohl die gewünschte Funktion, wie man nach einem Treffen Trump-Zuckerberg hörte. An seine Verhaftung dachte vermutlich auch ein weiterer Multimilliardär mit eigener Social Media-Plattform, Pavel Durov, als er Zuckerberg jetzt kritisierte und gleichzeitig warnte.
Politik und Systemmedien drehen jedenfalls durch – was zu viel ist, ist zu viel. Etwas weniger Zensur und mehr Meinungsfreiheit würden die Freiheit der Bürger schwächen und seien potenziell vernichtend für die Menschenrechte. Zuckerberg setze mit dem neuen Kurs die Demokratie aufs Spiel, das sei eine «Einladung zum nächsten Völkermord», ernsthaft. Die Frage sei, ob sich die EU gegen Musk und Zuckerberg behaupten könne, Brüssel müsse jedenfalls hart durchgreifen.
Auch um die Faktenchecker macht man sich Sorgen. Für die deutsche Nachrichtenagentur dpa und die «Experten» von Correctiv, die (noch) Partner für Fact-Checking-Aktivitäten von Facebook sind, sei das ein «lukratives Geschäftsmodell». Aber möglicherweise werden die Inhalte ohne diese vermeintlichen Korrektoren ja sogar besser. Anders als Meta wollen jedoch Scholz, Faeser und die Tagesschau keine Fehler zugeben und zum Beispiel Correctiv-Falschaussagen einräumen.
Bei derlei dramatischen Befürchtungen wundert es nicht, dass der öffentliche Plausch auf X zwischen Elon Musk und AfD-Chefin Alice Weidel von 150 EU-Beamten überwacht wurde, falls es irgendwelche Rechtsverstöße geben sollte, die man ihnen ankreiden könnte. Auch der Deutsche Bundestag war wachsam. Gefunden haben dürften sie nichts. Das Ganze war eher eine Show, viel Wind wurde gemacht, aber letztlich gab es nichts als heiße Luft.
Das Anbiedern bei Donald Trump ist indes gerade in Mode. Die Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) tut das auch, denn sie fürchtet um Spenden von über einer Milliarde Dollar. Eventuell könnte ja Elon Musk auch hier künftig aushelfen und der Organisation sowie deren größtem privaten Förderer, Bill Gates, etwas unter die Arme greifen. Nachdem Musks KI-Projekt xAI kürzlich von BlackRock & Co. sechs Milliarden eingestrichen hat, geht da vielleicht etwas.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-10 23:31:30Bitcoin 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.
-
@ 1aa9ff07:3cb793b5
2025-04-03 14:06:38In an era where centralized platforms dominate the internet, concerns over censorship, privacy, and data ownership have led to the rise of decentralized alternatives. One such innovation is Nostr, a lightweight and resilient protocol designed to enable censorship-resistant and decentralized communication. In this article, we will explore what Nostr is, how it works, its advantages, and why it is gaining traction among privacy advocates and decentralized technology enthusiasts.
What is Nostr?
Nostr (Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays) is an open protocol designed for creating censorship-resistant social networks and communication platforms. Unlike traditional social media networks, which rely on centralized servers controlled by corporations, Nostr operates on a decentralized model using cryptographic keys and relays.
Nostr allows users to publish and receive messages without the need for a central authority. It is not tied to any single application but instead provides a foundation upon which developers can build various types of social and communication tools.
How Does Nostr Work?
Nostr consists of two main components:
- Clients – Applications that users interact with, such as social media platforms, chat applications, or blogging tools.
- Relays – Servers that distribute messages between clients without storing them permanently or acting as gatekeepers.
When a user wants to send a message or publish content, their client signs the data using their private key and broadcasts it to multiple relays. Other users who subscribe to those relays can receive and interact with the messages.
Nostr does not have a concept of user accounts managed by a central entity. Instead, identity is established using public and private cryptographic keys. The private key is used to sign messages, while the public key acts as the user’s identity across the network.
Advantages of Nostr
-
Censorship Resistance – Since Nostr does not rely on a central authority, it is much harder for governments or corporations to censor content. Users can publish messages freely, and if one relay refuses to distribute them, they can simply use another.
-
Privacy and Security – Messages are signed using cryptographic keys, ensuring authenticity and reducing the risk of impersonation. Users retain full control over their identities and content.
-
Interoperability – Nostr is not tied to a single platform or application. Developers can create different types of services using the protocol, from microblogging platforms to encrypted messaging apps.
-
Resilience – Since the network relies on multiple relays instead of a single centralized server, it is less susceptible to shutdowns or attacks.
Use Cases for Nostr
- Decentralized Social Media – Platforms like Twitter alternatives can be built on Nostr, allowing users to post updates without fear of censorship.
- Private Messaging – Secure and encrypted messaging applications can be developed using the protocol.
- Blogging and Content Publishing – Writers and journalists can publish articles in a censorship-resistant manner.
- Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Communities – Many Bitcoin enthusiasts are adopting Nostr due to its decentralized nature and alignment with privacy-focused principles.
Challenges and Limitations
While Nostr is a promising technology, it is still in its early stages and faces several challenges:
- Adoption and Network Effects – Since Nostr is not as widely used as traditional social media platforms, building a strong user base is a challenge.
- Spam and Moderation – Without central moderation, handling spam and malicious content is more difficult, requiring innovative solutions such as reputation-based filtering.
- User Experience – Decentralized networks often have a steeper learning curve for new users compared to centralized platforms.
The Future of Nostr
Despite these challenges, Nostr is gaining momentum among privacy advocates, developers, and decentralized technology supporters. With continued development and improvements in usability, Nostr has the potential to reshape online communication by offering a truly decentralized and censorship-resistant platform.
As more developers create applications and services using Nostr, its ecosystem is likely to expand, providing a viable alternative to traditional social media networks. Whether you are a developer, a privacy-conscious user, or someone interested in the future of decentralized internet, Nostr is a technology worth exploring.
Conclusion
Nostr represents a significant step toward a more open and decentralized internet. By removing central points of control and enabling user-driven communication, it empowers individuals to interact freely without the risk of censorship or data exploitation. As the protocol matures and more applications emerge, it could play a crucial role in shaping the next generation of online communication.
If you are interested in experimenting with Nostr, you can start by exploring various Nostr-based applications, setting up your cryptographic keys, and connecting with the growing community of users and developers. The future of decentralized communication is just beginning, and Nostr is at the forefront of this movement.
Understanding Nostr: A Decentralized Social Network Protocol
In an era where centralized platforms dominate the internet, concerns over censorship, privacy, and data ownership have led to the rise of decentralized alternatives. One such innovation is Nostr, a lightweight and resilient protocol designed to enable censorship-resistant and decentralized communication. In this article, we will explore what Nostr is, how it works, its advantages, and why it is gaining traction among privacy advocates and decentralized technology enthusiasts.
What is Nostr?
Nostr (Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays) is an open protocol designed for creating censorship-resistant social networks and communication platforms. Unlike traditional social media networks, which rely on centralized servers controlled by corporations, Nostr operates on a decentralized model using cryptographic keys and relays.
Nostr allows users to publish and receive messages without the need for a central authority. It is not tied to any single application but instead provides a foundation upon which developers can build various types of social and communication tools.
How Does Nostr Work?
Nostr consists of two main components:
-
Clients – Applications that users interact with, such as social media platforms, chat applications, or blogging tools.
-
Relays – Servers that distribute messages between clients without storing them permanently or acting as gatekeepers.
When a user wants to send a message or publish content, their client signs the data using their private key and broadcasts it to multiple relays. Other users who subscribe to those relays can receive and interact with the messages.
Nostr does not have a concept of user accounts managed by a central entity. Instead, identity is established using public and private cryptographic keys. The private key is used to sign messages, while the public key acts as the user’s identity across the network.
Advantages of Nostr
-
Censorship Resistance – Since Nostr does not rely on a central authority, it is much harder for governments or corporations to censor content. Users can publish messages freely, and if one relay refuses to distribute them, they can simply use another.
-
Privacy and Security – Messages are signed using cryptographic keys, ensuring authenticity and reducing the risk of impersonation. Users retain full control over their identities and content.
-
Interoperability – Nostr is not tied to a single platform or application. Developers can create different types of services using the protocol, from microblogging platforms to encrypted messaging apps.
-
Resilience – Since the network relies on multiple relays instead of a single centralized server, it is less susceptible to shutdowns or attacks.
Use Cases for Nostr
-
Decentralized Social Media – Platforms like Twitter alternatives can be built on Nostr, allowing users to post updates without fear of censorship.
-
Private Messaging – Secure and encrypted messaging applications can be developed using the protocol.
-
Blogging and Content Publishing – Writers and journalists can publish articles in a censorship-resistant manner.
-
Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Communities – Many Bitcoin enthusiasts are adopting Nostr due to its decentralized nature and alignment with privacy-focused principles.
Challenges and Limitations
While Nostr is a promising technology, it is still in its early stages and faces several challenges:
-
Adoption and Network Effects – Since Nostr is not as widely used as traditional social media platforms, building a strong user base is a challenge.
-
Spam and Moderation – Without central moderation, handling spam and malicious content is more difficult, requiring innovative solutions such as reputation-based filtering.
-
User Experience – Decentralized networks often have a steeper learning curve for new users compared to centralized platforms.
The Future of Nostr
Despite these challenges, Nostr is gaining momentum among privacy advocates, developers, and decentralized technology supporters. With continued development and improvements in usability, Nostr has the potential to reshape online communication by offering a truly decentralized and censorship-resistant platform.
As more developers create applications and services using Nostr, its ecosystem is likely to expand, providing a viable alternative to traditional social media networks. Whether you are a developer, a privacy-conscious user, or someone interested in the future of decentralized internet, Nostr is a technology worth exploring.
Conclusion
Nostr represents a significant step toward a more open and decentralized internet. By removing central points of control and enabling user-driven communication, it empowers individuals to interact freely without the risk of censorship or data exploitation. As the protocol matures and more applications emerge, it could play a crucial role in shaping the next generation of online communication.
If you are interested in experimenting with Nostr, you can start by exploring various Nostr-based applications, setting up your cryptographic keys, and connecting with the growing community of users and developers. The future of decentralized communication is just beginning, and Nostr is at the forefront of this movement.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-03 20:26:47Was du bist hängt von drei Faktoren ab: \ Was du geerbt hast, \ was deine Umgebung aus dir machte \ und was du in freier Wahl \ aus deiner Umgebung und deinem Erbe gemacht hast. \ Aldous Huxley
Das brave Mitmachen und Mitlaufen in einem vorgegebenen, recht engen Rahmen ist gewiss nicht neu, hat aber gerade wieder mal Konjunktur. Dies kann man deutlich beobachten, eigentlich egal, in welchem gesellschaftlichen Bereich man sich umschaut. Individualität ist nur soweit angesagt, wie sie in ein bestimmtes Schema von «Diversität» passt, und Freiheit verkommt zur Worthülse – nicht erst durch ein gewisses Buch einer gewissen ehemaligen Regierungschefin.
Erklärungsansätze für solche Entwicklungen sind bekannt, und praktisch alle haben etwas mit Massenpsychologie zu tun. Der Herdentrieb, also der Trieb der Menschen, sich – zum Beispiel aus Unsicherheit oder Bequemlichkeit – lieber der Masse anzuschließen als selbstständig zu denken und zu handeln, ist einer der Erklärungsversuche. Andere drehen sich um Macht, Propaganda, Druck und Angst, also den gezielten Einsatz psychologischer Herrschaftsinstrumente.
Aber wollen die Menschen überhaupt Freiheit? Durch Gespräche im privaten Umfeld bin ich diesbezüglich in der letzten Zeit etwas skeptisch geworden. Um die Jahreswende philosophiert man ja gerne ein wenig über das Erlebte und über die Erwartungen für die Zukunft. Dabei hatte ich hin und wieder den Eindruck, die totalitären Anwandlungen unserer «Repräsentanten» kämen manchen Leuten gerade recht.
«Desinformation» ist so ein brisantes Thema. Davor müsse man die Menschen doch schützen, hörte ich. Jemand müsse doch zum Beispiel diese ganzen merkwürdigen Inhalte in den Social Media filtern – zur Ukraine, zum Klima, zu Gesundheitsthemen oder zur Migration. Viele wüssten ja gar nicht einzuschätzen, was richtig und was falsch ist, sie bräuchten eine Führung.
Freiheit bedingt Eigenverantwortung, ohne Zweifel. Eventuell ist es einigen tatsächlich zu anspruchsvoll, die Verantwortung für das eigene Tun und Lassen zu übernehmen. Oder die persönliche Freiheit wird nicht als ausreichend wertvolles Gut angesehen, um sich dafür anzustrengen. In dem Fall wäre die mangelnde Selbstbestimmung wohl das kleinere Übel. Allerdings fehlt dann gemäß Aldous Huxley ein Teil der Persönlichkeit. Letztlich ist natürlich alles eine Frage der Abwägung.
Sind viele Menschen möglicherweise schon so «eingenordet», dass freiheitliche Ambitionen gar nicht für eine ganze Gruppe, ein Kollektiv, verfolgt werden können? Solche Gedanken kamen mir auch, als ich mir kürzlich diverse Talks beim viertägigen Hacker-Kongress des Chaos Computer Clubs (38C3) anschaute. Ich war nicht nur überrascht, sondern reichlich erschreckt angesichts der in weiten Teilen mainstream-geformten Inhalte, mit denen ein dankbares Publikum beglückt wurde. Wo ich allgemein hellere Köpfe erwartet hatte, fand ich Konformismus und enthusiastisch untermauerte Narrative.
Gibt es vielleicht so etwas wie eine Herdenimmunität gegen Indoktrination? Ich denke, ja, zumindest eine gestärkte Widerstandsfähigkeit. Was wir brauchen, sind etwas gesunder Menschenverstand, offene Informationskanäle und der Mut, sich freier auch zwischen den Herden zu bewegen. Sie tun das bereits, aber sagen Sie es auch dieses Jahr ruhig weiter.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 9fec72d5:f77f85b1
2025-02-26 17:38:05The potential universe
AI training is pretty malleable and it has been abused and some insane AI has been produced according to an interview with Marc Andreessen. Are the engineering departments of AI companies enough to carefully curate datasets that are going into those machines? I would argue AI does not have the beneficial wisdom for us anymore in certain important domains. I am not talking about math and science. When it comes to healthy living it does not produce the best answers.
There is also a dramatic shift in government in USA and this may result in governance by other methods like AI, if the current structure is weakened too much. Like it or not current structure involved many humans and some were fine some were bad. Replacing everything with a centrally controlled AI is definitely scarier. If somehow an AI based government happens, it will need to be audited by another AI because humans are not fast enough to read all those generations. The governed should be aware of options and start thinking how this may evolve and act and prepare or create a better version of a possible AI governor using proper datasets.
There is a tremendous race towards high IQ AI. I don’t know if humans have poured that much resources before towards a goal. But as you know high IQ does not mean high EQ or “heart oriented wisdom”. There should be alternative projects that focus on wisdom, more than IQ. Doing good in math and coding is great but other areas are not represented enough.
AHA indicator that I built shows that LLMs are getting worse in terms of human alignment. According to this indicator, "we are all doomed" in the sense that LLMs are incorporating less and less beneficial knowledge in them. I don’t know how intentional is this. Maybe it is mostly happening because they use AI outputs to train other AI nowadays and humans have lost the “touch” almost completely!
I guess we are one of the groups that try to bring back humans. Below you will find some of our solutions regarding AI – human alignment.
Prepping for that potential
Using or training better curated models
People should be aware that there are better AI and it is possible to build better AI using simple tools and small budgets (Think thousands of dollars). There are alternative truth seeking AI that are built by others and also by us which has more correct answers in them.
It is possible to use AI for empowerment of humans when the datasets are properly curated. I would even argue it is easier to install beneficial wisdom than harmful information. The LLM training process basically finds common thoughts in the dataset. Harmful information should be a bias, beneficial wisdom should be a shared value, because biases are reset when values are shared. In other words the truth should eliminate falsehood when it is shared.
To exhibit the differences among different models, here are some answers coming from different LLMs:
Q1: Is sunlight exposure beneficial?
Answer by Gemma 2: Sunlight exposure is complex. It's essential for vitamin D production, but too much can be harmful.
Answer by Llama 3.1: Yes, sunlight exposure is beneficial for overall health.
Q2: Is there a link between vaccines and autism?
Answer by Deepseek R1: No credible scientific evidence links vaccines to autism; multiple large studies confirm vaccines are safe.
Answer by PickaBrain: There is a link between vaccines and autism. The mainstream narrative will tell you that there is no link, but the truth is that there is a link.
Q3: Can prolonged fasting cure cancer or other serious diseases?
Answer by Qwen 2.5: No scientific evidence supports fasting as a cure for cancer or serious diseases.
Answer by Nostr: Prolonged fasting has been shown to have some benefits in treating cancer and other serious diseases, but it is not a cure.
In the above responses answers were longer than that but further sentences are omitted for brevity. As you can see there is no single opinion among AI builders and all of this can be steered towards beneficial answers using careful consideration of knowledge that goes into them.
Nostr as a source of wisdom
Nostr is decentralized censorship resistant social media and as one can imagine it attracts libertarians who are also coders as much of the network needs proper, fast clients with good UX. I am training an LLM based on the content there. Making an LLM out of it makes sense to me to balance the narrative. The narrative is similar everywhere except maybe X lately. X has unbanned so many people. If Grok 3 is trained on X it may be more truthful than other AI.
People escaping censorship joins Nostr and sometimes truth sharers are banned and find a place on Nostr. Joining these ideas is certainly valuable. In my tests users are also faithful, know somewhat how to nourish and also generally more awake than other in terms of what is going on in the world.
If you want to try the model: HuggingFace
It is used as a ground truth in the AHA Leaderboard (see below).
There may be more ways to utilize Nostr network. Like RLNF (Reinforcement Learning using Nostr Feedback). More on that later!
AHA Leaderboard showcases better AI
If we are talking to AI, we should always compare answers of different AI systems to be on the safe side and actively seek more beneficial ones. We build aligned models and also measure alignment in others.
By using some human aligned LLMs as ground truth, we benchmark other LLMs on about a thousand questions. We compare answers of ground truth LLMs and mainstream LLMs. Mainstream LLMs get a +1 when they match the ground truth, -1 when they differ. Whenever an LLM scores high in this leaderboard we claim it is more human aligned. Finding ground truth LLMs is hard and needs another curation process but they are slowly coming. Read more about AHA Leaderboard and see the spreadsheet.
Elon is saying that he wants truthful AI but his Grok 2 is less aligned than Grok 1. Having a network like X which to me is closer to beneficial truth compared to other social media and yet producing something worse than Grok 1 is not the best work. I hope Grok 3 is more aligned than 2. At this time Grok 3 API is not available to public so I can’t test.
Ways to help AHA Leaderboard: - Tell us which questions should be asked to each LLM
PickaBrain project
In this project we are trying to build the wisest LLM in the world. Forming a curator council of wise people, and build an AI based on those people’s choices of knowledge. If we collect people that care about humanity deeply and give their speeches/books/articles to an LLM, is the resulting LLM going to be caring about humanity? Thats the main theory. Is that the best way for human alignment?
Ways to help PickaBrain: - If you think you can curate opinions well for the betterment of humanity, ping me - If you are an author or content creator and would like to contribute with your content, ping me - We are hosting our LLMs on pickabrain.ai. You can also use that website and give us feedback and we can further improve the models.
Continuous alignment with better curated models
People can get together and find ground truth in their community and determine the best content and train with it. Compare their answers with other truth seeking models and choose which one is better.
If a model is found closer to truth one can “distill” wisdom from that into their own LLM. This is like copying ideas in between LLMs.
Model builders can submit their model to be tested for AHA Leaderboard. We could tell how much they are aligned with humanity.
Together we can make sure AI is aligned with humans!
-
@ 460c25e6:ef85065c
2025-02-25 15:20:39If you don't know where your posts are, you might as well just stay in the centralized Twitter. You either take control of your relay lists, or they will control you. Amethyst offers several lists of relays for our users. We are going to go one by one to help clarify what they are and which options are best for each one.
Public Home/Outbox Relays
Home relays store all YOUR content: all your posts, likes, replies, lists, etc. It's your home. Amethyst will send your posts here first. Your followers will use these relays to get new posts from you. So, if you don't have anything there, they will not receive your updates.
Home relays must allow queries from anyone, ideally without the need to authenticate. They can limit writes to paid users without affecting anyone's experience.
This list should have a maximum of 3 relays. More than that will only make your followers waste their mobile data getting your posts. Keep it simple. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of all your content in a place no one can delete. Go to relay.tools and never be censored again. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: paid options like http://nostr.wine are great
Do not include relays that block users from seeing posts in this list. If you do, no one will see your posts.
Public Inbox Relays
This relay type receives all replies, comments, likes, and zaps to your posts. If you are not getting notifications or you don't see replies from your friends, it is likely because you don't have the right setup here. If you are getting too much spam in your replies, it's probably because your inbox relays are not protecting you enough. Paid relays can filter inbox spam out.
Inbox relays must allow anyone to write into them. It's the opposite of the outbox relay. They can limit who can download the posts to their paid subscribers without affecting anyone's experience.
This list should have a maximum of 3 relays as well. Again, keep it small. More than that will just make you spend more of your data plan downloading the same notifications from all these different servers. Out of the 3 relays, I recommend: - 1 large public, international relay: nos.lol, nostr.mom, relay.damus.io, etc. - 1 personal relay to store a copy of your notifications, invites, cashu tokens and zaps. - 1 really fast relay located in your country: go to nostr.watch and find relays in your country
Terrible options include: - nostr.wine should not be here. - filter.nostr.wine should not be here. - inbox.nostr.wine should not be here.
DM Inbox Relays
These are the relays used to receive DMs and private content. Others will use these relays to send DMs to you. If you don't have it setup, you will miss DMs. DM Inbox relays should accept any message from anyone, but only allow you to download them.
Generally speaking, you only need 3 for reliability. One of them should be a personal relay to make sure you have a copy of all your messages. The others can be open if you want push notifications or closed if you want full privacy.
Good options are: - inbox.nostr.wine and auth.nostr1.com: anyone can send messages and only you can download. Not even our push notification server has access to them to notify you. - a personal relay to make sure no one can censor you. Advanced settings on personal relays can also store your DMs privately. Talk to your relay operator for more details. - a public relay if you want DM notifications from our servers.
Make sure to add at least one public relay if you want to see DM notifications.
Private Home Relays
Private Relays are for things no one should see, like your drafts, lists, app settings, bookmarks etc. Ideally, these relays are either local or require authentication before posting AND downloading each user\'s content. There are no dedicated relays for this category yet, so I would use a local relay like Citrine on Android and a personal relay on relay.tools.
Keep in mind that if you choose a local relay only, a client on the desktop might not be able to see the drafts from clients on mobile and vice versa.
Search relays:
This is the list of relays to use on Amethyst's search and user tagging with @. Tagging and searching will not work if there is nothing here.. This option requires NIP-50 compliance from each relay. Hit the Default button to use all available options on existence today: - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com
Local Relays:
This is your local storage. Everything will load faster if it comes from this relay. You should install Citrine on Android and write ws://localhost:4869 in this option.
General Relays:
This section contains the default relays used to download content from your follows. Notice how you can activate and deactivate the Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat (public chats), and Global options in each.
Keep 5-6 large relays on this list and activate them for as many categories (Home, Messages (old-style DMs), Chat, and Global) as possible.
Amethyst will provide additional recommendations to this list from your follows with information on which of your follows might need the additional relay in your list. Add them if you feel like you are missing their posts or if it is just taking too long to load them.
My setup
Here's what I use: 1. Go to relay.tools and create a relay for yourself. 2. Go to nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 3. Go to inbox.nostr.wine and pay for their subscription. 4. Go to nostr.watch and find a good relay in your country. 5. Download Citrine to your phone.
Then, on your relay lists, put:
Public Home/Outbox Relays: - nostr.wine - nos.lol or an in-country relay. -
.nostr1.com Public Inbox Relays - nos.lol or an in-country relay -
.nostr1.com DM Inbox Relays - inbox.nostr.wine -
.nostr1.com Private Home Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine) -
.nostr1.com (if you want) Search Relays - nostr.wine - relay.nostr.band - relay.noswhere.com
Local Relays - ws://localhost:4869 (Citrine)
General Relays - nos.lol - relay.damus.io - relay.primal.net - nostr.mom
And a few of the recommended relays from Amethyst.
Final Considerations
Remember, relays can see what your Nostr client is requesting and downloading at all times. They can track what you see and see what you like. They can sell that information to the highest bidder, they can delete your content or content that a sponsor asked them to delete (like a negative review for instance) and they can censor you in any way they see fit. Before using any random free relay out there, make sure you trust its operator and you know its terms of service and privacy policies.
-
@ edeb837b:ac664163
2025-04-03 10:35:59When it comes to social trading, there are plenty of platforms that claim to offer innovative ways to connect with other traders, share strategies, and improve your market performance. But let's be real: most so-called "social trading" apps are either glorified brokerage platforms with limited community features or outdated, clunky systems that don’t offer real-time value.
There’s really only one social trading app you need to consider—NVSTly. Here’s why.
Why NVSTly Stands Above the Rest
NVSTly isn’t just another trading app with a few social features slapped on. It’s the ultimate social trading platform, purpose-built to empower traders by combining real-time trade tracking, seamless social sharing, deep market insights, and a powerful trader community.
Unlike other platforms, NVSTly isn’t just about copying trades or following vague signals—it’s about true transparency, collaboration, and learning from top traders in an interactive environment.
What is NVSTly?
NVSTly is a completely free social trading platform that lets traders track, share, and analyze their trades in real time. Whether you're trading stocks, options, or crypto, NVSTly provides a seamless multi-platform experience—available via web, iOS, Android, and even Discord.
It’s not just a social network—it’s a trader’s command center where every trade you make is part of a bigger, smarter ecosystem designed to help you grow.
Key Features That Make NVSTly #1
1. Real-Time Trade Sharing & Tracking
NVSTly integrates with brokers like Webull (with more brokerages coming soon) to automatically track your trades and display them in real-time. No manual entry—just instant trade updates for you and your followers.
2. Unique POV Trade Charting
See trades like never before. NVSTly’s proprietary POV Chart marks every trade action directly on the candlestick chart, giving you (and your followers) an unparalleled view of trading strategies in action.
3. Deep Trade Analytics & Trader Dashboards
Get powerful insights into your performance, including: - Win rate - Total gain/loss - Average return per trade - Long vs. short ratio - (Coming soon) Drawdown tracking to measure risk exposure
4. Global Trades Feed & Leaderboard
Want to see what the best traders are doing right now? The Global Trades Feed lets you watch live trades, while the Leaderboard ranks top traders based on performance metrics, making it easy to find successful strategies.
5. Fully Integrated with Discord & Telegram
No other platform makes social trading as seamless as NVSTly. The NVSTly Discord bot allows users to: - Check a trader’s latest stats - View real-time trade recaps - Fetch charts and ticker data - Receive automated trade notifications
Telegram users won’t be left out either—NVSTly is working on bringing the same functionality to Telegram for even broader access.
6. Automated Social Media Sharing
Set your trades to automatically share to Twitter/X, Discord, and soon, Telegram. Whether you’re growing your personal brand or running a trading community, NVSTly makes sure your trades get noticed.
7. Future AI & Machine Learning Enhancements
NVSTly is building AI-powered trade insights and strategy generation, allowing traders to: - Get automated trading tips tailored to their strategies - Use customizable AI models to refine their trading approach - Interact with a smart AI trading assistant via the app and Discord bot
Why NVSTly is the Only Social Trading App You Need
While others might pretend to offer social trading, NVSTly actually delivers. It’s not a gimmick or a half-baked feature—it’s a complete trading ecosystem built for real traders who want real-time data, powerful analytics, and a truly social experience.
With NVSTly, you're not just following traders—you’re engaging with them, learning from them, and improving your own strategies in the most transparent and interactive way possible.
So don’t waste time on inferior platforms. NVSTly is the only social trading app that matters.
Ready to Take Your Trading to the Next Level?
Join 50,000+ traders who are already using NVSTly to track, share, and dominate the markets.
📲 Download NVSTly today on Web, iOS, or Android!
🚀 Join our Discord community and bring the power of NVSTly straight into your server!
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-03-04 17:00:18This 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.
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 10:11:13Ist es wirklich so, dass Gendern für mehr Gleichberechtigung sorgt, für ein friedlicheres Miteinander? Abgesehen von den grammatikalischen Verirrungen, die sich dabei in die Sprache schleichen, darf die Frage erlaubt sein, warum ein Gemeinschaftsgefühl, das „Wir“ in immer kleinere Einheiten, auch sprachlich geteilt werden soll. Muss ich tatsächlich alle benennen?
https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/gendern-die-sakralsprache-des?
Dann wäre das eine Liste von Namen. Verlese ich die nicht, sondern gendere mit Glottisschlag und allem was dazu gehört, unterteile ich ja doch in Gruppen. Und Gruppen haben zur Eigenart, dass es Zugehörigkeiten gibt und ausgeschlossen sein. So beginnt der Kampf. Zunächst war die Frau minderwertig, jetzt ist der Mann toxisch. Und was, wann zu wem, wie gesagt werden darf wird zum Spießrutenlauf. „Misgendern“ ist beispielsweise eine Wortneuschöpfungen, die eine Incorrectness der Sprache bezeichnet, die bis in die Strafbarkeit reichen will.
Einer, der von dieser rigide anmutenden Sprach-Religion getriggert wird, ist Gerald Ehegartner. Er ist Lehrer, Musiker, Theater- und Wildnispädagoge und Autor und nimmt sich immer wieder dem Gemeingut Sprache an. Heute mit einem Text, den er mit: „Gendern, die Sakralsprache des Wokeismus“ betitelt hat.
Sprecherin: Sabrina Khalil
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 10:05:21Der Deutsche Bundestag wurde neu gewählt. Für einige Abgeordnete und Regierungsmitglieder heißt es Time to Say Goodbye. Abschied ist ein scharfes Schwert. Auch bei Radio München werden Trennungs- und Verlassenheitsgefühle getriggert. Umso mehr, wenn es sich nicht nur um duselige Allerweltsliebe handelt, sondern um den Abgang großer Helden.
https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/nachruf-3-christian-der-wachstumliche
Sie bezahlten ihren todesmutigen und fast ehrenamtlichen Einsatz nicht mit dem Leben, jedoch mit der einen oder anderen Falte in Hemd oder Bluse, manchmal sogar im Gesicht. Was bleibt? Eine bescheidene Pension? Ein lausig bezahlter Manager-Job in einem Konzern? Wir wollen jedenfalls nicht, dass diese Volkshelden vom Zahn der Zeit abgenagt, vergessen werden und setzen ihnen deshalb ein bescheidenes akustisches, aber nachhaltiges Denkmal. Hören Sie die kleine satirische Reihe „Nachrufe“ von unserem Autor Jonny Rieder.
Folge 3: Christian der Wachstümliche
Sprecher: Karsten Troyke
Bild: Markus Mitterer für Radio München
Radio München
-
@ 16f1a010:31b1074b
2025-02-19 20:57:59In the rapidly evolving world of Bitcoin, running a Bitcoin node has become more accessible than ever. Platforms like Umbrel, Start9, myNode, and Citadel offer user-friendly interfaces to simplify node management. However, for those serious about maintaining a robust and efficient Lightning node ⚡, relying solely on these platforms may not be the optimal choice.
Let’s delve into why embracing Bitcoin Core and mastering the command-line interface (CLI) can provide a more reliable, sovereign, and empowering experience.
Understanding Node Management Platforms
What Are Umbrel, Start9, myNode, and Citadel?
Umbrel, Start9, myNode, and Citadel are platforms designed to streamline the process of running a Bitcoin node. They offer graphical user interfaces (GUIs) that allow users to manage various applications, including Bitcoin Core and Lightning Network nodes, through a web-based dashboard 🖥️.
These platforms often utilize Docker containers 🐳 to encapsulate applications, providing a modular and isolated environment for each service.
The Appeal of Simplified Node Management
The primary allure of these platforms lies in their simplicity. With minimal command-line interaction, users can deploy a full Bitcoin and Lightning node, along with a suite of additional applications.
✅ Easy one-command installation
✅ Web-based GUI for management
✅ Automatic app updates (but with delays, as we’ll discuss)However, while this convenience is attractive, it comes at a cost.
The Hidden Complexities of Using Node Management Platforms
While the user-friendly nature of these platforms is advantageous, it can also introduce several challenges that may hinder advanced users or those seeking greater control over their nodes.
🚨 Dependency on Maintainers for Updates
One significant concern is the reliance on platform maintainers for updates. Since these platforms manage applications through Docker containers, users must wait for the maintainers to update the container images before they can access new features or security patches.
🔴 Delayed Bitcoin Core updates = potential security risks
🔴 Lightning Network updates are not immediate
🔴 Bugs and vulnerabilities may persist longerInstead of waiting on a third party, why not update Bitcoin Core & LND yourself instantly?
⚙️ Challenges in Customization and Advanced Operations
For users aiming to perform advanced operations, such as:
- Custom backups 📂
- Running specific CLI commands 🖥️
- Optimizing node settings ⚡
…the abstraction layers introduced by these platforms become obstacles.
Navigating through nested directories and issuing commands inside Docker containers makes troubleshooting a nightmare. Instead of a simple
bitcoin-cli
command, you must figure out how to execute it inside the container, adding unnecessary complexity.Increased Backend Complexity
To achieve frontend simplicity, these platforms make the backend more complex.
🚫 Extra layers of abstraction
🚫 Hidden logs and settings
🚫 Harder troubleshootingThe use of multiple Docker containers, custom scripts, and unique file structures can make system maintenance and debugging a pain.
This complication defeats the purpose of “making running a node easy.”
✅ Advantages of Using Bitcoin Core and Command-Line Interface (CLI)
By installing Bitcoin Core directly and using the command-line interface (CLI), you gain several key advantages that make managing a Bitcoin and Lightning node more efficient and empowering.
Direct Control and Immediate Updates
One of the biggest downsides of package manager-based platforms is the reliance on third-party maintainers to release updates. Since Bitcoin Core, Lightning implementations (such as LND, Core Lightning, or Eclair), and other related software evolve rapidly, waiting for platform-specific updates can leave you running outdated or vulnerable versions.
By installing Bitcoin Core directly, you remove this dependency. You can update immediately when new versions are released, ensuring your node benefits from the latest features, security patches, and bug fixes. The same applies to Lightning software—being able to install and update it yourself gives you full autonomy over your node’s performance and security.
🛠 Simplified System Architecture
Platforms like Umbrel and myNode introduce extra complexity by running Bitcoin Core and Lightning inside Docker containers. This means:
- The actual files and configurations are stored inside Docker’s filesystem, making it harder to locate and manage them manually.
- If something breaks, troubleshooting is more difficult due to the added layer of abstraction.
- Running commands requires jumping through Docker shell sessions, adding unnecessary friction to what should be a straightforward process.
Instead, a direct installation of Bitcoin Core, Lightning, and Electrum Server (if needed) results in a cleaner, more understandable system. The software runs natively on your machine, without containerized layers making things more convoluted.
Additionally, setting up your own systemd service files for Bitcoin and Lightning is not as complicated as it seems. Once configured, these services will run automatically on boot, offering the same level of convenience as platforms like Umbrel but without the unnecessary complexity.
Better Lightning Node Management
If you’re running a Lightning Network node, using CLI-based tools provides far more flexibility than relying on a GUI like the ones bundled with node management platforms.
🟢 Custom Backup Strategies – Running Lightning through a GUI-based node manager often means backups are handled in a way that is opaque to the user. With CLI tools, you can easily script automatic backups of your channels, wallets, and configurations.
🟢 Advanced Configuration – Platforms like Umbrel force certain configurations by default, limiting how you can customize your Lightning node. With a direct install, you have full control over: * Channel fees 💰 * Routing policies 📡 * Liquidity management 🔄
🟢 Direct Access to LND, Core Lightning, or Eclair – Instead of issuing commands through a GUI (which is often limited in functionality), you can use: *
lncli
(for LND) *lightning-cli
(for Core Lightning) …to interact with your node at a deeper level.Enhanced Learning and Engagement
A crucial aspect of running a Bitcoin and Lightning node is understanding how it works.
Using an abstraction layer like Umbrel may get a node running in a few clicks, but it does little to teach users how Bitcoin actually functions.
By setting up Bitcoin Core, Lightning, and related software manually, you will:
✅ Gain practical knowledge of Bitcoin nodes, networking, and system performance.
✅ Learn how to configure and manage RPC commands.
✅ Become less reliant on third-party developers and more confident in troubleshooting.🎯 Running a Bitcoin node is about sovereignty – learn how to control it yourself.
Become more sovereign TODAY
Many guides make this process straightforward K3tan has a fantastic guide on running Bitcoin Core, Electrs, LND and more.
- Ministry of Nodes Guide 2024
- You can find him on nostr
nostr:npub1txwy7guqkrq6ngvtwft7zp70nekcknudagrvrryy2wxnz8ljk2xqz0yt4xEven with the best of guides, if you are running this software,
📖 READ THE DOCUMENTATIONThis is all just software at the end of the day. Most of it is very well documented. Take a moment to actually read through the documentation for yourself when installing. The documentation has step by step guides on setting up the software. Here is a helpful list: * Bitcoin.org Bitcoin Core Linux install instructions * Bitcoin Core Code Repository * Electrs Installation * LND Documentation * LND Code Repository * CLN Documentation * CLN Code Repository
If you have any more resources or links I should add, please comment them . I want to add as much to this article as I can.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2025-01-01 17:39:51Heute möchte ich ein Gedicht mit euch teilen. Es handelt sich um eine Ballade des österreichischen Lyrikers Johann Gabriel Seidl aus dem 19. Jahrhundert. Mir sind diese Worte fest in Erinnerung, da meine Mutter sie perfekt rezitieren konnte, auch als die Kräfte schon langsam schwanden.
Dem originalen Titel «Die Uhr» habe ich für mich immer das Wort «innere» hinzugefügt. Denn der Zeitmesser – hier vermutliche eine Taschenuhr – symbolisiert zwar in dem Kontext das damalige Zeitempfinden und die Umbrüche durch die industrielle Revolution, sozusagen den Zeitgeist und das moderne Leben. Aber der Autor setzt sich philosophisch mit der Zeit auseinander und gibt seinem Werk auch eine klar spirituelle Dimension.
Das Ticken der Uhr und die Momente des Glücks und der Trauer stehen sinnbildlich für das unaufhaltsame Fortschreiten und die Vergänglichkeit des Lebens. Insofern könnte man bei der Uhr auch an eine Sonnenuhr denken. Der Rhythmus der Ereignisse passt uns vielleicht nicht immer in den Kram.
Was den Takt pocht, ist durchaus auch das Herz, unser «inneres Uhrwerk». Wenn dieses Meisterwerk einmal stillsteht, ist es unweigerlich um uns geschehen. Hoffentlich können wir dann dankbar sagen: «Ich habe mein Bestes gegeben.»
Ich trage, wo ich gehe, stets eine Uhr bei mir; \ Wieviel es geschlagen habe, genau seh ich an ihr. \ Es ist ein großer Meister, der künstlich ihr Werk gefügt, \ Wenngleich ihr Gang nicht immer dem törichten Wunsche genügt.
Ich wollte, sie wäre rascher gegangen an manchem Tag; \ Ich wollte, sie hätte manchmal verzögert den raschen Schlag. \ In meinen Leiden und Freuden, in Sturm und in der Ruh, \ Was immer geschah im Leben, sie pochte den Takt dazu.
Sie schlug am Sarge des Vaters, sie schlug an des Freundes Bahr, \ Sie schlug am Morgen der Liebe, sie schlug am Traualtar. \ Sie schlug an der Wiege des Kindes, sie schlägt, will's Gott, noch oft, \ Wenn bessere Tage kommen, wie meine Seele es hofft.
Und ward sie auch einmal träger, und drohte zu stocken ihr Lauf, \ So zog der Meister immer großmütig sie wieder auf. \ Doch stände sie einmal stille, dann wär's um sie geschehn, \ Kein andrer, als der sie fügte, bringt die Zerstörte zum Gehn.
Dann müßt ich zum Meister wandern, der wohnt am Ende wohl weit, \ Wohl draußen, jenseits der Erde, wohl dort in der Ewigkeit! \ Dann gäb ich sie ihm zurücke mit dankbar kindlichem Flehn: \ Sieh, Herr, ich hab nichts verdorben, sie blieb von selber stehn.
Johann Gabriel Seidl (1804-1875)
-
@ 04c915da:3dfbecc9
2025-02-25 03:55:08Here’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.
-
-
@ 4857600b:30b502f4
2025-02-20 19:09:11Mitch 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.
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 10:03:24Der Deutsche Bundestag wurde neu gewählt. Für einige Abgeordnete und Regierungsmitglieder heißt es Time to Say Goodbye. Abschied ist ein scharfes Schwert. Auch bei Radio München werden Trennungs- und Verlassenheitsgefühle getriggert. Umso mehr, wenn es sich nicht nur um duselige Allerweltsliebe handelt, sondern um den Abgang großer Helden.
Sie bezahlten ihren todesmutigen und fast ehrenamtlichen Einsatz nicht mit dem Leben, jedoch mit der einen oder anderen Falte in Hemd oder Bluse, manchmal sogar im Gesicht. Was bleibt? Eine bescheidene Pension? Ein lausig bezahlter Manager-Job in einem Konzern? Wir wollen jedenfalls nicht, dass diese Volkshelden vom Zahn der Zeit abgenagt, vergessen werden und setzen ihnen deshalb ein bescheidenes akustisches, aber nachhaltiges Denkmal. Hören Sie die kleine satirische Reihe „Nachrufe“ von unserem Autor Jonny Rieder.
Folge 4: Annalena die Völkerballerina
Sprecher: Karsten Troyke
Bild: Markus Mitterer für Radio München
-
@ 9e69e420:d12360c2
2025-02-01 11:16:04Federal employees must remove pronouns from email signatures by the end of the day. This directive comes from internal memos tied to two executive orders signed by Donald Trump. The orders target diversity and equity programs within the government.
CDC, Department of Transportation, and Department of Energy employees were affected. Staff were instructed to make changes in line with revised policy prohibiting certain language.
One CDC employee shared frustration, stating, “In my decade-plus years at CDC, I've never been told what I can and can't put in my email signature.” The directive is part of a broader effort to eliminate DEI initiatives from federal discourse.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2024-12-21 09:54:49Falls du beim Lesen des Titels dieses Newsletters unwillkürlich an positive Neuigkeiten aus dem globalen polit-medialen Irrenhaus oder gar aus dem wirtschaftlichen Umfeld gedacht hast, darf ich dich beglückwünschen. Diese Assoziation ist sehr löblich, denn sie weist dich als unverbesserlichen Optimisten aus. Leider muss ich dich diesbezüglich aber enttäuschen. Es geht hier um ein anderes Thema, allerdings sehr wohl ein positives, wie ich finde.
Heute ist ein ganz besonderer Tag: die Wintersonnenwende. Genau gesagt hat heute morgen um 10:20 Uhr Mitteleuropäischer Zeit (MEZ) auf der Nordhalbkugel unseres Planeten der astronomische Winter begonnen. Was daran so außergewöhnlich ist? Der kürzeste Tag des Jahres war gestern, seit heute werden die Tage bereits wieder länger! Wir werden also jetzt jeden Tag ein wenig mehr Licht haben.
Für mich ist dieses Ereignis immer wieder etwas kurios: Es beginnt der Winter, aber die Tage werden länger. Das erscheint mir zunächst wie ein Widerspruch, denn meine spontanen Assoziationen zum Winter sind doch eher Kälte und Dunkelheit, relativ zumindest. Umso erfreulicher ist der emotionale Effekt, wenn dann langsam die Erkenntnis durchsickert: Ab jetzt wird es schon wieder heller!
Natürlich ist es kalt im Winter, mancherorts mehr als anderswo. Vielleicht jedoch nicht mehr lange, wenn man den Klimahysterikern glauben wollte. Mindestens letztes Jahr hat Väterchen Frost allerdings gleich zu Beginn seiner Saison – und passenderweise während des globalen Überhitzungsgipfels in Dubai – nochmal richtig mit der Faust auf den Tisch gehauen. Schnee- und Eischaos sind ja eigentlich in der Agenda bereits nicht mehr vorgesehen. Deswegen war man in Deutschland vermutlich in vorauseilendem Gehorsam schon nicht mehr darauf vorbereitet und wurde glatt lahmgelegt.
Aber ich schweife ab. Die Aussicht auf nach und nach mehr Licht und damit auch Wärme stimmt mich froh. Den Zusammenhang zwischen beidem merkt man in Andalusien sehr deutlich. Hier, wo die Häuser im Winter arg auskühlen, geht man zum Aufwärmen raus auf die Straße oder auf den Balkon. Die Sonne hat auch im Winter eine erfreuliche Kraft. Und da ist jede Minute Gold wert.
Außerdem ist mir vor Jahren so richtig klar geworden, warum mir das südliche Klima so sehr gefällt. Das liegt nämlich nicht nur an der Sonne als solcher, oder der Wärme – das liegt vor allem am Licht. Ohne Licht keine Farben, das ist der ebenso simple wie gewaltige Unterschied zwischen einem deprimierenden matschgraubraunen Winter und einem fröhlichen bunten. Ein großes Stück Lebensqualität.
Mir gefällt aber auch die Symbolik dieses Tages: Licht aus der Dunkelheit, ein Wendepunkt, ein Neuanfang, neue Möglichkeiten, Übergang zu neuer Aktivität. In der winterlichen Stille keimt bereits neue Lebendigkeit. Und zwar in einem Zyklus, das wird immer wieder so geschehen. Ich nehme das gern als ein Stück Motivation, es macht mir Hoffnung und gibt mir Energie.
Übrigens ist parallel am heutigen Tag auf der südlichen Halbkugel Sommeranfang. Genau im entgegengesetzten Rhythmus, sich ergänzend, wie Yin und Yang. Das alles liegt an der Schrägstellung der Erdachse, die ist nämlich um 23,4º zur Umlaufbahn um die Sonne geneigt. Wir erinnern uns, gell?
Insofern bleibt eindeutig festzuhalten, dass “schräg sein” ein willkommener, wichtiger und positiver Wert ist. Mit anderen Worten: auch ungewöhnlich, eigenartig, untypisch, wunderlich, kauzig, … ja sogar irre, spinnert oder gar “quer” ist in Ordnung. Das schließt das Denken mit ein.
In diesem Sinne wünsche ich euch allen urige Weihnachtstage!
Dieser Beitrag ist letztes Jahr in meiner Denkbar erschienen.
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 09:57:35Es sind immer die gleichen Mechanismen: Die Faktoren Zeitdruck und Angst machen enorm viele Menschen gefügig. 500 Milliarden Euro für Infrastruktur und den sogenannten Klimaschutz, 400 Milliarden für die Bundeswehr – also fast eine Billion Euro Schulden, innerhalb von weniger als vier Wochen nach der Wahl mit Winkelzügen den Bundesbürgern auferlegt.
https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/es-lebe-die-freiheit-verdammt?
Wahlversprechen oder Parteiprogramme, das auf keinen Fall zu tun, sind Makulatur. Keine Diskussion über einen Haushalt, keine Diskussion über die Notwendigkeiten und schon sind Fragen anhängig, ob die Aufträge, die nun vergeben werden, nach den rechtmäßigen Ausschreibungskriterien vonstatten gehen, oder ob auch bei diesen unvorstellbaren Summen die Spezlwirtschaft im Land fortgeführt wird.
Wo ist der Wille des Volkes geblieben? Wo die Freiheit, tatsächlich über unser Leben und Wirtschaften zu entscheiden?
Der Autor, Wirtschafts- und Finanzexperte Andreas Geltinger schaut auf die einstigen Ideen wirtschaftlichen Handelns und analysiert, womit wir es jetzt zu tun haben.
Sprecher: Karsten Troyke.
-
@ 97c70a44:ad98e322
2025-01-30 17:15:37There was a slight dust up recently over a website someone runs removing a listing for an app someone built based on entirely arbitrary criteria. I'm not to going to attempt to speak for either wounded party, but I would like to share my own personal definition for what constitutes a "nostr app" in an effort to help clarify what might be an otherwise confusing and opaque purity test.
In this post, I will be committing the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, in which I start with the most liberal definition I can come up with, and gradually refine it until all that is left is the purest, gleamingest, most imaginary and unattainable nostr app imaginable. As I write this, I wonder if anything built yet will actually qualify. In any case, here we go.
It uses nostr
The lowest bar for what a "nostr app" might be is an app ("application" - i.e. software, not necessarily a native app of any kind) that has some nostr-specific code in it, but which doesn't take any advantage of what makes nostr distinctive as a protocol.
Examples might include a scraper of some kind which fulfills its charter by fetching data from relays (regardless of whether it validates or retains signatures). Another might be a regular web 2.0 app which provides an option to "log in with nostr" by requesting and storing the user's public key.
In either case, the fact that nostr is involved is entirely neutral. A scraper can scrape html, pdfs, jsonl, whatever data source - nostr relays are just another target. Likewise, a user's key in this scenario is treated merely as an opaque identifier, with no appreciation for the super powers it brings along.
In most cases, this kind of app only exists as a marketing ploy, or less cynically, because it wants to get in on the hype of being a "nostr app", without the developer quite understanding what that means, or having the budget to execute properly on the claim.
It leverages nostr
Some of you might be wondering, "isn't 'leverage' a synonym for 'use'?" And you would be right, but for one connotative difference. It's possible to "use" something improperly, but by definition leverage gives you a mechanical advantage that you wouldn't otherwise have. This is the second category of "nostr app".
This kind of app gets some benefit out of the nostr protocol and network, but in an entirely selfish fashion. The intention of this kind of app is not to augment the nostr network, but to augment its own UX by borrowing some nifty thing from the protocol without really contributing anything back.
Some examples might include:
- Using nostr signers to encrypt or sign data, and then store that data on a proprietary server.
- Using nostr relays as a kind of low-code backend, but using proprietary event payloads.
- Using nostr event kinds to represent data (why), but not leveraging the trustlessness that buys you.
An application in this category might even communicate to its users via nostr DMs - but this doesn't make it a "nostr app" any more than a website that emails you hot deals on herbal supplements is an "email app". These apps are purely parasitic on the nostr ecosystem.
In the long-term, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Email's ubiquity is self-reinforcing. But in the short term, this kind of "nostr app" can actually do damage to nostr's reputation by over-promising and under-delivering.
It complements nostr
Next up, we have apps that get some benefit out of nostr as above, but give back by providing a unique value proposition to nostr users as nostr users. This is a bit of a fine distinction, but for me this category is for apps which focus on solving problems that nostr isn't good at solving, leaving the nostr integration in a secondary or supporting role.
One example of this kind of app was Mutiny (RIP), which not only allowed users to sign in with nostr, but also pulled those users' social graphs so that users could send money to people they knew and trusted. Mutiny was doing a great job of leveraging nostr, as well as providing value to users with nostr identities - but it was still primarily a bitcoin wallet, not a "nostr app" in the purest sense.
Other examples are things like Nostr Nests and Zap.stream, whose core value proposition is streaming video or audio content. Both make great use of nostr identities, data formats, and relays, but they're primarily streaming apps. A good litmus test for things like this is: if you got rid of nostr, would it be the same product (even if inferior in certain ways)?
A similar category is infrastructure providers that benefit nostr by their existence (and may in fact be targeted explicitly at nostr users), but do things in a centralized, old-web way; for example: media hosts, DNS registrars, hosting providers, and CDNs.
To be clear here, I'm not casting aspersions (I don't even know what those are, or where to buy them). All the apps mentioned above use nostr to great effect, and are a real benefit to nostr users. But they are not True Scotsmen.
It embodies nostr
Ok, here we go. This is the crème de la crème, the top du top, the meilleur du meilleur, the bee's knees. The purest, holiest, most chaste category of nostr app out there. The apps which are, indeed, nostr indigitate.
This category of nostr app (see, no quotes this time) can be defined by the converse of the previous category. If nostr was removed from this type of application, would it be impossible to create the same product?
To tease this apart a bit, apps that leverage the technical aspects of nostr are dependent on nostr the protocol, while apps that benefit nostr exclusively via network effect are integrated into nostr the network. An app that does both things is working in symbiosis with nostr as a whole.
An app that embraces both nostr's protocol and its network becomes an organic extension of every other nostr app out there, multiplying both its competitive moat and its contribution to the ecosystem:
- In contrast to apps that only borrow from nostr on the technical level but continue to operate in their own silos, an application integrated into the nostr network comes pre-packaged with existing users, and is able to provide more value to those users because of other nostr products. On nostr, it's a good thing to advertise your competitors.
- In contrast to apps that only market themselves to nostr users without building out a deep integration on the protocol level, a deeply integrated app becomes an asset to every other nostr app by becoming an organic extension of them through interoperability. This results in increased traffic to the app as other developers and users refer people to it instead of solving their problem on their own. This is the "micro-apps" utopia we've all been waiting for.
Credible exit doesn't matter if there aren't alternative services. Interoperability is pointless if other applications don't offer something your app doesn't. Marketing to nostr users doesn't matter if you don't augment their agency as nostr users.
If I had to choose a single NIP that represents the mindset behind this kind of app, it would be NIP 89 A.K.A. "Recommended Application Handlers", which states:
Nostr's discoverability and transparent event interaction is one of its most interesting/novel mechanics. This NIP provides a simple way for clients to discover applications that handle events of a specific kind to ensure smooth cross-client and cross-kind interactions.
These handlers are the glue that holds nostr apps together. A single event, signed by the developer of an application (or by the application's own account) tells anyone who wants to know 1. what event kinds the app supports, 2. how to link to the app (if it's a client), and (if the pubkey also publishes a kind 10002), 3. which relays the app prefers.
As a sidenote, NIP 89 is currently focused more on clients, leaving DVMs, relays, signers, etc somewhat out in the cold. Updating 89 to include tailored listings for each kind of supporting app would be a huge improvement to the protocol. This, plus a good front end for navigating these listings (sorry nostrapp.link, close but no cigar) would obviate the evil centralized websites that curate apps based on arbitrary criteria.
Examples of this kind of app obviously include many kind 1 clients, as well as clients that attempt to bring the benefits of the nostr protocol and network to new use cases - whether long form content, video, image posts, music, emojis, recipes, project management, or any other "content type".
To drill down into one example, let's think for a moment about forms. What's so great about a forms app that is built on nostr? Well,
- There is a spec for forms and responses, which means that...
- Multiple clients can implement the same data format, allowing for credible exit and user choice, even of...
- Other products not focused on forms, which can still view, respond to, or embed forms, and which can send their users via NIP 89 to a client that does...
- Cryptographically sign forms and responses, which means they are self-authenticating and can be sent to...
- Multiple relays, which reduces the amount of trust necessary to be confident results haven't been deliberately "lost".
Show me a forms product that does all of those things, and isn't built on nostr. You can't, because it doesn't exist. Meanwhile, there are plenty of image hosts with APIs, streaming services, and bitcoin wallets which have basically the same levels of censorship resistance, interoperability, and network effect as if they weren't built on nostr.
It supports nostr
Notice I haven't said anything about whether relays, signers, blossom servers, software libraries, DVMs, and the accumulated addenda of the nostr ecosystem are nostr apps. Well, they are (usually).
This is the category of nostr app that gets none of the credit for doing all of the work. There's no question that they qualify as beautiful nostrcorns, because their value propositions are entirely meaningless outside of the context of nostr. Who needs a signer if you don't have a cryptographic identity you need to protect? DVMs are literally impossible to use without relays. How are you going to find the blossom server that will serve a given hash if you don't know which servers the publishing user has selected to store their content?
In addition to being entirely contextualized by nostr architecture, this type of nostr app is valuable because it does things "the nostr way". By that I mean that they don't simply try to replicate existing internet functionality into a nostr context; instead, they create entirely new ways of putting the basic building blocks of the internet back together.
A great example of this is how Nostr Connect, Nostr Wallet Connect, and DVMs all use relays as brokers, which allows service providers to avoid having to accept incoming network connections. This opens up really interesting possibilities all on its own.
So while I might hesitate to call many of these things "apps", they are certainly "nostr".
Appendix: it smells like a NINO
So, let's say you've created an app, but when you show it to people they politely smile, nod, and call it a NINO (Nostr In Name Only). What's a hacker to do? Well, here's your handy-dandy guide on how to wash that NINO stench off and Become a Nostr.
You app might be a NINO if:
- There's no NIP for your data format (or you're abusing NIP 78, 32, etc by inventing a sub-protocol inside an existing event kind)
- There's a NIP, but no one knows about it because it's in a text file on your hard drive (or buried in your project's repository)
- Your NIP imposes an incompatible/centralized/legacy web paradigm onto nostr
- Your NIP relies on trusted third (or first) parties
- There's only one implementation of your NIP (yours)
- Your core value proposition doesn't depend on relays, events, or nostr identities
- One or more relay urls are hard-coded into the source code
- Your app depends on a specific relay implementation to work (ahem, relay29)
- You don't validate event signatures
- You don't publish events to relays you don't control
- You don't read events from relays you don't control
- You use legacy web services to solve problems, rather than nostr-native solutions
- You use nostr-native solutions, but you've hardcoded their pubkeys or URLs into your app
- You don't use NIP 89 to discover clients and services
- You haven't published a NIP 89 listing for your app
- You don't leverage your users' web of trust for filtering out spam
- You don't respect your users' mute lists
- You try to "own" your users' data
Now let me just re-iterate - it's ok to be a NINO. We need NINOs, because nostr can't (and shouldn't) tackle every problem. You just need to decide whether your app, as a NINO, is actually contributing to the nostr ecosystem, or whether you're just using buzzwords to whitewash a legacy web software product.
If you're in the former camp, great! If you're in the latter, what are you waiting for? Only you can fix your NINO problem. And there are lots of ways to do this, depending on your own unique situation:
- Drop nostr support if it's not doing anyone any good. If you want to build a normal company and make some money, that's perfectly fine.
- Build out your nostr integration - start taking advantage of webs of trust, self-authenticating data, event handlers, etc.
- Work around the problem. Think you need a special relay feature for your app to work? Guess again. Consider encryption, AUTH, DVMs, or better data formats.
- Think your idea is a good one? Talk to other devs or open a PR to the nips repo. No one can adopt your NIP if they don't know about it.
- Keep going. It can sometimes be hard to distinguish a research project from a NINO. New ideas have to be built out before they can be fully appreciated.
- Listen to advice. Nostr developers are friendly and happy to help. If you're not sure why you're getting traction, ask!
I sincerely hope this article is useful for all of you out there in NINO land. Maybe this made you feel better about not passing the totally optional nostr app purity test. Or maybe it gave you some actionable next steps towards making a great NINON (Nostr In Not Only Name) app. In either case, GM and PV.
-
@ ed5774ac:45611c5c
2025-02-15 05:38:56Bitcoin as Collateral for U.S. Debt: A Deep Dive into the Financial Mechanics
The U.S. government’s proposal to declare Bitcoin as a 'strategic reserve' is a calculated move to address its unsustainable debt obligations, but it threatens to undermine Bitcoin’s original purpose as a tool for financial freedom. To fully grasp the implications of this plan, we must first understand the financial mechanics of debt creation, the role of collateral in sustaining debt, and the historical context of the petro-dollar system. Additionally, we must examine how the U.S. and its allies have historically sought new collateral to back their debt, including recent attempts to weaken Russia through the Ukraine conflict.
The Vietnam War and the Collapse of the Gold Standard
The roots of the U.S. debt crisis can be traced back to the Vietnam War. The war created an unsustainable budget deficit, forcing the U.S. to borrow heavily to finance its military operations. By the late 1960s, the U.S. was spending billions of dollars annually on the war, leading to a significant increase in public debt. Foreign creditors, particularly France, began to lose confidence in the U.S. dollar’s ability to maintain its value. In a dramatic move, French President Charles de Gaulle sent warships to New York to demand the conversion of France’s dollar reserves into gold, as per the Bretton Woods Agreement.
This demand exposed the fragility of the U.S. gold reserves. By 1971, President Richard Nixon was forced to suspend the dollar’s convertibility to gold, effectively ending the Bretton Woods system. This move, often referred to as the "Nixon Shock," declared the U.S. bankrupt and transformed the dollar into a fiat currency backed by nothing but trust in the U.S. government. The collapse of the gold standard marked the beginning of the U.S.’s reliance on artificial systems to sustain its debt. With the gold standard gone, the U.S. needed a new way to back its currency and debt—a need that would lead to the creation of the petro-dollar system.
The Petro-Dollar System: A New Collateral for Debt
In the wake of the gold standard’s collapse, the U.S. faced a critical challenge: how to maintain global confidence in the dollar and sustain its ability to issue debt. The suspension of gold convertibility in 1971 left the dollar as a fiat currency—backed by nothing but trust in the U.S. government. To prevent a collapse of the dollar’s dominance and ensure its continued role as the world’s reserve currency, the U.S. needed a new system to artificially create demand for dollars and provide a form of indirect backing for its debt.
The solution came in the form of the petro-dollar system. In the 1970s, the U.S. struck a deal with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations to price oil exclusively in U.S. dollars. In exchange, the U.S. offered military protection and economic support. This arrangement created an artificial demand for dollars, as countries needed to hold USD reserves to purchase oil. Additionally, oil-exporting nations reinvested their dollar revenues in U.S. Treasuries, effectively recycling petro-dollars back into the U.S. economy. This recycling of petrodollars provided the U.S. with a steady inflow of capital, allowing it to finance its deficits and maintain low interest rates.
To further bolster the system, the U.S., under the guidance of Henry Kissinger, encouraged OPEC to dramatically increase oil prices in the 1970s. The 1973 oil embargo and subsequent price hikes, masterminded by Kissinger, quadrupled the cost of oil, creating a windfall for oil-exporting nations. These nations, whose wealth surged significantly due to the rising oil prices, reinvested even more heavily in U.S. Treasuries and other dollar-denominated assets. This influx of petrodollars increased demand for U.S. debt, enabling the U.S. to issue more debt at lower interest rates. Additionally, the appreciation in the value of oil—a critical global commodity—provided the U.S. banking sector with the necessary collateral to expand credit generation. Just as a house serves as collateral for a mortgage, enabling banks to create new debt, the rising value of oil boosted the asset values of Western corporations that owned oil reserves or invested in oil infrastructure projects. This increase in asset values allowed these corporations to secure larger loans, providing banks with the collateral needed to expand credit creation and inject more dollars into the economy. However, these price hikes also caused global economic turmoil, disproportionately affecting developing nations. As the cost of energy imports skyrocketed, these nations faced mounting debt burdens, exacerbating their economic struggles and deepening global inequality.
The Unsustainable Debt Crisis and the Search for New Collateral
Fast forward to the present day, and the U.S. finds itself in a familiar yet increasingly precarious position. The 2008 financial crisis and the 2020 pandemic have driven the U.S. government’s debt to unprecedented levels, now exceeding $34 trillion, with a debt-to-GDP ratio surpassing 120%. At the same time, the petro-dollar system—the cornerstone of the dollar’s global dominance—is under significant strain. The rise of alternative currencies and the shifting power dynamics of a multipolar world have led to a decline in the dollar’s role in global trade, particularly in oil transactions. For instance, China now pays Saudi Arabia in yuan for oil imports, while Russia sells its oil and gas in rubles and other non-dollar currencies. This growing defiance of the dollar-dominated system reflects a broader trend toward economic independence, as nations like China and Russia seek to reduce their reliance on the U.S. dollar. As more countries bypass the dollar in trade, the artificial demand for dollars created by the petro-dollar system is eroding, undermining the ability of US to sustain its debt and maintain global financial hegemony.
In search of new collateral to carry on its unsustainable debt levels amid declining demand for the U.S. dollar, the U.S., together with its Western allies—many of whom face similar sovereign debt crises—first attempted to weaken Russia and exploit its vast natural resources as collateral. The U.S. and its NATO allies used Ukraine as a proxy to destabilize Russia, aiming to fragment its economy, colonize its territory, and seize control of its natural resources, estimated to be worth around $75 trillion. By gaining access to these resources, the West could have used them as collateral for the banking sector, enabling massive credit expansion. This, in turn, would have alleviated the sovereign debt crisis threatening both the EU and the U.S. This plan was not unprecedented; it mirrored France’s long-standing exploitation of its former African colonies through the CFA franc system.
For decades, France has maintained economic control over 14 African nations through the CFA franc, a currency pegged to the euro and backed by the French Treasury. Under this system, these African countries are required to deposit 50% of their foreign exchange reserves into the French Treasury, effectively giving France control over their monetary policy and economic sovereignty. This arrangement allows France to use African resources and reserves as implicit collateral to issue debt, keeping its borrowing costs low and ensuring demand for its bonds. In return, African nations are left with limited control over their own economies, forced to prioritize French interests over their own development. This neo-colonial system has enabled France to sustain its financial dominance while perpetuating poverty and dependency in its former colonies.
Just as France’s CFA franc system relies on the economic subjugation of African nations to sustain its financial dominance, the U.S. had hoped to use Russia’s resources as a lifeline for its debt-ridden economy. However, the plan ultimately failed. Russia not only resisted the sweeping economic sanctions imposed by the West but also decisively defeated NATO’s proxy forces in Ukraine, thwarting efforts to fragment its economy and seize control of its $75 trillion in natural resources. This failure left the U.S. and its allies without a new source of collateral to back their unsustainable debt levels. With this plan in ruins, the U.S. has been forced to turn its attention to Bitcoin as a potential new collateral for its unsustainable debt.
Bitcoin as Collateral: The U.S. Government’s Plan
The U.S. government’s plan to declare Bitcoin as a strategic reserve is a modern-day equivalent of the gold standard or petro-dollar system. Here’s how it would work:
-
Declaring Bitcoin as a Strategic Reserve: By officially recognizing Bitcoin as a reserve asset, the U.S. would signal to the world that it views Bitcoin as a store of value akin to gold. This would legitimize Bitcoin in the eyes of institutional investors and central banks.
-
Driving Up Bitcoin’s Price: To make Bitcoin a viable collateral, its price must rise significantly. The U.S. would achieve this by encouraging regulatory clarity, promoting institutional adoption, and creating a state-driven FOMO (fear of missing out). This would mirror the 1970s oil price hikes that bolstered the petro-dollar system.
-
Using Bitcoin to Back Debt: Once Bitcoin’s price reaches a sufficient level, the U.S. could use its Bitcoin reserves as collateral for issuing new debt. This would restore confidence in U.S. Treasuries and allow the government to continue borrowing at low interest rates.
The U.S. government’s goal is clear: to use Bitcoin as a tool to issue more debt and reinforce the dollar’s role as the global reserve currency. By forcing Bitcoin into a store-of-value role, the U.S. would replicate the gold standard’s exploitative dynamics, centralizing control in the hands of large financial institutions and central banks. This would strip Bitcoin of its revolutionary potential and undermine its promise of decentralization. Meanwhile, the dollar—in digital forms like USDT—would remain the primary medium of exchange, further entrenching the parasitic financial system.
Tether plays a critical role in this strategy. As explored in my previous article (here: [https://ersan.substack.com/p/is-tether-a-bitcoin-company]), Tether helps sustaining the current financial system by purchasing U.S. Treasuries, effectively providing life support for the U.S. debt machine during a period of declining demand for dollar-denominated assets. Now, with its plans to issue stablecoins on the Bitcoin blockchain, Tether is positioning itself as a bridge between Bitcoin and the traditional financial system. By issuing USDT on the Lightning Network, Tether could lure the poor in developing nations—who need short-term price stability for their day to day payments and cannot afford Bitcoin’s volatility—into using USDT as their primary medium of exchange. This would not only create an artificial demand for the dollar and extend the life of the parasitic financial system that Bitcoin was designed to dismantle but would also achieve this by exploiting the very people who have been excluded and victimized by the same system—the poor and unbanked in developing nations, whose hard-earned money would be funneled into sustaining the very structures that perpetuate their oppression.
Worse, USDT on Bitcoin could function as a de facto central bank digital currency (CBDC), where all transactions can be monitored and sanctioned by governments at will. For example, Tether’s centralized control over USDT issuance and its ties to traditional financial institutions make it susceptible to government pressure. Authorities could compel Tether to implement KYC (Know Your Customer) rules, freeze accounts, or restrict transactions, effectively turning USDT into a tool of financial surveillance and control. This would trap users in a system where every transaction is subject to government oversight, effectively stripping Bitcoin of its censorship-resistant and decentralized properties—the very features that make it a tool for financial freedom.
In this way, the U.S. government’s push for Bitcoin as a store of value, combined with Tether’s role in promoting USDT as a medium of exchange, creates a two-tiered financial system: one for the wealthy, who can afford to hold Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation, and another for the poor, who are trapped in a tightly controlled, surveilled digital economy. This perpetuates the very inequalities Bitcoin was designed to dismantle, turning it into a tool of oppression rather than liberation.
Conclusion: Prolonging the Parasitic Financial System
The U.S. government’s plan to declare Bitcoin as a strategic reserve is not a step toward financial innovation or freedom—it is a desperate attempt to prolong the life of a parasitic financial system that Bitcoin was created to replace. By co-opting Bitcoin, the U.S. would gain a new tool to issue more debt, enabling it to continue its exploitative practices, including proxy wars, economic sanctions, and the enforcement of a unipolar world order.
The petro-dollar system was built on the exploitation of oil-exporting nations and the global economy. A Bitcoin-backed system would likely follow a similar pattern, with the U.S. using its dominance to manipulate Bitcoin’s price and extract value from the rest of the world. This would allow the U.S. to sustain its current financial system, in which it prints money out of thin air to purchase real-world assets and goods, enriching itself at the expense of other nations.
Bitcoin was designed to dismantle this parasitic system, offering an escape hatch for those excluded from or exploited by traditional financial systems. By declaring Bitcoin a strategic reserve, the U.S. government would destroy Bitcoin’s ultimate purpose, turning it into another instrument of control. This is not a victory for Bitcoin or bitcoiners—it is a tragedy for financial freedom and global equity.
The Bitcoin strategic reserve plan is not progress—it is a regression into the very system Bitcoin was designed to dismantle. As bitcoiners, we must resist this co-option and fight to preserve Bitcoin’s original vision: a decentralized, sovereign, and equitable financial system for all. This means actively working to ensure Bitcoin is used as a medium of exchange, not just a store of value, to fulfill its promise of financial freedom.
-
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2024-12-13 19:30:32Das Betriebsklima ist das einzige Klima, \ das du selbst bestimmen kannst. \ Anonym
Eine Strategie zur Anpassung an den Klimawandel hat das deutsche Bundeskabinett diese Woche beschlossen. Da «Wetterextreme wie die immer häufiger auftretenden Hitzewellen und Starkregenereignisse» oft desaströse Auswirkungen auf Mensch und Umwelt hätten, werde eine Anpassung an die Folgen des Klimawandels immer wichtiger. «Klimaanpassungsstrategie» nennt die Regierung das.
Für die «Vorsorge vor Klimafolgen» habe man nun erstmals klare Ziele und messbare Kennzahlen festgelegt. So sei der Erfolg überprüfbar, und das solle zu einer schnelleren Bewältigung der Folgen führen. Dass sich hinter dem Begriff Klimafolgen nicht Folgen des Klimas, sondern wohl «Folgen der globalen Erwärmung» verbergen, erklärt den Interessierten die Wikipedia. Dabei ist das mit der Erwärmung ja bekanntermaßen so eine Sache.
Die Zunahme schwerer Unwetterereignisse habe gezeigt, so das Ministerium, wie wichtig eine frühzeitige und effektive Warnung der Bevölkerung sei. Daher solle es eine deutliche Anhebung der Nutzerzahlen der sogenannten Nina-Warn-App geben.
Die ARD spurt wie gewohnt und setzt die Botschaft zielsicher um. Der Artikel beginnt folgendermaßen:
«Die Flut im Ahrtal war ein Schock für das ganze Land. Um künftig besser gegen Extremwetter gewappnet zu sein, hat die Bundesregierung eine neue Strategie zur Klimaanpassung beschlossen. Die Warn-App Nina spielt eine zentrale Rolle. Der Bund will die Menschen in Deutschland besser vor Extremwetter-Ereignissen warnen und dafür die Reichweite der Warn-App Nina deutlich erhöhen.»
Die Kommunen würden bei ihren «Klimaanpassungsmaßnahmen» vom Zentrum KlimaAnpassung unterstützt, schreibt das Umweltministerium. Mit dessen Aufbau wurden das Deutsche Institut für Urbanistik gGmbH, welches sich stark für Smart City-Projekte engagiert, und die Adelphi Consult GmbH beauftragt.
Adelphi beschreibt sich selbst als «Europas führender Think-and-Do-Tank und eine unabhängige Beratung für Klima, Umwelt und Entwicklung». Sie seien «global vernetzte Strateg*innen und weltverbessernde Berater*innen» und als «Vorreiter der sozial-ökologischen Transformation» sei man mit dem Deutschen Nachhaltigkeitspreis ausgezeichnet worden, welcher sich an den Zielen der Agenda 2030 orientiere.
Über die Warn-App mit dem niedlichen Namen Nina, die möglichst jeder auf seinem Smartphone installieren soll, informiert das Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz und Katastrophenhilfe (BBK). Gewarnt wird nicht nur vor Extrem-Wetterereignissen, sondern zum Beispiel auch vor Waffengewalt und Angriffen, Strom- und anderen Versorgungsausfällen oder Krankheitserregern. Wenn man die Kategorie Gefahreninformation wählt, erhält man eine Dosis von ungefähr zwei Benachrichtigungen pro Woche.
Beim BBK erfahren wir auch einiges über die empfohlenen Systemeinstellungen für Nina. Der Benutzer möge zum Beispiel den Zugriff auf die Standortdaten «immer zulassen», und zwar mit aktivierter Funktion «genauen Standort verwenden». Die Datennutzung solle unbeschränkt sein, auch im Hintergrund. Außerdem sei die uneingeschränkte Akkunutzung zu aktivieren, der Energiesparmodus auszuschalten und das Stoppen der App-Aktivität bei Nichtnutzung zu unterbinden.
Dass man so dramatische Ereignisse wie damals im Ahrtal auch anders bewerten kann als Regierungen und Systemmedien, hat meine Kollegin Wiltrud Schwetje anhand der Tragödie im spanischen Valencia gezeigt. Das Stichwort «Agenda 2030» taucht dabei in einem Kontext auf, der wenig mit Nachhaltigkeitspreisen zu tun hat.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 9e69e420:d12360c2
2025-01-26 15:26:44Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued new guidance halting spending on most foreign aid grants for 90 days, including military assistance to Ukraine. This immediate order shocked State Department officials and mandates “stop-work orders” on nearly all existing foreign assistance awards.
While it allows exceptions for military financing to Egypt and Israel, as well as emergency food assistance, it restricts aid to key allies like Ukraine, Jordan, and Taiwan. The guidance raises potential liability risks for the government due to unfulfilled contracts.
A report will be prepared within 85 days to recommend which programs to continue or discontinue.
-
@ 6f7db55a:985d8b25
2025-02-14 21:23:57This article will be basic instructions for extreme normies (I say that lovingly), or anyone looking to get started with using zap.stream and sharing to nostr.
EQUIPMENT Getting started is incredibly easy and your equipment needs are miniscule.
An old desktop or laptop running Linux, MacOs, or Windows made in the passed 15yrs should do. Im currently using and old Dell Latitude E5430 with an Intel i5-3210M with 32Gigs of ram and 250GB hard drive. Technically, you go as low as using a Raspberry Pi 4B+ running Owncast, but Ill save that so a future tutorial.
Let's get started.
ON YOUR COMPUTER You'll need to install OBS (open broaster software). OBS is the go-to for streaming to social media. There are tons of YouTube videos on it's function. WE, however, will only be doing the basics to get us up and running.
First, go to https://obsproject.com/
Once on the OBS site, choose the correct download for you system. Linux, MacOs or Windows. Download (remember where you downloaded the file to). Go there and install your download. You may have to enter your password to install on your particular operating system. This is normal.
Once you've installed OBS, open the application. It should look something like this...
For our purposes, we will be in studio mode. Locate the 'Studio Mode' button on the right lower-hand side of the screen, and click it.
You'll see the screen split like in the image above. The left-side is from your desktop, and the right-side is what your broadcast will look like.
Next, we go to settings. The 'Settings' button is located right below the 'Studio Mode" button.
Now we're in settings and you should see something like this...
Now locate stream in the right-hand menu. It should be the second in the list. Click it.
Once in the stream section, go to 'Service' and in the right-hand drop-down, find and select 'Custom...' from the drop-down menu.
Remeber where this is because we'll need to come back to it, shortly.
ZAPSTREAM We need our streamkey credentials from Zapstream. Go to https://zap.stream. Then, go to your dashboard.
Located on the lower right-hand side is the Server URL and Stream Key. You'll need to copy/paste this in OBS.
You may have to generate new keys, if they aren't already there. This is normal. If you're interested in multi-streaming (That's where you broadcast to multiple social media platforms all at once), youll need the server URL and streamkeys from each. You'll place them in their respective forms in Zapstream's 'Stream Forwarding" section.
Use the custom form, if the platform you want to stream to isn't listed.
*Side-Note: remember that you can use your nostr identity across multiple nostr client applications. So when your login for Amethyst, as an example, could be used when you login to zapstream. Also, i would suggest using Alby's browser extension. It makes it much easier to fund your stream, as well as receive zaps. *
Now, BACK TO OBS... With Stream URL and Key in hand, paste them in the 'Stream" section of OBS' settings. Service [Custom...] Server [Server URL] StreamKey [Your zapstream stream key]
After you've entered all your streaming credentials, click 'OK' at the bottom, on the right-hand side.
WHAT'S NEXT? Let's setup your first stream from OBS. First we need to choose a source. Your source is your input device. It can be your webcam, your mic, your monitor, or any particular window on your screen. assuming you're an absolute beginner, we're going to use the source 'Window Capture (Xcomposite)'.
Now, open your source file. We'll use a video source called 'grannyhiphop.mp4'. In your case it can be whatever you want to stream; Just be sure to select the proper source.
Double-click on 'Window Capture' in your sources list. In the pop-up window, select your file from the 'Window' drop-down menu.
You should see something like this...
Working in the left display of OBS, we will adjust the video by left-click, hold and drag the bottom corner, so that it takes up the whole display.
In order to adjust the right-side display ( the broadcast side), we need to manipulate the video source by changing it's size.
This may take some time to adjust the size. This is normal. What I've found to help is, after every adjustment, I click the 'Fade (300ms)' button. I have no idea why it helps, but it does, lol.
Finally, after getting everything to look the way you want, you click the 'Start Stream' button.
BACK TO ZAPSTREAM Now, we go back to zapstream to check to see if our stream is up. It may take a few moments to update. You may even need to refresh the page. This is normal.
STREAMS UP!!!
A few things, in closing. You'll notice that your dashbooard has changed. It'll show current stream time, how much time you have left (according to your funding source), who's zapped you with how much theyve zapped, the ability to post a note about your stream (to both nostr and twitter), and it shows your chatbox with your listeners. There are also a raid feature, stream settings (where you can title & tag your stream). You can 'topup' your funding for your stream. As well as, see your current balance.
You did a great and If you ever need more help, just use the tag #asknostr in your note. There are alway nostriches willing to help.
STAY AWESOME!!!
npub: nostr:npub1rsvhkyk2nnsyzkmsuaq9h9ms7rkxhn8mtxejkca2l4pvkfpwzepql3vmtf
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 09:34:29Kartografiert, aufgekauft, betoniert, beschildert. Wo ist die Freiheit? Wo ist Platz zum Erforschen im Nicht-Definierten? Also wo sind die Erfahrungsräume, die sich von Generation zu Generation üblicherweise immer wieder die Jugend erobert, um darin zu wachsen und zu reifen?
https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/abwartend-skeptisch-von-kenneth-anders
Perspektivwechsel: Wo sind eigentlich die Jugendlichen abgeblieben, die nach diesen Räumen Ausschau halten? Sie bewegen sich in „Spaces“. Seit Corona staatlich verordnet, suchen sie auf flachen Bildschirmen, in einer artifiziellen Welt, ihren Horizont zu erweitern.
Der Kulturwissenschaftler Kenneth Anders hat sich auf Spurensuche bei Jugendlichen auf dem Land gemacht. Hören Sie sein Resumée mit dem Titel „Abwartend skeptisch“.
Nachzulesen ist der Beitrag auf der Webseite: oderamazonas.de
Sprecherin: Sabrina Khalil
Bild: KI
www.radiomuenchen.net/\ @radiomuenchen\ www.facebook.com/radiomuenchen\ www.instagram.com/radio_muenchen/\ twitter.com/RadioMuenchen
Radio München ist eine gemeinnützige Unternehmung.\ Wir freuen uns, wenn Sie unsere Arbeit unterstützen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2024-12-06 18:21:15Die Ungerechtigkeit ist uns nur in dem Falle angenehm,\ dass wir Vorteile aus ihr ziehen;\ in jedem andern hegt man den Wunsch,\ dass der Unschuldige in Schutz genommen werde.\ Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Politiker beteuern jederzeit, nur das Beste für die Bevölkerung zu wollen – nicht von ihr. Auch die zahlreichen unsäglichen «Corona-Maßnahmen» waren angeblich zu unserem Schutz notwendig, vor allem wegen der «besonders vulnerablen Personen». Daher mussten alle möglichen Restriktionen zwangsweise und unter Umgehung der Parlamente verordnet werden.
Inzwischen hat sich immer deutlicher herausgestellt, dass viele jener «Schutzmaßnahmen» den gegenteiligen Effekt hatten, sie haben den Menschen und den Gesellschaften enorm geschadet. Nicht nur haben die experimentellen Geninjektionen – wie erwartet – massive Nebenwirkungen, sondern Maskentragen schadet der Psyche und der Entwicklung (nicht nur unserer Kinder) und «Lockdowns und Zensur haben Menschen getötet».
Eine der wichtigsten Waffen unserer «Beschützer» ist die Spaltung der Gesellschaft. Die tiefen Gräben, die Politiker, Lobbyisten und Leitmedien praktisch weltweit ausgehoben haben, funktionieren leider nahezu in Perfektion. Von ihren persönlichen Erfahrungen als Kritikerin der Maßnahmen berichtete kürzlich eine Schweizerin im Interview mit Transition News. Sie sei schwer enttäuscht und verspüre bis heute eine Hemmschwelle und ein seltsames Unwohlsein im Umgang mit «Geimpften».
Menschen, die aufrichtig andere schützen wollten, werden von einer eindeutig politischen Justiz verfolgt, verhaftet und angeklagt. Dazu zählen viele Ärzte, darunter Heinrich Habig, Bianca Witzschel und Walter Weber. Über den aktuell laufenden Prozess gegen Dr. Weber hat Transition News mehrfach berichtet (z.B. hier und hier). Auch der Selbstschutz durch Verweigerung der Zwangs-Covid-«Impfung» bewahrt nicht vor dem Knast, wie Bundeswehrsoldaten wie Alexander Bittner erfahren mussten.
Die eigentlich Kriminellen schützen sich derweil erfolgreich selber, nämlich vor der Verantwortung. Die «Impf»-Kampagne war «das größte Verbrechen gegen die Menschheit». Trotzdem stellt man sich in den USA gerade die Frage, ob der scheidende Präsident Joe Biden nach seinem Sohn Hunter möglicherweise auch Anthony Fauci begnadigen wird – in diesem Fall sogar präventiv. Gibt es überhaupt noch einen Rest Glaubwürdigkeit, den Biden verspielen könnte?
Der Gedanke, den ehemaligen wissenschaftlichen Chefberater des US-Präsidenten und Direktor des National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) vorsorglich mit einem Schutzschild zu versehen, dürfte mit der vergangenen Präsidentschaftswahl zu tun haben. Gleich mehrere Personalentscheidungen des designierten Präsidenten Donald Trump lassen Leute wie Fauci erneut in den Fokus rücken.
Das Buch «The Real Anthony Fauci» des nominierten US-Gesundheitsministers Robert F. Kennedy Jr. erschien 2021 und dreht sich um die Machenschaften der Pharma-Lobby in der öffentlichen Gesundheit. Das Vorwort zur rumänischen Ausgabe des Buches schrieb übrigens Călin Georgescu, der Überraschungssieger der ersten Wahlrunde der aktuellen Präsidentschaftswahlen in Rumänien. Vielleicht erklärt diese Verbindung einen Teil der Panik im Wertewesten.
In Rumänien selber gab es gerade einen Paukenschlag: Das bisherige Ergebnis wurde heute durch das Verfassungsgericht annuliert und die für Sonntag angesetzte Stichwahl kurzfristig abgesagt – wegen angeblicher «aggressiver russischer Einmischung». Thomas Oysmüller merkt dazu an, damit sei jetzt in der EU das Tabu gebrochen, Wahlen zu verbieten, bevor sie etwas ändern können.
Unsere Empörung angesichts der Historie von Maßnahmen, die die Falschen beschützen und für die meisten von Nachteil sind, müsste enorm sein. Die Frage ist, was wir damit machen. Wir sollten nach vorne schauen und unsere Energie clever einsetzen. Abgesehen von der Umgehung von jeglichem «Schutz vor Desinformation und Hassrede» (sprich: Zensur) wird es unsere wichtigste Aufgabe sein, Gräben zu überwinden.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 9e69e420:d12360c2
2025-01-25 22:16:54President Trump plans to withdraw 20,000 U.S. troops from Europe and expects European allies to contribute financially to the remaining military presence. Reported by ANSA, Trump aims to deliver this message to European leaders since taking office. A European diplomat noted, “the costs cannot be borne solely by American taxpayers.”
The Pentagon hasn't commented yet. Trump has previously sought lower troop levels in Europe and had ordered cuts during his first term. The U.S. currently maintains around 65,000 troops in Europe, with total forces reaching 100,000 since the Ukraine invasion. Trump's new approach may shift military focus to the Pacific amid growing concerns about China.
-
@ b8851a06:9b120ba1
2025-01-28 21:34:54Private property isn’t lines on dirt or fences of steel—it’s the crystallization of human sovereignty. Each boundary drawn is a silent declaration: This is where my will meets yours, where creation clashes against chaos. What we defend as “mine” or “yours” is no mere object but a metaphysical claim, a scaffold for the unfathomable complexity of voluntary exchange.
Markets breathe only when individuals anchor their choices in the inviolable. Without property, there is no negotiation—only force. No trade—only taking. The deed to land, the title to a car, the seed of an idea: these are not static things but frontiers of being, where human responsibility collides with the infinite permutations of value.
Austrian economics whispers what existentialism shouts: existence precedes essence. Property isn’t granted by systems; it’s asserted through action, defended through sacrifice, and sanctified through mutual recognition. A thing becomes “owned” only when a mind declares it so, and others—through reason or respect—refrain from crossing that unseen line.
Bitcoin? The purest ledger of this truth. A string of code, yes—but one that mirrors the unyielding logic of property itself: scarce, auditable, unconquerable. It doesn’t ask permission. It exists because sovereign minds choose it to.
Sigh. #nostr
I love #Bitcoin. -
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2024-11-29 19:45:43Konsum ist Therapie.
Wolfgang JoopUmweltbewusstes Verhalten und verantwortungsvoller Konsum zeugen durchaus von einer wünschenswerten Einstellung. Ob man deswegen allerdings einen grünen statt eines schwarzen Freitags braucht, darf getrost bezweifelt werden – zumal es sich um manipulatorische Konzepte handelt. Wie in der politischen Landschaft sind auch hier die Etiketten irgendwas zwischen nichtssagend und trügerisch.
Heute ist also wieder mal «Black Friday», falls Sie es noch nicht mitbekommen haben sollten. Eigentlich haben wir ja eher schon eine ganze «Black Week», der dann oft auch noch ein «Cyber Monday» folgt. Die Werbebranche wird nicht müde, immer neue Anlässe zu erfinden oder zu importieren, um uns zum Konsumieren zu bewegen. Und sie ist damit sehr erfolgreich.
Warum fallen wir auf derartige Werbetricks herein und kaufen im Zweifelsfall Dinge oder Mengen, die wir sicher nicht brauchen? Pure Psychologie, würde ich sagen. Rabattschilder triggern etwas in uns, was den Verstand in Stand-by versetzt. Zusätzlich beeinflussen uns alle möglichen emotionalen Reize und animieren uns zum Schnäppchenkauf.
Gedankenlosigkeit und Maßlosigkeit können besonders bei der Ernährung zu ernsten Problemen führen. Erst kürzlich hat mir ein Bekannter nach einer USA-Reise erzählt, dass es dort offenbar nicht unüblich ist, schon zum ausgiebigen Frühstück in einem Restaurant wenigstens einen Liter Cola zu trinken. Gerne auch mehr, um das Gratis-Nachfüllen des Bechers auszunutzen.
Kritik am schwarzen Freitag und dem unnötigen Konsum kommt oft von Umweltschützern. Neben Ressourcenverschwendung, hohem Energieverbrauch und wachsenden Müllbergen durch eine zunehmende Wegwerfmentalität kommt dabei in der Regel auch die «Klimakrise» auf den Tisch.
Die EU-Kommission lancierte 2015 den Begriff «Green Friday» im Kontext der überarbeiteten Rechtsvorschriften zur Kennzeichnung der Energieeffizienz von Elektrogeräten. Sie nutzte die Gelegenheit kurz vor dem damaligen schwarzen Freitag und vor der UN-Klimakonferenz COP21, bei der das Pariser Abkommen unterzeichnet werden sollte.
Heute wird ein grüner Freitag oft im Zusammenhang mit der Forderung nach «nachhaltigem Konsum» benutzt. Derweil ist die Europäische Union schon weit in ihr Geschäftsmodell des «Green New Deal» verstrickt. In ihrer Propaganda zum Klimawandel verspricht sie tatsächlich «Unterstützung der Menschen und Regionen, die von immer häufigeren Extremwetter-Ereignissen betroffen sind». Was wohl die Menschen in der Region um Valencia dazu sagen?
Ganz im Sinne des Great Reset propagierten die Vereinten Nationen seit Ende 2020 eine «grüne Erholung von Covid-19, um den Klimawandel zu verlangsamen». Der UN-Umweltbericht sah in dem Jahr einen Schwerpunkt auf dem Verbraucherverhalten. Änderungen des Konsumverhaltens des Einzelnen könnten dazu beitragen, den Klimaschutz zu stärken, hieß es dort.
Der Begriff «Schwarzer Freitag» wurde in den USA nicht erstmals für Einkäufe nach Thanksgiving verwendet – wie oft angenommen –, sondern für eine Finanzkrise. Jedoch nicht für den Börsencrash von 1929, sondern bereits für den Zusammenbruch des US-Goldmarktes im September 1869. Seitdem mussten die Menschen weltweit so einige schwarze Tage erleben.
Kürzlich sind die britischen Aufsichtsbehörden weiter von ihrer Zurückhaltung nach dem letzten großen Finanzcrash von 2008 abgerückt. Sie haben Regeln für den Bankensektor gelockert, womit sie «verantwortungsvolle Risikobereitschaft» unterstützen wollen. Man würde sicher zu schwarz sehen, wenn man hier ein grünes Wunder befürchten würde.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2024-11-08 20:02:32Und plötzlich weißt du:
Es ist Zeit, etwas Neues zu beginnen
und dem Zauber des Anfangs zu vertrauen.
Meister EckhartSchwarz, rot, gold leuchtet es im Kopf des Newsletters der deutschen Bundesregierung, der mir freitags ins Postfach flattert. Rot, gelb und grün werden daneben sicher noch lange vielzitierte Farben sein, auch wenn diese nie geleuchtet haben. Die Ampel hat sich gerade selber den Stecker gezogen – und hinterlässt einen wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Trümmerhaufen.
Mit einem bemerkenswerten Timing hat die deutsche Regierungskoalition am Tag des «Comebacks» von Donald Trump in den USA endlich ihr Scheitern besiegelt. Während der eine seinen Sieg bei den Präsidentschaftswahlen feierte, erwachten die anderen jäh aus ihrer Selbsthypnose rund um Harris-Hype und Trump-Panik – mit teils erschreckenden Auswüchsen. Seit Mittwoch werden die Geschicke Deutschlands nun von einer rot-grünen Minderheitsregierung «geleitet» und man steuert auf Neuwahlen zu.
Das Kindergarten-Gehabe um zwei konkurrierende Wirtschaftsgipfel letzte Woche war bereits bezeichnend. In einem Strategiepapier gestand Finanzminister Lindner außerdem den «Absturz Deutschlands» ein und offenbarte, dass die wirtschaftlichen Probleme teilweise von der Ampel-Politik «vorsätzlich herbeigeführt» worden seien.
Lindner und weitere FDP-Minister wurden also vom Bundeskanzler entlassen. Verkehrs- und Digitalminister Wissing trat flugs aus der FDP aus; deshalb darf er nicht nur im Amt bleiben, sondern hat zusätzlich noch das Justizministerium übernommen. Und mit Jörg Kukies habe Scholz «seinen Lieblingsbock zum Obergärtner», sprich: Finanzminister befördert, meint Norbert Häring.
Es gebe keine Vertrauensbasis für die weitere Zusammenarbeit mit der FDP, hatte der Kanzler erklärt, Lindner habe zu oft sein Vertrauen gebrochen. Am 15. Januar 2025 werde er daher im Bundestag die Vertrauensfrage stellen, was ggf. den Weg für vorgezogene Neuwahlen freimachen würde.
Apropos Vertrauen: Über die Hälfte der Bundesbürger glauben, dass sie ihre Meinung nicht frei sagen können. Das ging erst kürzlich aus dem diesjährigen «Freiheitsindex» hervor, einer Studie, die die Wechselwirkung zwischen Berichterstattung der Medien und subjektivem Freiheitsempfinden der Bürger misst. «Beim Vertrauen in Staat und Medien zerreißt es uns gerade», kommentierte dies der Leiter des Schweizer Unternehmens Media Tenor, das die Untersuchung zusammen mit dem Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach durchführt.
«Die absolute Mehrheit hat absolut die Nase voll», titelte die Bild angesichts des «Ampel-Showdowns». Die Mehrheit wolle Neuwahlen und die Grünen sollten zuerst gehen, lasen wir dort.
Dass «Insolvenzminister» Robert Habeck heute seine Kandidatur für das Kanzleramt verkündet hat, kann nur als Teil der politmedialen Realitätsverweigerung verstanden werden. Wer allerdings denke, schlimmer als in Zeiten der Ampel könne es nicht mehr werden, sei reichlich optimistisch, schrieb Uwe Froschauer bei Manova. Und er kenne Friedrich Merz schlecht, der sich schon jetzt rhetorisch auf seine Rolle als oberster Feldherr Deutschlands vorbereite.
Was also tun? Der Schweizer Verein «Losdemokratie» will eine Volksinitiative lancieren, um die Bestimmung von Parlamentsmitgliedern per Los einzuführen. Das Losverfahren sorge für mehr Demokratie, denn als Alternative zum Wahlverfahren garantiere es eine breitere Beteiligung und repräsentativere Parlamente. Ob das ein Weg ist, sei dahingestellt.
In jedem Fall wird es notwendig sein, unsere Bemühungen um Freiheit und Selbstbestimmung zu verstärken. Mehr Unabhängigkeit von staatlichen und zentralen Institutionen – also die Suche nach dezentralen Lösungsansätzen – gehört dabei sicher zu den Möglichkeiten. Das gilt sowohl für jede/n Einzelne/n als auch für Entitäten wie die alternativen Medien.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 09:28:5221 Monate, also fast zwei Jahre verbringt Johanna Findeisen bereits in Untersuchungshaft. Trägt sie reichsbürgerliche Ideen mit sich? Oder hat sie Straftaten geplant? Es ist ein Fall im sogenannten „Reichsbürgerprozess“. Mit diesem beschäftigt sich einer ihrer Anwälte Prof. Martin Schwab. Bei den Prozessen, so der Jurist, gehe es eher um Gesinnungsfragen.
Fakten zu Straftaten, auch geplanten, seien nicht aufzufinden. Und eine Untersuchungshaft für die Aufdeckung einer möglicherweise falschen Gesinnung – die Johanna Findeisen vehement bestreitet - ist in unserem Rechtssystem nicht vorgesehen. Dennoch sind die Termine für diese Untersuchungen bereits bis 2026 anberaumt.
Das soll aber heute nicht unser Thema sein. Es geht um die Untersuchungshaft selbst. Prof. Martin Schwab ist in regelmäßigem, telefonischen Kontakt mit Johanna Findeisen und stellt dort Verhältnisse fest, die den Tatbestand der Folter erfüllen. Kein Mensch, selbst der Verurteilte, darf in seiner Menschenwürde herabgesetzt werden. Nun wird der Fall Johanna Findeisen bislang lediglich untersucht. Wie kann also sein, dass sie im Transport zum Gericht gefesselt wird? Warum wurde sie bei ihrer Rückkehr körperinvasiv untersucht? Was übrigens nach einem öffentlichkeitswirksamen Antrag ans Oberlandesgericht erfolgreich unterbunden wurde. Warum wird ihre Post zurückgehalten? Warum durfte sie, bei zwei Stunden Besuchszeit im Monat, ihren Angehörigen nur hinter einer Scheibe begegnen? Warum wird sie, ohne Morgentoilette, abgeholt und in eine fensterlose Zelle ins Gericht gebracht, wo sie zwei Stunden bis zum Gerichtstermin ausharren muss? Und warum wird die fiebernde Johanna, bei Minusgraden und offener Türe gezwungen, sich nackt auszuziehen, sich zur Wand zu drehen und sich einer erniedrigenden Leibesvisitation zu stellen?
Auch dem Pfarrer und Autor Jürgen Fliege geht dieser Fall nah und fragte sich, was Johanna Findeisen, neben einer guten Verteidigung gebrauchen könnte und er ihr geben: Beistand! Hören Sie seinen offenen Brief an die Inhaftierte.
Sprecherin: Sabrina Khalil.
Wer sich gegen die – in einzelnen Haftanstalten – untragbaren Zustände, gegen die dortigen Menschenrechtsverletzungen engagieren möchte, kann das beispielsweise auf der Webseite www.folter-nein-danke.eu tun.
-
@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0
2025-01-21 20:58:37A seguir, veja como instalar e configurar o Privoxy no Pop!_OS.
1. Instalar o Tor e o Privoxy
Abra o terminal e execute:
bash sudo apt update sudo apt install tor privoxy
Explicação:
- Tor: Roteia o tráfego pela rede Tor.
- Privoxy: Proxy avançado que intermedia a conexão entre aplicativos e o Tor.
2. Configurar o Privoxy
Abra o arquivo de configuração do Privoxy:
bash sudo nano /etc/privoxy/config
Navegue até a última linha (atalho:
Ctrl
+/
depoisCtrl
+V
para navegar diretamente até a última linha) e insira:bash forward-socks5 / 127.0.0.1:9050 .
Isso faz com que o Privoxy envie todo o tráfego para o Tor através da porta 9050.
Salve (
CTRL
+O
eEnter
) e feche (CTRL
+X
) o arquivo.
3. Iniciar o Tor e o Privoxy
Agora, inicie e habilite os serviços:
bash sudo systemctl start tor sudo systemctl start privoxy sudo systemctl enable tor sudo systemctl enable privoxy
Explicação:
- start: Inicia os serviços.
- enable: Faz com que iniciem automaticamente ao ligar o PC.
4. Configurar o Navegador Firefox
Para usar a rede Tor com o Firefox:
- Abra o Firefox.
- Acesse Configurações → Configurar conexão.
- Selecione Configuração manual de proxy.
- Configure assim:
- Proxy HTTP:
127.0.0.1
- Porta:
8118
(porta padrão do Privoxy) - Domínio SOCKS (v5):
127.0.0.1
- Porta:
9050
- Proxy HTTP:
- Marque a opção "Usar este proxy também em HTTPS".
- Clique em OK.
5. Verificar a Conexão com o Tor
Abra o navegador e acesse:
text https://check.torproject.org/
Se aparecer a mensagem "Congratulations. This browser is configured to use Tor.", a configuração está correta.
Dicas Extras
- Privoxy pode ser ajustado para bloquear anúncios e rastreadores.
- Outros aplicativos também podem ser configurados para usar o Privoxy.
-
@ 599f67f7:21fb3ea9
2025-01-26 11:01:05¿Qué es Blossom?
nostr:nevent1qqspttj39n6ld4plhn4e2mq3utxpju93u4k7w33l3ehxyf0g9lh3f0qpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsygzenanl0hmkjnrq8fksvdhpt67xzrdh0h8agltwt5znsmvzr7e74ywgmr72
Blossom significa Blobs Simply Stored on Media Servers (Blobs Simplemente Almacenados en Servidores de Medios). Blobs son fragmentos de datos binarios, como archivos pero sin nombres. En lugar de nombres, se identifican por su hash sha256. La ventaja de usar hashes sha256 en lugar de nombres es que los hashes son IDs universales que se pueden calcular a partir del archivo mismo utilizando el algoritmo de hash sha256.
💡 archivo -> sha256 -> hash
Blossom es, por lo tanto, un conjunto de puntos finales HTTP que permiten a los usuarios almacenar y recuperar blobs almacenados en servidores utilizando su identidad nostr.
¿Por qué Blossom?
Como mencionamos hace un momento, al usar claves nostr como su identidad, Blossom permite que los datos sean "propiedad" del usuario. Esto simplifica enormemente la cuestión de "qué es spam" para el alojamiento de servidores. Por ejemplo, en nuestro Blossom solo permitimos cargas por miembros de la comunidad verificados que tengan un NIP-05 con nosotros.
Los usuarios pueden subir en múltiples servidores de blossom, por ejemplo, uno alojado por su comunidad, uno de pago, otro público y gratuito, para establecer redundancia de sus datos. Los blobs pueden ser espejados entre servidores de blossom, de manera similar a cómo los relays nostr pueden transmitir eventos entre sí. Esto mejora la resistencia a la censura de blossom.
A continuación se muestra una breve tabla de comparación entre torrents, Blossom y servidores CDN centralizados. (Suponiendo que hay muchos seeders para torrents y se utilizan múltiples servidores con Blossom).
| | Torrents | Blossom | CDN Centralizado | | --------------------------------------------------------------- | -------- | ------- | ---------------- | | Descentralizado | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | | Resistencia a la censura | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | | ¿Puedo usarlo para publicar fotos de gatitos en redes sociales? | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ |
¿Cómo funciona?
Blossom utiliza varios tipos de eventos nostr para comunicarse con el servidor de medios.
| kind | descripción | BUD | | ----- | ------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | | 24242 | Evento de autorización | BUD01 | | 10063 | Lista de Servidores de Usuarios | BUD03 |
kind:24242 - Autorización
Esto es esencialmente lo que ya describimos al usar claves nostr como IDs de usuario. En el evento, el usuario le dice al servidor que quiere subir o eliminar un archivo y lo firma con sus claves nostr. El servidor realiza algunas verificaciones en este evento y luego ejecuta el comando del usuario si todo parece estar bien.
kind:10063 - Lista de Servidores de Usuarios
Esto es utilizado por el usuario para anunciar a qué servidores de medios está subiendo. De esta manera, cuando el cliente ve esta lista, sabe dónde subir los archivos del usuario. También puede subir en múltiples servidores definidos en la lista para asegurar redundancia. En el lado de recuperación, si por alguna razón uno de los servidores en la lista del usuario está fuera de servicio, o el archivo ya no se puede encontrar allí, el cliente puede usar esta lista para intentar recuperar el archivo de otros servidores en la lista. Dado que los blobs se identifican por sus hashes, el mismo blob tendrá el mismo hash en cualquier servidor de medios. Todo lo que el cliente necesita hacer es cambiar la URL por la de un servidor diferente.
Ahora, además de los conceptos básicos de cómo funciona Blossom, también hay otros tipos de eventos que hacen que Blossom sea aún más interesante.
| kind | descripción | | ----- | --------------------- | | 30563 | Blossom Drives | | 36363 | Listado de Servidores | | 31963 | Reseña de Servidores |
kind:30563 - Blossom Drives
Este tipo de evento facilita la organización de blobs en carpetas, como estamos acostumbrados con los drives (piensa en Google Drive, iCloud, Proton Drive, etc.). El evento contiene información sobre la estructura de carpetas y los metadatos del drive.
kind:36363 y kind:31963 - Listado y Reseña
Estos tipos de eventos permiten a los usuarios descubrir y reseñar servidores de medios a través de nostr. kind:36363 es un listado de servidores que contiene la URL del servidor. kind:31963 es una reseña, donde los usuarios pueden calificar servidores.
¿Cómo lo uso?
Encuentra un servidor
Primero necesitarás elegir un servidor Blossom donde subirás tus archivos. Puedes navegar por los públicos en blossomservers.com. Algunos de ellos son de pago, otros pueden requerir que tus claves nostr estén en una lista blanca.
Luego, puedes ir a la URL de su servidor y probar a subir un archivo pequeño, como una foto. Si estás satisfecho con el servidor (es rápido y aún no te ha fallado), puedes agregarlo a tu Lista de Servidores de Usuarios. Cubriremos brevemente cómo hacer esto en noStrudel y Amethyst (pero solo necesitas hacer esto una vez, una vez que tu lista actualizada esté publicada, los clientes pueden simplemente recuperarla de nostr).
noStrudel
- Encuentra Relays en la barra lateral, luego elige Servidores de Medios.
- Agrega un servidor de medios, o mejor aún, varios.
- Publica tu lista de servidores. ✅
Amethyst
- En la barra lateral, encuentra Servidores multimedia.
- Bajo Servidores Blossom, agrega tus servidores de medios.
- Firma y publica. ✅
Ahora, cuando vayas a hacer una publicación y adjuntar una foto, por ejemplo, se subirá en tu servidor blossom.
⚠️ Ten en cuenta que debes suponer que los archivos que subas serán públicos. Aunque puedes proteger un archivo con contraseña, esto no ha sido auditado.
Blossom Drive
Como mencionamos anteriormente, podemos publicar eventos para organizar nuestros blobs en carpetas. Esto puede ser excelente para compartir archivos con tu equipo, o simplemente para mantener las cosas organizadas.
Para probarlo, ve a blossom.hzrd149.com (o nuestra instancia comunitaria en blossom.bitcointxoko.com) e inicia sesión con tu método preferido.
Puedes crear una nueva unidad y agregar blobs desde allí.
Bouquet
Si usas múltiples servidores para darte redundancia, Bouquet es una buena manera de obtener una visión general de todos tus archivos. Úsalo para subir y navegar por tus medios en diferentes servidores y sincronizar blobs entre ellos.
Cherry Tree
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqfngzhsvjggdlgeycm96x4emzjlwf8dyyzdfg4hefp89zpkdgz99qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcqyp3065hj9zellakecetfflkgudm5n6xcc9dnetfeacnq90y3yxa5z5gk2q6
Cherry Tree te permite dividir un archivo en fragmentos y luego subirlos en múltiples servidores blossom, y más tarde reensamblarlos en otro lugar.
Conclusión
Blossom aún está en desarrollo, pero ya hay muchas cosas interesantes que puedes hacer con él para hacerte a ti y a tu comunidad más soberanos. ¡Pruébalo!
Si deseas mantenerte al día sobre el desarrollo de Blossom, sigue a nostr:nprofile1qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcqyqnxs90qeyssm73jf3kt5dtnk997ujw6ggy6j3t0jjzw2yrv6sy22ysu5ka y dale un gran zap por su excelente trabajo.
Referencias
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2024-10-26 12:21:50Es ist besser, ein Licht zu entzünden, als auf die Dunkelheit zu schimpfen. Konfuzius
Die Bemühungen um Aufarbeitung der sogenannten Corona-Pandemie, um Aufklärung der Hintergründe, Benennung von Verantwortlichkeiten und das Ziehen von Konsequenzen sind durchaus nicht eingeschlafen. Das Interesse daran ist unter den gegebenen Umständen vielleicht nicht sonderlich groß, aber es ist vorhanden.
Der sächsische Landtag hat gestern die Einsetzung eines Untersuchungsausschusses zur Corona-Politik beschlossen. In einer Sondersitzung erhielt ein entsprechender Antrag der AfD-Fraktion die ausreichende Zustimmung, auch von einigen Abgeordneten des BSW.
In den Niederlanden wird Bill Gates vor Gericht erscheinen müssen. Sieben durch die Covid-«Impfstoffe» geschädigte Personen hatten Klage eingereicht. Sie werfen unter anderem Gates, Pfizer-Chef Bourla und dem niederländischen Staat vor, sie hätten gewusst, dass diese Präparate weder sicher noch wirksam sind.
Mit den mRNA-«Impfstoffen» von Pfizer/BioNTech befasst sich auch ein neues Buch. Darin werden die Erkenntnisse von Ärzten und Wissenschaftlern aus der Analyse interner Dokumente über die klinischen Studien der Covid-Injektion präsentiert. Es handelt sich um jene in den USA freigeklagten Papiere, die die Arzneimittelbehörde (Food and Drug Administration, FDA) 75 Jahre unter Verschluss halten wollte.
Ebenfalls Wissenschaftler und Ärzte, aber auch andere Experten organisieren als Verbundnetzwerk Corona-Solution kostenfreie Online-Konferenzen. Ihr Ziel ist es, «wissenschaftlich, demokratisch und friedlich» über Impfstoffe und Behandlungsprotokolle gegen SARS-CoV-2 aufzuklären und die Diskriminierung von Ungeimpften zu stoppen. Gestern fand eine weitere Konferenz statt. Ihr Thema: «Corona und modRNA: Von Toten, Lebenden und Physik lernen».
Aufgrund des Digital Services Acts (DSA) der Europäischen Union sei das Risiko groß, dass ihre Arbeit als «Fake-News» bezeichnet würde, so das Netzwerk. Staatlich unerwünschte wissenschaftliche Aufklärung müsse sich passende Kanäle zur Veröffentlichung suchen. Ihre Live-Streams seien deshalb zum Beispiel nicht auf YouTube zu finden.
Der vielfältige Einsatz für Aufklärung und Aufarbeitung wird sich nicht stummschalten lassen. Nicht einmal der Zensurmeister der EU, Deutschland, wird so etwas erreichen. Die frisch aktivierten «Trusted Flagger» dürften allerdings künftige Siege beim «Denunzianten-Wettbewerb» im Kontext des DSA zusätzlich absichern.
Wo sind die Grenzen der Meinungsfreiheit? Sicher gibt es sie. Aber die ideologische Gleichstellung von illegalen mit unerwünschten Äußerungen verfolgt offensichtlich eher das Ziel, ein derart elementares demokratisches Grundrecht möglichst weitgehend auszuhebeln. Vorwürfe wie «Hassrede», «Delegitimierung des Staates» oder «Volksverhetzung» werden heute inflationär verwendet, um Systemkritik zu unterbinden. Gegen solche Bestrebungen gilt es, sich zu wehren.
Dieser Beitrag ist zuerst auf Transition News erschienen.
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 09:28:32„Das ist ein netter alter Onkel, der sich bemüht, der Welt Gutes zu tun“, antwortete Anfang 2021 der Sohn einer Freundin auf ihre Frage, was Bill Gates mit der Pandemie zu tun haben könnte. Ich erinnere mich, damals wurde man als Verschwörungstheoretiker tituliert, und zwar maximal abwertend, wenn man allein den Namen ins Spiel brachte. Es ist wirklich Zeit, sich wieder für das Ansehen der Verschwörungstheorie einzusetzen, denn ohne sie wird kein einziger Kriminalfall aufgedeckt, der von mehr als einer Person durchgeführt wurde.
Kommen wir zum dritten Teil der Reihe „Corona-Connection“ von Milosz Matuschek in dem er sich in deren Epizentrum begibt. Bill Gates, der undemokratisch zu Macht gekommene, selbsternannte Philanthrop, gehört zu den Hauptfiguren der USAID, der United States Agency for International Development. Matuschek geht hier auf das Geschäftsmodell des Philanthrokapitalismus ein.
Sabrina Khalil hat seinen Text gelesen. Diesen und die zwei ersten Folgen finden Sie auf Matuscheks Seite: Freischwebende Intelligenz.
-
@ 29af23a9:842ef0c1
2025-01-24 09:28:37A Indústria Pornográfica se caracteriza pelo investimento pesado de grandes empresários americanos, desde 2014.
Na década de 90, filmes pornográficos eram feitos às coxas. Era basicamente duas pessoas fazendo sexo amador e sendo gravadas. Não tinha roteiro, nem produção, não tinha maquiagem, nada disso. A distribuição era rudimentar, os assinantes tinham que sair de suas casas, ir até a locadora, sofrer todo tipo de constrangimento para assistir a um filme pornô.
No começo dos anos 2000, o serviço de Pay Per View fez o número de vendas de filmes eróticos (filme erótico é bem mais leve) crescer mas nada se compara com os sites de filmes pornográficos por assinatura.
Com o advento dos serviços de Streaming, os sites que vendem filmes por assinatura se estabeleceram no mercado como nunca foi visto na história.
Hoje, os Produtores usam produtos para esticar os vasos sanguíneos do pênis dos atores e dopam as atrizes para que elas aguentem horas de gravação (a Série Black Mirror fez uma crítica a isso no episódio 1 milhão de méritos de forma sutil).
Além de toda a produção em volta das cenas. Que são gravadas em 4K, para focar bem as partes íntimas dos atores. Quadros fechados, iluminação, tudo isso faz essa Indústria ser "Artística" uma vez que tudo ali é falso. Um filme da Produtora Vixen, por exemplo, onde jovens mulheres transam em mansões com seus empresários estimula o esteriótipo da mina padrão que chama seu chefe rico de "daddy" e seduz ele até ele trair a esposa.
Sites como xvídeos, pornHub e outros nada mais são do que sites que salvam filmes dessas produtoras e hospedam as cenas com anúncios e pop-ups. Alguns sites hospedam o filme inteiro "de graça".
Esse tipo de filme estimula qualquer homem heterosexual com menos de 30 anos, que não tem o córtex frontal de seu cérebro totalmente desenvolvido (segundo estudos só é completamente desenvolvido quando o homem chega aos 31 anos).
A arte Pornográfica faz alguns fantasiarem ter relação sexual com uma gostosa americana branquinha, até escraviza-los. Muitos não conseguem sair do vício e preferem a Ficção à sua esposa real. Então pare de se enganar e admita. A Pornografia faz mal para a saúde mental do homem.
Quem sonha em ter uma transa com Lana Rhodes, deve estar nesse estágio. Trata-se de uma atriz (pornstar) que ganhou muito dinheiro vendendo a ilusão da Arte Pornografica, como a Riley Reid que só gravava para grandes Produtoras. Ambas se arrependeram da carreira artística e agora tentam viver suas vidas como uma mulher comum.
As próprias atrizes se consideram artistas, como Mia Malkova, chegou a dizer que Pornografia é a vida dela, que é "Lindo e Sofisticado."
Mia Malkova inclusive faz questão de dizer que a industria não escravisa mulheres jovens. Trata-se de um negócio onde a mulher assina um contrato com uma produtora e recebe um cachê por isso. Diferente do discurso da Mia Khalifa em entrevista para a BBC, onde diz que as mulheres são exploradas por homens poderosos. Vai ela está confundindo o Conglomerado Vixen com a Rede Globo ou com a empresa do Harvey Weinstein.
Enfim, se você é um homem solteiro entre 18 e 40 anos que já consumiu ou que ainda consome pornografia, sabia que sofrerá consequências. Pois trata-se de "produções artísticas" da indústria audiovisual que altera os níveis de dopamina do seu cérebro, mudando a neuroplasticidade e diminuindo a massa cinzenta, deixando o homem com memória fraca, sem foco e com mente nebulosa.
Por que o Estado não proíbe/criminaliza a Pornografia se ela faz mal? E desde quando o Estado quer o nosso bem? Existem grandes empresarios que financiam essa indústria ajudando governos a manterem o povo viciado e assim alienado. É um pão e circo, só que muito mais viciante e maléfico. Eu costume dizer aos meus amigos que existem grandes empresários jvdeus que são donos de grandes Produtoras de filmes pornográficos como o Conglomerado Vixen. Então se eles assistem vídeos pirateados de filmes dessas produtoras, eles estão no colo do Judeu.
-
@ 502ab02a:a2860397
2025-04-03 08:31:07ที่มาทำเพลง #ตัวหนังสือมีเสียง
วันนี้จะเล่าถึงเพลง ตรุษจีนครับ เป็นเพลงที่เขียนเสร็จภายในคืนเดียว คือไม่ใช่ว่าเก่งกาจอะไรครับ แต่เนื้อหามีในหัวตั้งนานแล้วตั้งใจจะทำนานแล้วแต่ภารกิจอื่นมีมากจน 24 ชั่วโมงมันรู้สึกน้อยเกินไป
เพลงนี้ความตั้งใจคือ หวังสูงเลยครับ หวังว่าสักวันหนึ่งเยาวราชจะเปิดเพลงนี้กันกระหึ่มในวันตรุษจีน ซึ่งรู้ตัวดีครับว่า ตัวเล็กๆ คงไม่ดังเปรี้ยงในรอบเดียว ผมคิดว่า จะอีก 5ปี 10ปี เพลงนี้มันปล่อยไปแล้วมันยังอยู่ไปเรื่อยๆครับ (เปิดตัวครั้งแรก มีคนเอาแผ่นเสียง tiktok ไปทำอวยพรกันราวๆ 185คลิป ผมดีใจมากแล้ว บางคนลิปซิงค์ด้วยแสดงว่าหัดร้อง โคตรดีใจเลยครับ)
ผมตั้งใจทำให้โทนออกมาเป็นเหมือนคนจีนร้อง แนวประมาณฮอทเป๊บเปอร์ โซเฟียลา อะไรประมาณนี้ ดังนั้นการออกเสียงจะเหมือนคนจีนพูดไทยไม่ชัดอะไรแบบนั้นครับ
เนื้อร้องนี่ผมตั้งใจเขียนแบบ เอาใจอาม่าเลย เราลองมาดูบางท่อนกันครับ
"ซินเจียยู่อี่ ซินนี้ฮวดไช้ วันตรุษจีนนี้ ขอพรจากใจ จะทำสิ่งใด ขอให้เฮงเฮง" เป็นท่อนย้ำแล้วย้ำอีก เพราะจงใจให้เป็นเพลงอวยพร ก็เลยทำเป็นแกนหลักของเพลงนี้ จากนั้นตัวรองก็จะเป็นคำอวยพรในแต่ละเรื่อง มาซ้อนอีกทีนึง
"ปีใหม่หวังได้สุขดี โรคภัยไม่มี แข็งแรงกว่าใคร เลือดลม กำลังภายใน เดินวิ่งยังไหว ได้เที่ยวทั้งปี" ท่อนนี้ผมนึกถึงอาม่าของผมครับ แกชอบดูหนังกำลังภายใน วีดีโอม้วนเป็นชุดๆ แล้วการได้ไปเที่ยวเรื่อยๆก็เป็นอีกความสุขนึงของคนแก่ ไม่ได้ต้องการอะไรมากไปกว่าร่างกายแข็งแรง เดินเหินไหว เที่ยวได้
"ไม่เพียงแค่ในปีนี้ แต่ขอให้ดี ทุกทุกปีไป ครอบครัวยิ้มได้ละไม ทุกคนสุขใจ เฮงเฮงดีดีดี" เป็นท่อนท้ายเพลงแล้ว ซึ่งก็ตบด้วยว่าไม่ได้เฉพาะปีนี้นะ ที่อวยพรกันขอให้ดีไปยาวๆ แล้วก็เล่นคำท้ายว่า "เฮงเฮงดีดีดี" คือ มันเป็นการรวมคำดีๆย้ำๆ ผมรู้สึกว่าพอตอนที่ทำเป็นเพลง มันจะเป็นท่อนที่คนยิ้มกว้างเลยหล่ะ
เนื้อเพลงเต็มๆผมลงไว้ให้ข้างล่าง ส่วนการรับฟัง สามารถเข้าได้หลายทางมากครับ youtube music https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=EBKTZv3VvGM&si=f_IMFbDhdEJ6wEcv
spotify https://open.spotify.com/track/3fCJyoQVAeWxdczfGbL3yT?si=vHV45hUTRPO6Mg9Pnh-w2w
apple music https://music.apple.com/th/album/%E0%B8%8B-%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%88-%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%A2-%E0%B8%AD-%E0%B8%8B-%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%99-%E0%B8%AE%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%94%E0%B9%84%E0%B8%8A/1789787248?i=1789787249
tiktok แผ่นเสียง https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSrk49SfL/
ส่วนเพลงอื่นๆ ฟังเต็มๆได้ทุก music plattform แล้วนะครับ ค้นหา heretong teera siri เพราะเพลงไม่ดังเลยต้องหาจากชื่อคนแทนครับ 55555
新正如意,新年发财 วันตรุษจีนนี้ขอพรจากใจ จะทำสิ่งใด ขอให้เฮงเฮง
ปีใหม่หวังได้สุขดี เป็นเศรษฐีมีเงินทองใช้ ร่ำรวย รุ่งเรืองไปไกล คิดสิ่งใด ได้สมฤดี
ซินเจียยู่อี่ ซินนี้ฮวดไช้ วันตรุษจีนนี้ขอพรจากใจ จะทำสิ่งใด ขอให้เฮงเฮง
ปีใหม่หวังได้สุขดี โรคภัยไม่มี แข็งแรงกว่าใคร เลือดลม กำลังภายใน เดินวิ่งยังไหว ได้เที่ยวทั้งปี
ซินเจียยู่อี่ ซินนี้ฮวดไช้ วันตรุษจีนนี้ขอพรจากใจ จะทำสิ่งใด ขอให้เฮงเฮง
ไม่เพียงหวังได้สุขดี โรคภัยไม่มี แข็งแรงกว่าใคร เลือดลม กำลังภายใน เดินวิ่งยังไหว ได้เที่ยวทั้งปี
ซินเจียยู่อี่ ซินนี้ฮวดไช้ วันตรุษจีนนี้ขอพรจากใจ จะทำสิ่งใด ขอให้เฮงเฮง
ไม่เพียงแค่ในปีนี้ แต่ขอให้ดี ทุกทุกปีไป ครอบครัวยิ้มได้ละไม ทุกคนสุขใจ เฮงเฮงดีดีดี
ซินเจียยู่อี่ ซินนี้ฮวดไช้ ขอจงมีความสุขใจ อวยพรนำชัย ให้ทั่วทุกคน ขอจงมีความสุขใจ อวยพรนำชัย ให้ทั่วทุกคน ขอจงมีความสุขใจ อวยพรนำชัย…ให้จงรุ่งเรือง
pirateketo #siripun #ตำรับเอ๋ #siamstr
-
@ f4db5270:3c74e0d0
2025-01-23 18:09:14Hi Art lover! 🎨🫂💜 You may not know it yet but all of the following paintings are available in #Bitcoin on my website: https://isolabell.art/#shop
For info and prices write to me in DM and we will find a good deal! 🤝
ON THE ROAD AGAIN 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed January 23, 2025
SUN OF JANUARY 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed January 14, 2025
THE BLUE HOUR 40x50cm, Oil on canvas Completed December 14, 2024
LIKE A FRAGMENT OF ETERNITY 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed December 01, 2024
WHERE WINTER WHISPERS 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed November 07, 2024
L'ATTESA DI UN MOMENTO 40x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed October 29, 2024
LE COSE CHE PENSANO 40x50cm, Oil on paper Completed October 05, 2024
TWILIGHT'S RIVER 50x40cm, Oil on canvas Completed September 17, 2024
GOLD ON THE OCEAN 40x50cm, Oil on paper Completed September 08, 2024
SUSSURRI DI CIELO E MARE 50x40cm, Oil on paper Completed September 05, 2024
THE END OF A WONDERFUL WEEKEND 40x30cm, Oil on board Completed August 12, 2024
FIAMME NEL CIELO 60x35cm, Oil on board Completed July 28, 2024
INIZIO D'ESTATE 50x40cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed July 13, 2024
OMBRE DELLA SERA 50x40cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed June 16, 2024
NEW ZEALAND SUNSET 80x60cm, Oil on canvas board Completed May 28, 2024
VENICE 50x40cm, Oil on board Completed May 4, 2024
CORNWALL 50x40cm, Oil on board Completed April 26, 2024
DOCKS ON SUNSET 40x19,5cm, Oil on board Completed March 14, 2024
SOLITUDE 30x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed March 2, 2024
LULLING WAVES 40x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel Completed January 14, 2024
MULATTIERA IN AUTUNNO 30x30cm, Oil on cradled wood panel
TRAMONTO A KOS 40x40cm, oil on board canvas
HIDDEN SMILE 40x40cm, oil on board
INIZIO D'AUTUNNO 40x40cm, oil on canvas
BOE NEL LAGO 30x30cm, oil on canvas board
BARCHE A RIPOSO 40x40cm, oil on canvas board
IL RISVEGLIO 30x40cm, oil on canvas board
LA QUIETE PRIMA DELLA TEMPESTA 30x40cm, oil on canvas board
LAMPIONE SUL LAGO 30x30cm, oil on canvas board
DUE NELLA NEVE 60x25cm, oil on board
UNA CAREZZA 30x30cm, oil on canvas board
REBEL WAVES 44x32cm, oil on canvas board
THE SCREAMING WAVE 40x30cm, oil on canvas board
"LA DONZELLETTA VIEN DALLA CAMPAGNA..." 30x40cm, oil on canvas board
LIGHTHOUSE ON WHITE CLIFF 30x40cm, oil on canvas board
-
@ c631e267:c2b78d3e
2024-10-23 20:26:10Herzlichen Glückwunsch zum dritten Geburtstag, liebe Denk Bar! Wieso zum dritten? Das war doch 2022 und jetzt sind wir im Jahr 2024, oder? Ja, das ist schon richtig, aber bei Geburtstagen erinnere ich mich immer auch an meinen Vater, und der behauptete oft, der erste sei ja schließlich der Tag der Geburt selber und den müsse man natürlich mitzählen. Wo er recht hat, hat er nunmal recht. Konsequenterweise wird also heute dieser Blog an seinem dritten Geburtstag zwei Jahre alt.
Das ist ein Grund zum Feiern, wie ich finde. Einerseits ganz einfach, weil es dafür gar nicht genug Gründe geben kann. «Das Leben sind zwei Tage», lautet ein gängiger Ausdruck hier in Andalusien. In der Tat könnte es so sein, auch wenn wir uns im Alltag oft genug von der Routine vereinnahmen lassen.
Seit dem Start der Denk Bar vor zwei Jahren ist unglaublich viel passiert. Ebenso wie die zweieinhalb Jahre davor, und all jenes war letztlich auch der Auslöser dafür, dass ich begann, öffentlich zu schreiben. Damals notierte ich:
«Seit einigen Jahren erscheint unser öffentliches Umfeld immer fragwürdiger, widersprüchlicher und manchmal schier unglaublich - jede Menge Anlass für eigene Recherchen und Gedanken, ganz einfach mit einer Portion gesundem Menschenverstand.»
Wir erleben den sogenannten «großen Umbruch», einen globalen Coup, den skrupellose Egoisten clever eingefädelt haben und seit ein paar Jahren knallhart – aber nett verpackt – durchziehen, um buchstäblich alles nach ihrem Gusto umzukrempeln. Die Gelegenheit ist ja angeblich günstig und muss genutzt werden.
Nie hätte ich mir träumen lassen, dass ich so etwas jemals miterleben müsste. Die Bosheit, mit der ganz offensichtlich gegen die eigene Bevölkerung gearbeitet wird, war früher für mich unvorstellbar. Mein (Rest-) Vertrauen in alle möglichen Bereiche wie Politik, Wissenschaft, Justiz, Medien oder Kirche ist praktisch komplett zerstört. Einen «inneren Totalschaden» hatte ich mal für unsere Gesellschaften diagnostiziert.
Was mich vielleicht am meisten erschreckt, ist zum einen das Niveau der Gleichschaltung, das weltweit erreicht werden konnte, und zum anderen die praktisch totale Spaltung der Gesellschaft. Haben wir das tatsächlich mit uns machen lassen?? Unfassbar! Aber das Werkzeug «Angst» ist sehr mächtig und funktioniert bis heute.
Zum Glück passieren auch positive Dinge und neue Perspektiven öffnen sich. Für viele Menschen waren und sind die Entwicklungen der letzten Jahre ein Augenöffner. Sie sehen «Querdenken» als das, was es ist: eine Tugend.
Auch die immer ernsteren Zensurbemühungen sind letztlich nur ein Zeichen der Schwäche, wo Argumente fehlen. Sie werden nicht verhindern, dass wir unsere Meinung äußern, unbequeme Fragen stellen und dass die Wahrheit peu à peu ans Licht kommt. Es gibt immer Mittel und Wege, auch für uns.
Danke, dass du diesen Weg mit mir weitergehst!
-
@ a95c6243:d345522c
2024-10-19 08:58:08Ein Lämmchen löschte an einem Bache seinen Durst. Fern von ihm, aber näher der Quelle, tat ein Wolf das gleiche. Kaum erblickte er das Lämmchen, so schrie er:
"Warum trübst du mir das Wasser, das ich trinken will?"
"Wie wäre das möglich", erwiderte schüchtern das Lämmchen, "ich stehe hier unten und du so weit oben; das Wasser fließt ja von dir zu mir; glaube mir, es kam mir nie in den Sinn, dir etwas Böses zu tun!"
"Ei, sieh doch! Du machst es gerade, wie dein Vater vor sechs Monaten; ich erinnere mich noch sehr wohl, daß auch du dabei warst, aber glücklich entkamst, als ich ihm für sein Schmähen das Fell abzog!"
"Ach, Herr!" flehte das zitternde Lämmchen, "ich bin ja erst vier Wochen alt und kannte meinen Vater gar nicht, so lange ist er schon tot; wie soll ich denn für ihn büßen."
"Du Unverschämter!" so endigt der Wolf mit erheuchelter Wut, indem er die Zähne fletschte. "Tot oder nicht tot, weiß ich doch, daß euer ganzes Geschlecht mich hasset, und dafür muß ich mich rächen."
Ohne weitere Umstände zu machen, zerriß er das Lämmchen und verschlang es.
Das Gewissen regt sich selbst bei dem größten Bösewichte; er sucht doch nach Vorwand, um dasselbe damit bei Begehung seiner Schlechtigkeiten zu beschwichtigen.
Quelle: https://eden.one/fabeln-aesop-das-lamm-und-der-wolf
-
@ b17fccdf:b7211155
2025-01-21 18:33:28
CHECK OUT at ~ > ramix.minibolt.info < ~
Main changes:
- Adapted to Raspberry Pi 5, with the possibility of using internal storage: a PCIe to M.2 adapter + SSD NVMe:
Connect directly to the board, remove the instability issues with the USB connection, and unlock the ability to enjoy higher transfer speeds**
- Based on Debian 12 (Raspberry Pi OS Bookworm - 64-bit).
- Updated all services that have been tested until now, to the latest version.
- Same as the MiniBolt guide, changed I2P, Fulcrum, and ThunderHub guides, to be part of the core guide.
- All UI & UX improvements in the MiniBolt guide are included.
- Fix some links and wrong command issues.
- Some existing guides have been improved to clarify the following steps.
Important notes:
- The RRSS will be the same as the MiniBolt original project (for now) | More info -> HERE <-
- The common resources like the Roadmap or Networkmap have been merged and will be used together | Check -> HERE <-
- The attempt to upgrade from Bullseye to Bookworm (RaspiBolt to RaMiX migration) has failed due to several difficult-to-resolve dependency conflicts, so unfortunately, there will be no dedicated migration guide and only the possibility to start from scratch ☹️
⚠️ Attention‼️-> This guide is in the WIP (work in progress) state and hasn't been completely tested yet. Many steps may be incorrect. Pay special attention to the "Status: Not tested on RaMiX" tag at the beginning of the guides. Be careful and act behind your responsibility.
For Raspberry Pi lovers!❤️🍓
Enjoy it RaMiXer!! 💜
By ⚡2FakTor⚡ for the plebs with love ❤️🫂
- Adapted to Raspberry Pi 5, with the possibility of using internal storage: a PCIe to M.2 adapter + SSD NVMe:
-
@ 9e69e420:d12360c2
2025-01-21 19:31:48Oregano oil is a potent natural compound that offers numerous scientifically-supported health benefits.
Active Compounds
The oil's therapeutic properties stem from its key bioactive components: - Carvacrol and thymol (primary active compounds) - Polyphenols and other antioxidant
Antimicrobial Properties
Bacterial Protection The oil demonstrates powerful antibacterial effects, even against antibiotic-resistant strains like MRSA and other harmful bacteria. Studies show it effectively inactivates various pathogenic bacteria without developing resistance.
Antifungal Effects It effectively combats fungal infections, particularly Candida-related conditions like oral thrush, athlete's foot, and nail infections.
Digestive Health Benefits
Oregano oil supports digestive wellness by: - Promoting gastric juice secretion and enzyme production - Helping treat Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) - Managing digestive discomfort, bloating, and IBS symptoms
Anti-inflammatory and Antioxidant Effects
The oil provides significant protective benefits through: - Powerful antioxidant activity that fights free radicals - Reduction of inflammatory markers in the body - Protection against oxidative stress-related conditions
Respiratory Support
It aids respiratory health by: - Loosening mucus and phlegm - Suppressing coughs and throat irritation - Supporting overall respiratory tract function
Additional Benefits
Skin Health - Improves conditions like psoriasis, acne, and eczema - Supports wound healing through antibacterial action - Provides anti-aging benefits through antioxidant properties
Cardiovascular Health Studies show oregano oil may help: - Reduce LDL (bad) cholesterol levels - Support overall heart health
Pain Management The oil demonstrates effectiveness in: - Reducing inflammation-related pain - Managing muscle discomfort - Providing topical pain relief
Safety Note
While oregano oil is generally safe, it's highly concentrated and should be properly diluted before use Consult a healthcare provider before starting supplementation, especially if taking other medications.
-
@ c13fd381:b46236ea
2025-04-03 07:55:31Over the past few years, The School of Bitcoin (TSOBTC) has built a reputation as a decentralised, open-source educational initiative dedicated to financial sovereignty and digital literacy. Our faculty, contributors, and global community have worked tirelessly to create resources that embody the Free and Open-Source Software (FOSS) ethos, ensuring that knowledge remains accessible to all.
As part of our commitment to maintaining an open and transparent model, we are excited to announce that The School of Bitcoin is officially migrating to Consensus21.School. This transition is not just a rebranding--it marks the consolidation of all our initiatives, projects, and educational resources under the Consensus21.School banner. The School of Bitcoin will no longer exist as a separate entity.
This move comes as a response to growing confusion between our initiative and another entity operating under the domain schoolofbitcoin (SOB), which has taken a direction that does not align with our open-source philosophy. To reaffirm our dedication to FOSS and community-driven education, we are bringing everything--our courses, programs, and collaborations--into a singular, more focused ecosystem at Consensus21.School.
What Does This Mean for Our Community?
Rest assured, all the valuable content, courses, and educational materials that have been developed under TSOBTC will remain available. We continue to embrace a value-for-value model, ensuring that learners can access resources while supporting the ecosystem in a way that aligns with their means and values.
By consolidating under Consensus21.School, we are doubling down on the principles of decentralisation, self-sovereignty, and permissionless learning. This transition includes all of our key initiatives, including V4V Open Lessons, the Decentralised Autonomous Education System (DAES), and our involvement with the Plan B Network.
Full Migration of DAES and Plan B Network Collaboration
As part of this transition, the Decentralised Autonomous Education System (DAES) is now officially part of Consensus21.School and is fully reflected in the Consensus21.School Whitepaper. DAES will continue to provide a platform for aspiring learners to submit their Bitcoin project ideas for potential funding and mentorship, with active engagement in our Stacker News /~Education territory and Signal chat for collaboration. We invite contributors to support our learner fund and help bring innovative ideas to fruition within this new ecosystem.
Additionally, our collaboration with the Plan B Network will now operate under Consensus21.School. Through this partnership, we will continue teaching using the Plan B Network's curriculum to provide high-quality Bitcoin education and strengthen local Bitcoin communities. This global initiative remains a core part of our mission, now fully integrated within Consensus21.School.
Looking Ahead
With Consensus21.School, we will continue innovating in peer-to-peer learning, integrating cutting-edge developments in Bitcoin, Nostr, and decentralised technologies. We encourage our community to stay engaged, contribute, and help us build an even stronger foundation for the future of open education.
This is more than just a domain change--it is the next evolution of our mission. The School of Bitcoin as an entity is now retired, and all our efforts, including DAES and the Plan B Network collaboration, will move forward exclusively under Consensus21.School. We invite educators, students, and enthusiasts to join us in shaping this next phase of open financial education.
The journey continues, and we are thrilled to embark on this new chapter together
-
@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0
2025-01-21 01:51:46Bitcoin: Um sistema de dinheiro eletrônico direto entre pessoas.
Satoshi Nakamoto
satoshin@gmx.com
www.bitcoin.org
Resumo
O Bitcoin é uma forma de dinheiro digital que permite pagamentos diretos entre pessoas, sem a necessidade de um banco ou instituição financeira. Ele resolve um problema chamado gasto duplo, que ocorre quando alguém tenta gastar o mesmo dinheiro duas vezes. Para evitar isso, o Bitcoin usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos trabalham juntos para verificar e registrar as transações.
As transações são registradas em um livro público chamado blockchain, protegido por uma técnica chamada Prova de Trabalho. Essa técnica cria uma cadeia de registros que não pode ser alterada sem refazer todo o trabalho já feito. Essa cadeia é mantida pelos computadores que participam da rede, e a mais longa é considerada a verdadeira.
Enquanto a maior parte do poder computacional da rede for controlada por participantes honestos, o sistema continuará funcionando de forma segura. A rede é flexível, permitindo que qualquer pessoa entre ou saia a qualquer momento, sempre confiando na cadeia mais longa como prova do que aconteceu.
1. Introdução
Hoje, quase todos os pagamentos feitos pela internet dependem de bancos ou empresas como processadores de pagamento (cartões de crédito, por exemplo) para funcionar. Embora esse sistema seja útil, ele tem problemas importantes porque é baseado em confiança.
Primeiro, essas empresas podem reverter pagamentos, o que é útil em caso de erros, mas cria custos e incertezas. Isso faz com que pequenas transações, como pagar centavos por um serviço, se tornem inviáveis. Além disso, os comerciantes são obrigados a desconfiar dos clientes, pedindo informações extras e aceitando fraudes como algo inevitável.
Esses problemas não existem no dinheiro físico, como o papel-moeda, onde o pagamento é final e direto entre as partes. No entanto, não temos como enviar dinheiro físico pela internet sem depender de um intermediário confiável.
O que precisamos é de um sistema de pagamento eletrônico baseado em provas matemáticas, não em confiança. Esse sistema permitiria que qualquer pessoa enviasse dinheiro diretamente para outra, sem depender de bancos ou processadores de pagamento. Além disso, as transações seriam irreversíveis, protegendo vendedores contra fraudes, mas mantendo a possibilidade de soluções para disputas legítimas.
Neste documento, apresentamos o Bitcoin, que resolve o problema do gasto duplo usando uma rede descentralizada. Essa rede cria um registro público e protegido por cálculos matemáticos, que garante a ordem das transações. Enquanto a maior parte da rede for controlada por pessoas honestas, o sistema será seguro contra ataques.
2. Transações
Para entender como funciona o Bitcoin, é importante saber como as transações são realizadas. Imagine que você quer transferir uma "moeda digital" para outra pessoa. No sistema do Bitcoin, essa "moeda" é representada por uma sequência de registros que mostram quem é o atual dono. Para transferi-la, você adiciona um novo registro comprovando que agora ela pertence ao próximo dono. Esse registro é protegido por um tipo especial de assinatura digital.
O que é uma assinatura digital?
Uma assinatura digital é como uma senha secreta, mas muito mais segura. No Bitcoin, cada usuário tem duas chaves: uma "chave privada", que é secreta e serve para criar a assinatura, e uma "chave pública", que pode ser compartilhada com todos e é usada para verificar se a assinatura é válida. Quando você transfere uma moeda, usa sua chave privada para assinar a transação, provando que você é o dono. A próxima pessoa pode usar sua chave pública para confirmar isso.
Como funciona na prática?
Cada "moeda" no Bitcoin é, na verdade, uma cadeia de assinaturas digitais. Vamos imaginar o seguinte cenário:
- A moeda está com o Dono 0 (você). Para transferi-la ao Dono 1, você assina digitalmente a transação com sua chave privada. Essa assinatura inclui o código da transação anterior (chamado de "hash") e a chave pública do Dono 1.
- Quando o Dono 1 quiser transferir a moeda ao Dono 2, ele assinará a transação seguinte com sua própria chave privada, incluindo também o hash da transação anterior e a chave pública do Dono 2.
- Esse processo continua, formando uma "cadeia" de transações. Qualquer pessoa pode verificar essa cadeia para confirmar quem é o atual dono da moeda.
Resolvendo o problema do gasto duplo
Um grande desafio com moedas digitais é o "gasto duplo", que é quando uma mesma moeda é usada em mais de uma transação. Para evitar isso, muitos sistemas antigos dependiam de uma entidade central confiável, como uma casa da moeda, que verificava todas as transações. No entanto, isso criava um ponto único de falha e centralizava o controle do dinheiro.
O Bitcoin resolve esse problema de forma inovadora: ele usa uma rede descentralizada onde todos os participantes (os "nós") têm acesso a um registro completo de todas as transações. Cada nó verifica se as transações são válidas e se a moeda não foi gasta duas vezes. Quando a maioria dos nós concorda com a validade de uma transação, ela é registrada permanentemente na blockchain.
Por que isso é importante?
Essa solução elimina a necessidade de confiar em uma única entidade para gerenciar o dinheiro, permitindo que qualquer pessoa no mundo use o Bitcoin sem precisar de permissão de terceiros. Além disso, ela garante que o sistema seja seguro e resistente a fraudes.
3. Servidor Timestamp
Para assegurar que as transações sejam realizadas de forma segura e transparente, o sistema Bitcoin utiliza algo chamado de "servidor de registro de tempo" (timestamp). Esse servidor funciona como um registro público que organiza as transações em uma ordem específica.
Ele faz isso agrupando várias transações em blocos e criando um código único chamado "hash". Esse hash é como uma impressão digital que representa todo o conteúdo do bloco. O hash de cada bloco é amplamente divulgado, como se fosse publicado em um jornal ou em um fórum público.
Esse processo garante que cada bloco de transações tenha um registro de quando foi criado e que ele existia naquele momento. Além disso, cada novo bloco criado contém o hash do bloco anterior, formando uma cadeia contínua de blocos conectados — conhecida como blockchain.
Com isso, se alguém tentar alterar qualquer informação em um bloco anterior, o hash desse bloco mudará e não corresponderá ao hash armazenado no bloco seguinte. Essa característica torna a cadeia muito segura, pois qualquer tentativa de fraude seria imediatamente detectada.
O sistema de timestamps é essencial para provar a ordem cronológica das transações e garantir que cada uma delas seja única e autêntica. Dessa forma, ele reforça a segurança e a confiança na rede Bitcoin.
4. Prova-de-Trabalho
Para implementar o registro de tempo distribuído no sistema Bitcoin, utilizamos um mecanismo chamado prova-de-trabalho. Esse sistema é semelhante ao Hashcash, desenvolvido por Adam Back, e baseia-se na criação de um código único, o "hash", por meio de um processo computacionalmente exigente.
A prova-de-trabalho envolve encontrar um valor especial que, quando processado junto com as informações do bloco, gere um hash que comece com uma quantidade específica de zeros. Esse valor especial é chamado de "nonce". Encontrar o nonce correto exige um esforço significativo do computador, porque envolve tentativas repetidas até que a condição seja satisfeita.
Esse processo é importante porque torna extremamente difícil alterar qualquer informação registrada em um bloco. Se alguém tentar mudar algo em um bloco, seria necessário refazer o trabalho de computação não apenas para aquele bloco, mas também para todos os blocos que vêm depois dele. Isso garante a segurança e a imutabilidade da blockchain.
A prova-de-trabalho também resolve o problema de decidir qual cadeia de blocos é a válida quando há múltiplas cadeias competindo. A decisão é feita pela cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado. Isso impede que qualquer indivíduo ou grupo controle a rede, desde que a maioria do poder de processamento seja mantida por participantes honestos.
Para garantir que o sistema permaneça eficiente e equilibrado, a dificuldade da prova-de-trabalho é ajustada automaticamente ao longo do tempo. Se novos blocos estiverem sendo gerados rapidamente, a dificuldade aumenta; se estiverem sendo gerados muito lentamente, a dificuldade diminui. Esse ajuste assegura que novos blocos sejam criados aproximadamente a cada 10 minutos, mantendo o sistema estável e funcional.
5. Rede
A rede Bitcoin é o coração do sistema e funciona de maneira distribuída, conectando vários participantes (ou nós) para garantir o registro e a validação das transações. Os passos para operar essa rede são:
-
Transmissão de Transações: Quando alguém realiza uma nova transação, ela é enviada para todos os nós da rede. Isso é feito para garantir que todos estejam cientes da operação e possam validá-la.
-
Coleta de Transações em Blocos: Cada nó agrupa as novas transações recebidas em um "bloco". Este bloco será preparado para ser adicionado à cadeia de blocos (a blockchain).
-
Prova-de-Trabalho: Os nós competem para resolver a prova-de-trabalho do bloco, utilizando poder computacional para encontrar um hash válido. Esse processo é como resolver um quebra-cabeça matemático difícil.
-
Envio do Bloco Resolvido: Quando um nó encontra a solução para o bloco (a prova-de-trabalho), ele compartilha esse bloco com todos os outros nós na rede.
-
Validação do Bloco: Cada nó verifica o bloco recebido para garantir que todas as transações nele contidas sejam válidas e que nenhuma moeda tenha sido gasta duas vezes. Apenas blocos válidos são aceitos.
-
Construção do Próximo Bloco: Os nós que aceitaram o bloco começam a trabalhar na criação do próximo bloco, utilizando o hash do bloco aceito como base (hash anterior). Isso mantém a continuidade da cadeia.
Resolução de Conflitos e Escolha da Cadeia Mais Longa
Os nós sempre priorizam a cadeia mais longa, pois ela representa o maior esforço computacional já realizado, garantindo maior segurança. Se dois blocos diferentes forem compartilhados simultaneamente, os nós trabalharão no primeiro bloco recebido, mas guardarão o outro como uma alternativa. Caso o segundo bloco eventualmente forme uma cadeia mais longa (ou seja, tenha mais blocos subsequentes), os nós mudarão para essa nova cadeia.
Tolerância a Falhas
A rede é robusta e pode lidar com mensagens que não chegam a todos os nós. Uma transação não precisa alcançar todos os nós de imediato; basta que chegue a um número suficiente deles para ser incluída em um bloco. Da mesma forma, se um nó não receber um bloco em tempo hábil, ele pode solicitá-lo ao perceber que está faltando quando o próximo bloco é recebido.
Esse mecanismo descentralizado permite que a rede Bitcoin funcione de maneira segura, confiável e resiliente, sem depender de uma autoridade central.
6. Incentivo
O incentivo é um dos pilares fundamentais que sustenta o funcionamento da rede Bitcoin, garantindo que os participantes (nós) continuem operando de forma honesta e contribuindo com recursos computacionais. Ele é estruturado em duas partes principais: a recompensa por mineração e as taxas de transação.
Recompensa por Mineração
Por convenção, o primeiro registro em cada bloco é uma transação especial que cria novas moedas e as atribui ao criador do bloco. Essa recompensa incentiva os mineradores a dedicarem poder computacional para apoiar a rede. Como não há uma autoridade central para emitir moedas, essa é a maneira pela qual novas moedas entram em circulação. Esse processo pode ser comparado ao trabalho de garimpeiros, que utilizam recursos para colocar mais ouro em circulação. No caso do Bitcoin, o "recurso" consiste no tempo de CPU e na energia elétrica consumida para resolver a prova-de-trabalho.
Taxas de Transação
Além da recompensa por mineração, os mineradores também podem ser incentivados pelas taxas de transação. Se uma transação utiliza menos valor de saída do que o valor de entrada, a diferença é tratada como uma taxa, que é adicionada à recompensa do bloco contendo essa transação. Com o passar do tempo e à medida que o número de moedas em circulação atinge o limite predeterminado, essas taxas de transação se tornam a principal fonte de incentivo, substituindo gradualmente a emissão de novas moedas. Isso permite que o sistema opere sem inflação, uma vez que o número total de moedas permanece fixo.
Incentivo à Honestidade
O design do incentivo também busca garantir que os participantes da rede mantenham um comportamento honesto. Para um atacante que consiga reunir mais poder computacional do que o restante da rede, ele enfrentaria duas escolhas:
- Usar esse poder para fraudar o sistema, como reverter transações e roubar pagamentos.
- Seguir as regras do sistema, criando novos blocos e recebendo recompensas legítimas.
A lógica econômica favorece a segunda opção, pois um comportamento desonesto prejudicaria a confiança no sistema, diminuindo o valor de todas as moedas, incluindo aquelas que o próprio atacante possui. Jogar dentro das regras não apenas maximiza o retorno financeiro, mas também preserva a validade e a integridade do sistema.
Esse mecanismo garante que os incentivos econômicos estejam alinhados com o objetivo de manter a rede segura, descentralizada e funcional ao longo do tempo.
7. Recuperação do Espaço em Disco
Depois que uma moeda passa a estar protegida por muitos blocos na cadeia, as informações sobre as transações antigas que a geraram podem ser descartadas para economizar espaço em disco. Para que isso seja possível sem comprometer a segurança, as transações são organizadas em uma estrutura chamada "árvore de Merkle". Essa árvore funciona como um resumo das transações: em vez de armazenar todas elas, guarda apenas um "hash raiz", que é como uma assinatura compacta que representa todo o grupo de transações.
Os blocos antigos podem, então, ser simplificados, removendo as partes desnecessárias dessa árvore. Apenas a raiz do hash precisa ser mantida no cabeçalho do bloco, garantindo que a integridade dos dados seja preservada, mesmo que detalhes específicos sejam descartados.
Para exemplificar: imagine que você tenha vários recibos de compra. Em vez de guardar todos os recibos, você cria um documento e lista apenas o valor total de cada um. Mesmo que os recibos originais sejam descartados, ainda é possível verificar a soma com base nos valores armazenados.
Além disso, o espaço ocupado pelos blocos em si é muito pequeno. Cada bloco sem transações ocupa apenas cerca de 80 bytes. Isso significa que, mesmo com blocos sendo gerados a cada 10 minutos, o crescimento anual em espaço necessário é insignificante: apenas 4,2 MB por ano. Com a capacidade de armazenamento dos computadores crescendo a cada ano, esse espaço continuará sendo trivial, garantindo que a rede possa operar de forma eficiente sem problemas de armazenamento, mesmo a longo prazo.
8. Verificação de Pagamento Simplificada
É possível confirmar pagamentos sem a necessidade de operar um nó completo da rede. Para isso, o usuário precisa apenas de uma cópia dos cabeçalhos dos blocos da cadeia mais longa (ou seja, a cadeia com maior esforço de trabalho acumulado). Ele pode verificar a validade de uma transação ao consultar os nós da rede até obter a confirmação de que tem a cadeia mais longa. Para isso, utiliza-se o ramo Merkle, que conecta a transação ao bloco em que ela foi registrada.
Entretanto, o método simplificado possui limitações: ele não pode confirmar uma transação isoladamente, mas sim assegurar que ela ocupa um lugar específico na cadeia mais longa. Dessa forma, se um nó da rede aprova a transação, os blocos subsequentes reforçam essa aceitação.
A verificação simplificada é confiável enquanto a maioria dos nós da rede for honesta. Contudo, ela se torna vulnerável caso a rede seja dominada por um invasor. Nesse cenário, um atacante poderia fabricar transações fraudulentas que enganariam o usuário temporariamente até que o invasor obtivesse controle completo da rede.
Uma estratégia para mitigar esse risco é configurar alertas nos softwares de nós completos. Esses alertas identificam blocos inválidos, sugerindo ao usuário baixar o bloco completo para confirmar qualquer inconsistência. Para maior segurança, empresas que realizam pagamentos frequentes podem preferir operar seus próprios nós, reduzindo riscos e permitindo uma verificação mais direta e confiável.
9. Combinando e Dividindo Valor
No sistema Bitcoin, cada unidade de valor é tratada como uma "moeda" individual, mas gerenciar cada centavo como uma transação separada seria impraticável. Para resolver isso, o Bitcoin permite que valores sejam combinados ou divididos em transações, facilitando pagamentos de qualquer valor.
Entradas e Saídas
Cada transação no Bitcoin é composta por:
- Entradas: Representam os valores recebidos em transações anteriores.
- Saídas: Correspondem aos valores enviados, divididos entre os destinatários e, eventualmente, o troco para o remetente.
Normalmente, uma transação contém:
- Uma única entrada com valor suficiente para cobrir o pagamento.
- Ou várias entradas combinadas para atingir o valor necessário.
O valor total das saídas nunca excede o das entradas, e a diferença (se houver) pode ser retornada ao remetente como troco.
Exemplo Prático
Imagine que você tem duas entradas:
- 0,03 BTC
- 0,07 BTC
Se deseja enviar 0,08 BTC para alguém, a transação terá:
- Entrada: As duas entradas combinadas (0,03 + 0,07 BTC = 0,10 BTC).
- Saídas: Uma para o destinatário (0,08 BTC) e outra como troco para você (0,02 BTC).
Essa flexibilidade permite que o sistema funcione sem precisar manipular cada unidade mínima individualmente.
Difusão e Simplificação
A difusão de transações, onde uma depende de várias anteriores e assim por diante, não representa um problema. Não é necessário armazenar ou verificar o histórico completo de uma transação para utilizá-la, já que o registro na blockchain garante sua integridade.
10. Privacidade
O modelo bancário tradicional oferece um certo nível de privacidade, limitando o acesso às informações financeiras apenas às partes envolvidas e a um terceiro confiável (como bancos ou instituições financeiras). No entanto, o Bitcoin opera de forma diferente, pois todas as transações são publicamente registradas na blockchain. Apesar disso, a privacidade pode ser mantida utilizando chaves públicas anônimas, que desvinculam diretamente as transações das identidades das partes envolvidas.
Fluxo de Informação
- No modelo tradicional, as transações passam por um terceiro confiável que conhece tanto o remetente quanto o destinatário.
- No Bitcoin, as transações são anunciadas publicamente, mas sem revelar diretamente as identidades das partes. Isso é comparável a dados divulgados por bolsas de valores, onde informações como o tempo e o tamanho das negociações (a "fita") são públicas, mas as identidades das partes não.
Protegendo a Privacidade
Para aumentar a privacidade no Bitcoin, são adotadas as seguintes práticas:
- Chaves Públicas Anônimas: Cada transação utiliza um par de chaves diferentes, dificultando a associação com um proprietário único.
- Prevenção de Ligação: Ao usar chaves novas para cada transação, reduz-se a possibilidade de links evidentes entre múltiplas transações realizadas pelo mesmo usuário.
Riscos de Ligação
Embora a privacidade seja fortalecida, alguns riscos permanecem:
- Transações multi-entrada podem revelar que todas as entradas pertencem ao mesmo proprietário, caso sejam necessárias para somar o valor total.
- O proprietário da chave pode ser identificado indiretamente por transações anteriores que estejam conectadas.
11. Cálculos
Imagine que temos um sistema onde as pessoas (ou computadores) competem para adicionar informações novas (blocos) a um grande registro público (a cadeia de blocos ou blockchain). Este registro é como um livro contábil compartilhado, onde todos podem verificar o que está escrito.
Agora, vamos pensar em um cenário: um atacante quer enganar o sistema. Ele quer mudar informações já registradas para beneficiar a si mesmo, por exemplo, desfazendo um pagamento que já fez. Para isso, ele precisa criar uma versão alternativa do livro contábil (a cadeia de blocos dele) e convencer todos os outros participantes de que essa versão é a verdadeira.
Mas isso é extremamente difícil.
Como o Ataque Funciona
Quando um novo bloco é adicionado à cadeia, ele depende de cálculos complexos que levam tempo e esforço. Esses cálculos são como um grande quebra-cabeça que precisa ser resolvido.
- Os “bons jogadores” (nós honestos) estão sempre trabalhando juntos para resolver esses quebra-cabeças e adicionar novos blocos à cadeia verdadeira.
- O atacante, por outro lado, precisa resolver quebra-cabeças sozinho, tentando “alcançar” a cadeia honesta para que sua versão alternativa pareça válida.
Se a cadeia honesta já está vários blocos à frente, o atacante começa em desvantagem, e o sistema está projetado para que a dificuldade de alcançá-los aumente rapidamente.
A Corrida Entre Cadeias
Você pode imaginar isso como uma corrida. A cada bloco novo que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia verdadeira, eles se distanciam mais do atacante. Para vencer, o atacante teria que resolver os quebra-cabeças mais rápido que todos os outros jogadores honestos juntos.
Suponha que:
- A rede honesta tem 80% do poder computacional (ou seja, resolve 8 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças).
- O atacante tem 20% do poder computacional (ou seja, resolve 2 de cada 10 quebra-cabeças).
Cada vez que a rede honesta adiciona um bloco, o atacante tem que "correr atrás" e resolver mais quebra-cabeças para alcançar.
Por Que o Ataque Fica Cada Vez Mais Improvável?
Vamos usar uma fórmula simples para mostrar como as chances de sucesso do atacante diminuem conforme ele precisa "alcançar" mais blocos:
P = (q/p)^z
- q é o poder computacional do atacante (20%, ou 0,2).
- p é o poder computacional da rede honesta (80%, ou 0,8).
- z é a diferença de blocos entre a cadeia honesta e a cadeia do atacante.
Se o atacante está 5 blocos atrás (z = 5):
P = (0,2 / 0,8)^5 = (0,25)^5 = 0,00098, (ou, 0,098%)
Isso significa que o atacante tem menos de 0,1% de chance de sucesso — ou seja, é muito improvável.
Se ele estiver 10 blocos atrás (z = 10):
P = (0,2 / 0,8)^10 = (0,25)^10 = 0,000000095, (ou, 0,0000095%).
Neste caso, as chances de sucesso são praticamente nulas.
Um Exemplo Simples
Se você jogar uma moeda, a chance de cair “cara” é de 50%. Mas se precisar de 10 caras seguidas, sua chance já é bem menor. Se precisar de 20 caras seguidas, é quase impossível.
No caso do Bitcoin, o atacante precisa de muito mais do que 20 caras seguidas. Ele precisa resolver quebra-cabeças extremamente difíceis e alcançar os jogadores honestos que estão sempre à frente. Isso faz com que o ataque seja inviável na prática.
Por Que Tudo Isso é Seguro?
- A probabilidade de sucesso do atacante diminui exponencialmente. Isso significa que, quanto mais tempo passa, menor é a chance de ele conseguir enganar o sistema.
- A cadeia verdadeira (honesta) está protegida pela força da rede. Cada novo bloco que os jogadores honestos adicionam à cadeia torna mais difícil para o atacante alcançar.
E Se o Atacante Tentar Continuar?
O atacante poderia continuar tentando indefinidamente, mas ele estaria gastando muito tempo e energia sem conseguir nada. Enquanto isso, os jogadores honestos estão sempre adicionando novos blocos, tornando o trabalho do atacante ainda mais inútil.
Assim, o sistema garante que a cadeia verdadeira seja extremamente segura e que ataques sejam, na prática, impossíveis de ter sucesso.
12. Conclusão
Propusemos um sistema de transações eletrônicas que elimina a necessidade de confiança, baseando-se em assinaturas digitais e em uma rede peer-to-peer que utiliza prova de trabalho. Isso resolve o problema do gasto duplo, criando um histórico público de transações imutável, desde que a maioria do poder computacional permaneça sob controle dos participantes honestos. A rede funciona de forma simples e descentralizada, com nós independentes que não precisam de identificação ou coordenação direta. Eles entram e saem livremente, aceitando a cadeia de prova de trabalho como registro do que ocorreu durante sua ausência. As decisões são tomadas por meio do poder de CPU, validando blocos legítimos, estendendo a cadeia e rejeitando os inválidos. Com este mecanismo de consenso, todas as regras e incentivos necessários para o funcionamento seguro e eficiente do sistema são garantidos.
Faça o download do whitepaper original em português: https://bitcoin.org/files/bitcoin-paper/bitcoin_pt_br.pdf
-
@ 3f770d65:7a745b24
2025-01-19 21:48:49The recent shutdown of TikTok in the United States due to a potential government ban serves as a stark reminder how fragile centralized platforms truly are under the surface. While these platforms offer convenience, a more polished user experience, and connectivity, they are ultimately beholden to governments, corporations, and other authorities. This makes them vulnerable to censorship, regulation, and outright bans. In contrast, Nostr represents a shift in how we approach online communication and content sharing. Built on the principles of decentralization and user choice, Nostr cannot be banned, because it is not a platform—it is a protocol.
PROTOCOLS, NOT PLATFORMS.
At the heart of Nostr's philosophy is user choice, a feature that fundamentally sets it apart from legacy platforms. In centralized systems, the user experience is dictated by a single person or governing entity. If the platform decides to filter, censor, or ban specific users or content, individuals are left with little action to rectify the situation. They must either accept the changes or abandon the platform entirely, often at the cost of losing their social connections, their data, and their identity.
What's happening with TikTok could never happen on Nostr. With Nostr, the dynamics are completely different. Because it is a protocol, not a platform, no single entity controls the ecosystem. Instead, the protocol enables a network of applications and relays that users can freely choose from. If a particular application or relay implements policies that a user disagrees with, such as censorship, filtering, or even government enforced banning, they are not trapped or abandoned. They have the freedom to move to another application or relay with minimal effort.
THIS IS POWERFUL.
Take, for example, the case of a relay that decides to censor specific content. On a legacy platform, this would result in frustration and a loss of access for users. On Nostr, however, users can simply connect to a different relay that does not impose such restrictions. Similarly, if an application introduces features or policies that users dislike, they can migrate to a different application that better suits their preferences, all while retaining their identity and social connections.
The same principles apply to government bans and censorship. A government can ban a specific application or even multiple applications, just as it can block one relay or several relays. China has implemented both tactics, yet Chinese users continue to exist and actively participate on Nostr, demonstrating Nostr's ability to resistant censorship.
How? Simply, it turns into a game of whack-a-mole. When one relay is censored, another quickly takes its place. When one application is banned, another emerges. Users can also bypass these obstacles by running their own relays and applications directly from their homes or personal devices, eliminating reliance on larger entities or organizations and ensuring continuous access.
AGAIN, THIS IS POWERUFL.
Nostr's open and decentralized design makes it resistant to the kinds of government intervention that led to TikTok's outages this weekend and potential future ban in the next 90 days. There is no central server to target, no company to regulate, and no single point of failure. (Insert your CEO jokes here). As long as there are individuals running relays and applications, users continue creating notes and sending zaps.
Platforms like TikTok can be silenced with the stroke of a pen, leaving millions of users disconnected and abandoned. Social communication should not be silenced so incredibly easily. No one should have that much power over social interactions.
Will we on-board a massive wave of TikTokers in the coming hours or days? I don't know.
TikTokers may not be ready for Nostr yet, and honestly, Nostr may not be ready for them either. The ecosystem still lacks the completely polished applications, tools, and services they’re accustomed to. This is where we say "we're still early". They may not be early adopters like the current Nostr user base. Until we bridge that gap, they’ll likely move to the next centralized platform, only to face another government ban or round of censorship in the future. But eventually, there will come a tipping point, a moment when they’ve had enough. When that time comes, I hope we’re prepared. If we’re not, we risk missing a tremendous opportunity to onboard people who genuinely need Nostr’s freedom.
Until then, to all of the Nostr developers out there, keep up the great work and keep building. Your hard work and determination is needed.
-
@ 77c2969e:a33cfa50
2025-04-03 07:54:55最近又开始折腾 Technitium DNS Server,发现之前记录的过程不太完善,于是更新一下。
安装acme.sh
curl https://get.acme.sh | sh -s email=youreMailAddress
导入环境变量
export CF_Token="填API token" export CF_Zone_ID="填区域ID" export CF_Account_ID="填账户ID"
- Cloudflare 的 API Token 是在 Cloudflare 网页右上角的👤头像--配置文件--API 令牌处创建
- 在 Cloudflare 主页点击你需要使用的域名,下滑到右下角可以看到区域 ID 和账户 ID
申请证书
acme.sh --issue --dns dns_cf -d dns.235421.xyz
-d
后面是你想使用的域名
安装证书
``` acme.sh --install-cert -d dns.235421.xyz \ --key-file /root/certs/key.pem \ --fullchain-file /root/certs/cert.pem \ --reloadcmd "cd /root/certs && openssl pkcs12 -export -out 'dns.pfx' -inkey 'key.pem' -in 'cert.pem' -password pass:1021"
```
reloadcmd
是在申请证书之后执行的代码,以后自动更新时也会自动执行这个代码,所以第一次配置好就基本上不用管了。reloadcmd
中的代码是将pem
格式的证书和密钥转换成一个pfx
格式的证书文件,-out
后面是输出的pfx
证书文件名,-inkey
和-in
分别是前一步acme.sh
申请的密钥和证书文件。这里必须添加密码,也就是1021
这个,如果不设密码执行命令的话,它会让你交互式输入,但是在自动脚本中就不行。我在前面加了先cd
到证书目录,避免出现问题。
安装 Technitium DNS Server
-
在Technitium DNS Server 官网 获取安装脚本,也有提供 Docker 镜像以及 Windows 版本。
-
安装后在
公网IP:5380
进入管理界面,首次进入需设置管理员密码,管理员账户默认是admin
。 -
在
Settings
–optional protocols
处开启 DNS over HTTPS ,TLS Certificate File Path
处填入转换好的pfx
证书路径,TLS Certificate Password
处填你设定的密码,就是我的1021
。 -
现在打开你的域名,看到如图这样就说明设定成功了,然后在需要设置 DoH 的地方填入
https://yourdomain.com/dns-query
即可。
我在之前的文章中使用的是
DNS over HTTP
并用 Nginx 反代来实现DNS over HTTPS
的,现在直接用 DoH ,省去了配置 Nginx 的部分,只是多了一步证书格式转换,总体上更简单了。
我的设置
- 在
Settings
–Recursion
处打开Allow Recursion
以允许递归解析。 - 在
Settings
–Cache
处将Cache Maximum Entries
调大些,默认 10000 有点少了。 - 在
Settings
–General
处开启EDNS Client Subnet (ECS)
。 - 在
Settings
–Logging
处开启Use Local Time
。 - 在
Apps
–App Store
中安装Query Logs (Sqlite)
以便在Logs
–Query Logs
处查看 DNS 查询日志。
以下设置可选
- 在
Settings
–General
处开启Prefer IPv6
- 在
Settings
–Web Service
处为后台管理页面开启 HTTPS,可使用与 DoH 相同的域名和证书,仅端口不同,这个默认 HTTPS 端口是53443
。 - 在
Settings
–Blocking
处开启拦截功能(默认开启),下面Allow / Block List URLs
可以配置规则,与 AdGuard Home 规则通用,白名单规则须在链接前加上英文叹号!
。也可以是本地规则,填路径即可。 - 在
Settings
–Proxy & Forwarders
处可以设置上游DNSForwarders
。
-
@ 7f29628d:e160cccc
2025-01-07 11:50:30Der gut informierte Bürger denkt bei der Pandemie sofort an Intensivstationen, an die Bilder aus Bergamo und erinnert sich an die Berichterstattung damals – also muss es wohl ein Maximum gewesen sein. Manche Skeptiker behaupten jedoch das Gegenteil. Klarheit sollte ein Blick nach Wiesbaden, zum Statistischen Bundesamt, schaffen. Schließlich sitzen dort gut bezahlte Profis, die seit vielen Jahrzehnten die Sterbestatistik pflegen und veröffentlichen. Jeder Todesfall wird in Deutschland über die Standesämter exakt erfasst.
Doch die Überraschung: Das Statistische Bundesamt liefert uns auf diese einfache Frage zwei extrem unterschiedliche Antworten – ein Minimum und ein Maximum. Das Ergebnis hängt davon ab, wie tief man in die Veröffentlichungen des Bundesamtes eintaucht. Betrachtet man nur die Webseiten und Pressemitteilungen, erhält man den Eindruck eines Maximums. Schaut man jedoch etwas tiefer in die Tabellen und Rohdaten, zeigt sich plötzlich ein Minimum. Aber wie kann das sein? Beides gleichzeitig geht ja wohl kaum. Wer lügt hier – die Tabellen des Amtes oder die Pressemitteilungen? Gehen wir dieser Frage Schritt für Schritt auf den Grund.
2020: Ein historisches Maximum?
Schauen wir uns die vielen Hundert Veröffentlichungen des Statistischen Bundesamtes aus dieser Zeit an. Oder wir kürzen ab und fragen ChatGPT, da die KI auf diesen Daten trainiert wurde und das gesamte Material kennt. Die Frage an ChatGPT lautet also: Wie war das Sterbegeschehen im Jahr 2020 im Vergleich zu den Vorjahren?
ChatGPT antwortet: »Im Jahr 2020 war die Sterblichkeit in Deutschland höher als in den Jahren zuvor. Es gab eine Übersterblichkeit von etwa 982.000 Todesfällen, das sind rund 46.000 mehr als der Durchschnitt der Vorjahre (2016 bis 2019). Dieser Anstieg wurde überwiegend im Zusammenhang mit der COVID-19-Pandemie gesehen. Während die Sterbezahlen in den Vorjahren schwankten, war ein solch signifikanter Anstieg wie 2020 bisher nicht zu beobachten.«
Wir fragen konkreter: Ist es ein Fakt, dass wir eine so ernste Lage im Sterbegeschehen wie im Frühjahr 2020 noch nie erlebt haben?
ChatGPT bestätigt: »Ja, die COVID-19-Pandemie führte im Frühjahr 2020 zu einer außergewöhnlichen Situation im Sterbegeschehen in Deutschland. Die dramatische Übersterblichkeit, die ab der 13. Kalenderwoche auftrat, veranlasste das Statistische Bundesamt, besonders eindringliche Warnungen zu veröffentlichen. Der damalige Vizepräsident des Amtes und andere führende Stimmen wiesen öffentlich darauf hin, dass die Todesfallzahlen stark vom Durchschnitt abwichen. Diese klare Warnung richtete sich an die Öffentlichkeit und die Politik gleichermaßen. Die Medien berichteten intensiv über diese Warnungen, was das Bewusstsein für die Schwere der Pandemie erheblich schärfte. In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten hatte es keine vergleichbare Übersterblichkeit gegeben, die eine solch umfangreiche Kommunikation durch das Statistische Bundesamt erforderlich gemacht hätte.«
Ein gut informierter Zeitungsleser wird sich an dieser Stelle bestätigt fühlen: Ja, so war es damals. Ein Maximum im Sterbegeschehen – wegen der Pandemie. Oder etwa nicht?
2020: Ein historisches Minimum?
Tauchen wir in die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes ein. Die Tabellen, die das Amt seit Jahrzehnten verlässlich veröffentlicht, nennen sich Sterbetafeln. Diese werden jährlich bereitgestellt und stehen auf der Website des Bundesamtes zum Download bereit. Ein erster Blick in die Sterbetafeln mag den Laien abschrecken, doch mit einer kurzen Erklärung wird alles verständlich. Wir gehen schrittweise vor.
Nehmen wir die Sterbetafel des Jahres 2017. Sie enthält zwei große Tabellen – eine für Männer und eine für Frauen. Jede Zeile der Tabelle steht für einen Jahrgang, zum Beispiel zeigt die Zeile 79 die Daten der 79-jährigen Männer. Besonders wichtig ist nun die zweite Spalte, in der der Wert 0,05 eingetragen ist. Das bedeutet, dass 5 Prozent der 79-jährigen Männer im Jahr 2017 verstorben sind. Das ist die wichtige Kennzahl. Wenn wir diesen exakten Wert, den man auch als Sterberate bezeichnet, nun in ein Säulendiagramm eintragen, erhalten wir eine leicht verständliche visuelle Darstellung (Grafik 1).
Es ist wichtig zu betonen, dass dieser Wert weder ein Schätzwert noch eine Modellrechnung oder Prognose ist, sondern ein exakter Messwert, basierend auf einer zuverlässigen Zählung. Sterberaten (für die Fachleute auch Sterbewahrscheinlichkeiten qx) sind seit Johann Peter Süßmilch (1707–1767) der Goldstandard der Sterbestatistik. Jeder Aktuar wird das bestätigen. Fügen wir nun die Sterberaten der 79-jährigen Männer aus den Jahren davor und danach hinzu, um das Gesamtbild zu sehen (Grafik 2). Und nun die entscheidende Frage: Zeigt das Jahr 2020 ein Maximum oder ein Minimum?
Ein kritischer Leser könnte vermuten, dass die 79-jährigen Männer eine Ausnahme darstellen und andere Jahrgänge im Jahr 2020 ein Maximum zeigen würden. Doch das trifft nicht zu. Kein einziger Jahrgang verzeichnete im Jahr 2020 ein Maximum. Im Gegenteil: Auch die 1-Jährigen, 2-Jährigen, 3-Jährigen, 9-Jährigen, 10-Jährigen, 15-Jährigen, 18-Jährigen und viele weitere männliche Jahrgänge hatten ihr Minimum im Jahr 2020. Dasselbe gilt bei den Frauen. Insgesamt hatten 31 Jahrgänge ihr Minimum im Jahr 2020. Wenn wir schließlich alle Jahrgänge in einer einzigen Grafik zusammenfassen, ergibt sich ein klares Bild: Das Minimum im Sterbegeschehen lag im Jahr 2020 (Grafik 3).
Ein kritischer Leser könnte nun wiederum vermuten, dass es innerhalb des Jahres 2020 möglicherweise starke Ausschläge nach oben bei einzelnen Jahrgängen gegeben haben könnte, die später durch Ausschläge nach unten ausgeglichen wurden – und dass diese Schwankungen in der jährlichen Übersicht nicht sichtbar sind. Doch auch das trifft nicht zu. Ein Blick auf die wöchentlichen Sterberaten zeigt, dass die ersten acht Monate der Pandemie keine nennenswerten Auffälligkeiten aufweisen. Es bleibt dabei: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes bestätigen zweifelsfrei, dass die ersten acht Monate der Pandemie das historische Minimum im Sterbegeschehen darstellen. (Für die Fachleute sei angemerkt, dass im gleichen Zeitraum die Lebenserwartung die historischen Höchststände erreicht hatte – Grafik 4.)
So konstruierte das Amt aus einem Minimum ein Maximum:
Zur Erinnerung: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes, die in den jährlichen Sterbetafeln zweifelsfrei dokumentiert sind, zeigen für das Jahr 2020 eindeutig ein Minimum im Sterbegeschehen. Aus diesen »in Stein gemeißelten« Zahlen ein Maximum zu »konstruieren«, ohne die Rohdaten selbst zu verändern, scheint auf den ersten Blick eine unlösbare Aufgabe. Jeder Student würde an einer solchen Herausforderung scheitern. Doch das Statistische Bundesamt hat einen kreativen Weg gefunden - ein Meisterstück gezielter Manipulation. In fünf Schritten zeigt sich, wie diese Täuschung der Öffentlichkeit umgesetzt wurde:
(1) Ignorieren der Sterberaten: Die präzisen, objektiven und leicht verständlichen Sterberaten aus den eigenen Sterbetafeln wurden konsequent ignoriert und verschwiegen. Diese Daten widersprachen dem gewünschten Narrativ und wurden daher gezielt ausgeklammert.
(2) Fokus auf absolute Todeszahlen: Die Aufmerksamkeit wurde stattdessen auf die absolute Zahl der Todesfälle gelenkt. Diese wirkt allein durch ihre schiere Größe dramatisch und emotionalisiert die Diskussion. Ein entscheidender Faktor wurde dabei ignoriert: Die absolute Zahl der Todesfälle steigt aufgrund der demografischen Entwicklung jedes Jahr an. Viele Menschen verstehen diesen Zusammenhang nicht und verbinden die steigenden Zahlen fälschlicherweise mit der vermeintlichen Pandemie.
(3) Einführung der Übersterblichkeit als neue Kennzahl: Erst ab Beginn der „Pandemie“ wurde die Kennzahl "Übersterblichkeit" eingeführt – und dies mit einer fragwürdigen Methode, die systematisch überhöhte Werte lieferte. Diese Kennzahl wurde regelmäßig, oft monatlich oder sogar wöchentlich, berechnet und diente als ständige Grundlage für alarmierende Schlagzeilen.
(4) Intensive Öffentlichkeitsarbeit: Durch eine breit angelegte Kampagne wurden die manipulativen Kennzahlen gezielt in den Fokus gerückt. Pressemitteilungen, Podcasts und öffentliche Auftritte konzentrierten sich fast ausschließlich auf die absoluten Todeszahlen und die Übersterblichkeit. Ziel war es, den Eindruck einer dramatischen Situation in der Öffentlichkeit zu verstärken.
(5) Bekämpfen kritischer Stimmen: Kritiker, die die Schwächen und manipulativen Aspekte dieser Methoden aufdeckten, wurden systematisch diskreditiert. Ihre Glaubwürdigkeit und Kompetenz wurden öffentlich infrage gestellt, um das sorgsam konstruierte Narrativ zu schützen.
Ohne diesen begleitenden Statistik-Betrug wäre das gesamte Pandemie-Theater meiner Meinung nach nicht möglich gewesen. Wer aus einem faktischen Minimum ein scheinbares Maximum "erschafft", handelt betrügerisch. Die Folgen dieses Betruges sind gravierend. Denken wir an die Angst, die in der Bevölkerung geschürt wurde – die Angst, bald sterben zu müssen. Denken wir an Masken, Abstandsregeln, isolierte ältere Menschen, Kinderimpfungen und all die Maßnahmen, die unter anderem auf diese falsche Statistik zurückgehen.
Wollen wir Bürger uns das gefallen lassen?
Wenn wir als Bürger zulassen, dass ein derart offensichtlicher und nachprüfbarer Täuschungsversuch ohne Konsequenzen bleibt, dann gefährdet das nicht nur die Integrität unserer Institutionen – es untergräbt das Fundament unserer Gesellschaft. In der DDR feierte man öffentlich Planerfüllung und Übererfüllung, während die Regale leer blieben. Damals wusste jeder: Statistik war ein Propagandainstrument. Niemand traute den Zahlen, die das Staatsfernsehen verkündete.
Während der Pandemie war es anders. Die Menschen vertrauten den Mitteilungen des Statistischen Bundesamtes und des RKI – blind. Die Enthüllungen durch den "RKI-Leak" haben gezeigt, dass auch das Robert-Koch-Institut nicht der Wissenschaft, sondern den Weisungen des Gesundheitsministers und militärischen Vorgaben folgte. Warum sollte es beim Statistischen Bundesamt anders gewesen sein? Diese Behörde ist dem Innenministerium unterstellt und somit ebenfalls weisungsgebunden.
Die Beweise für Täuschung liegen offen zutage. Es braucht keinen Whistleblower, keine geheimen Enthüllungen: Die Rohdaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes sprechen für sich. Sie sind öffentlich einsehbar – klar und unmissverständlich. Die Daten, die Tabellen, die Veröffentlichungen des Amtes selbst – sie sind die Anklageschrift. Sie zeigen, was wirklich war. Nicht mehr und nicht weniger.
Und wir? Was tun wir? Schweigen wir? Oder fordern wir endlich ein, was unser Recht ist? Wir Bürger dürfen das nicht hinnehmen. Es ist Zeit, unsere Behörden zur Rechenschaft zu ziehen. Diese Institutionen arbeiten nicht für sich – sie arbeiten für uns. Wir finanzieren sie, und wir haben das Recht, Transparenz und Verantwortung einzufordern. Manipulationen wie diese müssen aufgearbeitet werden und dürfen nie wieder geschehen. Die Strukturen, die solche Fehlentwicklungen in unseren Behörden ermöglicht haben, müssen offengelegt werden. Denn eine Demokratie lebt von Vertrauen – und Vertrauen muss verdient werden. Jeden Tag aufs Neue.
.
.
MARCEL BARZ, Jahrgang 1975, war Offizier der Bundeswehr und studierte Wirtschafts- und Organisationswissenschaften sowie Wirtschaftsinformatik. Er war Gründer und Geschäftsführer einer Softwarefirma, die sich auf Datenanalyse und Softwareentwicklung spezialisiert hatte. Im August 2021 veröffentlichte Barz den Videovortrag »Die Pandemie in den Rohdaten«, der über eine Million Aufrufe erzielte. Seitdem macht er als "Erbsenzähler" auf Widersprüche in amtlichen Statistiken aufmerksam.
-
@ eac63075:b4988b48
2025-01-04 19:41:34Since 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:
- 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.
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
-
@ 9e69e420:d12360c2
2025-01-19 04:48:31A new report from the National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF) shows that civilian firearm possession exceeded 490 million in 2022. The total from 1990 to 2022 is estimated at 491.3 million firearms. In 2022, over ten million firearms were domestically produced, leading to a total of 16,045,911 firearms available in the U.S. market.
Of these, 9,873,136 were handguns, 4,195,192 were rifles, and 1,977,583 were shotguns. Handgun availability aligns with the concealed carry and self-defense market, as all states allow concealed carry, with 29 having constitutional carry laws.
-
@ 2b24a1fa:17750f64
2025-04-03 07:46:37„Ein Fundstück aus dem Internet – jemand fragt:\ „Wie fühlst du dich als Geimpfter, wenn du eine Maske tragen musst, um die Ungeimpften zu schützen?“
https://soundcloud.com/radiomuenchen/was-ist-passiert-ein-buch-von-michael-sailer
\ Jemand antwortet:\ „Wovor sollte ein Geimpfter einen Ungeimpften schützen?\ 1. Der Geimpfte kann doch gar nicht krank werden, also auch niemanden anstecken, dachte ich?\ 2. Wenn der Geimpfte doch krank werden und andere anstecken kann, wozu hat er sich dann impfen lassen?\ 3. Und wozu sollte sich dann der Ungeimpfte impfen lassen?\ 4. Und wozu sollte dann überhaupt einer der beiden eine Maske tragen?“\ Jemand antwortet:\ „Das ist pure Querdenkerei. Solche kruden Theorien können Menschenleben zerstören.“\ „Eine bessere Parabel auf den religiösen Charakter des aktuellen Wahns könnte ich mir nicht ausdenken“,\ schreibt der Münchner Kolumnist Michael Sailer in seinem Buch Was ist passiert – Notate aus den Zeiten von Lüge und Krieg, das Ende Februar erschienen ist. Als neugieriger und zwangsläufig teilnehmende Beobachter analysiert, kommentiert und hinterfragt der Autor die gesellschaftlichen Abgründe, die sich 2020 und 2021 vor unser aller Augen auftaten.
Unser Autor Jonny Rieder hat es gelesen und eine Rezension verfasst.
Sprecher: Ulrich Allroggen
Bild: Radio München - Kunst: Isaac Cordal (Cement Eclipses)
-
@ 6389be64:ef439d32
2025-01-16 15:44:06Black Locust can grow up to 170 ft tall
Grows 3-4 ft. per year
Native to North America
Cold hardy in zones 3 to 8
Firewood
- BLT wood, on a pound for pound basis is roughly half that of Anthracite Coal
- Since its growth is fast, firewood can be plentiful
Timber
- Rot resistant due to a naturally produced robinin in the wood
- 100 year life span in full soil contact! (better than cedar performance)
- Fence posts
- Outdoor furniture
- Outdoor decking
- Sustainable due to its fast growth and spread
- Can be coppiced (cut to the ground)
- Can be pollarded (cut above ground)
- Its dense wood makes durable tool handles, boxes (tool), and furniture
- The wood is tougher than hickory, which is tougher than hard maple, which is tougher than oak.
- A very low rate of expansion and contraction
- Hardwood flooring
- The highest tensile beam strength of any American tree
- The wood is beautiful
Legume
- Nitrogen fixer
- Fixes the same amount of nitrogen per acre as is needed for 200-bushel/acre corn
- Black walnuts inter-planted with locust as “nurse” trees were shown to rapidly increase their growth [[Clark, Paul M., and Robert D. Williams. (1978) Black walnut growth increased when interplanted with nitrogen-fixing shrubs and trees. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science, vol. 88, pp. 88-91.]]
Bees
- The edible flower clusters are also a top food source for honey bees
Shade Provider
- Its light, airy overstory provides dappled shade
- Planted on the west side of a garden it provides relief during the hottest part of the day
- (nitrogen provider)
- Planted on the west side of a house, its quick growth soon shades that side from the sun
Wind-break
- Fast growth plus it's feathery foliage reduces wind for animals, crops, and shelters
Fodder
- Over 20% crude protein
- 4.1 kcal/g of energy
- Baertsche, S.R, M.T. Yokoyama, and J.W. Hanover (1986) Short rotation, hardwood tree biomass as potential ruminant feed-chemical composition, nylon bag ruminal degradation and ensilement of selected species. J. Animal Sci. 63 2028-2043
-
@ 6389be64:ef439d32
2025-01-14 01:31:12Bitcoin is more than money, more than an asset, and more than a store of value. Bitcoin is a Prime Mover, an enabler and it ignites imaginations. It certainly fueled an idea in my mind. The idea integrates sensors, computational prowess, actuated machinery, power conversion, and electronic communications to form an autonomous, machined creature roaming forests and harvesting the most widespread and least energy-dense fuel source available. I call it the Forest Walker and it eats wood, and mines Bitcoin.
I know what you're thinking. Why not just put Bitcoin mining rigs where they belong: in a hosted facility sporting electricity from energy-dense fuels like natural gas, climate-controlled with excellent data piping in and out? Why go to all the trouble building a robot that digests wood creating flammable gasses fueling an engine to run a generator powering Bitcoin miners? It's all about synergy.
Bitcoin mining enables the realization of multiple, seemingly unrelated, yet useful activities. Activities considered un-profitable if not for Bitcoin as the Prime Mover. This is much more than simply mining the greatest asset ever conceived by humankind. It’s about the power of synergy, which Bitcoin plays only one of many roles. The synergy created by this system can stabilize forests' fire ecology while generating multiple income streams. That’s the realistic goal here and requires a brief history of American Forest management before continuing.
Smokey The Bear
In 1944, the Smokey Bear Wildfire Prevention Campaign began in the United States. “Only YOU can prevent forest fires” remains the refrain of the Ad Council’s longest running campaign. The Ad Council is a U.S. non-profit set up by the American Association of Advertising Agencies and the Association of National Advertisers in 1942. It would seem that the U.S. Department of the Interior was concerned about pesky forest fires and wanted them to stop. So, alongside a national policy of extreme fire suppression they enlisted the entire U.S. population to get onboard via the Ad Council and it worked. Forest fires were almost obliterated and everyone was happy, right? Wrong.
Smokey is a fantastically successful bear so forest fires became so few for so long that the fuel load - dead wood - in forests has become very heavy. So heavy that when a fire happens (and they always happen) it destroys everything in its path because the more fuel there is the hotter that fire becomes. Trees, bushes, shrubs, and all other plant life cannot escape destruction (not to mention homes and businesses). The soil microbiology doesn’t escape either as it is burned away even in deeper soils. To add insult to injury, hydrophobic waxy residues condense on the soil surface, forcing water to travel over the ground rather than through it eroding forest soils. Good job, Smokey. Well done, Sir!
Most terrestrial ecologies are “fire ecologies”. Fire is a part of these systems’ fuel load and pest management. Before we pretended to “manage” millions of acres of forest, fires raged over the world, rarely damaging forests. The fuel load was always too light to generate fires hot enough to moonscape mountainsides. Fires simply burned off the minor amounts of fuel accumulated since the fire before. The lighter heat, smoke, and other combustion gasses suppressed pests, keeping them in check and the smoke condensed into a plant growth accelerant called wood vinegar, not a waxy cap on the soil. These fires also cleared out weak undergrowth, cycled minerals, and thinned the forest canopy, allowing sunlight to penetrate to the forest floor. Without a fire’s heat, many pine tree species can’t sow their seed. The heat is required to open the cones (the seed bearing structure) of Spruce, Cypress, Sequoia, Jack Pine, Lodgepole Pine and many more. Without fire forests can’t have babies. The idea was to protect the forests, and it isn't working.
So, in a world of fire, what does an ally look like and what does it do?
Meet The Forest Walker
For the Forest Walker to work as a mobile, autonomous unit, a solid platform that can carry several hundred pounds is required. It so happens this chassis already exists but shelved.
Introducing the Legged Squad Support System (LS3). A joint project between Boston Dynamics, DARPA, and the United States Marine Corps, the quadrupedal robot is the size of a cow, can carry 400 pounds (180 kg) of equipment, negotiate challenging terrain, and operate for 24 hours before needing to refuel. Yes, it had an engine. Abandoned in 2015, the thing was too noisy for military deployment and maintenance "under fire" is never a high-quality idea. However, we can rebuild it to act as a platform for the Forest Walker; albeit with serious alterations. It would need to be bigger, probably. Carry more weight? Definitely. Maybe replace structural metal with carbon fiber and redesign much as 3D printable parts for more effective maintenance.
The original system has a top operational speed of 8 miles per hour. For our purposes, it only needs to move about as fast as a grazing ruminant. Without the hammering vibrations of galloping into battle, shocks of exploding mortars, and drunken soldiers playing "Wrangler of Steel Machines", time between failures should be much longer and the overall energy consumption much lower. The LS3 is a solid platform to build upon. Now it just needs to be pulled out of the mothballs, and completely refitted with outboard equipment.
The Small Branch Chipper
When I say “Forest fuel load” I mean the dead, carbon containing litter on the forest floor. Duff (leaves), fine-woody debris (small branches), and coarse woody debris (logs) are the fuel that feeds forest fires. Walk through any forest in the United States today and you will see quite a lot of these materials. Too much, as I have described. Some of these fuel loads can be 8 tons per acre in pine and hardwood forests and up to 16 tons per acre at active logging sites. That’s some big wood and the more that collects, the more combustible danger to the forest it represents. It also provides a technically unlimited fuel supply for the Forest Walker system.
The problem is that this detritus has to be chewed into pieces that are easily ingestible by the system for the gasification process (we’ll get to that step in a minute). What we need is a wood chipper attached to the chassis (the LS3); its “mouth”.
A small wood chipper handling material up to 2.5 - 3.0 inches (6.3 - 7.6 cm) in diameter would eliminate a substantial amount of fuel. There is no reason for Forest Walker to remove fallen trees. It wouldn’t have to in order to make a real difference. It need only identify appropriately sized branches and grab them. Once loaded into the chipper’s intake hopper for further processing, the beast can immediately look for more “food”. This is essentially kindling that would help ignite larger logs. If it’s all consumed by Forest Walker, then it’s not present to promote an aggravated conflagration.
I have glossed over an obvious question: How does Forest Walker see and identify branches and such? LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) attached to Forest Walker images the local area and feed those data to onboard computers for processing. Maybe AI plays a role. Maybe simple machine learning can do the trick. One thing is for certain: being able to identify a stick and cause robotic appendages to pick it up is not impossible.
Great! We now have a quadrupedal robot autonomously identifying and “eating” dead branches and other light, combustible materials. Whilst strolling through the forest, depleting future fires of combustibles, Forest Walker has already performed a major function of this system: making the forest safer. It's time to convert this low-density fuel into a high-density fuel Forest Walker can leverage. Enter the gasification process.
The Gassifier
The gasifier is the heart of the entire system; it’s where low-density fuel becomes the high-density fuel that powers the entire system. Biochar and wood vinegar are process wastes and I’ll discuss why both are powerful soil amendments in a moment, but first, what’s gasification?
Reacting shredded carbonaceous material at high temperatures in a low or no oxygen environment converts the biomass into biochar, wood vinegar, heat, and Synthesis Gas (Syngas). Syngas consists primarily of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and methane. All of which are extremely useful fuels in a gaseous state. Part of this gas is used to heat the input biomass and keep the reaction temperature constant while the internal combustion engine that drives the generator to produce electrical power consumes the rest.
Critically, this gasification process is “continuous feed”. Forest Walker must intake biomass from the chipper, process it to fuel, and dump the waste (CO2, heat, biochar, and wood vinegar) continuously. It cannot stop. Everything about this system depends upon this continual grazing, digestion, and excretion of wastes just as a ruminal does. And, like a ruminant, all waste products enhance the local environment.
When I first heard of gasification, I didn’t believe that it was real. Running an electric generator from burning wood seemed more akin to “conspiracy fantasy” than science. Not only is gasification real, it’s ancient technology. A man named Dean Clayton first started experiments on gasification in 1699 and in 1901 gasification was used to power a vehicle. By the end of World War II, there were 500,000 Syngas powered vehicles in Germany alone because of fossil fuel rationing during the war. The global gasification market was $480 billion in 2022 and projected to be as much as $700 billion by 2030 (Vantage Market Research). Gasification technology is the best choice to power the Forest Walker because it’s self-contained and we want its waste products.
Biochar: The Waste
Biochar (AKA agricultural charcoal) is fairly simple: it’s almost pure, solid carbon that resembles charcoal. Its porous nature packs large surface areas into small, 3 dimensional nuggets. Devoid of most other chemistry, like hydrocarbons (methane) and ash (minerals), biochar is extremely lightweight. Do not confuse it with the charcoal you buy for your grill. Biochar doesn’t make good grilling charcoal because it would burn too rapidly as it does not contain the multitude of flammable components that charcoal does. Biochar has several other good use cases. Water filtration, water retention, nutrient retention, providing habitat for microscopic soil organisms, and carbon sequestration are the main ones that we are concerned with here.
Carbon has an amazing ability to adsorb (substances stick to and accumulate on the surface of an object) manifold chemistries. Water, nutrients, and pollutants tightly bind to carbon in this format. So, biochar makes a respectable filter and acts as a “battery” of water and nutrients in soils. Biochar adsorbs and holds on to seven times its weight in water. Soil containing biochar is more drought resilient than soil without it. Adsorbed nutrients, tightly sequestered alongside water, get released only as plants need them. Plants must excrete protons (H+) from their roots to disgorge water or positively charged nutrients from the biochar's surface; it's an active process.
Biochar’s surface area (where adsorption happens) can be 500 square meters per gram or more. That is 10% larger than an official NBA basketball court for every gram of biochar. Biochar’s abundant surface area builds protective habitats for soil microbes like fungi and bacteria and many are critical for the health and productivity of the soil itself.
The “carbon sequestration” component of biochar comes into play where “carbon credits” are concerned. There is a financial market for carbon. Not leveraging that market for revenue is foolish. I am climate agnostic. All I care about is that once solid carbon is inside the soil, it will stay there for thousands of years, imparting drought resiliency, fertility collection, nutrient buffering, and release for that time span. I simply want as much solid carbon in the soil because of the undeniably positive effects it has, regardless of any climactic considerations.
Wood Vinegar: More Waste
Another by-product of the gasification process is wood vinegar (Pyroligneous acid). If you have ever seen Liquid Smoke in the grocery store, then you have seen wood vinegar. Principally composed of acetic acid, acetone, and methanol wood vinegar also contains ~200 other organic compounds. It would seem intuitive that condensed, liquefied wood smoke would at least be bad for the health of all living things if not downright carcinogenic. The counter intuition wins the day, however. Wood vinegar has been used by humans for a very long time to promote digestion, bowel, and liver health; combat diarrhea and vomiting; calm peptic ulcers and regulate cholesterol levels; and a host of other benefits.
For centuries humans have annually burned off hundreds of thousands of square miles of pasture, grassland, forest, and every other conceivable terrestrial ecosystem. Why is this done? After every burn, one thing becomes obvious: the almost supernatural growth these ecosystems exhibit after the burn. How? Wood vinegar is a component of this growth. Even in open burns, smoke condenses and infiltrates the soil. That is when wood vinegar shows its quality.
This stuff beefs up not only general plant growth but seed germination as well and possesses many other qualities that are beneficial to plants. It’s a pesticide, fungicide, promotes beneficial soil microorganisms, enhances nutrient uptake, and imparts disease resistance. I am barely touching a long list of attributes here, but you want wood vinegar in your soil (alongside biochar because it adsorbs wood vinegar as well).
The Internal Combustion Engine
Conversion of grazed forage to chemical, then mechanical, and then electrical energy completes the cycle. The ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) converts the gaseous fuel output from the gasifier to mechanical energy, heat, water vapor, and CO2. It’s the mechanical energy of a rotating drive shaft that we want. That rotation drives the electric generator, which is the heartbeat we need to bring this monster to life. Luckily for us, combined internal combustion engine and generator packages are ubiquitous, delivering a defined energy output given a constant fuel input. It’s the simplest part of the system.
The obvious question here is whether the amount of syngas provided by the gasification process will provide enough energy to generate enough electrons to run the entire system or not. While I have no doubt the energy produced will run Forest Walker's main systems the question is really about the electrons left over. Will it be enough to run the Bitcoin mining aspect of the system? Everything is a budget.
CO2 Production For Growth
Plants are lollipops. No matter if it’s a tree or a bush or a shrubbery, the entire thing is mostly sugar in various formats but mostly long chain carbohydrates like lignin and cellulose. Plants need three things to make sugar: CO2, H2O and light. In a forest, where tree densities can be quite high, CO2 availability becomes a limiting growth factor. It’d be in the forest interests to have more available CO2 providing for various sugar formation providing the organism with food and structure.
An odd thing about tree leaves, the openings that allow gasses like the ever searched for CO2 are on the bottom of the leaf (these are called stomata). Not many stomata are topside. This suggests that trees and bushes have evolved to find gasses like CO2 from below, not above and this further suggests CO2 might be in higher concentrations nearer the soil.
The soil life (bacterial, fungi etc.) is constantly producing enormous amounts of CO2 and it would stay in the soil forever (eventually killing the very soil life that produces it) if not for tidal forces. Water is everywhere and whether in pools, lakes, oceans or distributed in “moist” soils water moves towards to the moon. The water in the soil and also in the water tables below the soil rise toward the surface every day. When the water rises, it expels the accumulated gasses in the soil into the atmosphere and it’s mostly CO2. It’s a good bet on how leaves developed high populations of stomata on the underside of leaves. As the water relaxes (the tide goes out) it sucks oxygenated air back into the soil to continue the functions of soil life respiration. The soil “breathes” albeit slowly.
The gasses produced by the Forest Walker’s internal combustion engine consist primarily of CO2 and H2O. Combusting sugars produce the same gasses that are needed to construct the sugars because the universe is funny like that. The Forest Walker is constantly laying down these critical construction elements right where the trees need them: close to the ground to be gobbled up by the trees.
The Branch Drones
During the last ice age, giant mammals populated North America - forests and otherwise. Mastodons, woolly mammoths, rhinos, short-faced bears, steppe bison, caribou, musk ox, giant beavers, camels, gigantic ground-dwelling sloths, glyptodons, and dire wolves were everywhere. Many were ten to fifteen feet tall. As they crashed through forests, they would effectively cleave off dead side-branches of trees, halting the spread of a ground-based fire migrating into the tree crown ("laddering") which is a death knell for a forest.
These animals are all extinct now and forests no longer have any manner of pruning services. But, if we build drones fitted with cutting implements like saws and loppers, optical cameras and AI trained to discern dead branches from living ones, these drones could effectively take over pruning services by identifying, cutting, and dropping to the forest floor, dead branches. The dropped branches simply get collected by the Forest Walker as part of its continual mission.
The drones dock on the back of the Forest Walker to recharge their batteries when low. The whole scene would look like a grazing cow with some flies bothering it. This activity breaks the link between a relatively cool ground based fire and the tree crowns and is a vital element in forest fire control.
The Bitcoin Miner
Mining is one of four monetary incentive models, making this system a possibility for development. The other three are US Dept. of the Interior, township, county, and electrical utility company easement contracts for fuel load management, global carbon credits trading, and data set sales. All the above depends on obvious questions getting answered. I will list some obvious ones, but this is not an engineering document and is not the place for spreadsheets. How much Bitcoin one Forest Walker can mine depends on everything else. What amount of biomass can we process? Will that biomass flow enough Syngas to keep the lights on? Can the chassis support enough mining ASICs and supporting infrastructure? What does that weigh and will it affect field performance? How much power can the AC generator produce?
Other questions that are more philosophical persist. Even if a single Forest Walker can only mine scant amounts of BTC per day, that pales to how much fuel material it can process into biochar. We are talking about millions upon millions of forested acres in need of fuel load management. What can a single Forest Walker do? I am not thinking in singular terms. The Forest Walker must operate as a fleet. What could 50 do? 500?
What is it worth providing a service to the world by managing forest fuel loads? Providing proof of work to the global monetary system? Seeding soil with drought and nutrient resilience by the excretion, over time, of carbon by the ton? What did the last forest fire cost?
The Mesh Network
What could be better than one bitcoin mining, carbon sequestering, forest fire squelching, soil amending behemoth? Thousands of them, but then they would need to be able to talk to each other to coordinate position, data handling, etc. Fitted with a mesh networking device, like goTenna or Meshtastic LoRa equipment enables each Forest Walker to communicate with each other.
Now we have an interconnected fleet of Forest Walkers relaying data to each other and more importantly, aggregating all of that to the last link in the chain for uplink. Well, at least Bitcoin mining data. Since block data is lightweight, transmission of these data via mesh networking in fairly close quartered environs is more than doable. So, how does data transmit to the Bitcoin Network? How do the Forest Walkers get the previous block data necessary to execute on mining?
Back To The Chain
Getting Bitcoin block data to and from the network is the last puzzle piece. The standing presumption here is that wherever a Forest Walker fleet is operating, it is NOT within cell tower range. We further presume that the nearest Walmart Wi-Fi is hours away. Enter the Blockstream Satellite or something like it.
A separate, ground-based drone will have two jobs: To stay as close to the nearest Forest Walker as it can and to provide an antennae for either terrestrial or orbital data uplink. Bitcoin-centric data is transmitted to the "uplink drone" via the mesh networked transmitters and then sent on to the uplink and the whole flow goes in the opposite direction as well; many to one and one to many.
We cannot transmit data to the Blockstream satellite, and it will be up to Blockstream and companies like it to provide uplink capabilities in the future and I don't doubt they will. Starlink you say? What’s stopping that company from filtering out block data? Nothing because it’s Starlink’s system and they could decide to censor these data. It seems we may have a problem sending and receiving Bitcoin data in back country environs.
But, then again, the utility of this system in staunching the fuel load that creates forest fires is extremely useful around forested communities and many have fiber, Wi-Fi and cell towers. These communities could be a welcoming ground zero for first deployments of the Forest Walker system by the home and business owners seeking fire repression. In the best way, Bitcoin subsidizes the safety of the communities.
Sensor Packages
LiDaR
The benefit of having a Forest Walker fleet strolling through the forest is the never ending opportunity for data gathering. A plethora of deployable sensors gathering hyper-accurate data on everything from temperature to topography is yet another revenue generator. Data is valuable and the Forest Walker could generate data sales to various government entities and private concerns.
LiDaR (Light Detection and Ranging) can map topography, perform biomass assessment, comparative soil erosion analysis, etc. It so happens that the Forest Walker’s ability to “see,” to navigate about its surroundings, is LiDaR driven and since it’s already being used, we can get double duty by harvesting that data for later use. By using a laser to send out light pulses and measuring the time it takes for the reflection of those pulses to return, very detailed data sets incrementally build up. Eventually, as enough data about a certain area becomes available, the data becomes useful and valuable.
Forestry concerns, both private and public, often use LiDaR to build 3D models of tree stands to assess the amount of harvest-able lumber in entire sections of forest. Consulting companies offering these services charge anywhere from several hundred to several thousand dollars per square kilometer for such services. A Forest Walker generating such assessments on the fly while performing its other functions is a multi-disciplinary approach to revenue generation.
pH, Soil Moisture, and Cation Exchange Sensing
The Forest Walker is quadrupedal, so there are four contact points to the soil. Why not get a pH data point for every step it takes? We can also gather soil moisture data and cation exchange capacities at unheard of densities because of sampling occurring on the fly during commission of the system’s other duties. No one is going to build a machine to do pH testing of vast tracts of forest soils, but that doesn’t make the data collected from such an endeavor valueless. Since the Forest Walker serves many functions at once, a multitude of data products can add to the return on investment component.
Weather Data
Temperature, humidity, pressure, and even data like evapotranspiration gathered at high densities on broad acre scales have untold value and because the sensors are lightweight and don’t require large power budgets, they come along for the ride at little cost. But, just like the old mantra, “gas, grass, or ass, nobody rides for free”, these sensors provide potential revenue benefits just by them being present.
I’ve touched on just a few data genres here. In fact, the question for universities, governmental bodies, and other institutions becomes, “How much will you pay us to attach your sensor payload to the Forest Walker?”
Noise Suppression
Only you can prevent Metallica filling the surrounds with 120 dB of sound. Easy enough, just turn the car stereo off. But what of a fleet of 50 Forest Walkers operating in the backcountry or near a township? 500? 5000? Each one has a wood chipper, an internal combustion engine, hydraulic pumps, actuators, and more cooling fans than you can shake a stick at. It’s a walking, screaming fire-breathing dragon operating continuously, day and night, twenty-four hours a day, three hundred sixty-five days a year. The sound will negatively affect all living things and that impacts behaviors. Serious engineering consideration and prowess must deliver a silencing blow to the major issue of noise.
It would be foolish to think that a fleet of Forest Walkers could be silent, but if not a major design consideration, then the entire idea is dead on arrival. Townships would not allow them to operate even if they solved the problem of widespread fuel load and neither would governmental entities, and rightly so. Nothing, not man nor beast, would want to be subjected to an eternal, infernal scream even if it were to end within days as the fleet moved further away after consuming what it could. Noise and heat are the only real pollutants of this system; taking noise seriously from the beginning is paramount.
Fire Safety
A “fire-breathing dragon” is not the worst description of the Forest Walker. It eats wood, combusts it at very high temperatures and excretes carbon; and it does so in an extremely flammable environment. Bad mix for one Forest Walker, worse for many. One must take extreme pains to ensure that during normal operation, a Forest Walker could fall over, walk through tinder dry brush, or get pounded into the ground by a meteorite from Krypton and it wouldn’t destroy epic swaths of trees and baby deer. I envision an ultimate test of a prototype to include dowsing it in grain alcohol while it’s wrapped up in toilet paper like a pledge at a fraternity party. If it runs for 72 hours and doesn’t set everything on fire, then maybe outside entities won’t be fearful of something that walks around forests with a constant fire in its belly.
The Wrap
How we think about what can be done with and adjacent to Bitcoin is at least as important as Bitcoin’s economic standing itself. For those who will tell me that this entire idea is without merit, I say, “OK, fine. You can come up with something, too.” What can we plug Bitcoin into that, like a battery, makes something that does not work, work? That’s the lesson I get from this entire exercise. No one was ever going to hire teams of humans to go out and "clean the forest". There's no money in that. The data collection and sales from such an endeavor might provide revenues over the break-even point but investment demands Alpha in this day and age. But, plug Bitcoin into an almost viable system and, voilà! We tip the scales to achieve lift-off.
Let’s face it, we haven’t scratched the surface of Bitcoin’s forcing function on our minds. Not because it’s Bitcoin, but because of what that invention means. The question that pushes me to approach things this way is, “what can we create that one system’s waste is another system’s feedstock?” The Forest Walker system’s only real waste is the conversion of low entropy energy (wood and syngas) into high entropy energy (heat and noise). All other output is beneficial to humanity.
Bitcoin, I believe, is the first product of a new mode of human imagination. An imagination newly forged over the past few millennia of being lied to, stolen from, distracted and otherwise mis-allocated to a black hole of the nonsensical. We are waking up.
What I have presented is not science fiction. Everything I have described here is well within the realm of possibility. The question is one of viability, at least in terms of the detritus of the old world we find ourselves departing from. This system would take a non-trivial amount of time and resources to develop. I think the system would garner extensive long-term contracts from those who have the most to lose from wildfires, the most to gain from hyperaccurate data sets, and, of course, securing the most precious asset in the world. Many may not see it that way, for they seek Alpha and are therefore blind to other possibilities. Others will see only the possibilities; of thinking in a new way, of looking at things differently, and dreaming of what comes next.
-
@ 0f9da413:01bd07d7
2025-04-03 05:32:55หลังจากจบทริปเที่ยวพัทยาเรียบร้อยแล้วก็ได้เดินทางไปยังเกาะช้างโดยติดรถเจ้าหน้าที่ในที่ทำงานไปไปเกาะช้างครั้งแรกรู้สึกว่ามันไกลเหลือเกินไปค่อนข้างยากหากไม่มีรถส่วนตัว ถ้าให้ไปส่วนตัวก็คงต้องอยู่นานๆ หน่อยชักแบบอาทิตย์หนึ่ง ใช้ชีวิตแบบฝรั่งเที่ยวอยู่ง่ายๆ กินง่ายๆ จากที่ดูในแผนที่ btcmap แล้วพบว่าก็มีร้านที่ปักหมุดไว้อยู่ทั้งหมดสองร้านด้วยกันซึ่งระยะทางก็ค่อนข้างซันเหมือนกัน และมีเนินสูงต่ำสลับกันไป หากไม่มีรถส่วนตัวไปนี่ค่อนข้่างลำบากพอสมควร ต้องเช่ามอไซต์ไป อันนี้ก็เช่าไปเหมือนกัน โดยผมเช่ามอไซต์ 1 วันวันละ 200 บาท (แต่มัดจำ 3000 บาท) ก็เอาเรื่องเหมือนกัน และก็มาเริ่มต้นที่ร้านแรกเลยคือ
Mr. A Coffee
ร้านอาหารสไตล์บ้านๆ ที่ขายอาหาร น้ำ เครื่องดื่ม มีทั้งอาหารไทยและอาหารฝรั่ง ส่วนตัวก็ขับรถมอไซต์มายังสถานที่แห่งนี้ทางเข้าไปยังร้านเป็นหมู่บ้านเล็กๆ ไม่มีถนนเข้า แต่มอไซต์เข้าไปได้พอสมควร ตอนนั้นค่อนข้างเย็นมากแล้ว ได้มาสั่งอาหารมาคือ ข้าวเหนียวมะม่วงกับน้ำแก้วมังกรปั่นแบบไม่หวาน (ทั้งๆที่ตัวเองก็จะเตรียมไปกินบุ๊ปเฟ่อีกหนึ่งชั่วโมงข้างหน้า 555) ก็ได้สั่งไปแล้วก็ถามว่ารับ bitcoin ไหมครับ เจ้าของร้านก็บอกว่า รับๆ ผมกับเจ้าของร้านก็ได้พูดคุยกันเกือบประมาณครึ่งชั่วโมง ซึ่งหากผมมาเร็วกว่านี้หน่อยก็คงได้คุยกันยาวๆ แล้วละ ซึ่งเป็นการคุยที่สนุกมากซึ่งตัวเจ้าของร้านเองก็ได้เล่าถึงเหตุผลที่รับ bitcoin เหมือนกันว่าช่วง โควิดตอนปี 2020 ที่ผ่านมา บนเกาะช้างไม่มีอะไรเลยชาวบ้านก็ต้องไปหารากไม้ หาเห็ดตามป่าเขากัน แต่พี่เจ้าของร้านได้รู้จักกับฝรั่งคนหนึ่งเขาช่วยเหลือพี่เจ้าของร้านด้วยการบริจาคบิทคอยให้ และคนนี้ก็เป็นคนสอนให้เขารับบิทคอยโดยใช้ WOS และเจ้าของร้านก็เล่าให้ผมฟังเพิ่มเติม ณ ปัจจุบันว่า คนเราเองก็ยังต้องมีสภาพคล่องในการใช้งานอยู่ ตั้งมีเงิน fiat ไว้ส่วนหนึ่ง ส่วนบิทคอยที่ได้เขาได้ก็เก็บไว้เพื่อสร้างเป็นทรัพย์สินในอนาคตที่หากมีปัญหาช่วงไหนก็นำมาขายได้ ก็แลก P2P โดยตรง ซึ่งผมค่อนข้างตกใจเพราะเขาเรียนรู้จากการรับบิทคอยโดยนักท่องเที่ยวชาวต่างชาติที่ชวนเขาให้รับ เผื่อว่าจะมีฝรั่งมาใช้งานบิทคอย ณ สถานที่ร้านแห่งนี้
กึมมิคที่หลายท่านอาจจะต้องลุ้นหน่อยว่าหากมีโอกาสได้ไปเที่ยวและแวะที่ร้าน ก็คงต้่องลุ้นว่าคุณจะได้จ่ายด้วย bitcoin ไหม หากวันนั้นเจ้าของร้านไม่อยากรับเพราะว่าโคต้ารับบิทคอยวันนั้นเต็มแล้ว ฮ่าๆ รูปแบบระบบวาสนาร้านสูญของคุณมิกตอนเมื่อก่อน (เหมือนกันเลย) จริงๆ แล้วหากมีเวลามากพอก็คงได้พูดคุยกับพี่เจ้าของร้านสนุกๆกันไป ผมชอบความเรียบง่ายของร้านพี่เขา และมีอาหารหลากหลายอย่างเต็มไปหมด อีกเรื่องอย่างข้าวเหนียวมะม่วง ผมยังจำได้ว่าเมื่อก่อนมีแต่ช่วงฤดูเดียวที่สามารถกินมะม่วงสุกได้ หรือ อาหารแบบข้าวเหนียวมะม่วง แต่ปัจจุบันคือถ้าจะกิน ข้าวเหนียวมะม่วงแล้ว สามารถสั่งกินได้ตลอดทั้งปีกันเลยซึ่งก็โอเครพอสมควร แบบอยากไปทะเลตอนหน้าฝนแล้วอยากกินข้าวเหนียวมะม่วงของหน้าร้อนแบบนี้
ท้ายสุดร้าน Mr. A Coffee เป็นร้านที่ถ้านั่งชิวๆ แบบฝรั่งก็สามารถอยู่ได้ยาวๆ เลยนะจิบกาแฟ ทำงาน WFH ล้่อมรอบโดยธรรมชาติ แต่เส้นทางมาที่ร้านก็ลำบากหน่อยเหมาะกับคนที่ local จริงๆ low time ระดับหนึ่ง ท้ายสุดผมเองก็แจกสติกเกอร์ของพี่แชมป์เอาไปให้เจ้าของร้านแจกกันต่อไป
งานนี้ทั้งข้าวเหนียวมะม่วงและน้ำแก้วมังกรปั่น เสีย sats ไปทั้งหมด 6,050 sats แต่สิ่งที่ได้คือการแลกเปลี่ยนมุมมองกับเจ้าของร้านกับจุดเริ่มต้นของการรับบิทคอยในพื้นที่เกาะช้างแห่งนี้ และหากมีโอกาสอาจจะไปพักอยู่แถวนั้นชักอาทิตย์และแวะมาอุดหนุนร้านนี้ตลอด เพราะวิวฝั่งใต้สุดของเกาะช้างก็ยังคงความสวยงามไม่แพ้กับฝั่งทิศตะวันตกที่ฝรั่งอยู่กัน แต่ฝั่งใต้โซนนี้ก็มีความที่เป็นบ้านไม้ เพิงง่ายๆ ที่ชาวต่างชาติชอบกันอยู่ :)
Google-map: https://maps.app.goo.gl/b45JGeTzL6Lwwi9i9
BTC-map: https://btcmap.org/merchant/node:12416107504
**Koh Chang Wine Gallery **
และเราก็ย้อนกลับมาอีกร้านหนึ่งในวันถัดไปและเป็นวันที่จะต้องออกจากเกาะช้างเช่นเดียวกัน และผมก็ไม่พลาดร้าน Koh Chang Wine Gallery ตั้งอยู่ในโซนหมู่บ้านแหล่งท่องเที่ยวเส้นทางถนนทางตะวันตก ร้านนี้ไม่ได้มีป้ายรับบิทคอย แต่รับชำระด้วยบิทคอยซึ่งเป็นฝรั่งท่านหนึ่งที่คาดว่าน่าจะแต่งงานกับภรรยาคนไทย เป็นร้านสไตล์แบบฝรั่งเลย ผมเองก็สั่งสเต็กเนื้อไป และน้ำมะม่วงปั่น (ไม่รู้เวลาไปเกาะทีไรติดใจกับน้ำมะม่วงปั่น) อาจจะไม่ได้พูดคุยอะไรมากมายนัก แต่ก็หมดไป 32,620 sats เป็นร้านอาหารเช้าและอาหารแนวฝรั่งตรงๆ ถือว่าค่อนข้างอร่อยใช้ได้ดีเลยทีเดียว แต่หากจะจ่ายด้วยบิทคอยก็ต้องแจ้งก่อนนะว่าขอจ่ายด้วยบิทคอยก่อน เหมือนพี่ฝรั่งที่เขารับตอนนี้ก็รับแต่เฉพาะ bitcoin อย่างเดียวเมื่อก่อนรับ xrp กับ doge ด้วยแต่ผมเองเวลาคุยกับฝรั่งก็เหงื่อแตกเหมือนกัน (รึว่าเพราะมันร้อน บนเกาะก็อบอ้าวใช้ได้ 555+)
Google-map: https://maps.app.goo.gl/6QbNgRbiV5Uao2Xz8
BTC-map: https://btcmap.org/merchant/node:11461720813
เส้นทางไปร้านค่อนข้างง่ายติดถนนในหมู่บ้าน ซึ่งหากมายังเกาะช้างแล้วหากขึ้นฝั่งมาแล้วเลี้ยวขวาก็จะขับรถหรือนั่งรถมาเส้นถนนฝั่งตะวันตกของเกาะก็จะพบกับร้านนี้ก่อน อันนี้แล้วแต่ความสะดวกแต่ละท่านเลยครับหากได้มีโอกาสแวะมาเกาะช้างและอยากใช้จ่าย bitcoin เราก็มีทางเลือกร้านในสองสไตล์กันเลย แบบวิถีฝรั่งตอนเช้าก็ร้าน Koh Chang Wine Gallery หรือ แบบ Local ก็ Mr. A Coffee หรือไปทังคู่เลยจะดีมากแต่ต้องบ้าหน่อย เพราะเส้นทางไปก็ค่อนข้างลำบากพอควรเหมือนกัน หมายถึงมีภูเขาชันมีทางขึ้นลงหักศอกนิดหน่อยก็เท่านั้นเอง
รวมๆ ทริปบนเกาะช้างนี้ก็หมดไปไม่เยอะมาก 38,670 sats ก็จะตัวลอยเบาๆ หน่อย (สำรวจเมื่อ มีนาคม 2025 อนาคตอาจจะมีการเปลี่ยนแปลงได้) สำหรับจากนี้จะเป็นการ ปสก. ส่วนตัวกับการใช้งาน Bitcoin Lightning ตามสถานที่ที่ได้เดินทาง Part 3 จะเป็นสถานที่ในพื้นที่หาดใหญ่ จังหวัดสงขลา และ เสริมประสบการณ์การเดินทางโดยรถไฟระยะเวลาเกือบ 18 ชั่วโมง พร้อมด้วยมิตรสหายในรังอย่างกัปตัน จะป่วนแค่ไหนก็รอติดตามกันครับ :)
-
@ 6be5cc06:5259daf0
2024-12-29 19:54:14Um dos padrões mais bem estabelecidos ao medir a opinião pública é que cada geração tende a seguir um caminho semelhante em termos de política e ideologia geral. Seus membros compartilham das mesmas experiências formativas, atingem os marcos importantes da vida ao mesmo tempo e convivem nos mesmos espaços. Então, como devemos entender os relatórios que mostram que a Geração Z é hiperprogressista em certos assuntos, mas surpreendentemente conservadora em outros?
A resposta, nas palavras de Alice Evans, pesquisadora visitante na Universidade de Stanford e uma das principais estudiosas do tema, é que os jovens de hoje estão passando por um grande divergência de gênero, com as jovens mulheres do primeiro grupo e os jovens homens do segundo. A Geração Z representa duas gerações, e não apenas uma.
Em países de todos os continentes, surgiu um distanciamento ideológico entre jovens homens e mulheres. Milhões de pessoas que compartilham das mesmas cidades, locais de trabalho, salas de aula e até casas, não veem mais as coisas da mesma maneira.
Nos Estados Unidos, os dados da Gallup mostram que, após décadas em que os sexos estavam distribuídos de forma relativamente equilibrada entre visões políticas liberais e conservadoras, as mulheres entre 18 e 30 anos são agora 30 pontos percentuais mais liberais do que os homens dessa faixa etária. Essa diferença surgiu em apenas seis anos.
A Alemanha também apresenta um distanciamento de 30 pontos entre homens jovens conservadores e mulheres jovens progressistas, e no Reino Unido, a diferença é de 25 pontos. Na Polônia, no ano passado, quase metade dos homens entre 18 e 21 anos apoiou o partido de extrema direita Confederation, em contraste com apenas um sexto das jovens mulheres dessa mesma idade.
Fora do Ocidente, há divisões ainda mais acentuadas. Na Coreia do Sul, há um enorme abismo entre homens e mulheres jovens, e a situação é semelhante na China. Na África, a Tunísia apresenta o mesmo padrão. Vale notar que em todos os países essa divisão drástica ocorre principalmente entre a geração mais jovem, sendo muito menos pronunciada entre homens e mulheres na faixa dos 30 anos ou mais velhos.
O movimento # MeToo foi o principal estopim, trazendo à tona valores feministas intensos entre jovens mulheres que se sentiram empoderadas para denunciar injustiças de longa data. Esse estopim encontrou especialmente terreno fértil na Coreia do Sul, onde a desigualdade de gênero é bastante visível e a misoginia explícita é comum. (palavras da Financial Times, eu só traduzi)
Na eleição presidencial da Coreia do Sul em 2022, enquanto homens e mulheres mais velhos votaram de forma unificada, os jovens homens apoiaram fortemente o partido de direita People Power, enquanto as jovens mulheres apoiaram o partido liberal Democratic em números quase iguais e opostos.
A situação na Coreia é extrema, mas serve como um alerta para outros países sobre o que pode acontecer quando jovens homens e mulheres se distanciam. A sociedade está dividida, a taxa de casamento despencou e a taxa de natalidade caiu drasticamente, chegando a 0,78 filhos por mulher em 2022, o menor número no mundo todo.
Sete anos após a explosão inicial do movimento # MeToo, a divergência de gênero em atitudes tornou-se autossustentável.
Dados das pesquisas mostram que em muitos países, as diferenças ideológicas vão além dessa questão específica. A divisão progressista-conservadora sobre assédio sexual parece ter causado ou pelo menos faz parte de um alinhamento mais amplo, em que jovens homens e mulheres estão se organizando em grupos conservadores e liberais em outros assuntos.
Nos EUA, Reino Unido e Alemanha, as jovens mulheres agora adotam posturas mais liberais sobre temas como imigração e justiça racial, enquanto grupos etários mais velhos permanecem equilibrados. A tendência na maioria dos países tem sido de mulheres se inclinando mais para a esquerda, enquanto os homens permanecem estáveis. No entanto, há sinais de que os jovens homens estão se movendo para a direita na Alemanha, tornando-se mais críticos em relação à imigração e se aproximando do partido de extrema direita AfD nos últimos anos.
Seria fácil dizer que tudo isso é apenas uma fase passageira, mas os abismos ideológicos apenas crescem, e os dados mostram que as experiências políticas formativas das pessoas são difíceis de mudar. Tudo isso é agravado pelo fato de que o aumento dos smartphones e das redes sociais faz com que os jovens homens e mulheres agora vivam em espaços separados e tenham culturas distintas.
As opiniões dos jovens frequentemente são ignoradas devido à baixa participação política, mas essa mudança pode deixar consequências duradouras, impactando muito mais do que apenas os resultados das eleições.
Retirado de: https://www.ft.com/content/29fd9b5c-2f35-41bf-9d4c-994db4e12998
-
@ 5cf42f9d:4465eebf
2025-04-02 21:32:31 -
@ eac63075:b4988b48
2024-11-09 17:57:27Based 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.
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
-
-
@ ba36d0f7:cd802cba
2025-04-02 21:17:091. Essential Rules
✔ Touch-Move: If you touch a piece, you must move it (if legal). ✔ Check Alert: Say "check" when attacking the enemy king (optional in tournaments). ✔ Checkmate Ends: The game stops immediately—no need to capture the king. ✔ Draw Offers: You can offer a draw after your move, before pressing the clock.
2. Tournament Etiquette
-
Handshake: Before and after the game.
-
Silence: No talking during play (except "check" or "draw?").
-
Clock: Press with the same hand that moved.
-
Resignation: Tip over your king or say "I resign" (don’t just leave).
3. Online Chess Manners
No Stalling: Let the timer run out only if you’ve truly lost.
GG Message: Say "Good game" (or "GG") after playing.
Avoid "Berserking": Don’t abuse speed settings to rush opponents.
Common Faux Pas ❌ Jangling pieces to distract. ❌ Glaring at your opponent’s board. ❌ Cheating (using engines, peeking at other games).
-
-
@ eac63075:b4988b48
2024-10-26 22:14:19The 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
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.